# Are there any Christian Furries in here?



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Don't know if this should go into The Den or Off Topic, but screw it, to the Den it goes...


This being my third day on the forum, I was wondering if there are any "Christian Furries" that visit here, or any that you may know that visit here.  Don't want to make this into a dilemma, but I was just curious.

And please, it would be for the best that there are no religious debates or flame wars below.  Thanks.  :grin:


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

Yeah,me. :3 You a christian furry,too?


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Phyre said:


> Yeah,me. :3 You a christian furry,too?



Yes, I am!  Sweetness!

And your profile picture is so tiny and adorable!


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

Thanks!You don't even KNOW how much YIFF i had to go through to find it.Just...Don't ask...


----------



## Xela-Dasi (Mar 4, 2014)

Christian here. Maybe a poll would be more apropriate for this?


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Phyre said:


> Thanks!You don't even KNOW how much YIFF i had to go through to find it.Just...Don't ask...



Now I want to ask

...

How much?


----------



## BronwynMendoza (Mar 4, 2014)

Could we possibly have the poll for all religions? Be nice to see if there's any fellow Buddhists out there without making multiple threads and polls.


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

ENOUGH to last me for a few months...Or weeks,i dunno.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

BronwynMendoza said:


> Could we possibly have the poll for all religions? Be nice to see if there's any fellow Buddhists out there without making multiple threads and polls.



I have thought about that, but by then I already posted the thread.  I'll think about it.


----------



## BronwynMendoza (Mar 4, 2014)

Groovy, it was just a suggestion however


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

Can i just point a random thing out?


----------



## Kalmor (Mar 4, 2014)

BronwynMendoza said:


> Could we possibly have the poll for all religions? Be nice to see if there's any fellow Buddhists out there without making multiple threads and polls.


Last time we had a polled, stickied(?) thread about religion, it turned to shit as most religion threads do.

Anyway, no I'm not a christian, I just came in here to answer the question! XD


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

Raptros ,your signature,i'm dying XD


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 4, 2014)

Well, if you want to make a poll about religions you'd need first to account all of them, as well as beliefs that are not religions (atheism, atheistic agnostism, et cetera). And that ain't easy.


----------



## Auramaru (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm Christian as well.  Boop.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 4, 2014)

I try to follow the moral principles of the religion, but I don't identify as christian, so both yes and no here.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm atheist, but my best friend is Christian, does that count? x3


----------



## Tica (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm not Christian myself but interestingly enough I help to moderate for http://www.fursforchrist.com ...

p.s. come join us!


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 4, 2014)

Lastdirewolf said:


> I'm atheist, but my best friend is Christian, does that count? x3



is that like the whole "I can't be racist because I have a black friend?" argument?

 And BTW, I'm agnostic but I like the moral teachings within Christianity.


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

You are all so awesome...I can't even...GAH!


----------



## Captain Howdy (Mar 4, 2014)

sniperfreak223 said:


> is that like the whole "I can't be racist because I have a black friend?" argument?
> 
> And BTW, I'm agnostic but I like the moral teachings within Christianity.



well I figure 0 + 1 is still equal to one :v


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Phyre said:


> You are all so awesome...I can't even...GAH!



Aw, you're so sweet.  You're awesome, too!


----------



## Phyre (Mar 4, 2014)

:3


----------



## SierraCanine (Mar 4, 2014)

One SUPER conservative Baptist right here ^_^


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 4, 2014)

I wonder if there is a thread on some christian forum somewhere asking whether there's any furries. x3


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> I wonder if there is a thread on some christian forum somewhere asking whether there's any furries. x3



Oooh, the irony.


----------



## Catilda Lily (Mar 4, 2014)

Not a Christian but a Catholic.


----------



## yohon (Mar 4, 2014)

Im in seminary to become a paster. Dose that count.


----------



## Auramaru (Mar 4, 2014)

yohon said:


> Im in seminary to become a paster. Dose that count.



A furry... paster... ... That's a scary wombo combo right there.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 4, 2014)

Catilda Lily said:


> Not a Christian but a Catholic.



If I'm not mistaken, isn't Catholicism a sect of Christianity? My understanding is that christian refers to any religion that follows the teachings of or worships Christ.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 4, 2014)

All catholics are christians, not all christians are catholics. 

Just like all Germans are Europeans, but not all Europeans are Germans.


----------



## Troj (Mar 4, 2014)

There are a lot of Christians in the fandom, actually--but, I don't want to "out" anyone I know personally who might not want to be "outed."

There's a woman named XianJaguar whose art is lovely, so I've been following her for a bit.

There's even a Christian furry podcast called WagzTails, which even I enjoy, despite not being Christian.


----------



## kumiko (Mar 4, 2014)

Personally I'm agnostic due to my constant open-mindedness/neutrality on most subjects. But I do respect all religion and religious followers no matter what they believe, and I am glad to know there are people out there that are accepting. Some religious followers I've met are bigoted and hypocritical and give a bad stereotype to most of the awesome people I have met elsewhere. Peace and love no matter what is all really ! 

Either way, its interesting to see other peoples views on life and such.


----------



## alphakitsune (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm Christian. I'm really glad this thread hasn't turned into a flame war yet.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

alphakitsune said:


> I'm Christian. I'm really glad this thread hasn't turned into a flame war yet.



The only reason it could get derailed is if some guy doesn't answer the question and decides to troll.


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm not Christian per say (Agnostic-Theist more like). I follow the teachings somewhat and I enjoy the tough love the religion tries to bring without seeming hypocritical.
But I'm glad to see others that aren't afraid of what they believe it I suppose. Good on you all. :3


----------



## Sar (Mar 4, 2014)

Non-Fedora wearing Atheist here. As much as I'm not a person of religion. Beliefs are beliefs and it's a person's right. Let that be that and no flame wars.


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 4, 2014)

Sarukai said:


> Non-Fedora wearing Atheist here. As much as I'm not a person of religion. Beliefs are beliefs and it's a person's right. Let that be that and no flame wars.



But how else will I show my intellectual superiority?


----------



## Sar (Mar 4, 2014)

PastryOfApathy said:


> But how else will I show my intellectual superiority?


It's not the fedora that rests on your head, it's the fedora that rests in your heart.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 4, 2014)

Satanist
No seriously.


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Satanist
> No seriously.


That's kind of interesting actually. Are you LaVeyan or Theistic? o:


----------



## KyryK (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Satanist
> No seriously.



LaVeyan or theistic?


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Satanist
> No seriously.



Well, that escalated quickly.


----------



## Sar (Mar 4, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> Well, that escalated quickly.


Don't feel surprised, he does a lot of charity work for its community.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Sarukai said:


> Don't feel surprised, he does a lot of charity work for its community.



I just didn't expect that kind of a response.


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 4, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> Well, that escalated quickly.


Lmao, well at least it's something that heats up the thread. :V


----------



## ArmorcladCoyote (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm a Christian as well. I was raised in a half Catholic-half Protestant household.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

I'd like to make a corny comment and say thanks to all of those who posted.  It helps me get to know this community a bit more.

Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Mr. Sparta (Mar 4, 2014)

Lutheran here, with a pinch of fedora-wearing atheist.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 4, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> LaVeyan or theistic?


Theistic. Though I have read LeVeyans book.

And Im not trying to heat up or troll the thread. If you're christian or whatever else I dont care. Almost everyone gets satanism wrong. Ive heard the dumbest shit from people when they ask and I tell.


----------



## BronwynMendoza (Mar 4, 2014)

Ayattar said:


> Well, if you want to make a poll about religions you'd need first to account all of them, as well as beliefs that are not religions (atheism, atheistic agnostism, et cetera). And that ain't easy.



You're exactly right! I retract my request as I hadn't thought that through really. Now that I have I can barely visualise the huge amount of religions and sub religions in them, that would be very messy to organise! My apologies.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Theistic. Though I have read LeVeyans book.
> 
> And Im not trying to heat up or troll the thread. If you're christian or whatever else I dont care. Almost everyone gets satanism wrong. Ive heard the dumbest shit from people when they ask and I tell.




I'm not here to judge people, I just want to get to know the community a bit more.  Thanks for your input.


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Theistic. Though I have read LeVeyans book.
> 
> And Im not trying to heat up or troll the thread. If you're christian or whatever else I dont care. Almost everyone gets satanism wrong. Ive heard the dumbest shit from people when they ask and I tell.


So you're not into slaughtering goats on an altar? :V
Jokes aside, it's kind of nice to see something different. I haven't seen another person who believe in Satanism (literally the only other Satanist I've seen was this guy in my Earth Science class last year). It's always been Christian or Atheist as the common beliefs/religions that I've seen.


----------



## ArcticPhantom (Mar 4, 2014)

I am Catholic myself


----------



## Espereon (Mar 4, 2014)

Christian over here, yo


----------



## DrGravitas (Mar 4, 2014)

Huh. I thought this thread would be a train wreck.

Lutheran.


----------



## KyryK (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Theistic. Though I have read LeVeyans book.
> 
> And Im not trying to heat up or troll the thread. If you're christian or whatever else I dont care. Almost everyone gets satanism wrong. Ive heard the dumbest shit from people when they ask and I tell.



If you don't mind me asking what exactly do you believe satan to be, are there any rituals you perform to feel it/closer to it and are you a member of any group like the joy of satan or the misanthropic luciferan order or are your views of satan more idiosyncratic?


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 4, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> If you don't mind me asking what exactly do you believe satan to be, are there any rituals you perform to feel it/closer to it and are you a member of any group like the joy of satan or the misanthropic luciferan order or are your views of satan more idiosyncratic?


No rituals, my type of satanism isnt believing in the devil but more of a do what the fuck you want kind of way. Its hard to explain. Im a member of the church of satan amd thats about it. Oh yeah my husband is also a satanist.


----------



## Coyote Club (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm a Catholic with a Catholic mom and a Baptist/Methodist dad. It's a beautiful thing to coexist peaceably...

-CC/LL


----------



## Gogoat Rowboat (Mar 4, 2014)

I'm a straight-up Atheist, but I don't talk about religious topics unless I'm asked, and I've got plenty of friends who are Christian.  We just keep out of certain discussions we know we'll disagree on.
I'm not Richard Dawkins.


----------



## KyryK (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> No rituals, my type of satanism isnt believing in the devil but more of a do what the fuck you want kind of way. Its hard to explain. Im a member of the church of satan amd thats about it. Oh yeah my husband is also a satanist.



So if i've got this right your satanism is heavily infuenced by LaVeyan philosophy but you believe in some form of external satan as opposed to the symbolic metaphorical satan that LaVeyans use?


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> So if i've got this right your satanism is heavily infuenced by LaVeyan philosophy but you believe in some form of external satan as opposed to the symbolic metaphorical satan that LaVeyans use?



Jeez.  I create a thread talking about Christianity...  Next thing I know we are talking about Satan...


----------



## Gogoat Rowboat (Mar 4, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> Jeez.  I create a thread talking about Christianity...  Next thing I know we are talking about Satan...


Lol.

Well, someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand Satanism as NOT being a legitimate worship of a devil, but merely a collection of values that are supposed to be common sense, with a label that's meant to rustle a few jimmies.


----------



## Distorted (Mar 4, 2014)

I grew up in a Baptist church, but I refer to myself as Agnostic these days. I still tend to cite verses from Psalms though. It's the only part of the Bible I legitimately read.


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 4, 2014)

Gogoat Rowboat said:


> Lol.
> 
> Well, someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand Satanism as NOT being a legitimate worship of a devil, but merely a collection of values that are supposed to be common sense, with a label that's meant to rustle a few jimmies.


I wonder why the whole "sacrificing a goat" thing got more associated with them than those that follow the Bible, primarily Jews and Hebrews that follow the Torah where Lamb and I think Goat sacrifices were made in order to be cleansed.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 4, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> Jeez.  I create a thread talking about Christianity...  Next thing I know we are talking about Satan...


Just answering the curious ones questions. I will stop talking about it so you can continue on the original topic.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Just answering the curious ones questions. I will stop talking about it so you can continue on the original topic.



Oh, I don't mind.  I just don't want the thread to get TOO derailed.  If someone asks you a question, by all means, answer.


----------



## Aleu (Mar 4, 2014)

Catilda Lily said:


> Not a Christian but a Catholic.



...Catholics are a denomination of Christianity...


----------



## KyryK (Mar 4, 2014)

Gogoat Rowboat said:


> Lol.
> 
> Well, someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand Satanism as NOT being a legitimate worship of a devil, but merely a collection of values that are supposed to be common sense, with a label that's meant to rustle a few jimmies.



I'm hardly an expert but i do know that there are many forms of Satanism. There are people that believe in and worship the christian version of the devil. Then there are those that believe in satan but not god, these beliefs mirror aspects of neopagan religions and can vary considerably, if anything i fall into this catagory. Lastly there are satanists that don't believe in satan at all and simply use him/it as a metaphor, the first and most well known of this type of satanist are the LaVeyan satanists, named after the founder of the philosophy Anton LaVey. You also have weirdos like the Joy of Satan people that believe satan and jesus were aliens, all in all modern satanism is incredibly varied.


----------



## Xela-Dasi (Mar 4, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> I wonder if there is a thread on some christian forum somewhere asking whether there's any furries. x3



DONE! http://www.christianforumsite.com/threads/any-furry-christian-out-here.37317/  HAHAHAHAH


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Xela-Dasi said:


> DONE! http://www.christianforumsite.com/threads/any-furry-christian-out-here.37317/  HAHAHAHAH



You are the best person ever.


----------



## Xela-Dasi (Mar 4, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> You are the best person ever.



I know. lol I wonder how long do I have before getting ban. My name is dawg and I live in Narnia x)


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 4, 2014)

Xela-Dasi said:


> DONE! http://www.christianforumsite.com/threads/any-furry-christian-out-here.37317/  HAHAHAHAH


Oh my god. xD


----------



## Xela-Dasi (Mar 4, 2014)

Someone need to make an account replying to this one x) If they have the time I have of course.


----------



## Vukasin (Mar 4, 2014)

I am Christian as well.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 4, 2014)

Xela-Dasi said:


> Someone need to make an account replying to this one x) If they have the time I have of course.



Some folk might not know what a furry is.


----------



## Troj (Mar 4, 2014)

Daemonium said:


> That's kind of interesting actually. Are you LaVeyan or Theistic? o:



"LaVeyan" here. 

(Though, FYI, CoS members and sympathizers tend to resent that type of question, and also bristle at the term "LaVeyan." They don't recognize the legitimacy of "other forms" or "other types" of Satanism, because LaVey is seen as the first confirmed person in history to actually call his _own _codified, structured philosophy "Satanism." "Other types" of Satanists--for example, devil worshippers, theists, and their ilk--are typically seen by the the CoS as loonies, criminals, or rebellious teenyboppers who lack formal, structured beliefs, and who are mostly looking for an excuse to troll their parents and engage in criminal behavior.)

But, I actually post enough articles on  religion, and, in particular, liberal Christian theology on my Facebook that I imagine many of my friends think I'm Christian. I've come to feel great respect for Christians who _actually practice _Christianity--I'd say the same for many other religions as well---so I've been known to take Christians in particular to task for not following their own religion. 



			
				d.batty said:
			
		

> No rituals, my type of satanism isnt believing in the devil but more of a  do what the fuck you want kind of way. Its hard to explain. Im a member  of the church of satan amd thats about it. Oh yeah my husband is also a  satanist.



Well, then unless I misunderstood you before, that wouldn't make you theistic, Batty. That'd tend to make you atheistic or "apatheistic."


----------



## skylz (Mar 4, 2014)

< And another conservative Baptist joins the discussion "poll".


----------



## Kitte (Mar 5, 2014)

Satanist here too, cannot believe how much it's helped my life since i found it.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 5, 2014)

Troj said:


> "LaVeyan" here.
> 
> (Though, FYI, CoS members and sympathizers tend to resent that type of question, and also bristle at the term "LaVeyan." They don't recognize the legitimacy of "other forms" or "other types" of Satanism, because LaVey is seen as the first confirmed person in history to actually call his _own _codified, structured philosophy "Satanism." "Other types" of Satanists--for example, devil worshippers, theists, and their ilk--are typically seen by the the CoS as loonies, criminals, or rebellious teenyboppers who lack formal, structured beliefs, and who are mostly looking for an excuse to troll their parents and engage in criminal behavior.)
> 
> ...


Apparently I didnt catch that typo, but yes. I dont involve myself in "criminal activity" and all that nonsense. Im not some teeny bopper craving trollish attention from my parents or the public. I believe that if I want to do something I do it, which doesnt mean robbing a bank or murdering people in the name of satan. Like I said its hard for me to explain clearly, especially through text. If Im one on one with someone its easier for me. I use drugs, I can be violent, and all that other bullshit most satanic atheists are against. Im not to sure where to put myself, the closest I could come to is being a satanist, not some straight edge fuck face. Its complicated,  sometimes I dont even understand it myself.


----------



## KyryK (Mar 5, 2014)

If anyone's interested here's a FAQ from a theistic satanism website: http://theisticsatanism.com/varieties/FAQ-TS.html
I found this site and the ones it links to very useful when i first started looking into satanism.


----------



## Troj (Mar 5, 2014)

I _figured_ it might be a typo, so I just wanted to make sure, Batty .

I think I've only encountered one "theistic" Satanist (a Luciferian, in fact) who wasn't a total drip, and who didn't just seem to be trollin'.


----------



## KyryK (Mar 5, 2014)

Troj said:


> I _figured_ it might be a typo, so I just wanted to make sure, Batty .
> 
> I think I've only encountered one "theistic" Satanist (a Luciferian, in fact) who wasn't a total drip, and who didn't just seem to be trollin'.



I don't know if that second part was directed at me but i assure you i'm not trolling. Whether i'm a total drip or not is debatable however.


