| i wouldn't say i'm suuuper religious where i'm on my knees praying and going to church but i do still believe in god |
   ｡⋆｡˚☽˚｡⋆｡ from the days that i've lived those i had spent with you, seemed real 月光 |
MeisterDM said: 149597871 said: Mandela effect, Deja Vu? I'm pretty sure I've seen this thread. Oh, it's just someone breaking the rules and being unoriginal again. And how are you converting to Islam if you were already a Muslim like 2 years ago. Sounds like that one time you made a topic complaining about high school starting again and a month later you were in college according to another. Anyway Yes, I am. Although I would rather label myself as theist, believer, etc. than "a religious person". He probably meant that he's becoming a practicing Muslim, and not just a Muslim only in name. maybe, to convert means to change your faith or religion though. What you said above is not really a conversion in my opinion. If a christian kid starts going to Church it doesn't mean he "converted" to Christianity because he was a Christian to begin with. There is most likely a more accurate term for becoming more devoted to a certain religion rather than being a casual follower. |
| I made my peace with God years ago. That was enough for me. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| No, I don't have a need for imaginary companionship. |
 |
| I'm a deist, I believe there is a god but I happen to not quite believe in religion. I think though that religion is good for society and culture and I think we honestly could use a little more of it. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Definitely, whilst I certainly understand the absurdity of it and the many negatives that have come as a result of religion, there are just some really insane coincidences out there in the universe as well as things in the universe we will never be able to explain (almost as if intentionally put in a position to be that way) to the point where in my view there just has to be some sort of greater force out there whatever it may be that has pulled the strings on occasion. Of course I can't say I'm 100% confident in my belief (the odds are probably against me in fact) and when I contracted my autoimmune disease the hell I went through in the hospital (as well as a couple of other experiences in life) certainly shook my faith; but to me an existence where you die and that's just it and nothing else is just way too sad. I'd much rather believe in something silly and be able to live life / die happy "knowing" I'd be going to an afterlife of some sort after my time is up. |
| Grew up religious, but not closed minded. I think a large part of it is due to seeing religions taut themselves as the better alternative which to me is hard to swallow. There's not much good except the fact that (1) you get to hangout with people which fulfills a innate human need for social interaction AND (2) to believe in something provides hope I think is priceless because without hope can have nasty consequences. Besides that, I don't have a problem with any religion as long as it's not being shoved down my throat thru persistent intrusions. I prefer open-mindness and being human over religious as the only way to be human. |
 |
| I am a Christian, but I strongly dislike other Christians. Most of the Christians that I have known were pompous douchebags that used God as an excuse to manipulate you into behaving the way they wanted you to (To be fair, not all of them were like that). I also don't like Christians that tell people that they will go to hell for not believing in God. The bible literally forbids shit like that - Respect thy neighbor please. |
 |
| I was never religious until I moved in with my grandparents. We were going through a hard time and as a kid it did help me a bit. I thought it was kinda weird but never questioned it and it gave me something to share with my grandparents at the time. Then I got older and realized I didn't really care for it nor believed in it anymore. Just seems more like a waste of time but I get why people are into it. If if helps them out go ahead. I'm content with knowing theirs nothing after life and don't really need to know why I'm alive or the point of living. That's more comforting to me than anything. |
| ☆・。・。☆・(* ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ~Aphotic ☆・。・。☆・゜ |
| Not at all. I find people who are religious fascinating and interesting to talk to. But I could never bring myself to believe in fairy tale. The moment I see proof of gods existence is when I will consider it. But now? No thank you. |
Syclum said: It's simple, if God exists then why he/she didn't save Junko Furuta? If you haven't heard of Junko Furuta, check out her wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Junko_Furuta (Warning: NSFL) This goes for any other victims of heinous crimes, I really can't accept the fact that God exists and do nothing I've never read something so horrifying. You got me going down a rabbit hole of horrific murder cases. If stuff like this doesn't disprove a so-called god, i don't know what does. Where was god for her during the time she was tortured? Oh yeah he doesn't exist. |
| believing in aliens existence is more testable anyway heck if we find those smart aliens do they even have religion? like do they even know Jesus Fucking Christ? and just gonna share this here too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_inconsistent_revelations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory Sukhu said: I am Atheist But if God is Somewhere I Gonna Kill him. LOL to me that is a valid avengers or revenge reaction considering how much evil/destruction/suffering this world or entire universe has anyway |
degMay 6, 2019 4:27 AM
| No religion, although I do consider the existence of a God as I also consider the non-existence of it. Why, you ask. Well, there are multiple religions, as there are multiple gods, and followers of those, theoretically, have the same faith, belief. All believe in their religion or gods as much as the other ones, yes. That being the case, choosing one would be nothing more than playing a roulette to get the right one. Values of absolute evil and good, god and religion, a roulette for each, yes. In the end, it is pointless, and if a god really exists, there is hope they don't expect me to get that roulette right, otherwise I wouldn't have a problem being punished for that. Better punished than to be beside a disgusting god. And why consider the chance to its existence and non-existence? Well, I can see sense in both cases, yes, therefore I accept them as possibilities. |
