Dozer said: But it should be noted that whitout religion, cultures would steadily but surely drift away from morals and common sence. It was always religion that that kept society on the right track, no matter how much faggotry it may have done during it's more retarded times. No. Case in point: the nordic countries have some of the best conditions for life in the world, and are very low in criminality... And in overwhelming majority irreligious and secular. Dozer said: Don't try to trick me Kaiser, I'm better than that. We grew softer on eachother because we had religion to make us grow softer. If there wasn't any, it would still be dog eat dog out there. And the thing that separates us from animals, mostly, is that we are above dog eat dog. Mostly. We grew less religious at the same time we grew softer. Or are you saying religiosity hasn't decreased the past centuries? Or that religion has a delayed beneficient effect for a few millennia? Dozer said: It doesn't matter, sooner or later they would have crumbled because of their ways. Just look at the soviet union. In fact, I don't think China will last that long either(It will still win World War III though). No, they wouldn't (do we sound childish yet?). Anarchism excelsior, my friend! The Soviet Union didn't fall apart because it had no religion (State stalinism WAS pretty much a religion). What you think of China isn't of much interest. It's a very stable country, considering size. It looks like the States are a lot closer to the brink at the moment. Dozer said: Okay, you hold it right there Kaiser, what the hell are you talking about? If there are rules made up by a madman in charge and those rules go against any known form of morals and ethic code, I should still consider those rules morals because those are the rules? And questioning them would be the unethical thing to do? Even you can't be serious about this Kaiser, you've got to be trolling. Oh yeah, right and wrong do exist! Just ask someone who had a significant other killed off. Who said you had to accept the ethical system of the society? You can reject it as you see fit. Questioning is unethical only from the viewpoint of ethical systems that label it as such. That it is an ethical system, however, is undeniable. Right and wrong doesn't exist. There are ethical systems by which murder is a good thing, and I bet there are religions in which ceremonial rape would be acceptable. We can easily say "P is right to do!" (insert your favourite monstrosity). Why would we be wrong? At most, you can try a Kantian reductio ad absurdum on the scenario "if it were made an universal maxim, what would happen" That's easily sidestepped by modifying P - say, "P is right to do if you're ME!" How can we prove them wrong? Or they us? Or I you? Majority vote? I don't think so, no. Ethics is arbitrary, all that really matters is its effectivity in reaching its goal. Whether people align with the goal or not is up to them. Dozer said: Okay first of all, society doesn't create child rapists. Devious sexual acts(as well as most criminal acts, excludeing special cases) are concious, self made decisions, upon which society has no effect at all. Secondly, you're right. Morals can be changed by anyone, anytime, anywhere, anyhow. Wether those newfangled morals last or don't, is a whole other story(and no, the most basic morals were funded by religion agter inspiration from God). Yes, society forms us as individuals. Free will only exist inasmuch as we do what we want, and what we want is determined by former experiences. Agree on the second paragraph and non-paren-enclosed second paragraph. Would sure like proof of the parenthesis, please, and a conclusive argument why we'd have to agree with god on his autoritharian, fascist system of ethics (apart from his almighty carrot and stick - heaven and hell). ladyxzeus said: Edit: forgot to comment the statement of "science bases on experiences that can be observed" This is a bit off topic, but what about the purely theoric experiments, especially in the field of mathematics and physics? I've only read a little bit about them and did not understand them, but would like to know the general opinion on this. ^^ There are a few ways past this - while people are fond of shouting SCIENCE! there's actually still quite some dispute on what exactly is science and what is not. Mostly, totally theoretical physics (for example) relies on implication. If we can observe A, then B must be the case. Then we test B as a hypothesis, and if the tests show that B gives us more accurate predictions, we adopt B, if not we try to figure out another way to explain A. There are plenty of indirectly observable effects we can catch in experiments, depending on what we test. If B contains untestable part-hypotheses, it is not scientific. When it comes to mathematics it's different as most every mathematician treat mathematics as an a priori science - a posteriori are sciences that rely on observation, empirical study, while a priori are those that we can think our way through. I'm far from a mathematician myself (in fact I suck horribly at it), but in general it is about finding axioms (unproven statements that are considered