# Christian Furs



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

I know there aren't a ton of us around, but I'm curious to see how many other Christian Furs are here on the FA Forums! 

I'm also curious to see what Furs who aren't Christian think of us. I've seen several differing opinions on us, but I'm wondering if there's a general consensus somewhere.


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (May 12, 2015)

Apparently, there's a lot of them.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

Really? I thought the Fandom had higher numbers of agnosticism and atheism than anything else. Hmmm...I know about the Furry Chapel and the Christian Furry Fellowship, but I have no idea what their numbers are.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

I have nothing wrong w/ Christians, my hate is directed at fundamentalists who feel they're doing God's work by being bigoted assholes.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

You mean the ones who sit back and judge everybody like they have some kind of authority over them and their lives? I hate that too. I may disagree with someone else's life choices (like homosexuality or bisexuality, for example) but I never judge them for it and I don't think less of them for making those choices. It's not in my authority to judge anyone else. Matter of fact, most of the friends I've made on here are gay or bi so far XD


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> I may disagree with someone else's life choices (like homosexuality or bisexuality, for example)



Those are not choices...


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

Buddy, I sure as hell didn't want to be bisexual, so enough of this "it's a choice..." nonsense. I thought we got passed this, but I guess not.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

Anyway the point is I don't judge people for what they do with their lives, whether or not sexuality is a choice. Please don't miss the point I'm trying to make by getting hung up on that. I know people have different opinions on sexuality, and I was simply expressing mine.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Buddy, I sure as hell didn't want to be bisexual, so enough of this "it's a choice..." nonsense. I thought we got passed this, but I guess not.



What? It makes perfect sense to actively choose to be part of a group that has less rights and a higher suicide rate due to discrimination and dealing with religious bigots is fun too!


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

We get the point, we're just trying to educate you, that's all. Moving on...


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

Fair enough Sylox


----------



## Distorted (May 12, 2015)

Uh-oh, that didn't take long lol.

I don't really hate Christians. It's just that they don't like me so much. Most of them anyway. And I like the whole love and hope thing, but it sorta makes people stop asking questions. And that is something I can't accept at all. I had my mother once tell me to stop asking questions and trust in the Lord. That I should blindly believe in the Word and everything would work out for me. I still don't quite understand it, but it is definitely something I can't seem to do. I'm sure if the Word told her to jump off a building she would happily do it. And if it weren't for that Leviticus quote I'm quite sure she wouldn't have a problem with my orientation either.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Anyway the point is I don't judge people for what they do with their lives, whether or not sexuality is a choice. Please don't miss the point I'm trying to make by getting hung up on that. I know people have different opinions on sexuality, and I was simply expressing mine.



The issue is that you worded it the same way those religious nutjobs do it. It sounded like you assume that it has to be a choice because it deviates from what you consider "natural".
I'm not implying that you said or thought that, it just sounded like it. That is what scares me about religion, it makes decent people say awful and very hurtful things without them even realizing it...

As for christianity and this fandom, I think it doesn't mix well at all. The furry fandom is a very open community, especially when it comes to sexuality. But religion is one of the biggest sources for homophobia.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

I hear ya CaptainCool. I didn't mean to come across as a kook. And I can see why you would think religion is a breeding ground for homophobia. A lot of people take it much farther than they should, but not all Christians are like that. I'm one of the least homophobic people out there. I have friends from all sexualities and I'm proud to call each one of them my friend.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> I hear ya CaptainCool. I didn't mean to come across as a kook. And I can see why you would think religion is a breeding ground for homophobia. A lot of people take it much farther than they should, but not all Christians are like that. I'm one of the least homophobic people out there. I have friends from all sexualities and I'm proud to call each one of them my friend.



Right, not all religious people are like that. But you are still a vast majority, so even if the bigots are a minority there would still be tons of them. Not to mention that they are also usually the more vocal and extreme group.
I have nothing against personal beliefs that stay personal, but religion is causing far more harm than good which makes me wish that we could just get rid of it all together. In my honest opinion it is nothing but dangerous anti-scientific hogwash. Because Distorted pointed out another thing I hate about it, it makes you stop asking questions.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 12, 2015)

I'm one. Protestant - Reformed. Sadly, if you try to have a gay wedding in the church, you can get your ordination stripped. I'd expect no less from the other denominations.



CaptainCool said:


> As for christianity and this fandom, I think it doesn't mix well at all. The furry fandom is a very open community, especially when it comes to sexuality. But religion is one of the biggest sources for homophobia.



It's really for the Synods to figure out what they want to do with that issue, but if they do change, it might create some problems and have denominations split (again!). They can fit very well. People just don't want to make it fit.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> It's really for the Synods to figure out what they want to do with that issue, but if they do change, it might create some problems and have denominations split (again!). They can fit very well. People just don't want to make it fit.



It shouldn't be an issue to begin with.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

On CC's earlier post:
You hit the nail on the head in the first paragraph. The more extreme Christians are the ones that have come to represent the religion as a whole. The same goes for those on the dark side of the Fandom. They have come to represent all Furries when most Furries are nothing like them.
For the second paragraph, that depends on how deep into religion you go, really. There are some like one of my grandmothers that completely reject most of science based on her faith, whereas I keep a very open mind. Most young and middle-aged Christians do as well. It's the older ones that toss science aside more than anyone else, because they're more steeped in tradition.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

And I've honestly never understood the point of denominations. I don't see why we can't all just be Christian without the labels. Protestants and Catholics have a long history of fighting each other, but for what? They both worship the same Trinity, right? So what's the problem?