| I'm not because religions are man made. I'm an agnostic, i don't know if there is a god or not but if he exists i'm sure that he's not any of the gods that we know. |
| God is just as real as unicorns and dementors from Harry Potter. |
| Nah, I for myself don‘t care about religions, but believing in sth is always guuud |
| There are probably 3 reasons to follow a religion: 1) You seek the truth. 2) You seek personal comfort. 3) You seek a social structure. Let's talk about 2 and 3, which the vast majority of religious people fall under. Most religious people forsake the truth (purposely avoid thinking about it) to assert a spirit, since that helps them come to terms with death and the afterlife. Most people who are religious stay religious in part due to the entrenched social structure of being in that religion: Their friends and family all belong to this institution that looks down on outsiders. Now to 1. The reason almost no religious people care about the truth is because it's absolute logical garbage. It's unfalsifiable, cannot be empirically verified, often self-contradictory in its religious texts, often morally repugnant, philosophically intractable, contradicts much of what we know as scientific facts, etc. The only way you can claim to care about the truth and still be religious is if you've devoted your life to fighting almost literally all knowledge gained by humanity in the past 1000 years. Those are the cards stacked up against you, which requires a response on the same scale. On the other hand, it's very easy to not be religious: Just read a philosophy book, a geography book, a biology book, a mathematical logic book, a physics book, etc. -- one of the above is necessary, since it would contradict positive claims made by the religion. Then, we only need to see that all these fields can be independently verified, whereas the religion, by definition, cannot. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: There are probably 3 reasons to follow a religion: 1) You seek the truth. 2) You seek personal comfort. 3) You seek a social structure. Wow this thread still going? Anyway first which truth? That is such a vauge thing to say. The truth on if you spend to much time on the internet? Second science knows just as much abot what happens after death as any religious zealot. I.e nothing. Third you accuse religious people of looking down on others while you write a gigantic monoluge of you looking down on religous people. View must be great from that glass house of yours. All I am saying. |
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus  |
| Fuck all religions in this world. These are made to scam people. In other words, it's a scam group in order to ask others for money in exchange for "approval" in place x or place y |
hazarddex said: Truth are empirical facts. It's only vague from a metaphysical religious perspective -- because metaphysics doesn't need to exist beyond the natural. So the source of your confusion is your ignorance.katsucats said: Wow this thread still going?There are probably 3 reasons to follow a religion: 1) You seek the truth. 2) You seek personal comfort. 3) You seek a social structure. Anyway first which truth? That is such a vauge thing to say. The truth on if you spend to much time on the internet? hazarddex said: Science knows everything about what happens after death -- nothing. You can only assume that it knows nothing if you assume a supernatural dimension that you know nothing about. It's unreasonable to assert something that you can't even conceive.Second science knows just as much abot what happens after death as any religious zealot. I.e nothing. hazarddex said: If you call 6 sentences a gigantic monologue (sic), God help you. It is literally the fundamentalist religious position that atheists are incapable of morality and are doomed to eternal Hell after death. On the other hand, the non-religious person can only feel pity.Third you accuse religious people of looking down on others while you write a gigantic monoluge of you looking down on religous people. hazarddex said: The view is great. It's a house made of the finest masonry, of stone, wood, steel, and the finest materials mankind has to offer. From my vantage, your non-existent house is quite barbaric, and I don't apologize for it. If you still want to argue that we have no proof for the non-existence of Mickey Mouse, then I must call into question your arbitrary standard of evidence. I can definitely disprove your position, but the question is, since it has been done numerous times in literature, and on MAL, even, is it worth the time? Clearly, you haven't been reading.View must be great from that glass house of yours. All I am saying. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: hazarddex said: Truth are empirical facts. It's only vague from a metaphysical religious perspective -- because metaphysics doesn't need to exist beyond the natural. So the source of your confusion is your ignorance.Wow this thread still going? Anyway first which truth? That is such a vauge thing to say. The truth on if you spend to much time on the internet? hazarddex said: Science knows everything about what happens after death -- nothing. You can only assume that it knows nothing if you assume a supernatural dimension that you know nothing about. It's unreasonable to assert something that you can't even conceive.Second science knows just as much abot what happens after death as any religious zealot. I.e nothing. hazarddex said: If you call 6 sentences a gigantic monologue (sic), God help you. It is literally the fundamentalist religious position that atheists are incapable of morality and are doomed to eternal Hell after death. On the other hand, the non-religious person can only feel pity.Third you accuse religious people of looking down on others while you write a gigantic monoluge of you looking down on religous people. hazarddex said: The view is great. It's a house made of the finest masonry, of stone, wood, steel, and the finest materials mankind has to offer. From my vantage, your non-existent house is quite barbaric, and I don't apologize for it. If you still want to argue