basic) and then finding out the logical implications of their interaction (this is probably set theory - not sure - other kinds of maths is mostly about defining and proving, mostly through showing that if a certain mathematic "truth" wasn't true, contradictions would appear, as far as I've got it). Man, I'm gonna get raeped for speaking about stuff I don't know enough to talk of. EDIT: Baman said: Dozer said: Wether those newfangled morals last or don't, is a whole other story(and no, the most basic morals were funded by religion agter inspiration from God). Well, I guess this sets the stop sign for the debate. Drawing in your god as evidence is not something we non religious people can counter without devolving the debate into a long and drawn out war of attrition. But just for the record, I don't agree with you on that one XD Wise nihilist is wise. I'll stand by that, and please, Dozer, don't bring that up, we've been there and done that, we all know we won't bring up any arguments even making the other side understand us if that happens again. Both sides are too pigheaded. |
KaiserpingvinOct 2, 2008 2:56 PM
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| Religion is unfair anyway, since many parents does such a good job brainwashing their kids when they are young. |
 |
| I forgot to mention my own, I'm a rigourous anti-realist, nihilist, error-theorist, whatever it may be called in that I don't believe in the existence of 'true/false', 'objective moral', 'meaning', 'purpose', or 'objective reality'. Which leads to the famous sentence: 'There are no truths, thus this sentence is not true.' With amateurs, even amateurs who sold academic books saying that was a contradiction in nihilism, lawd, when I was seven or some-thing and that was praesented me I so simply showed why it wasn't a contradiction on the fly. The idea in conventional logic is that 'not true' automatically means 'false', because 'not true' is the complement of 'false' there, that is to say, some-thing is either true, or false, always, so if it's not true, it has to be false, pretty obvious, however in nihilism, there exist no true or false. So obviously that sentence isn't true, as there is no true or false, and it's not false either, there exists 'nothing'. Which makes in nihilism, nihilism itself a faith, some-thing which some-one assumes to be true which one cannot prove, as all propositions are, and within the structure of nihilism, this is not a contradiction, which it would be in conventional logic. Picture it as so: Take the set of all propositions, it can be proven (Gödel) that they are countably infinite, thus, one can associate each proposition with a natural number. All right, then take the set of every consistent axiomatic formal system, within such a formal system there are certain propositions which are true, and those which are false, if they can be both true and false, the system isn't consistent of course, remove the propositions from it which are independent of the axioms which will still leave countably infinite propositions which we can derive which can be shown to be true or false, of course, if we can show them to be true or false, then we have a function from a countably infinite set (the propositions) to the set of {0,1}, simply true or false, the function is then a representation of the formal system. Of course, the set of all the functions from the natural to {0,1} (= 2) is the powerset of the naturals, effectively, the set of all consistent formal systems in conventional logic can be represented with the powerset of the naturals. Now take nihilism, there is no true or false, there is 'nothing', we have the space of all functions from the naturals to the empty set, or quite a power of 0, which shall always be 0 unless it is taken to 0 itsself, the case of that there are no axiomatic systems, but we have countably infinite, making nihilism represented by 0 within the system of conventional logic. Which I find intriguing, that it all comes down to 0, the perfect number to me, in a sense, it could be seen as both negative and positive, both real and imaginary, in a way one could argue it to be both irrational and rational too as the only way to write 0 as a fraction of two numbers is using zero itself as the numerator, making the operation still closed if zero is removed from the set. One could also argue that zero is both algebraic and transcendental even, normally, transcendental numbers are defined as those which are not the solution of a polynomial, however one could also define transcendentals in a lot of other trivial ways which includes 0 in them. 0 still is the only algebraic number for instance to which a transcendental can be exponentiated which still returns an algebraic number, combined with that zero is the unique element of the intersection of a lot of other so sets which would divide it, having properties of both real and imaginary, positive and negative and such, making zero seem the exception almost to the rule of 'either true or false, not some-where in between' if one heads beyond mathematics and more into ill-defined philosophy... Which is some-thing which keeps intriguing me. |
| Perelman, martyr |