----------



## Troj (Mar 5, 2014)

^^No worries, King of Cats. I don't think you're trolling, and you don't seeeeem like a drip so far . I missed the part where you said you identified as a Theistic Satanist, so sorry if I sounded like I was being snarky.

Mostly, I was just giving my thoughts on how people under the "Satanism umbrella" tend to see each other, how they operate, and how they get along (or don't), from my point of view, and warning folks that the "Are you Modern/LaVeyan or Theistic?" question might get earn you a chewing-out if you ask it to the wrong person.

The Joy of Satan people are totally buggo in my book.

Order of the Nine Angles is even more so--yea, dangerously so.

Temple of Set isn't my cup of tea, since they're theistic and mystical, but they're benign, and they at least get kudos for largely developing their own philosophy and theology, and doing their own thing.

First Church of Satan is a joke.

Most of the online "churches" just crib their material from LaVey and the CoS, and a lot of them come and go with the wind.

Overwhelmingly, the theists I've had experience with have practiced this half-hearted hodgepodge seemingly intended to troll Mumsy and Dadsy, or they've come across as flat-out psychotic. 

There may be more theists who have their act together, but they certainly aren't as noticeable or high-profile as the people who could use a cold shower, a dose of lithium, and a slap upside the head. 

From my point of view, Satanism is about removing the blinders and climbing the walls that have ensnared and trapped so many other human beings. 

Whether you're worshipping God or Satan, you're still placing yourself below some intangible, immaterial entity outside of yourself, and you're still making assumptions about that being's plans, motives, and goals. 

Since I agree with LaVey that when people worship a deity, they're worshipping, by proxy, the human or humans who _created_ that deity in their own image, my feeling is, _cut out the middle man! _

For me, to come to critical realizations about how traditional ideologies (especially religious ones) have trapped and deceived people, only to re-insert yourself back into another theistic system is like taking two steps forward, one step backwards. 

Sorry for interrupting Christian Chat, by the by. If this isn't interesting or educational, I can shut up.


----------



## DrDingo (Mar 5, 2014)

Well, when I was born I was christened into protestant Christianity. But to be blunt, I don't really believe in God or Jesus.
So I s'pose you can call me an Atheist more than you can a Christian.


----------



## Kitte (Mar 5, 2014)

Troj said:


> ^^No worries, King of Cats. I don't think you're trolling, and you don't seeeeem like a drip so far . I missed the part where you said you identified as a Theistic Satanist, so sorry if I sounded like I was being snarky.
> 
> Mostly, I was just giving my thoughts on how people under the "Satanism umbrella" tend to see each other, how they operate, and how they get along (or don't), from my point of view, and warning folks that the "Are you Modern/LaVeyan or Theistic?" question might get earn you a chewing-out if you ask it to the wrong person.
> 
> ...





Most educational, rational, cool-headed discussion about religion I've ever seen, we need more people like this!


----------



## KyryK (Mar 5, 2014)

Troj said:


> From my point of view, Satanism is about removing the blinders and climbing the walls that have ensnared and trapped so many other human beings.



As far as i see it that's the underlying pricipal of satanism regardless of it's form whether theistic or athestic. I should say that i have a pantheistic view of satan, i see it, or rather i feel it, as a force, a wellspring of power and creativity that can be tapped into under the right conditions. It has no will and i'm not subservient to it. It's an enhanced state of mind. Now i can't say with any degree of certainty if what i experience as satan is truly an external force or simply an internal creation of my mind so it's more accurate to say i'm an agnostic satanist.


----------



## Mr. Sparta (Mar 5, 2014)

What do satanists imagine the afterlife to be then? Do they go to a nicer rendition of hell?


----------



## Troj (Mar 6, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> As far as i see it that's the underlying pricipal of satanism regardless of it's form whether theistic or athestic. I should say that i have a pantheistic view of satan, i see it, or rather i feel it, as a force, a wellspring of power and creativity that can be tapped into under the right conditions.



Ah, that makes sense! Though I'd consider myself an atheist, I have sometimes thought as "Satan" as a kind of prana, chi, or cosmic energy, at least in a metaphorical sense. I find thinking in this way is especially empowering and helpful when I ritualize. 

Rather, it's the conception of Satan as "horned-dude-I-have-to-appease-and-sacrifice-puppies-to" that makes me gag. 



			
				Mr. Sparta said:
			
		

> What do satanists imagine the afterlife to be then? Do they go to a nicer rendition of hell?



I'm already in Hell. It's called graduate school. 

Satanism as codified by LaVey is basically an atheistic or agnostic philosophy. There are no gods, no devils, no Heaven, and no Hell--at least, not as far as anyone can tell--so the purpose of life is to live life to the fullest, because chances are good that it's your one and only shot.

So, when you die, you die, and that's the end. You are worm chow.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 6, 2014)

You go no where, you die and rot.


----------



## Noctome (Mar 6, 2014)

Truthfully, I don't think satanist would be the most appropriate religion to group yourself with. Sounds more like catholicism to me. 
Lol


----------



## KyryK (Mar 6, 2014)

Mr. Sparta said:


> What do satanists imagine the afterlife to be then? Do they go to a nicer rendition of hell?



Seeing as i don't believe in an afterlife or any part of christian theology (my beliefs are actually very close to druidry) i can't really say but it's safe to assume that for those satanists that do believe in the christian concepts of heaven and hell that that is the case.


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 6, 2014)

Still trying to figure out a perspective faith that aligns to my thoughts.


----------



## Piroshki (Mar 6, 2014)

I love how a thread originally on Christianity has pretty much turned into a discussion on satanism. xD I know it's relevant, I just find it funny.

Anyway, I was born into a nondenominational church with a very Christian family, but I never really cared for it. I'm what I suppose you'd call an apatheist (thanks for that term, whoever it was that posted it - never heard it before but it pretty much describes my [ir]religious attitude to a T) although I still actively volunteer at my church on the production team or up onstage playing piano for sunday morning worship. I also still hold myself to very high moral standards, out of habit if nothing else. I could probably live with all the LDS' crazy rules better than any of my LDS friends if you took out all the devout religious bits.


----------



## KyryK (Mar 6, 2014)

Troj said:


> Rather, it's the conception of Satan as "horned-dude-I-have-to-appease-and-sacrifice-puppies-to" that makes me gag.



I don't think that the shove a crucifix up your ass, burn bown a church, sacrifice a goat on the sabbath type of satanism really exists outside of the minds of fundies and black metal musicians though. It's just a stereotype of satanism that has no basis in reality.


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 6, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> I don't think that the shove a crucifix up your ass, burn bown a church, sacrifice a goat on the sabbath type of satanism really exists outside of the minds of fundies and black metal musicians though. It's just a stereotype of satanism that has no basis in reality.



I admit though, as fictional as those concepts are, they are also metal as fuck.


----------



## Gogoat Rowboat (Mar 6, 2014)

Troj said:


> For me, to come to critical realizations about how traditional ideologies (especially religious ones) have trapped and deceived people, only to re-insert yourself back into another theistic system is like taking two steps forward, one step backwards.


I agree 100%.


Troj said:


> There are no gods, no devils, no Heaven, and no Hell--at least, not as far as anyone can tell--so the purpose of life is to live life to the fullest, because chances are good that it's your one and only shot.


This is basically my entire philosophy in one sentence.
Man, everything in this thread is actually interesting.  I think I just realized how boring I am for being an Atheist.


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 6, 2014)

Phew. Being an atheist or atheising agnostic as I am is the hardest thing possible. There is no future, there is no life after death and in truth nothing makes sence, and the only thing you can do is trying to not to think about the end. The only thing I'm afraid is death, but not the pain, hell no. I'm afraid of dissaprearing, of non-existence, like I was never alive. On the other hand, you don't need the courage to die whilst holding hands with your god - in the end you're going to better world, aren't you? But it takes the man to die, knowing that there is nothing waiting for you. Sadly, only few people, mostly ignorant ones can hold to their non-beliefs until their last breath. As for me - I don't know. It's very possible that one time I'll break and start falsely believing just out of fear - but I hope that will never happen since that would mean that I'm not human and not the man but utter shit, as I threw away my beliefs out of fear. On the other hand, paradoxically, I'd really like to be a believer even right now, as it would make my one and only fear dissapear, but sadly it's not possible, as all religious systems are unlogical, contradictory and flawed and I simply can't accept them as they are. Nevetherless, I'm infinitely jealous of people who have religious zeal in them.

It's one of the greatest questions - self respect or complacence? I chosen self-respect, as this way I can prove myself every day.

About satanism in black-metal like way - it almost doesn't exist at all. It's almost entirely a scenic pose, and also in some cases trolling and self-distance. Nothing more. Just go and watch some videos of bands making videos to their clips. A guy in a full corpse-paint and leather suit singing "lalalala" in a girly voice and spinning his ass? The most hillarious thing ever. I admit, there are some mentals, but that can't be avoided i guess.


----------



## DrDingo (Mar 6, 2014)

Troj said:


> I'm already in Hell. It's called graduate school.
> 
> Satanism as codified by LaVey is basically an atheistic or agnostic philosophy. There are no gods, no devils, no Heaven, and no Hell--at least, not as far as anyone can tell--so the purpose of life is to live life to the fullest, because chances are good that it's your one and only shot.
> 
> So, when you die, you die, and that's the end. You are worm chow.


Y'see, this actually sounds sensible. Nothing is made up or forced upon anyone. It's to-the-point and down-to-earth. It's practical and it just makes sense.

And to think that people use 'satanist' as an insult to describe an evil person!


----------



## Auramaru (Mar 6, 2014)

Well... since everyone else is slappin' down their aces...  I personally fucking _hate _talking about "beliefs" with people.

People will naturally believe whatever they want to believe because it makes them *happy*.  Regardless of how stupid their belief is, it makes them happy, and it probably makes them a more enjoyable person to be around.  This is why I don't bother judging or advising people on what to believe.  You could believe in the freakin' flying spaghetti monster for all I care.  As long as you're cool, you're not butting in on what I think, and your belief is making you a nicer person: go for it.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 6, 2014)

DrDingo said:


> Well, when I was born I was christened into protestant Christianity. But to be blunt, I don't really believe in God or Jesus.
> So I s'pose you can call me an Atheist more than you can a Christian.



On the government religion census they had me down as 'christian*' because I was baptised. So I crossed it out and wrote 'non religious' and sent it back. 

I had to do this like 3 times before they finally removed 'christian*' from their profile of me. 

This is the reason why the census reports that 72% of people in the UK are christian, despite between 60 and 70% of britons not believing in a higher power.



Auramaru said:


> Well... since everyone else is slappin' down their aces...  I personally fucking _hate _talking about "beliefs" with people.
> 
> People will naturally believe whatever they want to believe because it makes them *happy*.   Regardless of how stupid their belief is, it makes them happy, and it  probably makes them a more enjoyable person to be around.  This is why I  don't bother judging or advising people on what to believe.  You could  believe in the freakin' flying spaghetti monster for all I care.  As  long as you're cool, you're not butting in on what I think, and your  belief is making you a nicer person: go for it.




Well, personally I try to believe in the things which are real, whether or not they make me happy. There are lots of things which don't make me very happy at all, but which I still acknowledge. 

I think the notion of belief has unfortunately been associated with its functional merits, instead of the more literal point: whether the claim the belief concerns is actually true. Although I know that if this heretical notion is mentioned in a religion [or political] thread too aft things generally turn into a complete war.


----------



## Troj (Mar 6, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> I don't think that the shove a crucifix up your ass, burn bown a church, sacrifice a goat on the sabbath type of satanism really exists outside of the minds of fundies and black metal musicians though. It's just a stereotype of satanism that has no basis in reality.



Yup, and the rare people who do glom onto it tend to be a) angry teenagers or b) buggo-psychotic as all-get-out. Even so, you could still basically count them all on one hand, contrary to what Bob Larson would have you believe.

The Satanic Panic is really an intriguing and instructive period of our history, on a number of levels. The demon-hunters were the true demons in the end.



			
				DrDingo said:
			
		

> And to think that people use 'satanist' as an insult to describe an evil person!



Well, and that's largely why LaVey chose the name. 

If wanting to enjoy your flesh (responsibly and intelligently), use your mind, live your life to the fullest (again, responsibly and intelligently), love who you love and hate who you hate, and make yourself and your loved ones your top priority in life is "evil" according to the Powers That Be, and being credulous, subservient, submissive, self-deceitful, and self-harming is "good," then in that system, it makes more sense to be "evil."

One of the core messages of Satanism, I'd say, is that we need to pull back the curtain on the ideas, buzzwords, bromides, traditions, and cliches we take for granted, and actually evaluate and test them. That which the majority or the authorities insist is good and lovely may in fact be profoundly wicked and harmful, and that which they claim is evil may be life-affirming and positive. So, you can't judge a book by its cover reviews, so to speak.

BUT, the people who get really excited about the freedom Satanism affords will often drop out when I bring in Responsibility, because the CoS and its core philosophy place heavy emphasis on not being a criminal or a stupid dick. The CoS itself frowns upon drug use and abuse, and takes a hardline stance on illegal activity.

 I think it also helped me as a teenager, because it taught me that our choices and actions have consequences, so we need to consider what we do and don't want out of a situation before taking action, and then accept the natural and predictable consequences of the choices we've made.

It allowed me to adopt a more nuanced approach to, for example self-expression, at a time when most of my peers had a "I'm going to be 100% myself 100% of the time, and fuck you all" attitude, and were regularly hitting walls because of it. I learned to consider what I wanted out of a given situation or in a particular setting, and how much I was or wasn't willing to compromise or adjust in order to receive that desired outcome.


----------



## Roadkvlted (Mar 6, 2014)

I really love threads like this. Where even though you might have opposing views, you can learn so much from people without using harsh and insulting words. And really, it's cool to read about Satanism and from people who believe in it and what it means to them. I always believe that if you live and breath in your beliefs and it doesn't harm a living soul, then it's alright in my book.
And plus, it's really a good feeling for me to see something like Satanism being explained, instead of being shot down and told that it's evil. I wish more people could be rational like this.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 6, 2014)

The level of rationality and acceptance in here really surprises me at times...


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 6, 2014)

Daemonium said:


> I really love threads like this. Where even though you might have opposing views, you can learn so much from people without using harsh and insulting words. And really, it's cool to read about Satanism and from people who believe in it and what it means to them. I always believe that if you live and breath in your beliefs and it doesn't harm a living soul, then it's alright in my book.
> And plus, it's really a good feeling for me to see something like Satanism being explained, instead of being shot down and told that it's evil. I wish more people could be rational like this.



That is why I love this fandom; so many diverse people, it's interesting to see these kinds of things.


----------



## Troj (Mar 6, 2014)

To get the thread on track a little, one of my favorite bloggers is Fred Clark, a liberal Southern Baptist. He seems to really understand and embody what I see as the _best _and truest essence of Christianity, which is that Christ came (according the doctrine) to stand up to corrupt rulers and haughty religious authorities, and advocate for and embrace the marginalized, the suffering, the forgotten, and the oppressed--and so, it is the duty of all Christians to continue in that tradition by speaking truth to power, living a life of love and service, and giving a voice to the voiceless.

When you frame it that way, _that's pretty fucking cool_, and the world would be a better place if more Christians did that.

(Natch, the world would also arguably become a better place if more Buddhists embodied Buddhism better, and Muslims embodied the core of Islam better, and so on...)

I admit that, over the years, some liberal Christian theology and some aspects of Buddhism have crept into my practice of Satanism, so I've become kinder and gentler over time .

(I've even served on the board of a Lutheran church, so there!)

I'm absolutely opposed to right-wing fundagelicalism---you know, the kind practiced by Falwell and Robertson, and championed by the G.O.P.--and right-wing or hard-line theology in general.

Also don't particularly like the dumbed-down "Gospel of Wealth" self-help-y claptrap preached by Joel Osteen and Rick Warren, but _do _find it _very _interesting that LaVey correctly predicted that, eventually, the major religions would eventually have to adopt more "Satanic" preachings and teachings in order to survive. 

Sho' nuff, we now have Christian preachers telling people how to amass worldly wealth and how to look out for number one, and we even have manuals on how Christian couples can have hotter sex.

Don't get me started on that raging tool Mark Driscoll.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 6, 2014)

Troj said:


> and we even have manuals on how Christian couples can have hotter sex.



That's not really anything new, hell, Martin Luther said that a good christian husband should leave his wife "hungry and wanting"...


----------



## Troj (Mar 6, 2014)

Martin Luther was an interesting guy, aside from that little problem with Jews, ehh...

He also could hold his liquor pretty well.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 6, 2014)

Troj said:


> Martin Luther was an interesting guy, aside from that little problem with Jews, ehh...
> 
> He also could hold his liquor pretty well.



Well, he was German...


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 6, 2014)

Troj said:


> and we even have manuals on how Christian couples can have hotter sex.



Troj, I am successfully aroused.


----------



## Gator Joe (Mar 6, 2014)

How did I not see this thread sooner? I would've been one of the first to comment. 

I am a devout Roman Catholic. I absolutely love being a Christian. I'm an active "participitater" in my parish, and I help bring the joy of the Lord to others through praise & worship.


----------



## septango (Mar 6, 2014)

nope, an atheist with a soft spot for buddhist and hindu teachings


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Mar 6, 2014)

Gator Joe said:


> How did I not see this thread sooner? I would've been one of the first to comment.
> 
> I am a devout Roman Catholic. I absolutely love being a Christian. I'm an active "participitater" in my parish, and I help bring the joy of the Lord to others through praise & worship.



I absolutely love that enthusiasm!


----------



## Troj (Mar 6, 2014)

A Roman Catholic Cajun Alabama 'Gator, no less!

I'm impressed!


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 7, 2014)

And I'm just jealous.


----------



## BronwynMendoza (Mar 10, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Theistic. Though I have read LeVeyans book.
> 
> And Im not trying to heat up or troll the thread. If you're christian or whatever else I dont care. Almost everyone gets satanism wrong. Ive heard the dumbest shit from people when they ask and I tell.