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

I'm Christian, but I still don't understand what a furry is much. I just think its people who like to draw anthros like I do, so if that's the case then yes I am also in the fandom


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> On CC's earlier post:
> You hit the nail on the head in the first paragraph. The more extreme Christians are the ones that have come to represent the religion as a whole. The same goes for those on the dark side of the Fandom. They have come to represent all Furries when most Furries are nothing like them.
> For the second paragraph, that depends on how deep into religion you go, really. There are some like one of my grandmothers that completely reject most of science based on her faith, whereas I keep a very open mind. Most young and middle-aged Christians do as well. It's the older ones that toss science aside more than anyone else, because they're more steeped in tradition.



Science shouldn't be something to be "open minded" about though. Science directly describes nature. It is not based on opinion, it is based on facts. I hope you just worded that wrong...


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

Yep Naosrain that would make you a Fur!


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 12, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> It shouldn't be an issue to begin with.



It's more so an issue for 'extremists' vs 'non-extremists', but if the Synod handles it poorly then the splitting starts. They'd also have to change the teachings in Seminary school & yada yada (just a painful process overall). We should be happy that it's being brought to light as opposed to nothing being done about it at all. Ignoring it only breaks the threads of the same rope.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

I didn't word it wrong per se, but it does seem like a misunderstanding. A ton of people call Christians close-minded because of the belief that they don't believe in science. All I did was say "hey, I don't fit that close-minded stereotype" by calling myself "open-minded". Made a contrast, no more.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> And I've honestly never understood the point of denominations. I don't see why we can't all just be Christian without the labels. Protestants and Catholics have a long history of fighting each other, but for what? They both worship the same Trinity, right? So what's the problem?



http://www.truth.info/church/catholic.vs.protestant.htm


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 12, 2015)

Religion disappoints me.

So long as a live a virtuous life I don't care about labels.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

Oh yeah I know about the overwhelmingly stupid things the Catholics used to do, no question. I can see why they fought each other to begin with. I'm not saying they're not both Christian, but there is still a rivalry between the two groups, and same goes for all other denominations. Every one of them has some kind of strife with the others, even though none run as deep as Protestant vs Catholics. Maybe one day we'll go back under one banner, then again maybe not. I just wish there wasn't beef between the denominations anymore. It's about time we just grew up and settled our differences.


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (May 12, 2015)

I don't consider myself Christian, but there's some things I don't think that they're wrong about.


----------



## Amiir (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> I don't see why we can't all just be Christian without the labels. Protestants and Catholics have a long history of fighting each other, but for what? They both worship the same Trinity, right? So what's the problem?



Actually I think they don't worship the Trinity the same way. Like, either catholics or protestants do not recognize Mary as that important and stuff. I don't know. Confusing, plus different interpretations of the Bible etcetera etcetera. It all happened for political problems anyway, for the german princes to get rid of the Pope's influence but I digress. Besides, it's not got much to do with the topic (not exactly at least) so I'll shush lol

Edit: Oh wait Sylox fixed that for us


----------



## mcjoel (May 12, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> I may disagree with someone else's life choices (like homosexuality or bisexuality, for example)


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PSQSx3OCrXQ


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

I don't like religions that make it a point of saying one sex is better than the other and praise one over the other constantly.


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

I don't think there's anything necessarily good or bad about a religion itself, per se. Some of my favorite people are Christians. Some of my least favorite people are Christians. It's all about the person themself and how they interpret the religion.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

I think Christianity in its current neutered state is a lot better than its original Orthodox one. Still, it needs a lot of reform. They need to realize that their wanting to help the poor is good and wonderful but their hatred of gays and women's rights are super bad. So they should just change those things like they did in the old days. 

I will say I find it a bit odd that the bible says you shouldn't eat shrimp/shellfish or wear clothes made of two fabrics and then condemns homosexuality. (Kinda makes Christians look like homophobes who just look for any excuse to hate gay people...but then the Church did need a new target after it lost the divorce thing.)


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Funny thing is the bible doesn't tell them to hate and bash gays. Yet they do anyway. to "Condemn" something doesn't mean to hate and despise people for it. Basically it is like "Show people you don't agree with it" but it also says to "love thy neighbor" And to love people in general no matter what they do that you don't agree with. So you can not agree with something, yet still treat them like a human being.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

I don't regret lying to myself all these years about religion, because I did learn some important life lessons out of it, but holy shit there were times I wanted to scream. I had to cringe whenever they talked about homosexuality in CCD (religious education for Catholics) and father preached about it at the pulpit. The good thing about Catholics, at least here, is that they don't demonize it _as_ much and are more accepting, but don't get it twisted, Catholics can be just as backwards as our...there Protestant counterparts.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

One of the churches I went to basically summed up the whole thing by saying "you do your thing and I'll do mine" so thats what I believe when it comes to sexuality. Other things obviously i will defend till they change (You have to be crazy to say this to people who murder and rape and what not there is something you need to fight for there), but yeah. Most of my friends are gay, bi, or whatever. they are pretty swell and the best people I've met. ^^ tbh most of the "fellow straight" friends I had were backstabbing buttheads. So yeah -_-. Honestly all the other people I meet give me a quick stare for saying I'm christian and then warm up to me when they realize "idgaf about what they do, we can be friends even if skies aren't blue"


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Funny thing is the bible doesn't tell them to hate and bash gays. Yet they do anyway. to "Condemn" something doesn't mean to hate and despise people for it.



...um. To condemn something is to imply it is wrong and sinful. Homosexuality is hot as fuck and love between same sex partners has to endure hatred and a lifetime of strife. (And is kinda why its more noble than current day heterosexuality imo. It's something people have to fight for and in a way are tested on a daily basis.) 

You would condemn things like drug abuse or pedophilia. Not Homosexuality, Women's Rights, or biracial relationships. (Which a local shit college of us South Carolina-folk did until the year 2000)


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> ...um. To condemn something is to imply it is wrong and sinful. Homosexuality is hot as fuck and love between same sex partners has to endure hatred and a lifetime of strife. (And is kinda why its more noble than current day heterosexuality imo. It's something people have to fight for and in a way are tested on a daily basis.)
> 
> You would condemn things like drug abuse or pedophilia. Not Homosexuality, Women's Rights, or biracial relationships. (Which a local shit college of us South Carolina-folk did until the year 2000)



Was that the one mentioned at the end of mcjoel's video?