| I consider myself Christian... I'm not really that religious, though. Haven't been to church or even looked at a bible in years :/ I'm pretty sure the only thing that's keeping me considered Christian is believing in God, but other than that...there's some people who probably think I'm like agnostic or something >.< I feel sort of ashamed now that I think about it... |
| muslim, happy Ied al Fitr for everyone who celebrate it^^ for me, I don't have problem with any religion, I think everything is ok, the problem is for people who want to hurt others. I hate them, any religion. |
khorven said: Which makes in nihilism, nihilism itself a faith, some-thing which some-one assumes to be true which one cannot prove. NOOOOOO! I refuse! Do not want! :__: |
Baman said: khorven said: Which makes in nihilism, nihilism itself a faith, some-thing which some-one assumes to be true which one cannot prove. NOOOOOO! I refuse! Do not want! :__: _every_ proposition is a faith in nihilism, nihilism states that nothing can be proven. |
| Perelman, martyr |
| I'll take Baman's advice and end this debate but only after I'm done with you Kaiser. You said: No. Case in point: the nordic countries have some of the best conditions for life in the world, and are very low in criminality... And in overwhelming majority irreligious and secular. No. Just because you are like that does not necesserally mean the rest of the Scandinavian Isle is also like that. Graphs or it didn't happen, my friend. You said: We grew less religious at the same time we grew softer. Or are you saying religiosity hasn't decreased the past centuries? Or that religion has a delayed beneficient effect for a few millennia? What are you talking about, growing less religious? Just because religions don't act so extremely anymore doesn't mean the people have abandoned their faith. You also said: What you think of China isn't of much interest. It's a very stable country, considering size. It looks like the States are a lot closer to the brink at the moment. Kaiser, Kaiser, don't you ever take the human factor into consideration. You didn't think your opinion over when you wrote: Who said you had to accept the ethical system of the society? You can reject it as you see fit. Questioning is unethical only from the viewpoint of ethical systems that label it as such. That it is an ethical system, however, is undeniable. Right and wrong doesn't exist. There are ethical systems by which murder is a good thing, and I bet there are religions in which ceremonial rape would be acceptable. We can easily say "P is right to do!" (insert your favourite monstrosity). Why would we be wrong? At most, you can try a Kantian reductio ad absurdum on the scenario "if it were made an universal maxim, what would happen" That's easily sidestepped by modifying P - say, "P is right to do if you're ME!" How can we prove them wrong? Or they us? Or I you? Majority vote? I don't think so, no. Ethics is arbitrary, all that really matters is its effectivity in reaching its goal. Whether people align with the goal or not is up to them. Okay, let me clear this up for you. I say forcing you to punch (insert your significant other(s)) five times in the face every hour that you are awake is right to do. Catch my drift? You made you'reself look retarded when you wrote: Would sure like proof of the parenthesis, please, and a conclusive argument why we'd have to agree with god on his autoritharian, fascist system of ethics (apart from his almighty carrot and stick - heaven and hell). Okay, WHAT?! A godly ideal of eternal peace fascist? Well thank you wery much, this conversations over, I'm not even gonna reply to this! ... ... Is what I would have said had I not re-read your post. But then I spotted what you wrote just above your forementioned bullshit: Yes, society forms us as individuals. Free will only exist inasmuch as we do what we want, and what we want is determined by former experiences. Which basically say's that society puposefully creates rapists, child molesters and the like. And this is when I finally realised: Kaiserpingin! You are a troll! Well that means I'm done talking to you, after all, ther is no point in argueing with someone who would fail on 420chan in three posts. Enjoy that shallow nihil of a life you lead, I sincerely hope common sence will soon strike you(preferably in the form of lightning)! |
| We have heard enough of anime, it is now time for us to watch it! |