I read up a lot on satanism when I was younger and would I be right in saying it's quite an animalistic religion that members treat eachother with almost a pack mentality? A religion in which knowledge and intelligance are highly respected qualities? If I've  got it wrong I apologise.


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 10, 2014)

BronwynMendoza said:


> I read up a lot on satanism when I was younger and would I be right in saying it's quite an animalistic religion that members treat eachother with almost a pack mentality? A religion in which knowledge and intelligance are highly respected qualities? If I've  got it wrong I apologise.


Depends on the type, but pretty muc, yeah. Im sure Troj can put it in better words, shes got a knack for that.


----------



## BronwynMendoza (Mar 10, 2014)

d.batty said:


> Depends on the type, but pretty muc, yeah. Im sure Troj can put it in better words, shes got a knack for that.



Definitely, she has an amazing talent for explaining and articulating!


----------



## Batty Krueger (Mar 10, 2014)

BronwynMendoza said:


> Definitely, she has an amazing talent for explaining and articulating!


That she does.


----------



## Troj (Mar 10, 2014)

BronwynMendoza said:


> I read up a lot on satanism when I was younger and would I be right in saying it's quite an animalistic religion that members treat eachother with almost a pack mentality? A religion in which knowledge and intelligance are highly respected qualities? If I've  got it wrong I apologise.



Depends on what you mean by "pack mentality." Certainly, many Satanists do have a fondness for wolves, so you will come across plenty of wolf metaphors across the board. Some of these metaphors and images--while emotionally compelling or aesthetically pleasing-- demonstrate misconceptions for how wolf packs _actually _function_ in reality_. (And that's a nitpick, of course, and a lot of people also recognize this.)

The CoS often bills itself as a "mutual admiration society," which means, basically, that Satanists, when they gather or congregate, are doing so because they want to, not because they have to.

 It also means that while people will _usually_ be respectful and polite towards one another, you're not under any obligation to like or hang out with Jim or Sandy or Jane just because they're a fellow Satanist. 

This includes not having to interact with _anybody_ if you don't feel like it.

Overall, I'd say that Satanists tend to be a pretty intelligent, independent, driven, determined, and diverse bunch. Many people are outspoken misanthropes, but I've noticed that even the most vocal people-haters actually seem to relish chatting with like-minded people.

I'd say people do tend to value knowledge, experience, and intelligence, as well as competence and skill. Overall, I'd say most Satanists tend to respect people who are knowledgeable, and who _then_ do something practical or interesting with that knowledge in their real lives. 

Relevant



			
				d.batty said:
			
		

> Im sure Troj can put it in better words, shes got a knack for that.



Aww, thanks. I've been doing it a long time!


----------



## BlueRaccoon (Mar 10, 2014)

I'm a christian furry fan.  I'm from the Church of Christ and I don't really consider myself denominational or anything like that.  I just like to do what Jesus says to do.  Simple as that.  





> To get the thread on track a little, one of my favorite bloggers is Fred Clark, a liberal Southern Baptist. He seems to really understand and embody what I see as the _best _and truest essence of Christianity, which is that Christ came (according the doctrine) to stand up to corrupt rulers and haughty religious authorities, and advocate for and embrace the marginalized, the suffering, the forgotten, and the oppressed--and so, it is the duty of all Christians to continue in that tradition by speaking truth to power, living a life of love and service, and giving a voice to the voiceless.


I agree with this completely


----------



## DarrylWolf (Mar 10, 2014)

I am a Christian Fur. Isn't there a group on FA?


----------



## Sar (Mar 10, 2014)

DarrylWolf said:


> I am a Christian Fur. Isn't there a group on FA?



Interestingly, I've only seen atheist groups but others just don't mention beliefs or mark it down in their profile; and I browse FA a lot! There probably is one. I probably haven't seen it.


----------



## Jabberwocky (Mar 10, 2014)

grew up in an all christian household that is super conservative and still is. decided that I didn't like christianity because most of the sector I grew up in (I won't say the name though I am sure you can guess which one) is very hateful of...most people that aren't in their religion.
Still believe in God and the good old J man but I am more interested in being Wiccan than anything else.


----------



## Weiss (Mar 11, 2014)

Catholic. Close enough. ;-)


----------



## TrishaCat (Mar 14, 2014)

I be a Christian Protestant of no particular denomination.


----------



## SavageBlueWolf (Mar 14, 2014)

Im a christian but Ive not gone to church because of work and what not.Although I have tattoos of wolves who cares what the bible says in that matter because they mean something to me and who I am.


----------



## Kayla (Mar 15, 2014)

I am, but I tend to not bring my religion into the furry fandom.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Mar 15, 2014)

I went to a Presbyterian church when I was little, but when I got a little older and tried actually reading the Bible, I couldn't make it past the creation story (and its modern implications of animal abuse and ecological degradation) without telling the book, the religion, its founders and its predecessors to get to the back of the oven. My opinion has only been reinforced since then, and I've only found more reasons to hate the aforementioned parties through trying to look 'deeper'.


----------



## Weiss (Mar 15, 2014)

I believe in the flying spaghetti monster.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (Mar 15, 2014)

The flying spaghetti monster is a *LIE*


----------



## Weiss (Mar 15, 2014)

Pastafarians dreams crushed.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Mar 16, 2014)

I myself am agnostic, as I believe I've already mentioned here, but as an interesting aside that's totally relevant to this thread, my grandfather's grandfather was a Methodist pastor and founded the Union Dale United Methodist Church (Uniondale, PA) in 1858.


----------



## Paper Phoenix (Mar 20, 2014)

I am Christian! I didn't think I'd meet other Christians in the fandom until I stumbled across Furs For Christ, which Tica linked in a previous comment.


----------



## DorotheaH (Apr 18, 2014)

I am raised in a christian family, I sometimes attend church (on my own!). But if I have to be honest, I don't really know. I am actually interested in many other religions.


----------



## Zan'theros (Apr 19, 2014)

To consider myself a Christian, I'd have to put the phrase 'highly unorthodox' into the equation.

I mean, I AM a believer in everything told in the Bible about Jesus and his life, and apply the Good Book's teachings to my own on a routine basis. But my personal 'journeys' when I lay my head down to sleep, of which I've already made known, don't exactly agree with the Scriptures on a literal spiritual basis. On a technical/slanted basis, though, there is agreement, and it is on that basis that I would still consider myself a follower of Christ.


----------



## Rayne553 (May 14, 2014)

Im a non denominational christian so yeah


----------



## dogit (May 14, 2014)

Baptized catholic and had my communion but i'm agnostic. I think it may have something to do with me going to a catholic that made me reject it and i know i'm not the only one. 

My secondary/high school is a lot better but by early school was terrible I got sent to the head for saying I know a gay person. relay that happened.


----------



## Tremodo (May 14, 2014)

I used to be christian until 2012, praying is the most useless waste of action there is. Never did I get the friends or job I asked for everyday for 4 years. I ALWAYS asked for others before me. I went to mass MORE OFTEN than my so called devout mother. But she isn't devout, she is superstitious. This one time we went together just so my brother could have his blood sugar dangerously low, but hey because of "safety" we weren't allowed out of the church. SCREW his real life REAL threat of danger and entering a diabetic comma or death, he needed some sugar in him pronto. All we got from the church people were pedantic NOS. Doors are closed until they say they are open. I had to climb the fence and ask someone in the house in front of the church for sugar, talk about awkward! she gave me some chocolates. There were no stores around, let alone on a sunday  

At the time I still believed, so I held back when I got back. I swear that if I see the goddamn son of a bitch who refused us out I will make slushy out of his face. All I said after it was all done was "THOSE ARE NOT CHRISTIAN ACTIONS!". I think the piece of shit pissed his pants.

One year later my brother DID have to be rushed to the ER due to seizures, his blood sugar was so low it was undetectable. All goddamn doctors who you visit about diabetes always treat you like you are an absolute moron, and like it's your FIRST time, even after you tell them "FOR EIGHT YEARS NOW", and gradually "FOURTEEN YEARS NOW". NOBODY, NOT ONE ever mentioned what to do in case of seizures, not to me or my mom at least, my brother perhaps knew, but sometimes they ask the family out, to talk in private with the patients, THIS SHOULD NOT BE ONE OF THOSE REASONS. WE HAD NO IDEA WHAT TO DO, NOBODY TOLD US. 

Holy, shit, it's like I've only ever met ONE good person heavily involved in Christian activities. She taught me sunday school in 1998 and that's all I've even know of her.

NOBODY else lives by the "teachings", is nice or "forgiving". So my mother has one of those in your face attitudes, if you were offended by her (because rightfully so, you may have fucked up). Even though you saw ME more often, because 99% I went to mass alone. I suddenly became I ghost to you, angry at her, means angry at the good man, who is noting but nice.

Such good, forgiving, people.

I'm talking about Catholics here, which are bad, douche bag, ass holes bad. Don't get me started on evangelicals though, they ARE ALL EVIL (or like 99.9% of them), might as well be nazi rapists. In 5th grade I went to an evangelical school for some weeks. So one day while "PRAYING" before class, MY TEACHER says that all Catholics are rats, and says something else insulting them, WHILE PRAYING in front of all grades of the school. 

Le me remind you that she was my FIFTH GRADE TEACHER, she taught ME. She KNEW I was Catholic, I was this harmless, introverted, new kid who wouldn't brake a plate, and had NO friemds. Their idea of "praying" is insulting others who also believe in god? they are wrong and evil because they believe differently.

That is just my most personal experience, but I've known them to be downright cruel, malicious, hypocritical spawns of hell.

How's this, according to evangelicals, Catholics are not Christians, reaaaaaaaaaally, funny considering evangelism originated from Catholism. And the center of the whole religion revolves around a guy they call CHRIST. They don't call themselves evangelicals, they call themselves Christians. And correcting them means engaging in an endless discussion of invalid ridiculous arguments that originated from some self- righteous evangelical "pastor". With some serious, horribly dark skeletons in his closets; a lot of them show easily, but people just chose to ignore them.


To sum it all up, I used to be a Christian furry, I'd rather believe that satan is the saviour than going back to those creeds.

What I believe now is in dead dreams, and that luck exists and favors the wicked, persistently, and blatantly.


----------



## ArmorcladCoyote (May 14, 2014)

Tremodo said:


> -rant-



Quite frankly a lot of "Christians" are more like the Pharisees than Christ. Many of them are corrupt, hypocritical, moneychangers that proceed that not only doom themselves to hell but drag others down with them. Jesus spent quite a bit of time mocking idiots like them. But don't confuse these disgusting individuals with the message. There are many good Christians, but projects like Nothing but Nets tend to get less coverage than assholes like Fred Phelps. 

One last thing. The guy the refused to let you leave screwed up not just as a human being but even by religious doctrine. There are multiple points in the old testament alone that show that some of the rules can be ignored in cases of life and death.


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 14, 2014)

ArmorcladCoyote said:


> Many of them are corrupt, hypocritical, moneychangers that proceed that not only doom themselves to hell but drag others down with them. Jesus spent quite a bit of time mocking idiots like them.



This makes me laugh more often than it should.


----------



## Eggdodger (May 14, 2014)

I'm not a Christian, but I used to be. I grew up with my father, who is a devout nondenominational Christian (he dislikes establishment in general, and I think that rubbed off on me). Now that I live with my mother, I've been exploring my Jewish heritage quite a bit. I think if I fell into a branch of Judaism, it would be Reform because of their accepting, lax community (Actually, there's a temple some 20 miles away from where I live) and the fact that Judaism in general focuses on a more individualized interpretation of the scripture and your relationship with God than Christianity does.

 I really think the Jewish philosophy of Kabbalah would describe what I've always thought about the world, though. I like the idea that there's Godlike potential in all of us that we don't normally access because of our limited perception of reality as human beings. I've attempted to take a more neutral approach to situations because of what I've read on Kabbalah, and it's really neat how much that has improved my life. People often know me for being amiable and friendly unless there is an issue to be addressed-- that's because I see everyone as a potential friend. I let their awkward lapses in sentences and clearly forced body language slide and look for the content of their heart. After all, things like that only seem odd to those who know what the "proper" way to carry oneself is. If someone says something that could potentially be offensive, I ask for clarification before I take it personally.

 I think the basic principles of Kabbalah would enhance anyone's life, if they would only look beyond the surface of things and approach a more complete understanding of things around them. Perhaps they would no longer see a reason to oppose the issues and statutes they combat everyday, or to scorn the individual who carries himself a little differently. The fact that Kabbalah means "receive" is very telling of its whole schematic. If you give more consideration to your five senses, you will "receive" more objective information. I'm not saying that Kabbalah makes you some sort of psychic; in fact, there's a story in the Talmud regarding four sages that gives an Aesop to the contrary. You're not meant to ascend physically or mentally and never return; to make any use of the Kabbalic teachings, you must keep yourself in the here and now. In one way I've heard it put, "the objective is not to identify with the light and never return." Jesus, of course, historically existed; I believe he in some fashion understood these principles (he makes several references to scripture throughout the New Testament. How meta!), and that is how he appeared so omnipotent to his followers.

Anyways, that's all I know so far. I certainly won't stop my research and studying, though. It's simply too interesting!


----------



## FangWarrior (May 14, 2014)

I'm christian here, all my life I've been one. Well, ever since I was young at least.


----------



## Wayne Travers (May 15, 2014)

I tried to be a Christian, but I completely failed at it. I just couldn't humble myself with the faith like many of the good Christian friends I've had through my life have. It's not Christianity's fault that I'm not a Christian. It is none other than my own.

Right now, I consider myself an agnostic atheist, but I'm still open to the possibility that I might give Christianity another go at some point in the future. I personally don't expect any gods to exist or there to be any life after death, but I could very well be wrong, y'know? And honestly, I hope I'm wrong with my whole idea that there's no life after death. After all, despite being a non-believer, I still hold lots of respect for religions and their followers. I don't let the WBC types get to me. Christians and people of other religions have used their faith as their basis for bothering to help me out, so that's why I'm the kind of weirdo atheist that likes religion. =D


----------



## Gnarl (May 15, 2014)

Nope! not Christian.... I was raised Methodist!


----------



## Auramaru (May 15, 2014)

Tremodo said:


> I used to be christian until 2012, praying is the most useless waste of action there is.
> ...
> I'm talking about Catholics here, which are bad, douche bag, ass holes bad. Don't get me started on evangelicals though, they ARE ALL EVIL (or like 99.9% of them), might as well be nazi rapists. In 5th grade I went to an evangelical school for some weeks. So one day while "PRAYING" before class, MY TEACHER says that all Catholics are rats, and says something else insulting them, WHILE PRAYING in front of all grades of the school.
> ...
> ...



I'm really sorry you feel that way.  Sounds like you went through a lot of crap.  Just know that you are throwing a lot of people into the same basket by saying that Catholics "ARE ALL EVIL".  But I get it.  When I go to Church, I see a bunch of lazy people... doing the bare minimum, not exercising their faith at all.  There's a lot of Catholic organizations I've gotten involved with that do just that: exercise the teachings of their faith. You aren't going to find that in a Church, you're going to find it in a food drive, in a "youth group work camp" (where you spend a week working for people who are "less fortunate" [disabled usually]).

I know I can't convince you.  But just know that you expect too much from specific people, while there are people literally spending their entire waking lives to help others. (I'm talking about the adults who run those Catholic organizations).



ArmorcladCoyote said:


> Quite frankly a lot of "Christians" are more like the Pharisees than Christ. Many of them are corrupt, hypocritical, moneychangers that proceed that not only doom themselves to hell but drag others down with them. Jesus spent quite a bit of time mocking idiots like them. But don't confuse these disgusting individuals with the message. There are many good Christians, but projects like Nothing but Nets tend to get less coverage than assholes like Fred Phelps.
> 
> One last thing. The guy the refused to let you leave screwed up not just as a human being but even by religious doctrine. There are multiple points in the old testament alone that show that some of the rules can be ignored in cases of life and death.



I agree completely (on all of this).


----------



## KyryK (May 15, 2014)

Eggdodger said:


> I'm not a Christian, but I used to be. I grew up with my father, who is a devout nondenominational Christian (he dislikes establishment in general, and I think that rubbed off on me). Now that I live with my mother, I've been exploring my Jewish heritage quite a bit. I think if I fell into a branch of Judaism, it would be Reform because of their accepting, lax community (Actually, there's a temple some 20 miles away from where I live) and the fact that Judaism in general focuses on a more individualized interpretation of the scripture and your relationship with God than Christianity does.
> 
> I really think the Jewish philosophy of Kabbalah would describe what I've always thought about the world, though. I like the idea that there's Godlike potential in all of us that we don't normally access because of our limited perception of reality as human beings. I've attempted to take a more neutral approach to situations because of what I've read on Kabbalah, and it's really neat how much that has improved my life. People often know me for being amiable and friendly unless there is an issue to be addressed-- that's because I see everyone as a potential friend. I let their awkward lapses in sentences and clearly forced body language slide and look for the content of their heart. After all, things like that only seem odd to those who know what the "proper" way to carry oneself is. If someone says something that could potentially be offensive, I ask for clarification before I take it personally.
> 
> ...



This post, specifically the underlined, reminded me of a very interesting page on RationalWiki regarding the existence of Jesus and the origins of Christianity: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_for_the_historical_existence_of_Jesus_Christ


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (May 15, 2014)

Tremodo said:


> I used to be christian until 2012, praying is the most useless waste of action there is. Never did I get the friends or job I asked for everyday for 4 years. I ALWAYS asked for others before me. I went to mass MORE OFTEN than my so called devout mother. But she isn't devout, she is superstitious. This one time we went together just so my brother could have his blood sugar dangerously low, but hey because of "safety" we weren't allowed out of the church. SCREW his real life REAL threat of danger and entering a diabetic comma or death, he needed some sugar in him pronto. All we got from the church people were pedantic NOS. Doors are closed until they say they are open. I had to climb the fence and ask someone in the house in front of the church for sugar, talk about awkward! she gave me some chocolates. There were no stores around, let alone on a sunday
> 
> At the time I still believed, so I held back when I got back. I swear that if I see the goddamn son of a bitch who refused us out I will make slushy out of his face. All I said after it was all done was "THOSE ARE NOT CHRISTIAN ACTIONS!". I think the piece of shit pissed his pants.
> 
> ...