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

Bob Jones University is a joke of a school anyway.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> ...um. To condemn something is to imply it is wrong and sinful.


conÂ·demn
kÉ™nËˆdem/
_verb_
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]


*1*.
express complete disapproval of, typically in public; censure.






I think you are thinking of the word "Chastise"
chasÂ·tise
ËˆCHasËŒtÄ«z,ËŒCHaËˆstÄ«z/
_verb_
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]


rebuke or reprimand severely.

People just associate the word condemn with that, cause most people use it wrong.



One is like "mehhhh I don't really like it" and the other is Westburo baptist.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

Condemn in the religious sense of the word is akin to viewing something as sinful.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Astrium said:


> Was that the one mentioned at the end of mcjoel's video?



Bob Jones University. <3 

Home of the Cunts~~~* My parents and I used to eat at a restaurant across from it. It's in a bad section of town now. 



Naosrain said:


> One is like "mehhhh I don't really like it" and the other is Westburo baptist.



I need to teach you about passive hatred and the true horrors of homophobia. But hey, I lost my job because someone "meeehhhh didn't really like my gayness" so...you know. What's the big deal. It's not happening to you.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Condemn in the religious sense of the word is akin to viewing something as sinful.


True, but honestly the bible sees something like homosexuality and what not as that because it "isn't natural" which is just another word for "it doesn't make babies". -shrugs- I'm not going to really say the bible doesn't say it isn't sinful, because it does. What I am saying is that the bible doesn't give people a justification for being dickheads to homosexuals and other people of other sexualities.



Butters Shikkon said:


> I need to teach you about passive hatred and the true horrors of homophobia. But hey, I lost my job because someone "meeehhhh didn't really like my gayness" so...you know. What's the big deal. It's not happening to you.


Some people just take it to extremes. I'm not going to deny someone their wellbeing just because of their sexuality. Me saying I don't really like it doesn't translate to me preferring people over the other. If you act like a dick I'm not hiring you regardless if you are the same religion as me. If the only difference between the two is their preference/religion, I might just end up randomizing the choice, or looking at personality traits.
Plus I already know how how passive agressive things work. I see family go through it all the time because of them being a minority. I have to listen to how my friend's siblings get casted out because of them being gay. I just hate when I hear that "she did it because she was Christian." No she did it cause she was crazy.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> True, but honestly the bible sees something like homosexuality and what not as that because it "isn't natural" which is just another word for "it doesn't make babies". -shrugs- I'm not going to really say the bible doesn't say it isn't sinful, because it does. *What I am saying is that the bible doesn't give people a justification for being dickheads to homosexuals and other people of other sexualities.*



Agreed! But people do it anyway for whatever reason and I think I know why they do it.

Edit: This motherfucker right here...yes lawd. 

http://kevincraig.us/homophobia.htm


----------



## CrazyTundraWolf (May 12, 2015)

I'm catholic , I still support the LGBT community and all that stuff , and I'm a furry ,my logic is god made us to enjoy our time on earth and to help other people along the way , there's probably some point in the bible that screws with that logic but I don't take most of the bible literally , taking it literally leads to stuff like creationism and geocentricism.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Agreed! But people do it anyway for whatever reason and I think I know why they do it.


Yeah they do. They do it with anything. I think they just want to try and use anything to justify their racist, predjustice (can't spell and spell check isn't helping rn), and all around bad behavior. They don't have a right to judge, and the bible tells them that too, but they do it anyway. -_- People pick and choose things out of anything that makes them sound right.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> I see family go through it all the time because of them being a minority.



Ohoho~ You do! How's that racism make you feel? I wonder if the Bible said "black people are sinful" if it would still be seen as appropriate today. (Oh wait. That did kinda happen for the Mormons...in the 70's when people decided that racism was fucked up God suddenly changed his mind and let black people into the Church of Latter Day Saints.) 

:3 Christianity changes for progress all the time. (Islam could really learn a lesson from it) And it's changing for gays too if you haven't noticed. Maybe you'll be old and one of your grandkids will dig up this ancient thread and you'll blush, realizing what you say sounds super bigoted. Just like saying "I don't approve or agree with people being black" sounds racist and evil today.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

The Bible was used to justify slavery.


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Agreed! But people do it anyway for whatever reason and I think I know why they do it.
> 
> Edit: This motherfucker right here...yes lawd.
> 
> http://kevincraig.us/homophobia.htm



Separation of church and state separation of church and state *separation of church and state.*


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> Ohoho~ You do! How's that racism make you feel? I wonder if the Bible said "black people are sinful" if it would still be seen as appropriate today. (Oh wait. That did kinda happen for the Mormons...in the 70's when people decided that racism was fucked up God suddenly changed his mind and let black people into the Church of Latter Day Saints.)
> 
> :3 Christianity changes for progress all the time. (Islam could really learn a lesson from it) And it's changing for gays too if you haven't noticed. Maybe you'll be old and one of your grandkids will dig up this ancient thread and you'll blush, realizing what you say sounds super bigoted. Just like saying "I don't approve or agree with people being black" sounds racist and evil today.


I can sense the passive agressiveness in waves. And sarcasm. Sorry if I somehow offended you. That wasn't my intent. I am not trying to sound like some homophobe because I am not. I have gay characters and Yaoi is probably one of my favorite things to draw myself when it comes to cuddles. But I'm just going to leave it at that since this is obviously not going good in any direction.



Sylox said:


> The Bible was used to justify slavery.