that we have no proof for the non-existence of Mickey Mouse, then I must call into question your arbitrary standard of evidence. I can definitely disprove your position, but the question is, since it has been done numerous times in literature, and on MAL, even, is it worth the time? Clearly, you haven't been reading.View must be great from that glass house of yours. All I am saying. nothingness is not a scientific nor does it exist within reality please try again. so again neither side knows anything. by our current knowledge of how the world works until the concept of nothingness is proven as a fact and not a hypothesis with no evidence. its safer to say something happens, but we don't know what. the it is to say "nothing happens." expect not all religious people believe that. in fact hell is basically not even mentioned in the christian bible. you can thank books like dantes inferno for that one. hell existence in christian theology can be very debated on if it even exists in there theology or not. ya no I've ran into plenty of hateful non-religious people to know that it goes both ways. again glass house mate. i find your lack of self awareness humorous right now. |
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus |
hazarddex said: That is a semantic fallacy. Nothing happening after death does not refer to a metaphysical nothingness.katsucats said: Truth are empirical facts. It's only vague from a metaphysical religious perspective -- because metaphysics doesn't need to exist beyond the natural. So the source of your confusion is your ignorance. Science knows everything about what happens after death -- nothing. You can only assume that it knows nothing if you assume a supernatural dimension that you know nothing about. It's unreasonable to assert something that you can't even conceive. If you call 6 sentences a gigantic monologue (sic), God help you. It is literally the fundamentalist religious position that atheists are incapable of morality and are doomed to eternal Hell after death. On the other hand, the non-religious person can only feel pity. The view is great. It's a house made of the finest masonry, of stone, wood, steel, and the finest materials mankind has to offer. From my vantage, your non-existent house is quite barbaric, and I don't apologize for it. If you still want to argue that we have no proof for the non-existence of Mickey Mouse, then I must call into question your arbitrary standard of evidence. I can definitely disprove your position, but the question is, since it has been done numerous times in literature, and on MAL, even, is it worth the time? Clearly, you haven't been reading. nothingness is not a scientific nor does it exist within reality please try again. hazarddex said: You know, your argument by ignorance is getting rather tiresome.so again neither side knows anything. hazarddex said: Non sequitur. That no event happens is not a positive claim.by our current knowledge of how the world works until the concept of nothingness is proven as a fact and not a hypothesis with no evidence. its safer to say something happens, but we don't know what. the it is to say "nothing happens." https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/is-existence-a-predicate/5E5525776149C95CB218AA50463530C7 hazarddex said: Non-fundamentalist religiosity is even more disreputable than fundamentalism. It's like saying you think something is only half-way absolute.expect not all religious people believe that. hazarddex said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_Hell#New_Testamentin fact hell is basically not even mentioned in the christian bible. hazarddex said: Another reason why using religious texts as evidence is garbage since it is subject to arbitrary interpretation with no verification.you can thank books like dantes inferno for that one. hell existence in christian theology can be very debated on if it even exists in there theology or not. hazarddex said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderationya no I've ran into plenty of hateful non-religious people to know that it goes both ways. hazarddex said: How can you see my house from the depth of that hole you're digging?again glass house mate. i find your lack of self awareness humorous right now. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Whenever I did something wrong, I will believe in religious that I will be forgiven. Other than that maybe when I ran out of money, I will go to church trying to get some charity to fill my hunger I guess. |
| Signature removed. Check your inbox |
| I'm Ásatrú forever. I have no need for desert stories that are both culturally and spiritually irrelevant to me. I believe in the true gods and goddesses of my ancestors. Hail the Aesir! |
| “Loddfafnir, listen to my counsel: You will fare well if you follow it, It will help you much if you heed it. If aware that another is wicked, say so: Make no truce or treaty with foes.” - Havamal 127 |
katsucats said: That is a semantic fallacy. Nothing happening after death does not refer to a metaphysical nothingness. hazarddex said: You know, your argument by ignorance is getting rather tiresome.so again neither side knows anything. hazarddex said: Non sequitur. That no event happens is not a positive claim.by our current knowledge of how the world works until the concept of nothingness is proven as a fact and not a hypothesis with no evidence. its safer to say something happens, but we don't know what. the it is to say "nothing happens." https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/is-existence-a-predicate/5E5525776149C95CB218AA50463530C7 hazarddex said: Non-fundamentalist religiosity is even more disreputable than fundamentalism. It's like saying you think something is only half-way absolute.expect not all religious people believe that. hazarddex said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_Hell#New_Testamentin fact hell is basically not even mentioned in the christian bible. hazarddex said: Another reason why using religious texts as evidence is garbage since it is subject to arbitrary interpretation with no verification.you can thank books like dantes inferno for that one. hell existence in christian theology can be very debated on if it even exists in there theology or not. hazarddex said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderationya no I've ran into plenty of hateful