Quite the unfortunate turn of events, but I can't say I haven't heard a situation like yours before.

What I read made me furious.  This is the very reason why I don't associate myself with any denomination in particular.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 15, 2014)

I have been baptised, taken the communion and confirmation, apostolic roman catholic church.

Of course nothing of that means shit as it is all a bloody lie


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (May 15, 2014)

Kitsune Cross said:


> I have been baptised, taken the communion and confirmation, apostolic roman catholic church.
> 
> Of course nothing of that means shit as it is all a bloody lie



Well, of course not.  None of it was supposed to MEAN anything.  Baptism is simply a public acknowledgement of your faith, and communion is simply remembrance of The Last Supper.  Neither of them are required to be saved.

Christianity has always been about serving others, not making our own lives better.  I mean, take a look at the apostles: Apostle Peter was crucified upside down in Rome.  Apostle Andrew was crucified as well.  Apostle Thomas was tortured with red-hot plates and burned alive.  Apostle Philip was tortured and killed.  Apostle Matthew was beheaded.  Apostle Paul was stoned several times, I believe, and then beheaded.  A lot more that I didn't mention, but they all died professing their faith and helping others.

I can't help but admire their dedication.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 15, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> Well, of course not.  None of it was supposed to MEAN anything.  Baptism is simply a public acknowledgement of your faith, and communion is simply remembrance of The Last Supper.  Neither of them are required to be saved.
> 
> Christianity has always been about serving others, not making our own lives better.  I mean, take a look at the apostles: Apostle Peter was crucified upside down in Rome.  Apostle Andrew was crucified as well.  Apostle Thomas was tortured with red-hot plates and burned alive.  Apostle Philip was tortured and killed.  Apostle Matthew was beheaded.  Apostle Paul was stoned several times, I believe, and then beheaded.  A lot more that I didn't mention, but they all died professing their faith and helping others.
> 
> I can't help but admire their dedication.



You know who else was tortured, beheaded, stoned and burned alive? These people

It makes me shiver how can someone be so evil, so heartless, how can they live with themselves? After causing that much suffering, they are surely not humans, they can't be...

I feel terrible now, I want to vomit, how can they!? HOW!?


It's not even important if god exist or not, but such evil, I can't deal with, just thinking of it makes me sick, it's too much. Not even fiction can be compared to the horror they made and still do, it's irracional, do they enjoy it? Because I can't understand how can someone be ok with that, it's just... it's just the maximun expression of horror, the pure essence of evil, the perfect representation of everything that is wrong

how?


----------



## Ayattar (May 16, 2014)

Omg! Germans, what did they do in II World War! So much terror, so much killing, #concentration camps #genocide #holocaust
How it's possible to be a German now? It makes me sick! I can't deal with it! How can someone be ok with that! It's the pure essence of evil!

Omg! Americans! What did they do to those poor Indiands! [...] How can you immigrate to America now? To live in a land of such unspokable evil! 

And, coup de grace
Ateists! What did they do in XX century! Soviets! Some Nazis! Killed millions! Enslaved hundreds of millions! Yes, let's blame all atheists now! Even if they aren't affiliated with aforementioned in any way! So much evil! How it's possible that you can stand being atheist! I can't believe! You must be evil!

Seriously. Think for 5 minutes about it and stop.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (May 16, 2014)

Kitsune Cross said:


> You know who else was tortured, beheaded, stoned and burned alive? These people
> 
> It makes me shiver how can someone be so evil, so heartless, how can they live with themselves? After causing that much suffering, they are surely not humans, they can't be...
> 
> ...



The Inquisition was by far one of the most horrifying things I know next to The Holocaust.  The Crusades were horrible too.

I'm not at all OK with that, but what I have noticed that almost all those mentioned were committed by Christians with high stances of power, like The Crusades and The Spanish Inquisition.  Christians and power don't really mix.  I mean, a lot of the kings in the Bible grow corrupt with power, and they were all 'Christian'.  The Jews persecuted all those who apposed their traditions, which again goes back to the power thing.  Like the Pharisees, they use faith as a pillar for their personal agendas (or from sheer paranoia and hysteria) rather than what it is truly for, and that, my friend, is blasphemy.  Many Jews refused to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, so many of Jesus' teachings were not noticed, perhaps.

You don't need to approve of these actions to be Christian.  These things were sick and anything but Christian.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 16, 2014)

Ayattar said:


> Omg! Germans, what did they do in II World War!  So much terror, so much killing, #concentration camps #genocide  #holocaust
> How it's possible to be a German now? It makes me sick! I can't deal  with it! How can someone be ok with that! It's the pure essence of evil!
> 
> Omg! Americans! What did they do to those poor Indiands! [...] How can  you immigrate to America now? To live in a land of such unspokable evil!
> ...




Christians have been killing and persecutings people for almost all their time, and they are not over nor plan to be over. The nazi were around for less than a decade, you can't compare that.

And yes, nazies are also the scum of earth, but germans =/= nazi, you can even see american neonazis. The thing you consider nazies to be the same as german it's just retarded, how dare you.

Soviets... Atheist... Stalin was an atheist but he did not kill in name of atheism, but for soviets, it's religious views are irrelevant there as well as for hitler(who was christian) you can't blame atheist for that, just soviets, your argument is retarded.





Disgusting.

Oh and america's goverment... I'll just won't talk about that.

There you have it, the 3 cruelest organizations of human history.
1. Christians
2. Nazis
3. US goverment

___
God, everything you posted there was stupid, not even one intelligent argument.

As for you thinking; atheists = soviets; germans = nazies, you are douche.

I condemne christians, as I also condemne nazis and stalinists and the american goverment.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (May 16, 2014)

Do not... I repeat... _DO NOT associate me with anyone even remotely similar to the West Bureau Baptist Church.

_This is what happens when fanaticism takes place.  I'm not denying that bad apples of Christianity have persecuted others, but it should be obvious that none of those people correctly followed the practices, or are practicing the correct ones.  These people showed hatred, which Jesus said clearly, 

"If anyone says, â€œI love God,â€ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen." 1 John 4:20

"Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." 1 John 3:15


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 16, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> Do not... I repeat... _DO NOT associate me with anyone even remotely similar to the West Bureau Baptist Church.
> 
> _This is what happens when fanaticism takes place.  I'm not denying that bad apples of Christianity have persecuted others, but it should be obvious that none of those people correctly followed the practices, or are practicing the correct ones.  These people showed hatred, which Jesus said clearly,
> 
> ...



Just to be clear I don't have anything to you, anyone is free to believe whatever they want, there are good christians aswell as hateful atheist, what I am against it's the church itself.
These fuckers.


----------



## RabidLynx (May 16, 2014)

I'm not Christian, but I don't hate Christians.

Maybe it's just my personal experience, maybe it's where I live, maybe I'm just missing something, but so far I've met Christians who were nice, forgiving, and know I'm an atheist and don't give a crap. The only time I've seen a christian being a douchebag is when I was at church one time, the pastor said "We should forgive homosexuals" and one guy was shaking his head. That made me sick, but in every group there are bad people. Every group there are good people. That's the way it is. So when you're ranting, "ALL CHRISTIANZ R EVUL!!!11!!" you're basically just saying to Christians "All atheists are angry and childish and always hate on us!". I'm not supporting or opposing either side, because of course not every Christian is loving and forgiving, but not every Christian is a homophobic douche. I'm just saying there are idiots and geniuses on both sides, so saying one or the other is completely evil is generalizing.

So from what I've experienced, Christians in general =/= Westboro

Of course, maybe I'm just missing something obvious...


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (May 16, 2014)

I apologize, but when you said this:

"I condemne christians, as I also condemne nazis and stalinists and the american goverment."

It sounded as if you were condemning all Christians.

It seems the more "organized" a church is, the more and more corrupt or potential of corruption there is.

I find Catholicism, like a Monarchy, to be as corrupt as it's entitled "ruler/pope".  There are good popes and bad popes, much like there are good kings and bad kings.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 16, 2014)

Ohyoupokedme said:


> I apologize, but when you said this:
> 
> "I condemne christians, as I also condemne nazis and stalinists and the american goverment."
> 
> ...



Oh well, I apologize for that


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (May 16, 2014)

It's cool.  Next time, just remember to clarify.


----------



## Eggdodger (May 17, 2014)

TheKingOfTheCats said:


> This post, specifically the underlined, reminded me of a very interesting page on RationalWiki regarding the existence of Jesus and the origins of Christianity: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_for_the_historical_existence_of_Jesus_Christ



Very interesting article! They use the lack of historical articles and inaccurate datings to make a case-- which is really unprofessional of a wiki. Wikis are meant to present objective information without a bias. Regardless, I've given this quite a bit of thought since you showed it to me.

I based my belief on the archaeological evidence. I don't think that there would have been many historical records of him, considering he wasn't exactly a prominent government leader. He was a preacher who lived a humble life with few possessions. He died a death common for the time that inadvertently became a symbol for his movement, but at the time wasn't much different from the rest.

Anyways, thank you again for the article. It was an interesting read.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 17, 2014)

I think jesus christ was a real person, but just the bastard son of maria and not god in any sense


----------



## KyryK (May 19, 2014)

Eggdodger said:


> Very interesting article! They use the lack of historical articles and inaccurate datings to make a case-- which is really unprofessional of a wiki. Wikis are meant to present objective information without a bias. Regardless, I've given this quite a bit of thought since you showed it to me.
> 
> I based my belief on the archaeological evidence. I don't think that there would have been many historical records of him, considering he wasn't exactly a prominent government leader. He was a preacher who lived a humble life with few possessions. He died a death common for the time that inadvertently became a symbol for his movement, but at the time wasn't much different from the rest.
> 
> Anyways, thank you again for the article. It was an interesting read.



You're welcome man. :mrgreen: RationalWiki was created to refute evangelical and pseudoscientific ideas (young earth creationism, vaccine-denialism etc) so their articles are written from a skeptic pov. Anyway, my computer doesn't seem to like the huff post, i cant get that article to load properly.


----------



## monochromatic-dragon (May 19, 2014)

Christian, Furry, and LGBTQ ally. 

Don't know what happened there. x3


----------



## Eggdodger (May 19, 2014)

monochromatic-dragon said:


> Christian, Furry, and LGBTQ ally.
> 
> Don't know what happened there. x3



You're an endangered species! =v


----------



## monochromatic-dragon (May 19, 2014)

Eggdodger said:


> You're an endangered species! =v



I see what you did there :v
I think its great that more people are becoming tolerant AND keeping their faith.


----------



## Gator Joe (May 20, 2014)

monochromatic-dragon said:


> I see what you did there :v
> I think its great that more people are becoming tolerant AND keeping their faith.



Yeah, I've noticed it's really the people who have no faith that are intolerant of others. I've been discriminated by many folks in the furry fandom just for being Catholic, that's kind of what's kept me out of the fandom. Just two days ago, I found out one of my friends is religiously intolerant. 

So keep the faith and remain tolerant.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 20, 2014)

I worship Cthullu.


----------



## FenrirDarkWolf (May 20, 2014)

I'm not EXACTLY a Christian, but I was raised with Christian beliefs, and I still follow some of them.
I actually have a lot of tolerant, Christian friends too.


----------



## monochromatic-dragon (May 20, 2014)

Gator Joe said:


> Yeah, I've noticed it's really the people who have no faith that are intolerant of others. I've been discriminated by many folks in the furry fandom just for being Catholic, that's kind of what's kept me out of the fandom. Just two days ago, I found out one of my friends is religiously intolerant.
> 
> So keep the faith and remain tolerant.



Yes indeedy.

I was raised Catholic, but I didn't really like being Cahotlic so I was never confirmed. Now after experimenting with various Protestant sects, I think I want to go back and become a confirmed Catholic. 
Most of the Protestants of various sects who I hang out with or know all seem too high off of Jesus to think rationally about their religious beliefs.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (May 20, 2014)

I know I'm gonna get FLAK for this, but can we please stop lumping everyone in with the lowest common denominator of their chosen groups? Sure, Christians were responsible for horrible atrocities that were committed in the name of their God, but honestly, how many modern religions haven't been connected to some kind of atrocity? The history of organized religions is a long and bloody one, but that does not under any circumstances mean that everyone that follows that religion has to be connected to that atrocity. It's no better than considering every Muslim to be an extremist and possible terrorist, which is simply not true.

Humankind is violent and prejudiced by nature, regardless their religious affiliation or lack thereof, and it's merely the people that are unwilling or unable to rise above that that are responsible for atrocities, not the religion itself.I may be agnostic, but to judge or belittle a person based solely on their beliefs is just horribly wrong. Seriously, in my mind it's no different than racism/sexism/homophobia. The only way to prevent atrocities is to rise above the differences and accept that we are all the same regardless of our differences, and in many cases, religion helps people come to terms with that, in fact it is/was one of the core principles that the Christian religion was founded upon.

And if you need an example, a few years back, there was a shooting in a small Amish  Mennonite community in my neck of the woods, and there was all kinds of outrage when the community called for the forgiveness of the shooter, and offered prayers and donations to the families of both the victims and the shooter, simply because  their religion was built on forgiveness and kindness towards all.

Sorry for the long-winded rant,this kind of unfounded hatred just peeves me more than I could possibly express.


----------



## Gator Joe (May 20, 2014)

monochromatic-dragon said:


> Yes indeedy.
> 
> I was raised Catholic, but I didn't really like being Cahotlic so I was never confirmed. Now after experimenting with various Protestant sects, I think I want to go back and become a confirmed Catholic.
> Most of the Protestants of various sects who I hang out with or know all seem too high off of Jesus to think rationally about their religious beliefs.



I was proudly confirmed in 2011. Whenever people want to be rude to me because of my faith or try to persuade me to leave the Church (one friend highly insulted me to show me the "light and science of atheism;" only thing he showed is that as an atheist, he's extremely intolerant of others), I just remember that I made the decision to be confirmed. I didn't choose to confirm my faith just to throw it all away because someone doesn't agree with what I believe.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 20, 2014)

Gator Joe said:


> I was proudly confirmed in 2011. Whenever people want to be rude to me because of my faith or try to persuade me to leave the Church (one friend highly insulted me to show me the "light and science of atheism;" only thing he showed is that as an atheist, he's extremely intolerant of others), I just remember that I made the decision to be confirmed. I didn't choose to confirm my faith just to throw it all away because someone doesn't agree with what I believe.



I have nothing against personal beliefs that stay personal. Being a dick to others, for what ever reason, is just not right.
However, I can still suggest certain things for you to take a closer look at. Like, when you openly state that you don't believe in evolution because of your beliefs even though it is a fact. I can't force anything on you. I can just attept to show you why it is a fact.
I don't hate religious people, I just hate the beliefsystems and the institution in itself. If you just keep it to yourself without bothering me with it then we are perfectly cool.
That is a line that many atheists tend to cross. They don't realize that whether you are religious or an atheist, a dick is still a dick.


----------



## Gator Joe (May 20, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> I have nothing against personal beliefs that stay personal. Being a dick to others, for what ever reason, is just not right.
> However, I can still suggest certain things for you to take a closer look at. Like, when you openly state that you don't believe in evolution because of your beliefs even though it is a fact. I can't force anything on you. I can just attept to show you why it is a fact.
> I don't hate religious people, I just hate the beliefsystems and the institution in itself. If you just keep it to yourself without bothering me with it then we are perfectly cool.
> That is a line that many atheists tend to cross. They don't realize that whether you are religious or an atheist, a dick is still a dick.



Personally, I do believe in evolution. A lot of people have this notion that Christianity and science are polar opposites and that you can't care about both. I have a strong passion for science, and I know many fellow Catholics who do, too. 

I agree, there are ignorant jerks from every group of people no matter what they believe.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 20, 2014)

Gator Joe said:


> Personally, I do believe in evolution. A lot of people have this notion that Christianity and science are polar opposites and that you can't care about both. I have a strong passion for science, and I know many fellow Catholics who do, too.
> 
> I agree, there are ignorant jerks from every group of people no matter what they believe.



Technically religion and science _are_ polar opposites^^ Because science is based on evidence and observation while religion is purely based on faith.
But I guess you can't really see them as "two sides of a coin" when it comes to how people treat them. It's more like a spectrum. Depending on how far gone you are to the "crazy side" of the religious side of the spectrum you see science differently.
So there isn't really anything that stops you from acknowledging scientific facts when you are religious. 
Especially since the bible technically supports evolution with Genesis 1:30. The word "evolution" means "change". And animals supposedly changed from being only herbivores to some of them being carnivores. That is a pretty big change if you ask me^^


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 21, 2014)

Gator Joe said:


> I agree, there are ignorant jerks from every group of people no matter what they believe.



I think the world would be a far better place if we could all just call out jerks for being jerks, without either painting others (we believe to be) in the same group with the same brush, or hiding behind non-jerk members of our groups.


----------



## tisr (May 21, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> Especially since the bible technically supports evolution with Genesis 1:30. The word "evolution" means "change". And animals supposedly changed from being only herbivores to some of them being carnivores. That is a pretty big change if you ask me^^



I usually afraid of internet arguments due to something that happened a while back, but I am a rather strong proponent of science, and an atheist, and this really bugged me.