Yeah... People just insert it everywhere.. And its all white washed... -_- If you think about it, how could anyone in the sun for long amounts of time doing labor be such "snow white" white... People ruin a lot of things, and humans can ruin the bible


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> I can sense the passive agressiveness in waves. And sarcasm. Sorry if I somehow offended you. That wasn't my intent. I am not trying to sound like some homophobe because I am not. I have gay characters and Yaoi is probably one of my favorite things to draw myself when it comes to cuddles. But I'm just going to leave it at that since this is obviously not going good in any direction.



Well, if it came off that way I do apologize. I wanted it to come off cheeky. ;3 

@Sylox: You know that's probably the biggest reason I got out of Christianity? (I was raised Baptist) I realized that the Bible could be changed for any reason (and of course I was getting to that age where I noticed no one practiced what they preached).


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> Well, if it came off that way I do apologize. I wanted it to come off cheeky. ;3
> 
> @Sylox: You know that's probably the biggest reason I got out of Christianity? (I was raised Baptist) I realized that the Bible could be changed for any reason (and of course I was getting to that age where I noticed no one practiced what they preached).


Oh okay then, I didn't want you to think I was okay with how people were. I honestly can't stand to hear some of the things people in churches say about it. I mostly direct the bible inwardly, so when I say that sort of stuff I mean personally I wouldn't.
and
 Yeah I am realizing that too. But it happens with anything and all things. The Bible just seems to have more of an impact because of crazy people and America starting as a Protestant place.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Oh okay then, I didn't want you to think I was okay with how people were. I honestly can't stand to hear some of the things people in churches say about it. I mostly direct the bible inwardly, so when I say that sort of stuff I mean personally I wouldn't.
> and
> Yeah I am realizing that too. But it happens with anything and all things. The Bible just seems to have more of an impact because of crazy people and America starting as a Protestant place.


Then you are a sweetheart Christian <3 We should make you a lil rainbow heart with a cross in it. 

Not only protestant (Which has protest in it <3 I love that.) but Puritan. >.< Blech! Can you think of a meaner type of person than a Puritan? They beat up those sweet Quakers for god's sake!


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> Then you are a sweetheart Christian <3 We should make you a lil rainbow heart with a cross in it.
> 
> Not only protestant (Which has protest in it <3 I love that.) but Puritan. >.< Blech! Can you think of a meaner type of person than a Puritan? They beat up those sweet Quakers for god's sake!


Oh yeah Puritan... Thats the one I forgot. I think that is what my teacher sad was basically "Everything that seems fun is against God."


----------



## BlitzCo (May 12, 2015)

I believe that the Huge amount of LGBT furries is the reason why there are _so many_ atheistic/agnostic furries.


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> Then you are a sweetheart Christian <3 We should make you a lil rainbow heart with a cross in it.
> 
> Not only protestant (Which has protest in it <3 I love that.) but Puritan. >.< Blech! Can you think of a meaner type of person than a Puritan? They beat up those sweet Quakers for god's sake!



"I'm a Quaker, honey. We do oats and hippie shit here." ~My Friend Angel, 2015.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

I think it might also be because some people associate Furries with Beastiality and don't see those types of furries as their own little subculture in the Fandom.

Edit:
And I also wouldn't mind that necklace it sounds awesome. Espcially since I associate rainbows with hope and promise X3


----------



## HaloTennis (May 12, 2015)

Everybody follows religion in their own way, if you ask me. That can either lead to a lot of misguided prejudice or a great deal of acceptance. I practice Christianity the way I believe it should be, in which I stay modest and humble myself before God. But to humble yourself means to not stand in judgement of those who live their life without religion, belong to other sexualities, etc. Judging people based on the way they live their lives is nothing short of hypocrisy. Christian or not, every one of us sins every single day. That's why I don't stand in judgement of atheists or agnostics or gay people or bisexuality people or really anybody else for that matter. None of us are perfect, so I have no right to judge. And when it comes to homosexuality and bisexuality, I dislike the sexualities themselves, but I'm perfectly A-OK with the people who belong to those sexualities.


----------



## GamingGal (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Funny thing is the bible doesn't tell them to hate and bash gays. Yet they do anyway. to "Condemn" something doesn't mean to hate and despise people for it. Basically it is like "Show people you don't agree with it" but it also says to "love thy neighbor" And to love people in general no matter what they do that you don't agree with. So you can not agree with something, yet still treat them like a human being.



[h=1]Leviticus 20:13New King James Version (NKJV)
*13 *If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood _shall be upon them._[/h]^^^
'Technically, the Bible does kinda tell them to bash gays. Mind you that's the Old Testament, which we're not required to follow law wise what with Jesus dying for us and all that, but they still use this verse as a reason.

That being said, I was raised good ole Southern Baptist. The church basically kicked me out when I came out as gay, and I've been very resentful towards them since despite having enjoyed the fellowship and most teachings. I've argued with pastor after pastor about homosexuality. All are the same. The most recent one told me I'm too pretty to be with a girl and that I must have had my heart broken by a guy when I was younger and found comfort in women, followed by saying my slightly absent and emotionally abusive father turned me against men, hence why I sought comfort with a woman >.>

However, my girlfriend is a Christian and she loves the church. She's currently battling with them over her sexuality. A support group she attends has demoted her from her leadership position and told her she can no longer teach because they are affiliated with the church and cannot let a homosexual be a leader. But she's still loving her religion, and that amazes me. I go with her to church on Sundays cause she's trying to find a new church home. It's uncomfortable for me cause I always prepare to be screamed at (despite us going to only open and affirming churches), but it makes her happy. I highly doubt I could ever be fully immersed in it again, though. There is just too much bitterness and hate.

As to how I feel towards Christians: hella wary. That's awful judgmental of me, but past treatment has created this wariness. Sure, some, like my girlfriend, are amazing people, but a lot aren't.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> I believe that the Huge amount of LGBT furries is the reason why there are _so many_ atheistic/agnostic furries.