| Arguments? None of the sort, my dear Watson! They are for the rich and blessed. Dozer said: No. Just because you are like that does not necesserally mean the rest of the Scandinavian Isle is also like that. Graphs or it didn't happen, my friend. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Europe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden#Economy -> And continue on down. I find it fun a creationist who thinks it's stupid and unethical to change ones opinion asks for evidence. Dozer said: What are you talking about, growing less religious? Just because religions don't act so extremely anymore doesn't mean the people have abandoned their faith. They have. Dozer said: Kaiser, Kaiser, don't you ever take the human factor into consideration. Your grammar here is a bit wonky, I suppose it was meant as a question (as a warningful imperative it's pretty retarded). And frankly, China is so repressed and perfectly controlled it probably won't fall apart for a good while to come. Also, nice work in making me play along with your pseudologic there! Correlation != causation. Religious societies have fallen as well. Dozer said: Okay, let me clear this up for you. I say forcing you to punch (insert your significant other(s)) five times in the face every hour that you are awake is right to do. Catch my drift? No. There are sadists who would like that, even. Masochists who'd enjoy getting hit, too. And sentiments aside, getting to the meat of it - that consensus would magically reveal absolute values - the lack is even more glaring in realist (in the meaning of "morals are real things") assumptions. What should be counted - the intentions, consequences or virtue of an action? There's no telling what matters more - because none of them matters at all. The universe doesn't give waffles if we kill eachother or bake delicious cake to eachother. I like the irony of someone supporting Light trying to look like he's against murder. Anything can be justified by something. Anything can be made immoral by something. Dozer said: Okay, WHAT?! A godly ideal of eternal peace fascist? Yes, fascist. And psychopathic, for that matter. He creates us, and then forces us to live according to wholly arbitrary and denigrating laws as to avoid grossly disproportionate punishments and attain incredibly overflowing benefits, but doesn't give us a shred of evidence to point to his own actuality, contradicts himself, purposefully misleads us, murders people in the thousands for mad reasons, and then decides to kill himself so he can forgive us. He's a symbol of absolute authority. Peace through coercion? Right and wrong through coercion? Joy through coercion? Ridiculous. I don't agree with his morals at very many points at all, so why should I follow them? No reason. And if I'm wrong and the git does exist? I'm doomed to eternal death. I can't even vote him off the Board of Metaphysical Directors, because he's chairman, and he is the only one with a vote. Sure doesn't sound democratic to me. This doesn't apply to all versions of god, but it sure does to yours. Dozer said: Which basically say's that society puposefully creates rapists, child molesters and the like. lol @ not comprehending basic psychology and sociology. Purposefully? No, it just doesn't know nor care. It does, of course, purposefully create poverty and war. Dozer said: Kaiserpingin! You are a troll! Well that means I'm done talking to you, after all, ther is no point in argueing with someone who would fail on 420chan in three posts. Enjoy that shallow nihil of a life you lead, I sincerely hope common sence will soon strike you(preferably in the form of lightning)! Mm, hypocrisy. Tastes like cider. I don't want common sense, because it's generally very, hideously wrong. I side with logic and empirical study, thanks. Nice talking with you~ |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| I'm not trying to stir things up here, but i believe someone got horribly mauled. Also, as predicted, this thread goes all over the place. It became common sense that religious discussions make people feel like they got stepped on the dick. (hence the existence of extremists) |
| Time out guys. I'm not really following the contents of the discussion, so this may come a bit late, but do play nice. Discussion is fine. I may even forgive that the discussion isn't entirely according to topic, but it seems that some people in here are starting to get personal with their arguments. So here's a warning: when arguing, focus on the arguments and not on the people. If this is going to continue like this, I'll be forced to lock this thread. ......aaaaaand time in. |
Kaiserpingvin said: I can't even vote him off the Board of Metaphysical Directors, because he's chairman, and he is the only one with a vote. Sure doesn't sound democratic to me. Many things can be said about how religious debates are inevitably fruitless, but I'll say, there are some rather good quotes popping up here and there :D Kaiserpingvin said: I don't want common sense, because it's generally very, hideously wrong. I side with logic and empirical study, thanks. Scientifically speaking, "Common Sense" is really naught but a thick blend of superstitions and rather shady "folk knowledge". Even only in the field of psychology, I keep getting amazed by how fundamentally wrong this so called "common sense" really is. Boursk said: Time out guys. I'm not really following the contents of the discussion, so this may come a bit late, but do play nice. Discussion is fine. I may even forgive that the discussion isn't entirely according to topic, but it seems that some people in here are starting to get personal with their arguments. So here's a warning: when arguing, focus on the arguments and not on the people. If this is going to continue like this, I'll be forced to lock this thread. ......aaaaaand time in. We promise we'll be good boys, Boursk sama! :D |