I would like to clarify that Genesis 1:30 does not state that animals changed from being only carnivores to being herbivores, it states that all animals and life can eat every plant.
Also, changing some animals from being herbivores to carnivores is not evolution. Firstly, macroevolution happens over a long time scale, and is not instant. Secondly, evolution is a result of natural selection, which does not have a specific purpose or destination in mind.

My views on religion, like my views on nearly any opinion, would be to argue against the opinion, but don't hate the person. I still debate religion with a few good friends of mine and keep good contact. The only time I detest religious people is when they use religion to justify wrongdoings or prevent people from seeking medical treatment.

Similarly regarding science and religion, I do know of religious people who are well versed in science, the main point being that they separate their religion from science, and use their beliefs on personal matters without interfering with work. I do get irritated when people try to justify or replace science with beliefs, though.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 21, 2014)

You have taken captain cool too literally tisr. Captaincool's comment was humorous- as indicated by the smiley face at the end. 

Of course a literal interpretation of genesis, even if some traits of animal life change in its course, is nothing more than mythology and has no scientific value at all.



On the subject of the nature of science and of religion as philosophies. They are incompatible. Any merger of the two- even if it is reconciled by a person molding their religion to fit the facts, is still an exercise in confirmation bias- just as warping your impression of the world to incorporate stone circle magic would be. 

People who claim there is compatibility are executing this confirmation bias. Scientific achievement can be achieved in spite of this- Newton is an example, but certain areas of inquest are damaged and deprived of their real value by forcing religion into the equation- such that the history of western science is, in essence, a history of fact competing with the Bible as the null hypothesis- which has exhibited a significant retardation.


----------



## tisr (May 21, 2014)

Well, I guess people who intend to be humorous or sarcastic should stick to the ":V"
Cos stupidity on the internet is unbounded and sarcasm meters don't work on the internet :'V


----------



## Feste (May 21, 2014)

I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.


----------



## Gator Joe (May 22, 2014)

Feste said:


> I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.



I like the Jewish people. I have no reason to have any resentment towards them. My favorite math teacher was a Holocaust survivor. Aside from being the best math teacher I ever had, he was great at telling us how he and his family escaped from Poland. He was featured in our local newspaper, and he has a website and is working on publishing a book about his life. I think when people are antisemitic, they haven't actually spent time with any Jewish people. Granted, he's the only one I have spent gotten to know, but he has given me any reason to look down on the Jewish people. He is a wonderful person. Now talking about individual Jewish people, that's different. I'm sure I'll come across some Jewish people I don't like just like I'll come across people of any religion or no religion whom I will not like.


----------



## tarblacktomcat (May 22, 2014)

I am a Christian. I grew up in an agnostic home, and used to debate many people against the belief in God, however in high school I came into the belief in God. I briefly studied Buddhism, before joining a nondenominational Christian church. I've seen evidence that support Christianity being connected to some form of higher power, however this evidence does not disprove other theistic religions, and I must also critique the majority of Christians for there lack of logic, and reason. Though I still attend church on a regular basis, I find the work of theist intellectuals and scholars to be far more substantive. A good example of a logical Christian would be William Lane Craig, founder of the organization Rational Faith, seen here in his debate against Klemens kappel. I however disagree with William Craig on his stance against homosexuality(here). Perhaps as a bisexual I'm just being biased, but I am more inclined to support Matthew Vines, seen here in his presentation at College Hill United Methodist.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (May 22, 2014)

Feste said:


> I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.



I respect everyone until they give me a reason not to...I don't judge based on beliefs. I don't care if you're Jewish, Muslim, Pastafarian or whatever, as long as you act like a decent human being I have no problem with you.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 22, 2014)

Feste said:


> I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.



Same as christians, but with the difference they didn't kill a lot of people... except for jesus... and palestine, but that is politics not religion. Anyway I don't have anything against jews, and I don't see why anyone should, even more, I hate antisemites and nazis a lot.


----------



## Batty Krueger (May 22, 2014)

Gator Joe said:


> I like the Jewish people. I have no reason to have any resentment towards them. My favorite math teacher was a Holocaust survivor. Aside from being the best math teacher I ever had, he was great at telling us how he and his family escaped from Poland. He was featured in our local newspaper, and he has a website and is working on publishing a book about his life. I think when people are antisemitic, they haven't actually spent time with any Jewish people. Granted, he's the only one I have spent gotten to know, but he has given me any reason to look down on the Jewish people. He is a wonderful person. Now talking about individual Jewish people, that's different. I'm sure I'll come across some Jewish people I don't like just like I'll come across people of any religion or no religion whom I will not like.



My best friend is jewish,.but doesnt practice.


----------



## Duality Jack (May 22, 2014)

Can I be your personal Jesus? I am all about being worshipped.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (May 22, 2014)

Feste said:


> I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.


    Their beliefs were the inspiration for every religiously-derived injustice in Western society, so dont expect me to rush to their defense.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 22, 2014)

Jack Arclight said:


> Can I be your personal Jesus? I am all about being worshipped.



Oh hey, where were you?


----------



## TrishaCat (May 22, 2014)

Christian here.


Feste said:


> I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.


I don't see why furries would think anything different from your average person; we're human too.
To me, I'm all right with the Jews. Even if their book is the Old Testament. I don't really hold the Old Testament in a negative light, although there are some things in it that seem unusual. I don't believe the Jewish to be correct in their assertion that the Messiah hasn't risen yet, but neither will I go around telling them that they are wrong. They have every right to believe what they do, and I see no reason for chastising them for it.


----------



## Duality Jack (May 22, 2014)

Kitsune Cross said:


> Oh hey, where were you?


Life, romance, work, Horrible mistakes. 

All good.


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 22, 2014)

Jack Arclight said:


> Life, romance, work, *Horrible mistakes*.
> 
> All good.



Crazy chick?


----------



## Duality Jack (May 22, 2014)

Kitsune Cross said:


> Crazy chick?


 You could say that... I really need to stop finding crazy attractive. Unlikely though.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 22, 2014)

Feste said:


> I am kind of curious, what do furries think of Jews? It's already a little scary to be one on the Internet- reactions are either "Oh that's cool" to "F*** you, you deserve to rot in h***". After all, the Old Testament, which I've seen brought up, is the tome of the Jews, although I personally see it more as Historical with moral undertones rather than in a religious light.



I think the genital mutilation is abhorrent and regard the holy texts as false- like all other holy texts. 

I don't have a view on the Jewish people in general. It's not really possible to.



tarblacktomcat said:


> I am a Christian. I grew up in an agnostic  home, and used to debate many people against the belief in God, however  in high school I came into the belief in God. I briefly studied  Buddhism, before joining a nondenominational Christian church. I've seen  evidence that support Christianity being connected to some form of  higher power, however this evidence does not disprove other theistic  religions, and I must also critique the majority of Christians for there  lack of logic, and reason. Though I still attend church on a regular  basis, I find the work of theist intellectuals and scholars to be far  more substantive. A good example of a logical Christian would be William  Lane Craig, founder of the organization Rational Faith, seen here in his debate against Klemens kappel. I however disagree with William Craig on his stance against homosexuality(here). Perhaps as a bisexual I'm just being biased, but I am more inclined to support Matthew Vines, seen here in his presentation at College Hill United Methodist.



The belief system which craig calls 'rational' faith leads him to suppose that gay people have some sort of disease that can be cured- in spite of all medical evidence indicating conversion therapy is quackery. 

It's like believing in a religion where a significant amount of the church's followers practice homeopathy. Just..how can anybody think there is a web of rational support for that? So many followers of that apparent logic are drawn to pseudoscience, like moths to a lantern. ._.

Craig's arguments in the video are also nonsense. 'The reasons for the existence of our universe, despite cosmologists knowing too little to provide a concrete answer 'can only be the result of a higher reality- of which only an ephemeral disembodied monkey brain is a plausible option,'. 

You may as well try to solve a complicated puzzle by doing a great big turd on it. Indeed, such a great triumph that craig has discovered his world view is applicable to a plethora of practical issues that might affect christians, like homosexuality, failure and...oh, just the two.


----------



## AnthroSim (May 23, 2014)

w00t! my very first post! I'm Christian too


----------



## Gator Joe (May 23, 2014)

AnthroSim said:


> w00t! my very first post! I'm Christian too



â€‹Good for you! ^.^ Not a bad way to go about your first post.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (May 23, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> I think the genital mutilation is abhorrent and regard the holy texts as false- like all other holy texts.




Fun historical fact: The Jews actually borrowed the circumcision ritual from the Egyptians. In Egypt, soldiers were paid according to the number of enemies they slew, and the traditional means of proving that was to amputate the manhood of the fallen enemies, so to prevent soldiers from merely amputating the bits of fallen Egyptian soldiers to get more money,they came up with the idea of circumcision to immediately be able to distinguish Egyptian from non-Egyptian.

Yay for learning really weird and totally irrelevant crap from a drunk fox!!!


----------



## Fallowfox (May 23, 2014)

sniperfreak223 said:


> Fun historical fact: The Jews actually borrowed the circumcision ritual from the Egyptians. In Egypt, soldiers were paid according to the number of enemies they slew, and the traditional means of proving that was to amputate the manhood of the fallen enemies, so to prevent soldiers from merely amputating the bits of fallen Egyptian soldiers to get more money,they came up with the idea of circumcision to immediately be able to distinguish Egyptian from non-Egyptian.
> 
> Yay for learning really weird and totally irrelevant crap from a drunk fox!!!



...That's horrific.


----------



## Crimson Wolf (May 23, 2014)

*raises hand* I am too, though I'm more laid back and more on the loving thy fellow man and not all judgmental, unlike the majority now and days that really bring a bad name to the entire group.


----------



## tarblacktomcat (May 24, 2014)

Fallowfox you claim that Craig's argument and it in the video is nonsense. A am very interested to hear how you can support that claim. I've seen a lot of atheists voice their opinions against Craig, But do not provided a strong argument for that opinion. I think this quote from the video sums up my opinion quite well. "If  professor Kappel wants us to believe atheism instead, he must first tear down all of the evidence that I've presented for theism. And then in its place erect a positive case of his own that atheism is true unless and until he does that I think that theism is the more rational worldview."


----------



## Fallowfox (May 24, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> Fallowfox you claim that Craig's argument and it in the video is nonsense. A am very interested to hear how you can support that claim. I've seen a lot of atheists voice their opinions against Craig, But do not provided a strong argument for that opinion. I think this quote from the video sums up my opinion quite well. "If  professor Kappel wants us to believe atheism instead, he must first tear down all of the evidence that I've presented for theism. And then in its place erect a positive case of his own that atheism is true unless and until he does that I think that theism is the more rational worldview."



I'll dispense with formalities, and substitute god with the easter bunny, to illustrate the problem. 

'If professor Kappel wants us to believe the easter bunny doesn't exist, he must first tear down all of the evidence that I've presented for the easter bunny. And then in its place erect a positive case of his own that the easter bunny doesn't exist is true. Unless and until he does that I think easter bunny is a rational belief'.

What Craig has asked, is for the proof of a negative, which is philosophically impossible. If the measure of a belief is that it is unfalsifiable, be prepared to add astrology, psychic powers and pixies to your list of beliefs.

In science and philosophy positive claims take the burden of proof, because it is only possible to prove positive claims. This means that the claim's negative partner is the *null hypothesis*- which must be proven wrong for the claim to be correct. 

*
It is one of the simplest tenets of logic ever.* In the court of law it is known as 'innocent until proven guilty,', because the accusation of criminal activity is a positive claim. 

This subject is elucidated in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzAfn2NZ_sc

Now that you have seen just how Craig's mind works, are you in the least bit surprised that his views about homosexuals are not informed by any medical evidence? Are you surprised he tacitly approves of conversion therapies that medicine has flouted as quackery that potentially imparts psychological harm? Are you surprised his recommendations about the practicalities of christian life are limited to the banality of 2 subjects in which he affords us no greater insight than an agony aunt or a new-age crystal therapist?


----------



## TrishaCat (May 24, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> Fallowfox you claim that Craig's argument and it in the video is nonsense. A am very interested to hear how you can support that claim. I've seen a lot of atheists voice their opinions against Craig, But do not provided a strong argument for that opinion. I think this quote from the video sums up my opinion quite well. "If  professor Kappel wants us to believe atheism instead, he must first tear down all of the evidence that I've presented for theism. And then in its place erect a positive case of his own that atheism is true unless and until he does that I think that theism is the more rational worldview."


Why are you making the font so big?


----------



## Fallowfox (May 24, 2014)

Battlechili1 said:


> Why are you making the font so big?



Because there are none so blind as those who will not see? :V


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 24, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> Fallowfox you claim that Craig's argument and it in the video is nonsense. A am very interested to hear how you can support that claim. I've seen a lot of atheists voice their opinions against Craig, But do not provided a strong argument for that opinion. I think this quote from the video sums up my opinion quite well. "If  professor Kappel wants us to believe atheism instead, he must first tear down all of the evidence that I've presented for theism. And then in its place erect a positive case of his own that atheism is true unless and until he does that I think that theism is the more rational worldview."



The font size alone would announce this troll post, but the content is /so/ inane, it's not even funny. I know others try to counter this post, but is it worth it?


----------



## tisr (May 25, 2014)

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheMessianicManic

This guy makes a bunch of videos countering Craig's arguments, I have watched most of them, and Craig's original videos. Overall I think Craig's arguments are rather unsound. There are many such videos and pages on the interwebs, as well of many of Craig's videos and arguments to reference from.


----------



## speedactyl (May 25, 2014)

I do know as Christians do have special interests and hobbies. I don't see anything wrong with that given it doesn't violate or take you away from what it means to be Christians
that simple.


----------



## tarblacktomcat (May 25, 2014)

I have come to the counterargument on the burden of proof, but I quickly realized that even the most basic explanation I would have to write the equivalent of an entire book, which would be a complete waste of time to post on a chat board. Put very simply the burden of proof is only one method of eliminating the "Encyclopedia of statements we cannot prove false" and reducing the number of questions asked down to only questions that are relevant. Is not that I don't have an answer itâ€™s just the answer is too long and complicated to explain to somebody with such a narrow mind. However, I'd like to point out now I never meant to start a debate about theism at all, I was interested in what other Christian furry's had to say about homosexuality and Christianity. If you look at it, I was answering the original question that this board was started for. I was saying I am a Christian, this is how I came into Christianity in where I stand in Christianity right now. Oh, and by the way I am gay.  I Included William Lane Craig for two reasons, first I thought other Christians would be interested in hearing about him and secondly he is a anti-gay Christian in the gay Christian debate. I selected that video at random from a collection Of William Lane Craig debates I had in my  browsing history as a way to introduce Mr. Craig to other Christians who have not heard of him. I never claimed That William Lane Craig debates were flawless, I claimed That William Lane Craig debates were more substantive than my church. In fact I immediately argued against Craig. The conversation I wanted to start was between pro-gay and anti-gay Christians, not because I wanted to troll, but because I was interested in what other Christian furries had to say. Notice none of you paid any attention to the Matthew vines. Why do you think I posted the video?  




 In my second post, I stated I Support William Lane Craig argument that atheists should support their claims. I was simply asking Followfox to support your claim.  He showed up on the board created by a Christian furry  and then act like everybody else is wrong and he is right, but his only support for this is a vulgar metaphor about a man relieving himself on a complicated puzzle. So I wanted him to actually present an argument, not hide behind vulgarity. I'll give it to him, his video did a significantly better job of defending the burden of proof than others I have encountered. Most atheists I have spoken to do a terrible job of explaining the burden of proof and more importantly why it was  even relevant. I'd like to reiterate there is a flaw in the burden of proof, and the theism debate is far from over. However,  it has no relevance to what I actually wanted to talk about.




 Now that we've gotten this cleared up I would like to ask other Christian furries what is their opinion on pro-gay Christian perspective. Most Christians I've spoken to disagree with Matthew Vines however they respect and sometimes approve of my point of view. What is your guyâ€™s opinion?


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 25, 2014)

Cheez-its, they're now denigrating between "side A" and "side B"? Like they are vinyls, cassettes, or what have you? xD


----------



## Gator Joe (May 25, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> Now that we've gotten this cleared up I would like to ask other Christian furries what is their opinion on pro-gay Christian perspective. Most Christians I've spoken to disagree with Matthew Vines however they respect and sometimes approve of my point of view. What is your guyâ€™s opinion?



â€‹I have no problem with homosexuality.


----------



## tisr (May 26, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> Now that we've gotten this cleared up I would like to ask other Christian furries what is their opinion on pro-gay Christian perspective. Most Christians I've spoken to disagree with Matthew Vines however they respect and sometimes approve of my point of view. What is your guyâ€™s opinion?


I have no problems with homosexuality.

I am still rather unsure where your position stands. Do you agree with William Lane Craig and/or with Matthew Vines, and whose arguments do you present as the evidence which we have the burden of proof to tear down?
If you are referring to Craig, I had posted a channel with videos that counter a few of Craig's points far better than I can. If you are referring to Matthew Vines, then please do state so, and I shall research more about his arguments and evaluate them.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 26, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> I have come to the counterargument on the burden of proof, but I quickly realized that even the most basic explanation I would have to write the equivalent of an entire book, which would be a complete waste of time to post on a chat board. Put very simply the burden of proof is only one method of eliminating the "Encyclopedia of statements we cannot prove false" and reducing the number of questions asked down to only questions that are relevant. Is not that I don't have an answer itâ€™s just the answer is too long and complicated to explain to somebody with such a narrow mind. However, I'd like to point out now I never meant to start a debate about theism at all, I was interested in what other Christian furry's had to say about homosexuality and Christianity. If you look at it, I was answering the original question that this board was started for. I was saying I am a Christian, this is how I came into Christianity in where I stand in Christianity right now. Oh, and by the way I am gay.  I Included William Lane Craig for two reasons, first I thought other Christians would be interested in hearing about him and secondly he is a anti-gay Christian in the gay Christian debate. I selected that video at random from a collection Of William Lane Craig debates I had in my  browsing history as a way to introduce Mr. Craig to other Christians who have not heard of him. I never claimed That William Lane Craig debates were flawless, I claimed That William Lane Craig debates were more substantive than my church. In fact I immediately argued against Craig. The conversation I wanted to start was between pro-gay and anti-gay Christians, not because I wanted to troll, but because I was interested in what other Christian furries had to say. Notice none of you paid any attention to the Matthew vines. Why do you think I posted the video?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Narrowmindedness is the refusal to consider new ideas. 