non-religious people to know that it goes both ways. hazarddex said: How can you see my house from the depth of that hole you're digging?again glass house mate. i find your lack of self awareness humorous right now. Then how do you know that it's nothing? Its better to say you dont know instated of insisting on the non scientific concept of nothingness. only disruptive if you veiw the world in that black and white absolutist perspective of yours. No one has the answers to everything. So why go about hating other simply because they are religious. Again my point is you claim religious people look down on others and sure some are. However that does not make it the case 100% of the time. But right now your doing the same thing. Which is why your a hypocrite. You are being what you hate just thought I would point that out. also your using that moderation falacy wrong. Two side being assholes to each other doesnt make one side better. At the end of the day they are still both assholes If you dont like religious people who look down on others for not being religious then dont look down on religious people for being religious. That Seems to be the logical choice to me. |
GrimAtramentMay 7, 2019 6:12 PM
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus |
hazarddex said: The concept of nothingness is irrelevant to this discussion. It's a grammatical error to assert the lack of something as an existence, as Kant said, if you read. If you continue to blatantly ignore what's being written, then you can feel free to continue this argument with yourself.katsucats said: That is a semantic fallacy. Nothing happening after death does not refer to a metaphysical nothingness. You know, your argument by ignorance is getting rather tiresome. Non sequitur. That no event happens is not a positive claim. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/is-existence-a-predicate/5E5525776149C95CB218AA50463530C7 Non-fundamentalist religiosity is even more disreputable than fundamentalism. It's like saying you think something is only half-way absolute. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_Hell#New_Testament Another reason why using religious texts as evidence is garbage since it is subject to arbitrary interpretation with no verification. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation How can you see my house from the depth of that hole you're digging? Then how do you know that it's nothing? Its better to say you dont know instated of insisting on the non scientific concept of nothingness. hazarddex said: Religion asserts an absolute perspective by asserting the unverifiable. Science asserts the tentative position that we must hold based on our best knowledge instead of imagination. Stop projecting.only disruptive if you veiw the world in that black and white absolutist perspective of yours. hazarddex said: "Everything" is irrelevant to this discussion. What's relevant are the claims each religion makes, and since no religion is free of internal contradiction and contradictions with what we know as facts, religions are simply wrong. Your inquisition into why I'm "hating" religion is called an ad hominem fallacy.No one has the answers to everything. So why go about hating other simply because they are religious. hazarddex said: Christianity itself looks down on non-Abrahamic religions and atheists, even if hypocritical Christians don't follow Christianity.Again my point is you claim religious people look down on others and sure some are. However that does not make it the case 100% of the time. hazarddex said: So if someone who is correct is calling out someone who is incorrect, you think that makes him a hypocrite? But right now your doing the same thing. Which is why your a hypocrite. You are being what you hate just thought I would point that out. hazarddex said: That's a straw man. The reference to moderation is that you're falsely taking a middle ground, when it is clear that one position is wrong.also your using that moderation falacy wrong. Two side being assholes to each other doesnt make one side better. hazarddex said: At the end of the day, you're outclassed in this high school level conversation.At the end of the day they are still both assholes hazarddex said: Not. The difference is religious people look down on people based on faith. That is evidentially why they are pitiful. You're like the racist calling people bigoted for being intolerant toward bigotry. That's a pathetic look. You don't know what logic is. If you did, you would stop making all these silly fallacies that could be easily dispelled on a very low level.If you dont like religious people who look down on others for not being religious then dont look down on religious people for being religious. That Seems to be the logical choice to me. I'm getting impatient. I fully understand that teaching calculus to a third grader would most likely be unfruitful. I would hope that basic algebra should suffice, but in this case I might go back to counting blocks, except I don't have time for that. Go read any of the links I've posted, or, you know, a book or something. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: hazarddex said: The concept of nothingness is irrelevant to this discussion. It's a grammatical error to assert the lack of something as an existence, as Kant said, if you read. If you continue to blatantly ignore what's being written, then you can feel free to continue this argument with yourself.Then how do you know that it's nothing? Its better to say you dont know instated of insisting on the non scientific concept of nothingness. hazarddex said: Religion asserts an absolute perspective by asserting the unverifiable. Science asserts the tentative position that we must hold based on our best knowledge instead of imagination. Stop projecting.only disruptive if you veiw the world in that black and white absolutist perspective of yours. hazarddex said: "Everything" is irrelevant to this discussion. What's relevant are the claims each religion makes, and since no religion is free of internal contradiction and contradictions with what we know as facts, religions are simply wrong. Your inquisition into why I'm "hating" religion is called an ad hominem fallacy.No one has the answers to everything. So why go about hating other simply because they are religious. hazarddex said: Christianity itself looks down on non-Abrahamic