While it is true LGBT people tend to be Atheist, I don't know if that's the overriding factor.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

GamingGal said:


> *Leviticus 20:13New King James Version (NKJV)
> 13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.*
> 
> ^^^
> ...


Yeah most stuff from the Old testimate is pretty much irrelevant because of Jesus, but some people don't believe in Jesus. so there is another problem.

I don't blame you. I blame them for being so judgemental. They shouldn't be pushing people away. It honestly makes all the the things they see as "problems" worse. And it makes all of us look bad as well


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

> If you're a homosexual, you hate the God of the Bible. If God grants you repentance, you'll be glad someone committed a "hate crime" toward you by telling you that God is angry with you.



This man wanted to be in Congress.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> This man wanted to be in Congress.



Lol I had to read that like 8 times before I somewhat understood the nonsense. Thats like a big no. They are bad and they should feel bad.. God doesn't want them either


----------



## CaptainCool (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Yeah most stuff from the Old testimate is pretty much irrelevant because of Jesus



No, that is simply not true and the bible is very clear there:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. *For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,* *not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished*."
Jesus makes it very clear that the old laws are still valid and will stay valid until all prophecies are fulfilled, which happens when the world ends.
Saying that the old laws are now not necessary anymore is just a weak excuse in my opinion. I mean, does that mean that the commandments are now not necessary anymore as well?


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> No, that is simply not true and the bible is very clear there:
> "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. *For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,* *not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished*."
> Jesus makes it very clear that the old laws are still valid and will stay valid until all prophecies are fulfilled, which happens when the world ends.
> Saying that the old laws are now not necessary anymore is just a weak excuse in my opinion. I mean, does that mean that the commandments are now not necessary anymore as well?



Now I'm just an old ex-southern baptist, but I sorta thought Old Jeebus was talking about that sacrificing lambs shit. Then when he came back to life after partying with Beelzebub, "It was finished" since he was the lamb and final sacrifice so everything went all Catholic. 

Or maybe I am just too gay to get it.


----------



## GamingGal (May 12, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> No, that is simply not true and the bible is very clear there:
> "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. *For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,* *not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished*."
> Jesus makes it very clear that the old laws are still valid and will stay valid until all prophecies are fulfilled, which happens when the world ends.
> Saying that the old laws are now not necessary anymore is just a weak excuse in my opinion. I mean, does that mean that the commandments are now not necessary anymore as well?



The Old Testament served it's purpose, and when Jesus said that in the Sermon on the Mount, he means fulfill as be what the law could not. Before Christ, the law was how people assured themselves they were holy enough for heaven. Follow everything right, do all the rituals, sacrifice all the animals, and you'd be good in God's eyes for we were to avoid sin and any sin committed needed to be forgiven in blood.

*Galatians 3:24-25New King James Version (NKJV)
24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.*

Paul refers to the Old Testament as the tutor that was to bring us to Christ. Once Christ came, we could simply come to him instead of having a mediator/tutor, so the need for the old law fell away. Christ saying nothing shall disappear from the Law is referring to keeping the whole Bible in tact and for men to not alter what is said. I draw this from the end of Revelations:

*18 *For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; *19 *and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and _from the things which are written in this book._


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

Fuck I haven't opened a Bible in like 10 years. Blech!


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (May 12, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> I believe that the Huge amount of LGBT furries is the reason why there are _so many_ atheistic/agnostic furries.


 It seems a lot of furries come from abusive religious parents so their perception of all religious people associated with specific viewpoints becomes negative.


----------



## RedSavage (May 12, 2015)

Damn. We're actually having an honest to god discussion about religion (if youll pardon the phrase). Sure there's a bit of sarcasm here and there. But I'll be damned if I'm not seeing an healthy discussion on these things (again--pardon the phrasing). 


I was raised Penecostal so there was a lot of crazy shit that left an impression on me. Funny thing, it was actual a discussion about doubt and faith that started my decent into agnostic hedonism. I realized religion was asking me to blindly follow with faith and not doubt. Yet, intellectually, through books and school, I was learning to question everything and take nothing at fave value. 

They often say athiests and agnostics are the ones who know the Bible best. No doubt there. I feel that more than the casual once-a-week Christian, we've scoured the Bible for answers and sought to decipher it. I think there comes a point where one either sets down the book, or sets down both the book and the faith. Sometimes I envy those who have that blind, comforting faith and sense of meaning in religion. My sense of pragmatism and the workings of my kind simply do not allow such a luxury.  

Plus I really got riled the wrong way when the preachers would go on about the woman being subservient to the man, in extact or more sugar coated phrasings. My mom was a strong woman who carried our family through hard times by working her ass off while my father did his social things with school. Once I disagreed with that I began having more a mind to  leave the rest be. 


In the end, the Bible was written by mankind. Mankind is falliable. Word of god? I find it presumptuous and arrogant that a mortal being would be able to comprehend or understand a god's meaning. And even if such an entity has done as much to reach out to his followers to speak the word, then one thing is for sure mthe Christian god is a cruel god. A hateful god. Certainly onr capable of showing mercy, but often one that shows anger and wrath on cataclysmic scales. One who even today forsakes full nations and nationalities of people. 


Rambly. I dont really have a point. That's not the reasons why Im not a follower. Im better than to think "well he's a big meany" in terms of faith. It's simply that, the act of faith, outside of parables and in the realm of tangible manifestations, that I cannot blindly follow. The paradox of something that supposedly appeared often in the times of ancient, and yes somehow dissappeared as time went on.....

Ah. Well. Im a believer in the Big Electron, of George Carlin's philosophical stand up ramblings.   The Big Electron doesnt judge. It doesnt condemn. It doesnt reward. It just is. It just is, just like us, who are only here for a little while anyways.


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (May 12, 2015)

Unabashed Christian here <: Let me turn my other cheeks for ya'll.