Your idea has been considered, but not only is there no supporting evidence, you deny that you should _even be obliged to provide evidence_ and don't have an explanation why you are exempt from the same standards that everyone else is expected to meet. 

Craig, having looked at more material about him, is a disgusting and corrosive agent of quaziscience and petty discrimination. He openly flouts and distorts mainstream science to jam his god into it, and uses that god to provide reason for being nasty to other people for insignificant reasons. :\

The man even claims relativistic physics is wrong, such is his will to distort reality to accommodate his homophobic deity. 

This is what happens to people when they believe that, if their claims are divine, that they don't have to satisfy a burden of proof. 

If you want to talk about homophobia in christianity...well...sigh. To outsiders it sounds just as petty as Nordic supremacy being presented as if it were a contentious issue that needs a religious explanation before we can dismiss the white supremacists as looneys.


----------



## tarblacktomcat (May 28, 2014)

I think this video says everything I want to say.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 29, 2014)

The video presents a false dichotomy- that you have to answer questions about god in a yes or no format in order to answer questions about biology or physics. 
We do not need to answer 'do fairies exist'? In order to answer the question 'how does photosynthesis work', for example.  Even if the proponents of fairies insist that it is those magical creatures which facilitate the process.

The video presents an appeal to ignorance- that we cannot scientifically interrogate questions like 'what is the origin of biodiversity?'. These questions have been successfully interrogated already. 

The video presents a correct assertion. 'a good world view should allow you to see what it is possible to know.' It is evident that the world view the video's creator holds is defective, because she incorrectly dismisses questions as unanswerable and later she demonstrates a very warped idea of astronomy, in which she criticizes the big bang for not explaining the origin of life. 
Her view is, as she would say, distorted, because her discussion of epistemology makes woeful mistakes- and neglects to distinguish the difference between comprehensive explanation, and explicative power. 

A comprehensive explanation of chemistry would be 'it's wizard magic'. But this explanation has no explicative power. The much less comprehensive explanation of orbital theories before valence-bond orbital theory fail to explain phenomenon such as paramagnetism in Oxygen. However their explicative power is infinitely greater than 'it is magic'.


She states that all views in a world view must be coherent. This is only true if all the beliefs are causally interdependent. This is not always true. Whether or not you believe that there is an afterlife isn't relevant to a description of planetary accretion- for example. Even if you found out there really was an afterlife this would not prove the planetary accretion hypothesis wrong, or even suggest it was wrong- because they are not causally connected. 

She also presents the existence of gaps in a world view as troubling, but if these gaps are honest they are infinitely more favourable than substituting unfalsifiable claims to fill the gaps up. To do this, would be a 'God of the gaps' fallacy. 

Her description of the Big Bang's 'gaps' for instance are problematic. The Big Bang is not meant to describe how life, language and consciousness emerged. We know the Big bang happened, because of the literally astronomical evidence, but we aren't sure about exactly every detail- which is why there are still gap which remain to be filled. With patience and scientific endeavor we might fill these in the future. 

Complaining the the big bang theory doesn't explain the origin of life, language and consciousness, however, is as relevant as complaining that the theory of thermodynamics doesn't explain why I like to eat scrambled eggs and why I speak with an English accent. The theory doesn't explain these things because it doesn't concern them. It concerns the motion of small particles of matter as a function of temperature- not linguistics. 


It is a huge middle ground fallacy, in which the null hypothesis is viewed as a positive claim. In which case, in court, we would have to propose the position 'The defendant is neither innocent or guilty until proven one way or the other,', which is not functionally useful. If there exists no evidence to convict the defendant, we would not be able to release them as innocent. Even if the defendant had a very good alibi, the position of guilt could be rationalised to encompass it, by stating 'the defendant works in mysterious ways outside of our current understand of science- and that is how he committed the crime'. We would understand these ideas are ridiculous in a court of law, but they are given a ridiculous free-pass by many religious people. 

So, in conclusion, the video's creator wants to present the null hypothesis that 'an unfalsifiable claim is not true', as an independent positive claim which must also be proven. In order to justify this middle ground fallacy, she presents false dichotomies and argues that they are only answerable with arguments from ignorance, and that the value of these arguments is their description of reality- not their prediction of it. 

By this standard astrology would have the same epistemological status as chemistry. Think about that.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 29, 2014)

I should've known that some kind of debate would happen in this thread sooner or later, it kinda sorta never fails. I wonder how many pages it'll go. 

I also wanna just drop this here: http://www.culturalcognition.net/bl...science-literacy-interact-evolution-scie.html

Also here's the other thing that irks me. Why is it seen as being okay to come into a Christian thread and go "RAWR it's all a lie!" and then proceed to turn it into a big debate thread (I mean shoot, there was a thread on supernatural occurrences, and an atheist came in and gave their rhetoric on it - spoiler alert: they said none of it was real), but if a Christian were to do that same exact thing in a atheist thread why...why people would have a hissy fit! A commotion! It'd be another example of Christians shoving their religion down peoples' throats! 

I dunno. Maybe it's not good to type things up at 6:30am. 

Anyways, as for myself, I'm an ex-Christian after seeing and reading a lot of things regarding the Bible and its origins and what not. But I somehow seemed to develop the trait to not have the burning desire to tell every Christ-follower I see "Do you know that there's a possiblilty you're following a LIE?" because hey, that's their religion, they're happy with it, why do I need to destroy their world view? It ain't doin' me a lick of harm.

And to people saying you can't "Kill in the name of atheism" well duh, of course you can't....you can't kill in the name of something like that. You can't kill in the name of religion either. When's the last time you heard someone go "I kill you in the name of RELIGION!" Now when you read that, use Exact Words. I'm not saying "A Religion" and not using "Religion" as a place holder; I mean someone LITERALLY killing in the name of Religion.

However, people usually kill in the  name of a religious idea, like Christianity, Muslim, Buddhism, etc. Same thing with Atheism. You can't kill in the name of atheism, but you can kill in the name of an atheistic idea, such as Communism. So Stalin would've been killing in pursuit of an atheistic idea, not the whole of atheism itself; just as someone blowing themselves up is killing in pursuit of a religious idea, not the whole of religion itself.


----------



## tisr (May 29, 2014)

I do agree that such a happening is occuring, that the atheist community has been given higher social superiority by teh internetz.
For me, I try to be as neutral as possible, and disregard personal insults, motives, and emotions. I simply focus entirely on the arguments presented and either support or debunk the claims made regardless of whoever made the stand, what their opinions are, and their motives for doing so.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> I should've known that some kind of debate would happen in this thread sooner or later, it kinda sorta never fails. I wonder how many pages it'll go.
> 
> I also wanna just drop this here: http://www.culturalcognition.net/bl...science-literacy-interact-evolution-scie.html
> 
> ...



Specifically a video by a creationist called William Craig was posted, along with material in which Craig justified petty discrimination and medical quackery with his creationist world view. 

Craig's claims extend even further- in his attempted deconstruction of a wide variety of modern scientific theories including relativity. [because how can things be relative if there is an objective divine answer to everything? :V ]

It is this collection of irksome claims I've been taking to pieces, because they are not only epistemological corrosive, but because they encourage people who believe in the same religion as Craig to do things that actually do cause harm, such as permitting psuedoscientific sexual conversion therapies. 

Being religious isn't an excuse to expect people to respect your incorrect views on scientific theories or epistemological philosophy. This is why anybody asserting that null hypotheses own the burden of proof, not the positive claim, should expect to be challenged regardless of whether their assertion is made on religious grounds or not.


edit: I have spotted an error in one of the questions asked in cultural cognition, but do not believe it has influenced the result. It relates to incorrect usage of the word 'explosion',- a term which people who understand the big bang theory would be less likely to use to describe inflation. 

The specific question is 'the universe started in a huge explosion,'. Whilst descriptions of the big bang make it clear 'The Big Bang is not an explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe'.


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> I should've known that some kind of debate would happen in this thread sooner or later, it kinda sorta never fails. I wonder how many pages it'll go.
> 
> Also here's the other thing that irks me. Why is it seen as being okay to come into a Christian thread and go "RAWR it's all a lie!" and then proceed to turn it into a big debate thread, but if a Christian were to do that same exact thing in a atheist thread why...why people would have a hissy fit!
> 
> ...



It's like innocently walking by a group of people, and you overhear them discussing how the Sun rotates around the Earth. Do you keep on walking and leave ignorant people to spreading their false info, or do you stop and interject to do some on-the-fly Bill Nye stuff? Atheists sorta feel obligated to do the latter - It's a bit of narcissism mixed with an odd-yet-helpful form of Aladdin. 

Though if the reverse happened, a bunch of Atheists discussing the theory of gravity or something, and a Christian stops and starts saying "It's all lies!", they'd either get laughed at, or invited to join the discussion (in which I repeat, Aladdin). 

I also don't think anyone ever meant that someone was literally killing in the name of religion (even a specific religion), but rather it's ideals and junk, when they say that - Did you genuinely believe that when people say "X killed in the name of religion/for their religion", that they were talking about the religion's name? 

The problem with the Communism/Stalinism comparison, is that atheism doesn't work like a religion, _mostly _because it's not one - You can't really kill in the name of atheistic ideas, because there really aren't any in atheism other than the lack of belief in a god. I suppose if someone was killing others specifically because they don't believe any gods exist, and _for no other reason whatsoever_, you could be right (albeit I dunno how they'd go about it), but that's nothing to do with Communism/Stalinism


----------



## Gator Joe (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> I should've known that some kind of debate would happen in this thread sooner or later, it kinda sorta never fails. I wonder how many pages it'll go.
> 
> I also wanna just drop this here: http://www.culturalcognition.net/bl...science-literacy-interact-evolution-scie.html
> 
> ...



I was thinking about the same thing. If the question was if there are any Christians in FAF, why would people of other religions or no religion respond just to say they're not Christian? That's not what was asked. The poster wants to know who is Christian, not who isn't. It'd be like if I went to a basketball thread just to say I don't like basketball when the thread is about folks discussing their love for the sport.


----------



## Troj (May 29, 2014)

I agree wholeheartedly with Gator Joe here, and felt bad about participating in one of these derails as I did it--in my defense, it was to ward off any potential misconceptions about _my_ religion once that ball started rolling, but it still wasn't cool. I'm sorry for my role in contributing to the derail.

If someone asks, "Who does/is/enjoys X?" with the intention of finding some likeminded folks, it's obnoxious to butt in and talk about how you do/are/enjoy A, B, C, or D, or how you personally hate X. If you want to talk about A, B, C, or D, or how much X sucks, then by all means, start a separate conversation, but don't disrupt or derail someone else's.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 29, 2014)

Troj said:


> I agree wholeheartedly with Gator Joe here, and felt bad about participating in one of these derails as I did it--in my defense, it was to ward off any potential misconceptions about _my_ religion once that ball started rolling, but it still wasn't cool. I'm sorry for my role in contributing to the derail.
> 
> If someone asks, "Who does/is/enjoys X?" with the intention of finding some likeminded folks, it's obnoxious to butt in and talk about how you do/are/enjoy A, B, C, or D, or how you personally hate X. If you want to talk about A, B, C, or D, or how much X sucks, then by all means, start a separate conversation, but don't disrupt or derail someone else's.



I'm sorry, but people actually got on to the topic of discussing whether homophobia could be justified by their religion. 

Imagine if a bunch of ufo enthusiasts started discussing whether the aliens want them to carry out their racist commands in preparation for the final invasion and you get a similar picture of how far-fucking-flung from reality things just got.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> In my second post, I stated I Support William Lane Craig argument *that atheists should support their claims*.



WHAT CLAIMS?! That I don't believe that gods exist because you completely fail to provide proper evidence for their existence on all levels? That is not a claim!
Christians, or rather religious people, are the ones making the claims. You are the ones claiming that there is a magical creator being that willed everything into existence. And you are making these claims without providing even a shred of evidence.
Oh wait I am sorry. Your "evidence" is a book that was supposedly written or influenced by that god. God exists because it says that it exists, makes sense right? ^.^ NOPE! It doesn't. It ain't my fault that you can't see circular logic when it is dryhumping your face.
Just stop beating around the bush for once and just show me proper evidence that your god exists. Then we can talk!

As for homosexuality: There is nothing wrong with it. People who hate gay people based on the fairy tales they believe in deserve to be kicked in the nuts/ovaries.
Also, you said you are gay yourself. So why are you following a homophobic beliefsystem? What is your reason for that?

As for Craig, I agree with Fallow. He is a disgusting person who does nothing but spreading lies, revolting propaganda and hate. He also deserves to be kicked in the nuts. That a gay person supports an argument that he made (as in that atheists should "prove their claims") terrifies me. What is wrong with you?

As for the other video, I agree with Fallow there as well. Some partd are utter nonsense and the rest is very missleading.
It is, again like Craig's bullshit, nothing but propaganda.

How about you stop being indoctrinated by others and start to think for yourself for once? Independant of outside influences?


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 29, 2014)

Uh oh, someone activated CC again.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> How about you stop being indoctrinated by others and start to think for yourself for once? Independent of outside influences?



You'd be surprised how little people actually do that,not just in the realm of atheist vs religious, but pretty much any part of life, be it politics, philosophy, etc. 

Besides, completely cutting off any outside influences is impossible. People will ALWAYS be influenced by things, be it music, movies, stories, etc. Some of the best ideas I have about life and things comes from the music I listen to. To not be influenced by anything at all is a task that I would rather think is hard.

Edit: And I kinda see where they're coming from with "Atheist prove your claims". Because a lot of the time, you see atheists coming in and asserting that God doesn't exist, but yet when a religious person asks them why that is, they resort to saying "Well the burden of proof should be on you!" 

It really should be on whoever makes the initial claim, methinks. So a religious person asserting Christ exists needs to back their stuff up, but if the atheist fires first, than it is they that should explain their moves. 

Furthermore, I still think debating religion like this is a waste of time. If people want to discuss religion in a way that'll actually further understanding or bring to light new questions, instead of this never ending wheel of "I'mma prove you wrong!!", then I'm open for religious discussion. But so far on FAF all I ever see are religious people and atheists going at it, usually with atheists ganging up on the religious people and curb stomping them. Seriously, a gridlocked congress accomplishes more than these so-called debates.


----------



## Lobar (May 29, 2014)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Uh oh, someone activated CC again.



he's not wrong though


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> you see atheists coming in and asserting that God doesn't exist, but yet when a religious person asks them why that is, they resort to saying "Well the burden of proof should be on you!"



There is no evidence for their existence at all and all holy texts and religions are full of contradictions, historical errors and obvious loopholes. There. Now it's their turn >__>



Lobar said:


> he's not wrong though



Have I ever been wrong? :3
I'm just blunt.


----------



## Auramaru (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> WHAT CLAIMS?! That I don't believe that gods exist because you completely fail to provide proper evidence for their existence on all levels? That is not a claim!
> Christians, or rather religious people, are the ones making the claims. You are the ones claiming that there is a magical creator being that willed everything into existence. And you are making these claims without providing even a shred of evidence.
> Oh wait I am sorry. Your "evidence" is a book that was supposedly written or influenced by that god. God exists because it says that it exists, makes sense right? ^.^ NOPE! It doesn't. It ain't my fault that you can't see circular logic when it is dryhumping your face.
> Just stop beating around the bush for once and just show me proper evidence that your god exists. Then we can talk!
> ...



Gotta say, you said it all pretty well... but your approach fuckin' sucks. (while making sense, you offended the shit out of people)


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Auramaru said:


> Gotta say, you said it all pretty well... but your approach fuckin' sucks. (while making sense, you offended the shit out of people)



So what part up there is offensive?
The truth hurts some times. It is not my problem if people get offended by the truth.
Whining because someone said something that they think is mean shouldn't give them special treatment.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> So what part up there is offensive?
> The truth hurts some times. It is not my problem if people get offended by the truth.
> Whining because someone said something that they think is mean shouldn't give them special treatment.



Yeah but there is the old notion of what you're trying to say being affected by how you say it.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> Yeah but there is the old notion of what you're trying to say being affected by how you say it.



But no one told me what's so offensive about it yet XD
Also, if someone is using Craig as a source like that I am not exactly gonna hold back.


----------



## Auramaru (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> WHAT CLAIMS?! That I don't believe that gods exist because you completely fail to provide proper evidence for their existence on all levels? That is not a claim!
> Christians, or rather religious people, are the ones making the claims. You are the ones claiming that there is a _*magical creator*_ being that willed everything into existence. And you are making these claims without providing even a shred of evidence.
> _*Oh wait I am sorry*_. Your "evidence" is a book that was supposedly written or influenced by that god. God exists because it says that it exists, *makes sense right? ^.^ NOPE! It doesn't*._* It ain't my fault that you can't see circular logic when it is dryhumping your face.*_
> Just stop beating around the bush for once and just show me proper evidence that your god exists. Then we can talk!
> ...





CaptainCool said:


> So what part up there is offensive?
> The truth hurts some times. It is not my problem if people get offended by the truth.
> Whining because someone said something that they think is mean shouldn't give them special treatment.



You stomped on people's beliefs, referring things to "fairy tales" and "magical creator".  You talked down to others. You sorta came across as an ass.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Auramaru said:


> You stomped on people's beliefs



Correction, I stomped on ancient nonsense. (_That_ is offensive.)


----------



## Auramaru (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> Correction, I stomped on ancient nonsense.



Which is still people's beliefs.  Although you didn't disagree with me: again, you are offending people by calling it "ancient nonsense".