religions and atheists, even if hypocritical Christians don't follow Christianity.Again my point is you claim religious people look down on others and sure some are. However that does not make it the case 100% of the time. hazarddex said: So if someone who is correct is calling out someone who is incorrect, you think that makes him a hypocrite? But right now your doing the same thing. Which is why your a hypocrite. You are being what you hate just thought I would point that out. hazarddex said: That's a straw man. The reference to moderation is that you're falsely taking a middle ground, when it is clear that one position is wrong.also your using that moderation falacy wrong. Two side being assholes to each other doesnt make one side better. hazarddex said: At the end of the day, you're outclassed in this high school level conversation.At the end of the day they are still both assholes hazarddex said: Not. The difference is religious people look down on people based on faith. That is evidentially why they are pitiful. You're like the racist calling people bigoted for being intolerant toward bigotry. That's a pathetic look. You don't know what logic is. If you did, you would stop making all these silly fallacies that could be easily dispelled on a very low level.If you dont like religious people who look down on others for not being religious then dont look down on religious people for being religious. That Seems to be the logical choice to me. I'm getting impatient. I fully understand that teaching calculus to a third grader would most likely be unfruitful. I would hope that basic algebra should suffice, but in this case I might go back to counting blocks, except I don't have time for that. Go read any of the links I've posted, or, you know, a book or something. Not really religions change all the time Christianity has gone through multiple recreations and has vast amounts of sects. So to claim all religions are absolutism is in fact false. Which again demonstrates your use of absolutism. I am Christian but I view everyone elses religion with equal respect. As long as it does not involve physical harm of other people. How are you acting any different? You continue to look down on people for being Christian even going as far to compare me to a child. You dont see the hpocrticalness of this? You claim religious people look down on people but you are blaitently looking down on others right this second. What a simple straw man Attacking others for being religious has nothing to do with being "correct" People can have there own beliefs. No one knows everything about the universe. That is a fact. If they are generally a nice person are you saying you would still treat them badly because they are Christian? You continue to demonstrate that you cant see passed your own personal bias. The way you act is no different then a religous zealot. Funny you accuse me of using ad hominem when all youve been doing this entire time is throw ad homineims around. I have yet to see any evidence of you being diffrent then these fire and brimstone calling Christians you claim to be diffrent from. Exepct not all religous people look down on others faiths so again your the one acting the part of the bigot here. And the rest of you paragraph devolves into more ad hominems. Sure you can go feel free to come back when you've cold your head. You keep throwing. Straw man statement to avoid actually looking at my point. You are acting the same. This isnt some contest about whos better. The point is that you are being the same thing that you hate. No diffrent then the people who try to deflect from hitlers actions by bringing up Stalin. Its not a contest of who's better or worse. The point is your doing the same thing. Sure you might have diffrent excuses but at the end of the day your being the same. I have spoken my peace. Now I'm going back on topic. majokkotrash said: I believe in God, not so much as a person, but more as a force of nature. Destiny, fate, that sort of thing. I'm not a fan of organized religion, so I don't label myself, but if I had to, I guess I'd say I'm some sort of New Age Christian? I dunno. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. While I agree with the force of nature part i dont believe in destiny or fate we decide who we are. Its not predermited by some one else. I'm not overly fond of organized religion myself, but I dont think its existence is bad either. If people wish to gather for a religous purpose ( that doesnt involve harming others mind you.) Then I see no reason they shouldn't. I enjoy viewing other peoples views on the world even if I dont nessisarly agree on everything. As for myself I tend to look at all religions as part of a whole. You can find very similar stories scatter among varius diffrent religous texts. |
GrimAtramentMay 7, 2019 11:23 PM
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus |
hazarddex said: False. The Bible is claimed to be the unchanging word of God. That people have chosen to interpret it differently throughout time is a point for me, not you. It contradicts the central tenet of Christianity to see different sects as actual change in the word of God.Not really religions change all the time Christianity has gone through multiple recreations and has vast amounts of sects. So to claim all religions are absolutism is in fact false. hazarddex said: I was describing religion.Which again demonstrates your use of absolutism. hazarddex said: Then you're a hypocrite and you haven't read the parts of the Bible where God destroyed entire tribes and cities of people for worshiping idols, etc. You can't claim to be a Christian where your belief is dependent on the Bible, and then arbitrarily discard parts of the Bible, if you care for the truth. This just demonstrates my original post: You don't care about truth, you care about comfort and socialization.I am Christian but I view everyone elses religion with equal respect. As long as it does not involve physical harm of other people. hazarddex said: I don't have a metaphysical position.How are you acting any different? hazarddex said: No, that would be an insult to the child. A child is not willfully ignorant. A child does not deliberately lie to himself just to create online argument, and deny other people the right to pity him so he could pity himself. Your intellectual dishonesty does not even qualify you to be a