| tho i was raised catholic/orthodox, i say that because celebrate both Christmas and Easters, my half-brothers are catholic tho officially im orthodox. However i don't belive in the so so the answer for me its atheist or pastafarian |
oko za oko, zub za zub - eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth |
| Just wondering, (but) is there a religion for anime fanatics? |
 My Anime List | My Video Game Collection Discord ID: KidRyan89 | Telegram ID: KidRyan |
Baby_Naruto said: Just wondering, (but) is there a religion for anime fanatics? Eclectic Paganism. Most anime shows have some degree of it in there. |
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Baby_Naruto said: Just wondering, (but) is there a religion for anime fanatics? Haruhiism |
 Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori |
CCZilla said: I would say I'm Atheist, but that's sort of a religion also. I'll just say none because I believe that there may be a God or some higher being. However, I don't think humans have the capacity to get the exact idea of it right. Especially since there are hundreds of different theories about it. Obviously, all of them can't be right because of their vast differences with one another. So why should only one be right? I would say you would be considered Agnostic... which is what I am. Some people criticize this point of view, as it is somewhat on the fence. I think it is perfect. It doesn't deny or affirm the existence of some all powerful being or god. To me, it is a state of being that lets you have an open mind to all sorts of religious beliefs. It is a lot easier to see many point of views if you are not tied to one side or the other. |
     |
ladyxzeus said: Baby_Naruto said: Just wondering, (but) is there a religion for anime fanatics? Haruhiism Damn you beat me with 12 minutes. Anyways, yes, Haruhiism is the way to go if you really want to show dedication to anime. However, Haruhiism does not include anything with shrines like churches or mosques yet. You could contribute such things though :3 |
Chavez said: ladyxzeus said: Baby_Naruto said: Just wondering, (but) is there a religion for anime fanatics? Haruhiism Damn you beat me with 12 minutes. Anyways, yes, Haruhiism is the way to go if you really want to show dedication to anime. However, Haruhiism does not include anything with shrines like churches or mosques yet. You could contribute such things though :3 All you need is an angry mob of Haruhiists and some "Behead those who insult Haruhi!" banners and maybe a couple of anon's with afro wigs and suits, and you'd easily conquer yourself your own temple. |
Baman said: Chavez said: ladyxzeus said: Baby_Naruto said: Just wondering, (but) is there a religion for anime fanatics? Haruhiism Damn you beat me with 12 minutes. Anyways, yes, Haruhiism is the way to go if you really want to show dedication to anime. However, Haruhiism does not include anything with shrines like churches or mosques yet. You could contribute such things though :3 Nah, you don't really need a temple. If people really really want one I suppose Bandai Entertainment would happilly let your use their lounge. xD All you need is an angry mob of Haruhiists and some "Behead those who insult Haruhi!" banners and maybe a couple of anon's with afro wigs and suits, and you'd easily conquer yourself your own temple. |
Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori |
| I'm a Christian and I have been for about 8ish years |
| I really don't know what I am. I don't technically believe in a god though I think if there is a god it would be more like gods as in several gods that are of far lessor importance than the christian/muslem/jewish/ god, oh I hope reincarnation is what actually happens when you die. Though I think that what really happens when you die is nothing, you just cease to exist which BTW would totally suck. and lets see umm I also believe in ghosts. so umm where do I fit in? Or do I just not fit in anywhere? |
 |
| I see you as an animistic Buddhist. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
W_K said: I really don't know what I am. I don't technically believe in a god though I think if there is a god it would be more like gods as in several gods that are of far lessor importance than the christian/muslem/jewish/ god, oh I hope reincarnation is what actually happens when you die. Though I think that what really happens when you die is nothing, you just cease to exist which BTW would totally suck. and lets see umm I also believe in ghosts. so umm where do I fit in? Or do I just not fit in anywhere? In case of doubt... Online tests are the solution =p http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html But still, you don't need to name and have a set of known activities to keep your beliefs. ^^ Just because you don't name them they don't stop being beliefs. =p |
Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori |
| Rules of niarchism: 1: All human qualities I do not like ultimately spawn from happiness or cause it. 2: Social life is for idiots. 3: Lolicon is awesome. 4: Black metal ceases to be tr00 kvlt if the guitars in it sound more like guitars than vacuum cleaners. 5: 0 > 2 6: British English for the win. 7: Ich bin ein Berliner. |