Sylox said:


> Agreed! But people do it anyway for whatever reason and I think I know why they do it.
> 
> Edit: This motherfucker right here...yes lawd.
> 
> http://kevincraig.us/homophobia.htm



This guy's argument is utter tripe. He needs to go back and read his bible more :Ã¾

Matthew 6:14-15

"For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."



CaptainCool said:


> No, that is simply not true and the bible is very clear there:
> "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. *For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,* *not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished*."
> Jesus makes it very clear that the old laws are still valid and will stay valid until all prophecies are fulfilled, which happens when the world ends.
> Saying that the old laws are now not necessary anymore is just a weak excuse in my opinion. I mean, does that mean that the commandments are now not necessary anymore as well?



The law was never meant to save us. It was meant to be a contrast between God's holiness and the depravity of man. No human, christian, homosexual, straight or otherwise is able to live up to the law save Jesus.

Romans 7:7-12

"_What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good_"

We, being the sinners that we are, use the law as a springboard for our own sin. The law gives life through its fulfilment and death through its violation, but being the rebellious little shits we are its impossible for us by nature to live up to it. That's why its only through Jesus that we're saved. When Christ fulfilled the law, he earned the privilege of life. Those who are in Christ, likewise, share in his righteousness and are declared righteous right along side him. In that sense, the law has always stood and and will continue to stand. That being said though, it's important to realize that we basically choose whether the law applies to us individually or not, through grace, we can choose to be in Christ, or we can choose to stand on our own merits when we're judged. In that sense, too, the law still stands. 

Romans 7:4-6

"_Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. *But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.*_"

Romans 8:1-5

"_There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. *For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.* For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit._"

We're not going to fulfill the law in our own lives, and we're not expected to. We are however supposed to set our sights on righteousness out of gratitude and duty to our Savior


----------



## RedSavage (May 12, 2015)

Turn that other cheek you delicious hunk. I want a good look. And a good feel too~


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

My favorite story from the bible was when Jesus taught the Rich folk about percentages. He was doting on this old widow who gave her last penny and said she gave more than all the rich folk did. It always made me smile as a kid. 

But I must admit Red, I never found religion comforting. It made me anxious. So many people going to hell, so many prophecies to worry about, so many sinners to go bother and convert, so much shame to have. I also came from a church that believed in Satan so you had to worry about boogiemen under your bed and shit too. 

I'm much happier now that I can see things for the way they are.



RedSavage said:


> Turn that other cheek you delicious hunk. I want a good look. And a good feel too~



Have mercy oh lord, cuz Red is about to sin~~


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

RedSavage said:


> Damn. We're actually having an honest to god discussion about religion (if youll pardon the phrase). Sure there's a bit of sarcasm here and there. But I'll be damned if I'm not seeing an healthy discussion on these things (again--pardon the phrasing).


ikr? One of the benifits of typing imo. If congress was forced to have a forum chat about laws, maybe it would turn out better


----------



## mcjoel (May 12, 2015)

I love ya Garth you are one of the good ones I'll send you a post card from hell when I get there as that's where people have told me I'm going. ^w^


----------



## monochromatic-dragon (May 12, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> I will say I find it a bit odd that the bible says you shouldn't eat shrimp/shellfish or wear clothes made of two fabrics and then condemns homosexuality. (Kinda makes Christians look like homophobes who just look for any excuse to hate gay people...but then the Church did need a new target after it lost the divorce thing.)



Taken into a modern context, it doesn't make sense at all. Maybe it made more sense 2000+ years ago or whenever that part of the Old Testament was written. (Technically, Christians shouldn't even follow the Old Testament)


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

I don't need a church to tell me I'm going to Hell.

On a related note, does the Bible say anywhere what sin is? Like, is it things God decided are bad, or is sin its own separate entity, in a way. Like, the Bible always talk about sin like it's a living thing that is capable of its own plans and machinations. So is sin its own force?


----------



## Hikaru Okami (May 12, 2015)

Oh shiet another religion thread!

I don't follow any religion in particular. I've learned to respect all religions and people under that religion as long as they aren't condemning or converting others against their will.


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (May 12, 2015)

This thread is pointless.


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (May 12, 2015)

Astrium said:


> I don't need a church to tell me I'm going to Hell.
> 
> On a related note, does the Bible say anywhere what sin is? Like, is it things God decided are bad, or is sin its own separate entity, in a way. Like, the Bible always talk about sin like it's a living thing that is capable of its own plans and machinations. So is sin its own force?



1 John 3:4

"_Whoever commits sin transgresses also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law._"

1 John 5:17

"_All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not to death._"


----------



## RedSavage (May 12, 2015)

TheMetalVelocity said:


> This thread is pointless.



Why? We've got decent discussion going on.


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

I can't wait to tell my aunt I'm an Atheist, that'll make things interesting at the dinner table.


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I can't wait to tell my aunt I'm an Atheist, that'll make things interesting at the dinner table.



Tell her at Easter. Or Christmas.


----------



## Taikugemu (May 12, 2015)

I particularly don't care about religion, as long you don't shove it in my face.


----------



## Hikaru Okami (May 12, 2015)

Astrium said:


> Tell her at Easter. Or Christmas.



I'd go with Christmas because the whole family will be there. Saves time and you still get presents! :V


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

Well this thread went off topic real fast. If you really want to be mature about it, don't do it on a religious holiday. X'D I think you know that though so. But other than that. This thread had this path coming lol


----------



## mcjoel (May 12, 2015)

It's funny I've had people get more angry at me when I tell them I'm atheist then when I say I'm a Satanist it's quite funny if not sad


----------



## Hikaru Okami (May 12, 2015)

Going off topic is inevitable on this forum. All it takes is one post heheh...