Christian since you so blatantly violate the 10 Commandments without a second thought.You continue to look down on people for being Christian even going as far to compare me to a child. hazarddex said: A hypocrite is someone who claims A and not A. Or in this case, A, therefore B; and A, therefore not B. I claimed A therefore B; and A therefore not C. I look down on you because of your blatant dishonesty. Christians look down on me because I don't believe in Jesus. You dont see the hpocrticalness of this? hazarddex said: You're right I am.You claim religious people look down on people but you are blaitently looking down on others right this second. hazarddex said: A straw man is when you misrepresent someone else, not when you act in the way of your accusations -- which I have not. You don't know what hypocrisy means, and you don't know what straw man means.What a simple straw man hazarddex said: It does, because religions comprise incorrect facts.Attacking others for being religious has nothing to do with being "correct" hazarddex said: Again, no one needs to know everything about the universe, they only need to know the veracity of what they're claiming. In this case, religious claims are incorrect. You can believe there's no such thing as a dinosaur or that women are created out of the rib of a man all you want, but that doesn't make you correct. It means that you don't care about the truth.People can have there own beliefs. No one knows everything about the universe. hazarddex said: It is an irrelevant fact.That is a fact. hazarddex said: Treating someone badly is irrelevant to whether someone is making a correct claim.If they are generally a nice person are you saying you would still treat them badly because they are Christian? hazarddex said: Facts are not a personal bias.You continue to demonstrate that you cant see passed your own personal bias. hazarddex said: A religious zealot does not comport to facts.The way you act is no different then a religous zealot. hazarddex said: Ad hominem is when you dismiss a person's argument based on an attack on his person. I addressed all of your points and then called you a liar because you are. An ad hominem would like you talking about me treating Christians poorly or questioning my motivations while failing to address any of my points.Funny you accuse me of using ad hominem when all youve been doing this entire time is throw ad homineims around. hazarddex said: That's because you lack the mental capacity and intellectual honesty to read arguments objectively. You are emotive and reactive, and you fail to argue the points. I am saying that Christian claims are incorrect, and you are getting your feelings hurt over a factual claim.I have yet to see any evidence of you being diffrent then these fire and brimstone calling Christians you claim to be diffrent from. hazarddex said: Again, this is irrelevant to the fact that the Bible proposes the murder of non-Christians.Exepct not all religous people look down on others faiths so again your the one acting the part of the bigot here. hazarddex said: Again, you have no idea what hypocrisy, straw man, or ad hominems are.And the rest of you paragraph devolves into more ad hominems. hazarddex said: I am cool. I've dealt with Christians 100 times more logical than you. You have failed to make even one argument for your case. First, you've delved into grammatical fallacies like the relevance of nothingness. Then, you've questioned my motivations with ad hominem attacks. Now, you're playing this "I know you are, but what am I" came like a 6th grader.Sure you can go feel free to come back when you've cold your head. hazarddex said: Your actual point is that people have no right to assert facts because knowledge is impossible. No kidding. You've said that asserting facts make someone a hypocrite when other people are asserting incorrect claims. You've said that no one can say what is correct or incorrect because no one knows everything. I'm pretty sure Christianity is against nihilism, yet you still want to call yourself a Christian while deny the possibility of knowledge, and at the same time asserting knowledge using speech.You keep throwing. Straw man statement to avoid actually looking at my point. hazarddex said: No, but this is a contest about who's not being offended over trivial facts.You are acting the same. This isnt some contest about whos better. hazarddex said: I do not hate anything, but I pity dishonest people. But insofar that you're using the word "hate" wrong, I am also not religious.The point is that you are being the same thing that you hate. hazarddex said: Hitler is very different from Stalin, and...No diffrent then the people who try to deflect from hitlers actions by bringing up Stalin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law hazarddex said: If it makes you feel better, repeat yourself about 5 more times, then click your heels.Its not a contest of who's better or worse. The point is your doing the same thing. Sure you might have diffrent excuses but at the end of the day your being the same. I have spoken my peace. Now I'm going back on topic. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: hazarddex said: False. The Bible is claimed to be the unchanging word of God. That people have chosen to interpret it differently throughout time is a point for me, not you. It contradicts the central tenet of Christianity to see different sects as actual change in the word of God.Not really religions change all the time Christianity has gone through multiple recreations and has vast amounts of sects. So to claim all religions are absolutism is in fact false. hazarddex said: I was describing religion.Which again demonstrates your use of absolutism. hazarddex said: Then you're a hypocrite and you haven't read the parts of the Bible where God destroyed entire tribes and cities of people for worshiping idols, etc. You can't claim to be a Christian where your belief is dependent on the Bible, and then arbitrarily discard parts of the Bible, if you care for the truth. This just demonstrates my original post: You don't care about truth, you care about comfort and socialization.I am Christian but I view everyone elses religion with equal respect. As long as it does not involve physical harm of other people. hazarddex said: I don't have a metaphysical position.How are you acting any different? hazarddex