| Perelman, martyr |
ladyxzeus said: In case of doubt... Online tests are the solution =p http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html Too many ads.:/ Also, too Christocentric. Your Results: 1. Neo-Pagan (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (82%) 3. Reform Judaism (81%) 4. Mahayana Buddhism (74%) 5. Sikhism (70%) 6. New Age (70%) 7. Scientology (68%) 8. Bahá'í Faith (68%) 9. Hinduism (68%) 10. Liberal Quakers (66%) 11. New Thought (66%) 12. Jainism (65%) 13. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (60%) 14. Theravada Buddhism (53%) 15. Orthodox Judaism (53%) 16. Islam (50%) 17. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (48%) 18. Taoism (45%) 19. Orthodox Quaker (45%) 20. Secular Humanism (44%) 21. Nontheist (36%) 22. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (34%) 23. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (28%) 24. Eastern Orthodox (24%) 25. Roman Catholic (24%) 26. Seventh Day Adventist (20%) 27. Jehovah's Witness (7%) |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| I got a 100% Secular Humanism. Too bad Nihilist wasn't listed there ): Bloody discrimination. |
| 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (97%) 3. Liberal Quakers (80%) 4. Theravada Buddhism (79%) 5. Nontheist (75%) 6. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (71%) 7. Neo-Pagan (69%) 8. Reform Judaism (59%) 9. New Age (56%) 10. Mahayana Buddhism (50%) 11. Taoism (48%) 12. Scientology (46%) 13. New Thought (42%) 14. Bahá'í Faith (40%) 15. Orthodox Quaker (40%) 16. Jainism (38%) 17. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (37%) 18. Sikhism (35%) 19. Islam (32%) 20. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (32%) 21. Orthodox Judaism (32%) 22. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (30%) 23. Hinduism (24%) 24. Seventh Day Adventist (23%) 25. Eastern Orthodox (16%) 26. Roman Catholic (16%) 27. Jehovah's Witness (12%) |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| 1. Theravada Buddhism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (99%) 3. Secular Humanism (97%) 4. Neo-Pagan (90%) 5. Nontheist (89%) 6. Liberal Quakers (84%) 7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (80%) 8. Reform Judaism (76%) 9. New Age (72%) 10. New Thought (72%) 11. Mahayana Buddhism (69%) 12. Taoism (66%) 13. Scientology (62%) 14. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (54%) 15. Bahá'í Faith (50%) 16. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (45%) 17. Orthodox Judaism (45%) 18. Sikhism (45%) 19. Jainism (39%) 20. Orthodox Quaker (38%) 21. Islam (35%) 22. Hinduism (26%) 23. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (23%) 24. Eastern Orthodox (23%) 25. Roman Catholic (23%) 26. Seventh Day Adventist (18%) 27. Jehovah's Witness (7%) xD |
     |
| It's just a test, but it's fun. xD I only remember my top result which was 100% Neo-Pagan ^_^ |
Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori |
| SCIENCE |
 |
| 0. DISCORDIANISM (Definitely) 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (87%) 3. Nontheist (81%) 4. Theravada Buddhism (72%) 5. Liberal Quakers (70%) 6. Neo-Pagan (67%) 7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (52%) 8. Taoism (48%) 9. New Age (42%) 10. Reform Judaism (40%) 11. Orthodox Quaker (33%) 12. Mahayana Buddhism (29%) 13. Bahá'í Faith (26%) 14. Sikhism (26%) 15. Seventh Day Adventist (25%) 16. Jainism (23%) 17. Scientology (20%) 18. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (20%) 19. Hinduism (16%) 20. New Thought (16%) 21. Eastern Orthodox (16%) 22. Islam (16%) 23. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (16%) 24. Orthodox Judaism (16%) 25. Roman Catholic (16%) 26. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (10%) 27. Jehovah's Witness (6%) Om nom nom. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (94%) 3. Liberal Quakers (82%) 4. Theravada Buddhism (73%) 5. Neo-Pagan (72%) 6. Nontheist (71%) 7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (67%) 8. New Age (52%) 9. Reform Judaism (51%) 10. Mahayana Buddhism (50%) 11. Taoism (48%) 12. Orthodox Quaker (46%) 13. Sikhism (40%) 14. Jainism (38%) 15. Scientology (38%) 16. New Thought (33%) 17. Bahá'í Faith (32%) 18. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (32%) 19. Hinduism (32%) 20. Seventh Day Adventist (29%) 21. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (28%) 22. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (25%) 23. Islam (24%) 24. Orthodox Judaism (24%) 25. Jehovah's Witness (21%) 26. Eastern Orthodox (18%) 27. Roman Catholic (18%) Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. |
| Your search on "Oran Solus" returned the following quotes: "Oran Solus? I know him. What a wanker. He still owes me a tenner." Oscar Wilde "Oran, you're so intelligent and awesome <3" Bakayaro "Oran's sexy." LolitaDecay "Oran is a sophisticated penguin." Drybananna "Oran is a Hand-Eye you faggots." EddieSpaghetti "Oran for Prime Minister." the_prime_one "Oran is all that is stated in his sig and more." orbitzz |