My personal views on Christians specifically are either extreme or pleasant. I've encountered Christians that wouldn't leave me alone until I'm forced to literally RUN away. I also have plenty of friends that are Christian and they are wonderful people. I haven't met someone in between, so it's usually one or the other.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Hikaru Okami said:


> Going off topic is inevitable on this forum. All it takes is one post heheh...
> 
> My personal views on Christians specifically are either extreme or pleasant. I've encountered Christians that wouldn't leave me alone until I'm forced to literally RUN away. I also have plenty of friends that are Christian and they are wonderful people. I haven't met someone in between, so it's usually one or the other.



They are like Feminists that way. ^^


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 12, 2015)

Love thy neighbor as thyself, ye fools!


----------



## Sylox (May 12, 2015)

Americans would rather have a Muslim as President, than an Atheist...what does that tell you?


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Americans would rather have a Muslim as President, than an Atheist...what does that tell you?



Nothing at all. 
That's just being plain hostile to each other on both sides, whether you notice it or not.


----------



## Naosrain (May 12, 2015)

mcjoel said:


> It's funny I've had people get more angry at me when I tell them I'm atheist then when I say I'm a Satanist it's quite funny if not sad


I would probably be the oppsite... since my only experience was the only Satanist I have met hated me for no reason and just made the only excuse for doing so was "I'm a Satanist." I have yet to meet any type of nice or chill Satanist, so that has been my view on them.


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (May 12, 2015)

RedSavage said:


> Why? We've got decent discussion going on.


 You mean Groundhog Day discussion.


----------



## BlitzCo (May 12, 2015)

It seems like that _some_ atheists only attack religious people just  to stroke their inflated egos


----------



## Astrium (May 12, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> It seems like that _some_ atheists only attack religious people just  to stroke their inflated egos



Acting like a shithead transcends religious boundaries.


----------



## RedSavage (May 12, 2015)

TheMetalVelocity said:


> You mean Groundhog Day discussion.



Ignoring my question to just make another sarcastic quip. That's cool. You've said your lines I suppose. We'll move on with the rest of the show, thank you.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 12, 2015)

My mom is agnostic and my dad has his own custom set of beliefs. He is very open minded about things. I am an atheist, but if others need religion to keep them going, let them believe. It just drives me crazy when people use religion to justify hatred, prejudice, intolerance, ignorance, killing, and general stupidity. Believe in what you want, but don't use it as an excuse to harm the people around you.
Also, if it weren't for heaven and hell, power metal may have not taken off so easily, as the music libraries of Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, and Dio era Black Sabbath show. And I am reading a fantastic book about a demon and an angel teaming up to stop the apocalypse. It is called Good Omens. 
But the movies that are supposed to make you believe, like Left Behind or Saving Christmas? Terribad.


----------



## ShioBear (May 12, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Americans would rather have a Muslim as President, than an Atheist...what does that tell you?


 dude.... hes christian.


----------



## PastryOfApathy (May 12, 2015)

Y'know, this thread fills me with hope. 1 year ago it would have been a completely horrific atheist hatejerk. Now that most of the fedora-tippers rage-quit in an explosion of salt there's actually something resembling a discussion now.

God bless the USA...


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 12, 2015)

These discussions just aren't the same without Ruhk and Roose.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> These discussions just aren't the same without Ruhk and Roose.



Fallowfox gave them a bit of a sophisticated flare too I thought.


----------



## Rayzr (May 12, 2015)

Y'all need science.


----------



## GamingGal (May 12, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Well this thread went off topic real fast. If you really want to be mature about it, don't do it on a religious holiday. X'D I think you know that though so. But other than that. This thread had this path coming lol



Sylox? Be mature about something? HA! Funny funny.

You guys are actually keeping this thread on topic and sane. I commend you :3


----------



## BlitzCo (May 12, 2015)

What if your name is Jobe Martin?


----------



## PastryOfApathy (May 12, 2015)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> These discussions just aren't the same without Ruhk and Roose.



I almost miss Lobar now. I mean he was a salty Susie but he was funny in his silliness. Also I miss Bitcoin "I own a COMPANY! Did I mention I'm better than you because my dad owns a COMPANY!!!111" Guy.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 12, 2015)

PastryOfApathy said:


> Also I miss Bitcoin "I own a COMPANY! Did I mention I'm better than you because my dad owns a COMPANY!!!111" Guy.



Bitch pls. 

He showed up just the other day. You gone blind, Sister Christian.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

The powah of chwist compell U


----------



## Derin Darkpaw (May 13, 2015)

I am a Gnostic Christian which uses an entirely different set of mythologies and assumptions then traditional Judeo-Christianity.


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

yall muthafuckas need zeus!


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Ruethel said:


> Nahhhh mannn... The Morrigan is where its at, get your gods in order!


what about the flying spaghetti monster?


----------



## GamingGal (May 13, 2015)

ShioBear said:


> yall muthafuckas need zeus!



Screw Zeus, I want me some Aphrodite <3 Or Artemis. Mhmmmmm.


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

GamingGal said:


> Screw Zeus


 okay  .... HEY ZEUS! CMERE!!


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

I at first read Zeus as Yesus and I was about to block you for trying to convert people to Kanyeism. >> (jk course)


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

GamingGal said:


> Screw Zeus, I want me some Aphrodite <3 Or Artemis. Mhmmmmm.



I'm sorry I'm going to go with Zeus also. Father of Olympians

meaning he's a daddy... And I can't recall how many women he's slept with so he's a stud, lightning charged sex machine


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 13, 2015)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> I'm sorry I'm going to go with Zeus also. Father of Olympians
> 
> meaning he's a daddy... And I can't recall how many women he's slept with so he's a stud, lightning charged sex machine



He's fucked men, women, animals, gods, probably even rocks. Zeus is sorta all over the place.