said: No, that would be an insult to the child. A child is not willfully ignorant. A child does not deliberately lie to himself just to create online argument, and deny other people the right to pity him so he could pity himself. Your intellectual dishonesty does not even qualify you to be a Christian since you so blatantly violate the 10 Commandments without a second thought.You continue to look down on people for being Christian even going as far to compare me to a child. hazarddex said: A hypocrite is someone who claims A and not A. Or in this case, A, therefore B; and A, therefore not B. I claimed A therefore B; and A therefore not C. I look down on you because of your blatant dishonesty. Christians look down on me because I don't believe in Jesus. You dont see the hpocrticalness of this? hazarddex said: You're right I am.You claim religious people look down on people but you are blaitently looking down on others right this second. hazarddex said: A straw man is when you misrepresent someone else, not when you act in the way of your accusations -- which I have not. You don't know what hypocrisy means, and you don't know what straw man means.What a simple straw man hazarddex said: It does, because religions comprise incorrect facts.Attacking others for being religious has nothing to do with being "correct" hazarddex said: Again, no one needs to know everything about the universe, they only need to know the veracity of what they're claiming. In this case, religious claims are incorrect. You can believe there's no such thing as a dinosaur or that women are created out of the rib of a man all you want, but that doesn't make you correct. It means that you don't care about the truth.People can have there own beliefs. No one knows everything about the universe. hazarddex said: It is an irrelevant fact.That is a fact. hazarddex said: Treating someone badly is irrelevant to whether someone is making a correct claim.If they are generally a nice person are you saying you would still treat them badly because they are Christian? hazarddex said: Facts are not a personal bias.You continue to demonstrate that you cant see passed your own personal bias. hazarddex said: A religious zealot does not comport to facts.The way you act is no different then a religous zealot. hazarddex said: Ad hominem is when you dismiss a person's argument based on an attack on his person. I addressed all of your points and then called you a liar because you are. An ad hominem would like you talking about me treating Christians poorly or questioning my motivations while failing to address any of my points.Funny you accuse me of using ad hominem when all youve been doing this entire time is throw ad homineims around. hazarddex said: That's because you lack the mental capacity and intellectual honesty to read arguments objectively. You are emotive and reactive, and you fail to argue the points. I am saying that Christian claims are incorrect, and you are getting your feelings hurt over a factual claim.I have yet to see any evidence of you being diffrent then these fire and brimstone calling Christians you claim to be diffrent from. hazarddex said: Again, this is irrelevant to the fact that the Bible proposes the murder of non-Christians.Exepct not all religous people look down on others faiths so again your the one acting the part of the bigot here. hazarddex said: Again, you have no idea what hypocrisy, straw man, or ad hominems are.And the rest of you paragraph devolves into more ad hominems. hazarddex said: I am cool. I've dealt with Christians 100 times more logical than you. You have failed to make even one argument for your case. First, you've delved into grammatical fallacies like the relevance of nothingness. Then, you've questioned my motivations with ad hominem attacks. Now, you're playing this "I know you are, but what am I" came like a 6th grader.Sure you can go feel free to come back when you've cold your head. hazarddex said: Your actual point is that people have no right to assert facts because knowledge is impossible. No kidding. You've said that asserting facts make someone a hypocrite when other people are asserting incorrect claims. You've said that no one can say what is correct or incorrect because no one knows everything. I'm pretty sure Christianity is against nihilism, yet you still want to call yourself a Christian while deny the possibility of knowledge, and at the same time asserting knowledge using speech.You keep throwing. Straw man statement to avoid actually looking at my point. hazarddex said: No, but this is a contest about who's not being offended over trivial facts.You are acting the same. This isnt some contest about whos better. hazarddex said: I do not hate anything, but I pity dishonest people. But insofar that you're using the word "hate" wrong, I am also not religious.The point is that you are being the same thing that you hate. hazarddex said: Hitler is very different from Stalin, and...No diffrent then the people who try to deflect from hitlers actions by bringing up Stalin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law hazarddex said: If it makes you feel better, repeat yourself about 5 more times, then click your heels.Its not a contest of who's better or worse. The point is your doing the same thing. Sure you might have diffrent excuses but at the end of the day your being the same. I have spoken my peace. Now I'm going back on topic. Okay and how many Christians tried to kill you today? I'll bet none. In other words your the kind of person who attacks the man in the grocery store for say god bless you when you sneeze. Even though they had no ill will direct towards you. no my actual point is that your looking down on people for having beleifs while acusing them of looking down on people. Which is hypocritical by nature. Again your strawmanning. You just said the definition of strawmanning then kept doing it. I'm going to have to assume you are trolling. To get mad at some one for an action that you yourself make. makes you a hypocrite that is a fact. so if its an insult to children why are you still making comparisons to them after that statement? At lest try to follow through with what you say. Also thats an ad homeinum Its funny that you cant see your own fallacies, but you keep making the same ones. And I'm sure religious zealots pitty you for the same exact reason. Still not seeing what makes you diffrent. It doesn't make either of them better then the other. Where did you get nihilism from? where in my statments have I expressed the beleif that everything is pointless? Now your really just grasping at straws. Ya sure you dont who you kidding. Dislike and hate are in human nature everyone has things they dont like. Just as everyone has things they like. I have yet to see you make a objective arugment in this thread. Just a bunch of ad homienums |