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Auramaru said:


> Which is still people's beliefs.  Although you didn't disagree with me, again, you are offending people by calling it "ancient nonsense".



I was being offensive on purpose this time... I was exaggerating. Although I do think it is accurate...

Anyway, why should I give these beliefs special treatment? They get to be offended when I say something negative about religion but when someone speaks badly about MY beliefs based on THEIR religious beliefs, like the whole "evolution is bullshit" thing, I am just supposed to bend over and take it? Because OH NO I MIGHT OFFEND THEIR RELIGOUNS BELIEFS?
Fuck that. Fuck religion. FUCK Craig and everyone who agrees with him.
FFFFFFUCK.


----------



## Auramaru (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> I was being offensive on purpose this time... I was exaggerating. Although I do think it is accurate...
> 
> Anyway, why should I give these beliefs special treatment? They get to be offended when I say something negative about religion but when someone speaks badly about MY beliefs based on THEIR religious beliefs, like the whole "evolution is bullshit" thing, I am just supposed to bend over and take it? Because OH NO I MIGHT OFFEND THEIR RELIGOUNS BELIEFS?
> Fuck that. Fuck religion. FUCK Craig and everyone who agrees with him.
> FFFFFFUCK.



Just pointing out that "Fuck you and everything you stand for" isn't a very good approach to convincing people or informing people about anything.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Auramaru said:


> Just pointing out that "Fuck you and everything you stand for" isn't a very good approach to convincing people or informing people about anything.



If "everything you stand for" is nothing but an ancient myth (and an immunity to reason) that is not supported by ANYTHING and that is so shaky that if you just look at it funny it collapses under its own lack of logic I just can't be bothered to give a shit about that.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 29, 2014)

Auramaru said:


> Just pointing out that "Fuck you and everything you stand for" isn't a very good approach to convincing people or informing people about anything.



It really isn't. It doesn't matter how scientific your facts are, being the way that Cool's being about it has a greater chance of turning people off to your argument than it does bringing people to it. All it'll lead to is more preaching to the choir.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> It really isn't. It doesn't matter how scientific your facts are, being the way that Cool's being about it has a greater chance of turning people off to your argument than it does bringing people to it. All it'll lead to is more preaching to the choir.



I can't convince anyone anyway. Religion is an unfalsifiable belief. "It is a fact because it is a fact". My point is just that I don't understand why religious people get to be assholes but once an atheist says something negative about religion he is immediately worse than Stalin.

I refuse to tolerate these beliefsystems. And when I hear nonsense like what Craig is spewing then I spew right back.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> I can't convince anyone anyway. Religion is an unfalsifiable belief. "It is a fact because it is a fact". My point is just that I don't understand why religious people get to be assholes but once an atheist says something negative about religion he is immediately worse than Stalin.
> 
> I refuse to tolerate these beliefsystems. And when I hear nonsense like what Craig is spewing then I spew right back.



Yes because religious people were _totally _being asshats to atheists in this thread before the debates started.  I know you mean elsewhere, but I don't think religious people were acting as you described in this thread.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> Yes because religious people were _totally _being asshats to atheists in this thread before the debates started.  I know you mean elsewhere, but I don't think religious people were acting as you described in this thread.



I don't care about the thread in this case , I meant that in general. Like that Craig bitch.


----------



## Ozriel (May 29, 2014)

Okay guys, let's stop hitting below the belt with a cattle prod.

As much as CC is being irreverent, the Craig person is a tightwad, sheep-shagging, insufferable, and myopic jerkdick.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Ozriel said:


> the Craig person is a tightwad sheep-shagging jerkdick.



That seems accurate to me.
The funny thing is that those "big christians" are using the same old arguments as those supper annoying, preachy christians. The cosmological argument, circular reasoning, all that good stuff.
Those people are dangerous. They stand in the way of progress.


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> I can't convince anyone anyway. Religion is an unfalsifiable belief. "It is a fact because it is a fact". My point is just that I don't understand why religious people get to be assholes but once an atheist says something negative about religion he is immediately worse than Stalin.
> 
> I refuse to tolerate these beliefsystems. And when I hear nonsense like what Craig is spewing then I spew right back.



You really just need to tone it down. You come across as all aggression without empathy or patience - Akin to Dawkins or Hitchens, minus the subtly. Take Bill Nye and Neil Degrasse Tyson - They're knowledgeable and respected, _but_ they'll sit there and hold your hand through everything, _just _to make sure you understand what they're explaining. It might be tedious and frustrating, but are you trying to spread information, or are you really just trying to "win"?


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2014)

Lastdirewolf said:


> You really just need to tone it down. You come across as all aggression without empathy or patience - Akin to Dawkins or Hitchens, minus the subtly. Take Bill Nye and Neil Degrasse Tyson - They're knowledgeable and respected, _but_ they'll sit there and hold your hand through everything, _just _to make sure you understand what they're explaining. It might be tedious and frustrating, but are you trying to spread information, or are you really just trying to "win"?



We are on the internet. You already have all the necessary information ready at your fingertips. And I still should hold their hands and explain things because they are being lazy?
Bill and Neil are dealing with old guys who are scared of the internet. Not with people in their twenties who sit in front of a PC all day. I shouldn't have to explain anything when all the information is just one Google search away :T


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 29, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> We are on the internet. You already have all the necessary information ready at your fingertips. And I still should hold their hands and explain things because they are being lazy?
> Bill and Neil are dealing with old guys who are scared of the internet. Not with people in their twenties who sit in front of a PC all day. I shouldn't have to explain anything when all the information is just one Google search away :T



You're not wrong, but there's being right, and then there's being the asshole who always has to be right. *shrug*

That was my one drunk attempt at giving a fuck :v take it or leave it. I find it somewhat amusing regardless.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (May 29, 2014)

I will never understand how furries can follow a religion that holds that all life other than humans is soulless meat that lives, suffers and dies for nothing. I abandoned it long ago, and have no regrets. 
Of course there are those apologists around here who'll pull the few Bible quotes that may indicate the contrary, but they are weak and half-assed excuses compared to detailed descriptions of animal abuse in the service of the Hebrew god. (Judges 15-4  ,e.g)


----------



## tisr (May 30, 2014)

There is no reason to devalue or be offensive in a formal debate, unless you're trying to do satire or be an ass. No matter how much you may think that something is 'ancient nonsense', you should not distort it as such.  In fact, its best if you present all evidence as neutral and unbiased as possible to mantain rigorousness of definition and clarity of argument.
Argue with evidence, not insult.
Your argument style is already similar to that of a Westboro Baptist. Seriously, come on.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 30, 2014)

Kit H. Ruppell said:


> I will never understand how furries can follow a religion that holds that all life other than humans is soulless meat that lives, suffers and dies for nothing. I abandoned it long ago, and have no regrets.
> Of course there are those apologists around here who'll pull the few Bible quotes that may indicate the contrary, but they are weak and half-assed excuses compared to detailed descriptions of animal abuse in the service of the Hebrew god. (Judges 15-4  ,e.g)



So, you want to play the picking verses game eh? 

"The righteous care for the needs of their animals, but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel." Proverbs. 

Also keep in mind that 1) Not everything those who follow God do is God approved; where do you see God giving his approval of what Samson was doing in that verse and 2)Samson was a bit of a jackass. An arrogant jackass.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 30, 2014)

Yehoweh, the God of Abraham, unfortunately demands a lot of animal sacrifices- which is where the term 'scape goat' originates from.
 A village would sacrifice a goat to Yehoweh in penance for their crimes against one another- and hope that Yehoweh would favour them in the future.  
Today we appreciate that the way to make penance for crimes against each other is nuanced, but fundamentally built on the idea of apologising to the victim and making it up to them, rather than killing an animal who has no causal connection to the crime what so ever to provoke divine action. 

 The martyrdom of Christ is a scape-goat sacrifice, in which Christ takes the role of the goat. He has no causal connection to any of the sins of humanity and his death does not achieve the apology and reconciliation we now view as integral to justice. He is, therefore, a scape goat. 

This view of animal, and human life, as currency for divine influence is fundamentally sick. It shouldn't just be furries who view an allegory of animal sacrifice as absurd and cruel, but humans in general should be disgusted, as the Spanish conquistadors were when they discovered that Central American cultures viewed human sacrifice as divine currency.


----------



## VintageLynx (May 30, 2014)

As religion is based mainly upon faith rather than fact it never does well in internet debates as this one demonstrates. Shame really because there are a lot of good points in the bible that get ignored.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 30, 2014)

VintageLynx said:


> As religion is based mainly upon faith rather than fact it never does well in internet debates as this one demonstrates. Shame really because there are a lot of good points in the bible that get ignored.


Like what, don't kill people? Be nice to others? These things should be common sense and I hope no one here needs a book to figure out that murder is bad :T


----------



## tisr (May 30, 2014)

The problem, about the 'good points in the bible', is that there are also many bad and contradictory points in the bible as well, such that the bible no longer becomes a credible morality guidebook or universal truth. You could cherry-pick good and bad points from the bible, and that reduces the bible to a random set or points.

A way to put this would be, for example, if a man did charity and helped the poor and other good deeds, but is also a murderer, that does not make the man good. The bible works the same way, and the presence of both good and bad points makes it a dubious source.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 30, 2014)

I will say the one thing I never got about Christians was how they're just a-ok with letting Jesus take the fall for their sins. >.> Seems like he got fucking screwed and everyone is happy to fuck him over.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 30, 2014)

Butters Shikkon said:


> I will say the one thing I never got about Christians was how they're just a-ok with letting Jesus take the fall for their sins. >.> Seems like he got fucking screwed and everyone is happy to fuck him over.



Why did he get screwed? He got promoted to vice president of the universe! Seems like a good deal to me!


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 30, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> Why did he get screwed? He got promoted to vice president of the universe! Seems like a good deal to me!



the 3 days hell thing. (oh and the painful cross torture) Seems sorta dickish to go. "Hmmm. Yeah, you can go to hell for what ive done. :3" I mean, you would think that grown adults would want to take responsibility for their own actions and shit. 

But I guess times are still a bit savage that way.


----------



## tisr (May 30, 2014)

The thing about suffering on the cross is enough suffering to bear the sin of all the world is a bit dubious. There are people out there, such as torture or rape victims, who probably experience much greater suffering than being hung on a cross for a few days.
An argument I've seen to justify this is that Jesus had to suffer 'God's wrath', which is supposed to be extremely intolerable or something along those lines, but then again the existence of such a presence or how anyone might prove such a presence is dubious.


----------



## Nikolinni (May 30, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> Like what, don't kill people? Be nice to others? These things should be common sense and I hope no one here needs a book to figure out that murder is bad :T



Go read Proverbs some time. There's lots of good things other than "don't kill people" and "be nice to others". 

"Blessed is the one who finds wisdom, and the one who gets understanding, for the gain from her is better than gain from silver, and her profit better than gold." 3:13-14

"Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. Without having any cheif, officer, or ruler, she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest." 6:6 - 8

"Treasures gained by wickedness do not profit, but righteousness delivers from death". 10:2

"Whoever walks in integrity walks securely, but he who makes his ways crooked will be found out." 10:9

"On the lips of him who has understanding, wisdom is found, but a rod is for the back of him who lacks sense". 10:13

"A wise son hears his father's instruction, but a scoffer does not listen to rebuke". 13:1

"The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender." 22:7

And in other places...
"For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?" Mark 8:36

"Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven; give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed sown, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap, for with the measure you use it will be measured back to you." Luke 6:37-38

"Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgement on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practie the very same things." Romans 2:1

"The point is: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully." 2 Corinthians 9:6

Much more than "Be nice and don't kill people" me thinks.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 30, 2014)

In order to discern the wheat from the chaff of religious texts we employ a moral architecture derived from outside of that text- from our cultural setting, experience and perhaps exposure to scientific research that affirms or discredits the efficacy of certain behaviours achieving certain outcomes. 

It doesn't take a genius to realise that there is wealth inequality for instance, but this is exactly the type of basic assertion which is expected to lend moral credence to the bible. 

It is as weak as expecting people to believe that the bible is the font of knowledge about plate tectonics because it predicts 'earthquakes in various places,'. 

This doesn't mean people can't use ancient texts as tools of moral investigation, but it does show that their often accepted status as 'morally divine' is rather troubling, because the morality they assert is a mixture at best- and the descriptions of moral behaviour we still agree with are vague and simple.

But perhaps that's the kind of person the morality of Roman times appeals- people who like to feel morally justified for holding simple views that are so obvious they take almost no endeavour to reach.


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 30, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> In order to discern the wheat from the chaff of religious texts we employ a moral architecture derived from outside of that text- from our cultural setting, experience and perhaps exposure to scientific research that affirms or discredits the efficacy of certain behaviours achieving certain outcomes.
> 
> It doesn't take a genius to realise that there is wealth inequality for instance, but this is exactly the type of basic assertion which is expected to lend moral credence to the bible.
> 
> ...



Well the Bible _was_ heavily edited, and it's unlikely that it was the commoners that were re-writing/translating or editing it (for the most part), so it was likely "simplified" over time for them (amongst other things).


----------



## Kitsune Cross (May 30, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> Like what, don't kill people? Be nice to others? These things should be common sense and I hope no one here needs a book to figure out that murder is bad :T



Too bad they don't play by their own rules; oh you don't think like me? *murder*


----------



## Fallowfox (May 30, 2014)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Well the Bible _was_ heavily edited, and it's unlikely that it was the commoners that were re-writing/translating or editing it (for the most part), so it was likely "simplified" over time for them (amongst other things).



So should we expect more sophisticated and justified dissections of morality to be present in the original greek, hebrew and aramaic texts, such as the dead sea scrolls?


----------



## tisr (May 30, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> Go read Proverbs some time. There's lots of good things other than "don't kill people" and "be nice to others".
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## Nikolinni (May 30, 2014)

tisr said:


> Nikolinni said:
> 
> 
> > Go read Proverbs some time. There's lots of good things other than "don't kill people" and "be nice to others".
> ...


----------



## Fallowfox (May 30, 2014)

The specific examples tisr quoted are, unfortunately, not regarded as irrelevant and old fashioned by all modern Christians.
 In the United Kingdom a parenting book, which specifically advised severely beating children with sticks because of biblical instruction, was removed from sale [it even provided advice on how to 'safely' whip babies.] Millions of parents, most of whom live in the United states, bought and follow this book's advice, brutalising their children.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 30, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> tisr said:
> 
> 
> > I know it contains questionable morals, how do you think i got where it was?
> ...


----------



## tarblacktomcat (May 30, 2014)

There are then two problems I've seen with the atheist argument so far. To explain the first problem let's say that instead of a Christian I was a Deist. Well then you'd really have no case to believe God doesn't exist. In my original post I had considered putting in Anthony flew, I decided not to because first I thought it would just complicate things, secondly I figured I was talking to Christians not atheists. In in the case of Deism an atheist don't really have a very good argument against the belief in God, in fact Richard Dawkins says that "one can make a reasonable case for that, not a case that I would accept but I think it's a serious discussion we could have." So I think that that shows that it's perfectly rational to believe in God. So the question is not â€œdoes God exist?â€ Or even â€œwhat god?â€, However the issue is what do people do based on their belief in God? 



 So what people do based on the belief that God? Well this seems to be the area where atheists have shown the greatest bias. They believe that Christianity generates hatred  intolerance and bigotry. Now I certainly know Christians like that, in fact my house across the street from one such church. But these churches are in the minority, and they are losing attendance. I seen this too often, people look at the hatred intolerance and bigotry created by a a few members of a group, but completely ignore that groups actions of kindness, caring, and generosity done by the majority. This effect of choosing the worst in people, is taken to the extreme on both the Internet and the media. I figured furries would know this more than anyone.



 Christians are far more tolerant than media, and Internet would have you believe. I announced that I have a boyfriend at my church Bible study, they were more accepting than my agnostic family. If that wasn't enough of a display of Christian tolerance, I've had my openly transgender, wiccan, friend fursuit at my church. My friend liked it so much he put the church logo on his suit. As it turns out many Christians take all that "judge not lest you be judged", "love thy neighbor", and "love your enemies" stuff seriously. Many Christians believe that they have to be respectful, generous, kindhearted, and tolerant not because society tells them to, but because it's part of the religious code. 



 Atheists believe that the spread of atheism will promote tolerance, but when I look at this idea I see the exact opposite.  you don't have to take my word for it, look back at the board, look at the statements made by the Christians and other religious people, and compare them to the statements made by the atheists. Which group sounds more tolerant of other people's ideals?


----------



## Troj (May 30, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> I'm sorry, but people actually got on to the topic of discussing whether homophobia could be justified by their religion.
> 
> Imagine if a bunch of ufo enthusiasts started discussing whether the aliens want them to carry out their racist commands in preparation for the final invasion and you get a similar picture of how far-fucking-flung from reality things just got.



That's fair. I think when the conversation is about an actual debatable topic, anyone who has some insight into that topic should ideally be able to weigh in. 

I was referring more to the beginning of the thread, when the Christian roll call devolved into people adding THEIR religions to the roll call. 

Basically, when someone says, "Who here is Christian?" or "Who here watches Supernatural?" it's kind of obnoxious to say, "I'm a Pastafarian!" or "I read Anne Rice!" because that wasn't the question. 

But, yeah, if the question is, "Who here thinks homosexuals will roast in the Fires of the Pit for all Eternity?" that's actually an open discussion question.


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 30, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> So should we expect more sophisticated and justified dissections of morality to be present in the original greek, hebrew and aramaic texts, such as the dead sea scrolls?