| 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (95%) 3. Nontheist (90%) 4. Theravada Buddhism (78%) 5. Liberal Quakers (77%) 6. Neo-Pagan (75%) 7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (69%) 8. New Age (63%) 9. Reform Judaism (60%) 10. Taoism (55%) 11. Mahayana Buddhism (52%) 12. Scientology (52%) 13. New Thought (50%) 14. Orthodox Quaker (45%) 15. Sikhism (45%) 16. Jainism (38%) 17. Orthodox Judaism (37%) 18. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (36%) 19. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (33%) 20. Seventh Day Adventist (33%) 21. Bahá'í Faith (30%) 22. Hinduism (29%) 23. Islam (27%) 24. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (26%) 25. Eastern Orthodox (17%) 26. Roman Catholic (17%) 27. Jehovah's Witness (13%) fun test |
| |
Flibbertigibbet said: Baman said: I got a 100% Secular Humanism. Too bad Nihilist wasn't listed there ): Bloody discrimination. Nihilism is more of a philosophy than a religion is it not? Secular Humanism is too no? They're both life philosophies that bar the existence of god creatures... |
| I'm not going to post my entire list; I understand that the test shows you how much you have in common with their list of religions, but I felt appalled to be compared to some of them. So I'm posting my top five :D 1. Unitarian Universalism (100%) 2. Mahayana Buddhism (96%) 3. Theravada Buddhism (88%) 4. Liberal Quakers (88%) 5. Neo-Pagan (88%) Not bad, not bad. I was a neo-pagan in high school (after freeing myself from Catholicism), but now identify as a Buddhist. Liberal Quakers are cool people, though. As for Unitarian Universalists...I find myself agreeing with most of them, I just don't like how much they have in common with organized religion. OranSolus said: Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. You can click on the religion to find out more about it. And haha, it was the same for me (thrown into RC, and it was at the bottom of my list). |
ScrumYummy said: OranSolus said: Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. You can click on the religion to find out more about it. And haha, it was the same for me (thrown into RC, and it was at the bottom of my list). Yeah, I did check out a few of them. On Catholicism, as far as that church is concerned, once you are a Catholic you are forever a Catholic. You could set fire to a church, assassinate the Pope and level an orphanage and you'd just be a bad Catholic. |
| Your search on "Oran Solus" returned the following quotes: "Oran Solus? I know him. What a wanker. He still owes me a tenner." Oscar Wilde "Oran, you're so intelligent and awesome <3" Bakayaro "Oran's sexy." LolitaDecay "Oran is a sophisticated penguin." Drybananna "Oran is a Hand-Eye you faggots." EddieSpaghetti "Oran for Prime Minister." the_prime_one "Oran is all that is stated in his sig and more." orbitzz |
OranSolus said: ScrumYummy said: OranSolus said: Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. You can click on the religion to find out more about it. And haha, it was the same for me (thrown into RC, and it was at the bottom of my list). Yeah, I did check out a few of them. On Catholicism, as far as that church is concerned, once you are a Catholic you are forever a Catholic. You could set fire to a church, assassinate the Pope and level an orphanage and you'd just be a bad Catholic. The Pope has the power to un-catholic you. ^^ It's called "excommunicate" (had to look it up on the dictionary, still the word sounds weird in English xD) |
Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori |
| baptist |
| atheist :) |
 |
| I really don't care what religion you are i mostly like all people. I'm christian , Orthodox to be precise. ;D |
ladyxzeus said: OranSolus said: ScrumYummy said: OranSolus said: Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. You can click on the religion to find out more about it. And haha, it was the same for me (thrown into RC, and it was at the bottom of my list). Yeah, I did check out a few of them. On Catholicism, as far as that church is concerned, once you are a Catholic you are forever a Catholic. You could set fire to a church, assassinate the Pope and level an orphanage and you'd just be a bad Catholic. The Pope has the power to un-catholic you. ^^ It's called "excommunicate" (had to look it up on the dictionary, still the word sounds weird in English xD) Yeah, I know, but I just dismiss that as more hypocrisy. Catholicism is supposed to be a religion that preaches forgiveness and the fact that you'll always find acceptance with them, yet they have a means of 'exile'. Yes, that doesn't contradict in the slightest. |
| Your search on "Oran Solus" returned the following quotes: "Oran Solus? I know him. What a wanker. He still owes me a tenner." Oscar Wilde "Oran, you're so intelligent and awesome <3" Bakayaro "Oran's sexy." LolitaDecay "Oran is a sophisticated penguin." Drybananna "Oran is a Hand-Eye you faggots." EddieSpaghetti "Oran for Prime Minister." the_prime_one "Oran is all that is stated in his sig and more." orbitzz |