GrimAtramentMay 8, 2019 3:00 AM
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus |
| Lol, you already lost me on your first argument hazarddex said: I am Christian but I view everyone elses religion with equal respect. As long as it does not involve physical harm of other people. katsucats said: Then you're a hypocrite and you haven't read the parts of the Bible where God destroyed entire tribes and cities of people for worshiping idols. You can't claim to be a Christian where your belief is dependent on the Bible, and then arbitrarily discard parts of the Bible It was repeated again and again : So what @hazarddex said about respecting others belief's is perfectly acceptable. Don’t go twisting his words unless you know what you’re talking about. What does respecting other people’s beliefs have to do with God destroying wicked people? It’s clearly stated that : But you're probably going to ask me Thou shalt not muder. Yet : God allowed murder of people worshipping idols. No. God did not allow murder. "Murder is the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought." God DID allowed the killing of a lot of people in the old testament, for the sake and purpose of protecting his chosen people from the persecution of other nations. katsucats said: Your intellectual dishonesty does not even qualify you to be a Christian since you so blatantly violate the 10 Commandments without a second thought You should study the 10 Commandments yourself, as it’s plain as day that you have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t plan on going into further debate with you as debate is frowned upon on this forum, and I have no intention of debating with someone who only argues for the sake of arguing. |
  |
| In the past I was a Roman Catholic. I am currently an Apostate Antichristian. For the Roman Church, apostasy is the "maximum sin" because this is the extreme and absolute form of "infidelity", so according to its theologians, my soul is much more "darkened" than pagans, cismatics, heretics, agnostics, atheists and bad catholics souls. I suppose that to some extent, the Church does well to identify us with Satan and the Antichrist, because the apostasy of faith is the rebellion per excelence against the "divine order" and tends to the deification of man. Corruptio optimi pessima. |
_Nemrod_May 8, 2019 5:52 PM
 |
_Nemrod_ said: In the past I was a Roman Catholic. I am currently an Apostate Antichristian. For the Roman Church, apostasy is the "maximum sin" because this is the extreme and absolute form of "infidelity", so according to its theologians, my soul is much more "obscured" than pagans, cismatics, heretics, agnostics, atheists and bad Catholics souls. I suppose that to some extent they do well to identify with Satan and the Antichrist, because the apostasy of faith is a rebellion against the " divine order" and tends to the deification of man. Corruptio optimi pessima It is okay, for God still loves thee more than modern Christians. "So, because thou art lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spew thee out of my mouth." |
 |
Soverign said: It is okay, for God still loves thee more than modern Christians. "So, because thou art lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spew thee out of my mouth." The reason why that bastard narcissist prefers to deal with anti-christian apostates like me than with lukewarm christians, it is because our "arrogant" hatred takes him seriously while the indifference of his adepts does not. Sometimes minor offenses cause greater disgust than major offenses. This has nothing to do with "love" but pride. On the other hand, in some aspects the "divine love" offends me more than the "divine justice", so please, do not bring back to my memory the first one. |
_Nemrod_May 8, 2019 7:32 PM
|
_Nemrod_ said: Soverign said: It is okay, for God still loves thee more than modern Christians. "So, because thou art lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spew thee out of my mouth." The reason why that bastard narcissist prefers to deal with anti-Christian apostates like me than with lukewarm Christians, it is because our "arrogant" hatred takes him seriously while the indifference of his adepts does not. Sometimes minor offenses cause greater disgust than major offenses. This has nothing to do with "love" but pride. On the other hand, in some aspects the "divine love" offends me more than the "divine justice" Lol. Maybe so. Or, perhaps one could be so very bad that a divine intervention is necessary. I Have Daddy issues sorry., but you really need to stop ignoring me. I mean, it isn't like there aren't ways to put this to the test with a finality, they just aren't very nice. >:3 |
|
| It depends on the situation, if a dire situation arises; I literally worship God more than I worship my waifus. |
| I used to be religious but now I am not. |
 It’s okay to look back at the past, just don’t stare too long |
| i am a good catholic boy. i'll try to remember to pray for everyone in this thread's souls. |
 Oh maybe, maybe it's the clothes we wear The tasteless bracelets and the dye in our hair Or maybe, maybe it's our nowhere towns or our nothing places But we're trash, you and me We're the litter on the breeze We're the lovers on the streets Just trash, me and you It's in everything we do It's in everything we do |
More topics from this board
» Do you celebrate your BirthdayST63LTH - 3 hours ago |
8 |
by BitChilly
»»
27 minutes ago |
|
» Did you ever cut ties with a family member or friend?Sad - Yesterday |
31 |
by Sad
»»
45 minutes ago |
|
» 2023-2024 NBA Season Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Jun 18, 2023 |
738 |
by deg
»»
45 minutes ago |
|
» What is one thing your country is famous for that you wish it wasn'tMadanielFL - Mar 31, 2023 |
46 |
by elgatosaika
»»
1 hour ago |
|
» What is the point of forums?cosmosreceiver - Yesterday |
22 |
by Auron_
»»
1 hour ago |