Quite the opposite actually. I think it was likely _worse_ in the original languages, but was made softer and more ambiguous as literacy grew amongst the commoners. Can't exactly have a book _totally_ filled with "proper" ways to abuse others. :v


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (May 30, 2014)

Nikolinni said:


> So, you want to play the picking verses game eh?
> 
> "The righteous care for the needs of their animals, but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel." Proverbs.
> 
> Also keep in mind that 1) Not everything those who follow God do is God approved; where do you see God giving his approval of what Samson was doing in that verse and 2)Samson was a bit of a jackass. An arrogant jackass.


I had already accounted for this kind of response in my original post, but I guess I'll grace this with a response. 
Factoring in the arrogance of Genesis 1:27 , and 1:28 that overshadows all , and such savagery as Fallowfox mentioned, can you really pull any other quotes than the one that everyone uses in this debate?


----------



## Captain Howdy (May 30, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> There are then two problems I've seen with the atheist argument so far. To explain the first problem let's say that instead of a Christian I was a Deist. Well then you'd really have no case to believe God doesn't exist. In my original post I had considered putting in Anthony flew, I decided not to because first I thought it would just complicate things, secondly I figured I was talking to Christians not atheists. In in the case of Deism an atheist don't really have a very good argument against the belief in God, in fact Richard Dawkins says that "one can make a reasonable case for that, not a case that I would accept but I think it's a serious discussion we could have." So I think that that shows that it's perfectly rational to believe in God. So the question is not â€œdoes God exist?â€ Or even â€œwhat god?â€, However the issue is what do people do based on their belief in God?
> 
> So what people do based on the belief that God? Well this seems to be the area where atheists have shown the greatest bias. They believe that Christianity generates hatred  intolerance and bigotry. Now I certainly know Christians like that, in fact my house across the street from one such church. But these churches are in the minority, and they are losing attendance. I seen this too often, people look at the hatred intolerance and bigotry created by a a few members of a group, but completely ignore that groups actions of kindness, caring, and generosity done by the majority. This effect of choosing the worst in people, is taken to the extreme on both the Internet and the media. I figured furries would know this more than anyone.
> 
> Atheists believe that the spread of atheism will promote tolerance, but when I look at this idea I see the exact opposite.  you don't have to take my word for it, look back at the board, look at the statements made by the Christians and other religious people, and compare them to the statements made by the atheists. Which group sounds more tolerant of other people's ideals?



You do realise that if you _were_ a Deist, that it genuinely would not matter if ANY god existed, right? The absolute basic premise of Deism, is that a Creator created the world/universe, and then abandoned the creation for the rest of eternity (except for the occasional "miracle"). How is that better? It would literally make no difference, other than a god started the 'big bang', and then did absolutely nothing else, and any supernatural interaction in the Bible would be 100% false (or filed under 'a miracle', which is worthless), other than Genesis(maybe?). That is why Dawkins is indifferent to it and why atheists don't have a "good" argument against it, because it's sorta like atheism, other than the one-time-only-and-has-no-proof-what-so-ever "supernatural" event that occurred when no-one was looking, or the extremely rare (and laughable) "miracle". 

Your personal anecdote about tolerance is touching, but yeah...Try harder. Crack open a history book or two, and let the waves of Christian and religious "love" wash over you - You don't even need to go that far back, just 50-100 years or so will do. We're not just talking about the here and now, or even this century for the most part, but the centuries that have passed. 

Tolerance is a funny thing. You'll have a handful of extremely vocal bigoted assholes, and maybe a group twice that size trying to be as vocal and squash the hatred...but then where's the rest of them? Sure, the uninitiated might _believe_ that the bigoted asshole is wrong and going to hell, or whatever, but they rarely actively try to do anything. Indifference is _far _worse and far more damaging in the long-run. 

On the final part, atheists do not *collectively *believe/do/etc. _anything_. There is no defining feature of atheism, other than the lack of a belief in any god. There is literally nothing holding any atheist to another in any way. If you drop the pretense of religion, atheists are the same as anyone else. They live, they laugh, they love, they die, and life goes on.


----------



## Fallowfox (May 30, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> There are then two problems I've seen with the atheist argument so far. To explain the first problem let's say that instead of a Christian I was a Deist. Well then you'd really have no case to believe God doesn't exist. In my original post I had considered putting in Anthony flew, I decided not to because first I thought it would just complicate things, secondly I figured I was talking to Christians not atheists. In in the case of Deism an atheist don't really have a very good argument against the belief in God, in fact Richard Dawkins says that "one can make a reasonable case for that, not a case that I would accept but I think it's a serious discussion we could have." So I think that that shows that it's perfectly rational to believe in God. So the question is not â€œdoes God exist?â€ Or even â€œwhat god?â€, However the issue is what do people do based on their belief in God?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Deism isn't, in my view, rational either. No more explicative power is gained, in any scientific field, by implying the existence of divine agency. Nor does any scientific field considering the natural world imply the action of conscious minds, apart from when it concerns the actions of physical creatures which possess brains. 

So there is no reason to imply the existence of a supernatural creature to orchestrate the universe. If you can prove there are fields of science in which explicative power is improved by doing so, then I will reconsider. 


Unfortunately churches which distort science to meet their supernatural claims [which should be viewed as immoral, because it is lying] and which preach petty discrimination are not in the global minority. Fortunately in many regions they are in a minority, but even in the United Kingdom they exert a political force for petty discrimination that is substantial [and this is a country in which 2 thirds of people aren't even sure if they believe there is a god]. 

When your ideals include believing that magic is a better way of understanding the universe than astronomy, trying to convince other people of this bullshit and opening the floor to discussions about whether your magical beliefs justify petty discrimination that is not a mode of behaviour which merits tolerance. It merits criticism.


----------



## RabidLynx (May 30, 2014)

I feel like the odd one out here. I've met nice, forgiving Christians and I've never met the homophobic, arrogant, sign-holding violent Christian ever in my life. It might just be I live in an exceptionally welcoming area and my experience with Christians is not as big as some of the adults around here.

Or maybe everybody is just overreacting and wanting to hate on something.

You do realize that when you hate and judge an ENTIRE religion based on what Westboro does and what some people a long time ago did, you're being the hateful, arrogant ones, not the Christians?

Good god this is why I hate most people. I'm just going to say it: Atheists are not oppressed. Gays are not oppressed. Christians are the oppressed. We live in a society where being gay or an Atheist is an accepted thing, and if you're a Christian, life is hell. You get crushed and beaten and you become the scum of society, not because of what you did, but because some idiots in the same group as you killed some people and are holding up signs and have tainted the whole message your religion originally meant to spread. You just want to tell people about your God, you want to celebrate him, and you want others to see how your religion is good. But you can't because you are bashed, hated, and not allowed to show your religion anywhere. 

Oh, the poor gays! The poor atheists! Such oppressed! Much hated! Wow! The poor wittle gays, such a harsh society where the BIG EVIL CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES rule, everybody hates the poor wittle gays, wow coming out such bravery, they need to praised by Obama on television because they were so brave! Who cares about the brave soldiers at war! Who cares about the Christians who pray in public and celebrate their religion! They shouldn't because EVERYTHING SINGLE THING ABOUT CHRISTIANITY IS EVIL OOOH THEY ALL HATE AND JUDGE AND KILL AND HOLD UP SIGNS AND HATE GAYS OOOOOH US ATHEISTS ARE  SO OPPRESSED, SO OUT OF PLACE OUT OF SOCIETY WAAAAAAAH THIS IS TOTALLY THE SOCIETY WE LIVE IN, WHERE GAYS AND ATHEISTS ARE HATED AND CHRISTIANS RULE GOTTA HATE ON THOSE CHRISTIANS CAUSE WE ARE SO MUCH SMARTER AND BETTER THAN THOSE H8TERS

wake the fuck up.

[e] sorry this meant to be like a sentence or two and then i started to mad, and then i raged a bit... i've just kinda been in a pissy mood all week and i should really calm down


----------



## Fallowfox (May 30, 2014)

I'm going to find it difficult to engage RabidLynx's comments, because I think that the problem is actually mosaic. I'm going to discuss the USA, because in the UK most people tend to get along, and creationist-style religionists belong to an exotic fringe, while in the United states they constitute ~40% of the population.
 Suffice to say when someone is in a 73% majority in their country, to whom all legal right are applicable, complaints of oppression are somewhat redundant. 
There are states in which belief in a higher power is a prerequisite for election as governor. That_ is _legal discrimination. 

Imagine living in a state in which Christians were prohibited from holding public office and a notion of discrimination may begin to emerge. What you're complaining about is bickering and the mere notion that people express a view of a religion which isn't positive.

Christians never will be given less legal rights than any other group, because that wouldn't be fair, and complaining that the current state constitutes discrimination is much like a man reacting to feminism with the insistence that 'men are the real victims in society'. Yes, they have their own issues, which are a complicated mosaic, and no they aren't responsible for all the ills suffered by the opposite gender, but good god- what a false dichotomy.


----------



## tisr (May 31, 2014)

As I always say, I abhor people who try to base an argument mostly or entirely off appeal to emotion. I argue by evidence, and on evidence alone.

To RabidLynx, somehow, you tried to refute the point of overdramatization with an overdramization of your own. You argue that atheists make passing statements over christians by making a passing statement of atheists of your own. Somehow that does not come off as very convincing. With people holding any opinion, there are those extremists who overgeneralize and overcomplicate any issue. However, most of the time, these vocal groups do not generalise the overall community.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 31, 2014)

tarblacktomcat said:


> So I think that that shows that it's perfectly rational to believe in God.



No, it is not. It is entirely irrational.
Why? Because there is no evidence for it's existence.
Personally I believe that there is an EXTREMELY slim chance that a being that we might call a "god" could potentially exist. I think so because I can't know everything that exists in the universe or everything that is possible in the universe.
I don't believe in a specific being. I just know that it is just as irrational to dismiss something that we can't know as it is to fully believe in something that we can't know.

Also, stop making atheism out to be a beliefsytem. It is NOT an active believe! Atheism is a non-belief. All it says is that I don't believe in a higher power of any kind due to a complete lack of evidence.
Me being an atheist doesn't make me do things. An intolerant atheist isn't intolerant because he is an atheist! He is intolerant because he is intolerant...
And just to clarify, I do tolerate religious people who leave me alone with their nonsense. If you start actively spreading it among society or if you start to force your beliefs on me, THAT is when I am starting to become intolerant towards you, and with good reason.
I don't have anything against religious people in general. I just absolutely hate the beliefsystems that they follow because religion is evil.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Jun 2, 2014)

Butters Shikkon said:


> the 3 days hell thing. (oh and the painful cross torture) Seems sorta dickish to go. "Hmmm. Yeah, you can go to hell for what ive done. :3" I mean, you would think that grown adults would want to take responsibility for their own actions and shit.
> 
> But I guess times are still a bit savage that way.



Jesus did it willingly out of his love for us.  Willingly.  The Apostles were appalled when Jesus first mentioned his death and even after his death.  We celebrate the death and *RESURRECTION* of Jesus, so stop making us look twisted.  What is twisted is accusations without proper knowledge of the subject.

His sacrifice is remembered and his resurrection is celebrated.  How does that equate to savage?  We now have a clear path to eternal paradise.


----------



## Ohyoupokedme (Jun 2, 2014)

Can you all just stop this bickering?  I don't want this thread to turn into a debate fest.  Please!


----------



## Hikaru Okami (Jun 2, 2014)

Heyyy I'm just gonna leave this here. I was raised in a Christian home, but I like to learn about different religions too.

Anyway, you know what would've been awesome? If Jesus died with a smile on his face. You know that kind of smile that says "Don't be sad I'll be back" or something like that. People usually draw him with a sad expression, but I'd like to imagine that he was happy to sacrifice himself to save the people he loved. I know that sounds weird, but I just like to think that he is always happy as long as his followers love God.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 3, 2014)

CaptainCool said:


> No, it is not. It is entirely irrational.
> Why? Because there is no evidence for it's existence.
> Personally I believe that there is an EXTREMELY slim chance that a being that we might call a "god" could potentially exist. I think so because I can't know everything that exists in the universe or everything that is possible in the universe.
> I don't believe in a specific being. I just know that it is just as irrational to dismiss something that we can't know as it is to fully believe in something that we can't know.



Whoa there CC, you are being far too reasonable :v

Admitting you can't possibly know everything, _and_ that there's an infinitesimal chance of a god potentially existing?


----------



## EternalSushi (Jun 20, 2014)

I am too! I'm from Hong Kong actually, and there's no furries here. :'( I'm trying to find a furry friend/mate overseas in the US/Canada, but it's extremely hard apparently. Even harder if it's Christian. ;-; 

It's like finding a needle within a haystack! It's not like furries are everywhere nowadays...wish I can meet more Christians!


----------



## Rhyane (Jun 20, 2014)

I am Christian, not very religious but I associate as a christian if asked.


----------



## EternalSushi (Jun 20, 2014)

That's still fine. c:


----------



## KingFriday1989 (Jun 22, 2014)

EternalSushi said:


> I am too! I'm from Hong Kong actually, and there's no furries here. :'( I'm trying to find a furry friend/mate overseas in the US/Canada, but it's extremely hard apparently. Even harder if it's Christian. ;-;
> 
> It's like finding a needle within a haystack! It's not like furries are everywhere nowadays...wish I can meet more Christians!



Lol

Furry, Canadian, chistian, noob composer, and new to the scene. check. send me a PM I would love to chat.


----------



## DragonsMaw (Jun 25, 2014)

I am indeed a proud and open Christian though I do not consider myself a furry.
It is nice and reassuring to know that I have fellow Christians out there.
Feel free to stop by my page and say hello.


----------



## Cassafrass (Jul 9, 2014)

I'm a Christian furry, and believe that humans did not evolve from animals... but my fascination and desire for me to be one is not subsiding.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jul 9, 2014)

Cassafrass said:


> I'm a Christian furry, and believe that humans did not evolve from animals... but my fascination and desire for me to be one is not subsiding.



Well thankfully, evolution is not a _belief_. AMIRITE FELLAS?!


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (Jul 9, 2014)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Well thankfully, evolution is not a _belief_. AMIRITE FELLAS?!



But believing that humans didn't evolve from dirty smelly lesser animals is.


----------



## maymon (Jul 9, 2014)

Christian furry here~


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (Jul 11, 2014)

I'm not a Christian, and am a skeptic but I follow some Christian values. 

I would consider myself a traditional person in the sense that I would never marry a man as I don't support it personally, I am all for traditional marriage even with my gay tendencies, that's just how I feel, I don't feel totally comfortable with the idea of fully accepting homosexuality even though I have a small percentage of it in me (as you can probably tell on my FA). I know some people/furries have said they've gotten over that, but it's just part of my moral stance and how I feel, plus I'm kind of traditional in a sense, and being very passionate about holding some social traditions/values. I also wouldn't appreciate people convincing me to change. I'm different than the majority of the furry fandom, what can I tell ya? It's rather uncommon finding people like me. I generally like the idea of some of the morals/rules associated with Christianity and I favor them. I personally didn't read the whole bible, I think the book is rather TL;DR or thick as a phone book. 

I am overall an agnostic type person who's kind of a skeptic. I don't consider myself a Christian because how can I form a belief if I have never seen Jesus Christ walk on this planet before? I think the existence of god is more likely than Jesus actually claiming to being god himself. I find it hard to believe one human with no evidence of his existence was the almighty in heaven as people claim, but there's a small percentage of Christianity left in me that gives me a very slight hope and since it associates with my family, I kind of like being part of it in a sense.


----------



## Furlover123 (Aug 15, 2014)

I am.


----------



## Fallowfox (Aug 15, 2014)

Cassafrass said:


> I'm a Christian furry, and believe that humans did not evolve from animals... but my fascination and desire for me to be one is not subsiding.



Hello, I'm a training Geologist, and am keen to point out that intertwining your religious sentiments with discredited views about science is a bad idea, because it curtails one's own capacity for unimpeded free thought and naturally means your religious views' veracity is jeopardised by association with pseudoscience. 

It's like saying 'I am a Muslim, and homeopathic medicine is the foundation of my faith, rather than like...love or something that's actually important'. 

Pursue whatever spiritual philosophy you please, but beware that embroiling yourself with pseudoscience is a bad idea.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Aug 15, 2014)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> But believing that humans didn't evolve from dirty smelly lesser animals is.


 And yet, the inventors of the creation myths this belief comes from were dirty, smelly lesser humans- which are a kind of animal.


----------



## scoooterc (Aug 17, 2014)

I am a Christian Furry, but i don't want to get into any religious debate.


----------



## Ayattar (Aug 17, 2014)

scoooterc said:


> I am a Christian Furry, but i don't want to get into any religious debate.



And that's why you get all the yes from me.


----------



## funky3000 (Aug 17, 2014)

I guess you could call me a Christian fur. I believe in God and Jesus and stuff like that, but as far as God goes, I believe he played a different role in creation. I don't believe he created us on purpose, but rather created a blob of stuff that eventually made what we have today via science.

I'm a mostly scientific man, with a tint of religious effects, but I don't want to get into THAT debate again.

That being said, I am Christian, but I don't really practice anything. I don't go to church, I don't say grace, I don't pray daily. Its just there. I don't feel connected to a religious lifestyle, it just doesn't seem my style.


----------



## FoxWolfie (Aug 19, 2014)

I'm a Christian, in the sense that I do my best to follow, to the best of my understanding, the teachings of Christ Jesus.  I don't consider myself to be religious though.  I am more comfortable following Christ than in following a religion.  There's a huge difference between the two.  Christ told us to love each other unconditionally, to be forgiving, even to those that hate us, and to be wise stewards of the creation.

If a religion tells us to hate people based on their sexuality or lifestyle, to ignore the environment, to get rich at the expense of the poor and needy, to seek revenge on people, etc., then the god of that religion is surely not Christ.  Sadly, many people who call themselves Christian, are religious instead, and have little to do with Christ.

If Christ loves and accepts a furvert like myself, then there is no place for hate in my life!  I highly doubt that any religions would accept me as Christ does though.


----------