OranSolus said: ladyxzeus said: OranSolus said: ScrumYummy said: OranSolus said: Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. You can click on the religion to find out more about it. And haha, it was the same for me (thrown into RC, and it was at the bottom of my list). Yeah, I did check out a few of them. On Catholicism, as far as that church is concerned, once you are a Catholic you are forever a Catholic. You could set fire to a church, assassinate the Pope and level an orphanage and you'd just be a bad Catholic. The Pope has the power to un-catholic you. ^^ It's called "excommunicate" (had to look it up on the dictionary, still the word sounds weird in English xD) Yeah, I know, but I just dismiss that as more hypocrisy. Catholicism is supposed to be a religion that preaches forgiveness and the fact that you'll always find acceptance with them, yet they have a means of 'exile'. Yes, that doesn't contradict in the slightest. XD Well, I was told (quite literally by one of my catholic school teachers), "Be good or you're going to hell." X3 |
| free thinking that's what it is ... i can belive whatever i want and whenever i want the diffrence between me and most religious and non-religious people is that at least i admit that |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
ScrumYummy said: OranSolus said: ladyxzeus said: OranSolus said: ScrumYummy said: OranSolus said: Funny thing is, I don't even have a clue what half of these are. Even funnier is the fact that the religion I was thrown into as a child is at the bottom. You can click on the religion to find out more about it. And haha, it was the same for me (thrown into RC, and it was at the bottom of my list). Yeah, I did check out a few of them. On Catholicism, as far as that church is concerned, once you are a Catholic you are forever a Catholic. You could set fire to a church, assassinate the Pope and level an orphanage and you'd just be a bad Catholic. The Pope has the power to un-catholic you. ^^ It's called "excommunicate" (had to look it up on the dictionary, still the word sounds weird in English xD) Yeah, I know, but I just dismiss that as more hypocrisy. Catholicism is supposed to be a religion that preaches forgiveness and the fact that you'll always find acceptance with them, yet they have a means of 'exile'. Yes, that doesn't contradict in the slightest. XD Well, I was told (quite literally by one of my catholic school teachers), "Be good or you're going to hell." X3 Isn't that the Pope's motto? I'll stop ripping on Catholicism now, I should be nicer about other peoples beliefs. :) |
| Your search on "Oran Solus" returned the following quotes: "Oran Solus? I know him. What a wanker. He still owes me a tenner." Oscar Wilde "Oran, you're so intelligent and awesome <3" Bakayaro "Oran's sexy." LolitaDecay "Oran is a sophisticated penguin." Drybananna "Oran is a Hand-Eye you faggots." EddieSpaghetti "Oran for Prime Minister." the_prime_one "Oran is all that is stated in his sig and more." orbitzz |
OranSolus said: Yeah, I know, but I just dismiss that as more hypocrisy. Catholicism is supposed to be a religion that preaches forgiveness and the fact that you'll always find acceptance with them, yet they have a means of 'exile'. Yes, that doesn't contradict in the slightest. Religion in general is so full of trolls and contradictions that it's hard to know if they're being serious. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_inconsistencies_in_the_Bible |
 "Sanity is overrated." |
Azamat said: OranSolus said: Yeah, I know, but I just dismiss that as more hypocrisy. Catholicism is supposed to be a religion that preaches forgiveness and the fact that you'll always find acceptance with them, yet they have a means of 'exile'. Yes, that doesn't contradict in the slightest. Religion in general is so full of trolls and contradictions that it's hard to know if they're being serious. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_inconsistencies_in_the_Bible Part of the reason I wanted out. But like I said, I'll keep quiet now because I don't want to start a war here. I'm all for a quiet life! |
| Your search on "Oran Solus" returned the following quotes: "Oran Solus? I know him. What a wanker. He still owes me a tenner." Oscar Wilde "Oran, you're so intelligent and awesome <3" Bakayaro "Oran's sexy." LolitaDecay "Oran is a sophisticated penguin." Drybananna "Oran is a Hand-Eye you faggots." EddieSpaghetti "Oran for Prime Minister." the_prime_one "Oran is all that is stated in his sig and more." orbitzz |
More topics from this board
» there is a zombie invasion and you have to team with one of the 3 users above, who would you choose?removed-user - Jan 22 |
44 |
by AdamBirch
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
» Why did you break up with the person above you v4 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Kunii - Mar 4 |
346 |
by R-unknown
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» Person for whatever V.4 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Tensho - Aug 28, 2019 |
8413 |
by asschewer
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» Tell the person above you something about yourself ( 1 2 3 )Groovysensei - Dec 12, 2019 |
108 |
by AdamBirch
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» What are your thoughts after visiting the profile of the user above? v.3 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Kunii - Aug 9, 2023 |
4155 |
by briqk
»»
12 minutes ago |