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Ruethel said:


> Well the FSM is just assumed to be above all other gods obviously, that wasn't even worth mentioning!


join me now for a pastafarian prayer 
I believe Thou art the      Creator of Goodness and Nourishment, and  of Sustenance. I thank the Pasta,      and the Sauce, and the  Meatballs, for they provide me all my needs.
I thank Thee for the Many      Beverages that Thou provides, for  they engender true fellowship, and I      will quaff them heartily, be  they Beer, or Wine, or Sweet Iced Tea (in the      South), or even Milk  or Kool-Aid, for it is not good to withhold fluids,      and I need to  take care of my Body, as Beneficiary of Thine Holy Goodness.
I thank Thee for the giving      of healthful Green Salad, the Yummy  Garlic Bread, and the Blessed Cheese      for the top of my Spaghetti,  and also I am most thankful that If I eat All      my Dinner, a Dessert  of Extreme Chocolateness will surely follow,      preferably Dark  Chocolate, for it is Good.
I believe that Thou are      neither Male, nor Female, but are  instead beyond the reaches of the gender      confusion of Man and Woman  Kind, yea, thou are ageless, timeless and      all-encompassing.
I most humbly thank Thee, oh      Noodly Appendaged One, for  Touching me with the mental capacity to adapt      the mythologies of  This Universe to aid and comfort me here, until that      day I am able  to join together with my Pastafarian Brothers and Sisters at      the  foot of the Beer Volcano, and enumerate my specifications at the       Stripper Factory, so that happiness and contentedness and good cheer be       present for all, forever and forever, Ramen


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Ruethel said:


> Ramen... hallelujah!



Ramen Brotha. Ramen!


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

What does the phrase "Jesus is Lord" mean? Is Jesus God? Is God just fucking w/ us and Jesus is just a puppet?


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> He's fucked men, women, animals, gods, probably even rocks. Zeus is sorta all over the place.



My kind of guy XD


----------



## GamingGal (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> What does the phrase "Jesus is Lord" mean? Is Jesus God? Is God just fucking w/ us and Jesus is just a puppet?



Jesus/God/Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost) are all the same being. It's like how a woman can be a sister/daughter/mother all at once. Same entity, different face. God is, well, God. He is too holy for us to be able to actually look at Him or be in His presence, which is why He came to earth as Jesus. Jesus was fully human and fully God at the same time meaning he felt all the pain us humans feel and felt all the emotions we feel and went through all the issues humans went through then, but he could not sin because he was God. This being said, he did not want to do what he was required to do. In the Garden of Gethsemane while he was praying he asked for the cup (his death) to be passed from him. He knew it was going to be torture and the human part of him did not want that. Of course, he did what he had to do and in doing so took away the middle man (the priest and sacrifices and Old Testament laws) that used to be required to commune with God and become saved. The Holy Spirit is how God is generally seen to interact with humans. When someone is "saved" (which means they accept Jesus as their savior, acknowledge he was the son of God who came to provide forgiveness for our sins and a pathway to God) it is generally credited to the Holy Spirit having moved in the person's heart and the person having acknowledged this. It's hard to explain to someone who is a non-believer (not that I'm calling myself a believer, but I used to be), but when in church or something.....sometimes there is a palpable feeling in the air that is hard to explain other than saying it is the Holy Spirit being there (for God says where two or more are gathered in His name, He is there among them).

Does any of that make sense?


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

GamingGal said:


> Jesus/God/Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost) are all the same being. It's like how a woman can be a sister/daughter/mother all at once. Same entity, different face. God is, well, God. He is too holy for us to be able to actually look at Him or be in His presence, which is why He came to earth as Jesus. Jesus was fully human and fully God at the same time meaning he felt all the pain us humans feel and felt all the emotions we feel and went through all the issues humans went through then, but he could not sin because he was God. This being said, he did not want to do what he was required to do. In the Garden of Gethsemane while he was praying he asked for the cup (his death) to be passed from him. He knew it was going to be torture and the human part of him did not want that. Of course, he did what he had to do and in doing so took away the middle man (the priest and sacrifices and Old Testament laws) that used to be required to commune with God and become saved. The Holy Spirit is how God is generally seen to interact with humans. When someone is "saved" (which means they accept Jesus as their savior, acknowledge he was the son of God who came to provide forgiveness for our sins and a pathway to God) it is generally credited to the Holy Spirit having moved in the person's heart and the person having acknowledged this. It's hard to explain to someone who is a non-believer (not that I'm calling myself a believer, but I used to be), but when in church or something.....sometimes there is a palpable feeling in the air that is hard to explain other than saying it is the Holy Spirit being there (for God says where two or more are gathered in His name, He is there among them).
> 
> Does any of that make sense?



I've always been told Jesus is the son of God, not actually God himself.


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Ruethel said:


> Welcome to the great schisms of Christianity mah boi.


he is also toast i do believe and a zombie


----------



## GamingGal (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I've always been told Jesus is the son of God, not actually God himself.



John 10:38
But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.â€

John 17:11
I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.

--------

Jesus refers to himself and God as one in multiple occasions, but he is separate from God and the Holy Spirit as he says below:

John 16:25-28
â€œThese things I have spoken to you in figurative language; an hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but will tell you plainly of the Father. 26 In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I will request of the Father on your behalf; 27 for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me and have believed that I came forth from the Father. 28 I came forth from the Father and have come into the world; I am leaving the world again and going to the Father.â€

-------

They are all one in the same, yet separate entities at the same time.


----------



## Blackberry Polecat (May 13, 2015)

I met a Christian furry at ConFuzzled (UK con) a few years ago. He had a really cute otter partial suit and told me about how his church let him wear it there, which was pretty cool. :3

I've seen some people online saying that anthro animals are a sin and blah blah, but it's_ quite possible_ they were trollololols.


----------



## monochromatic-dragon (May 13, 2015)

Basically we need to break down God into a way that we can understand. We cannot possibly understand how huge He is so we break him up into three. Its the same reason why Hinduism has like a million deities. They are all facets of Atman I believe, and Atman is pretty much just "that which is everything".


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Blackberry Polecat said:


> I've seen some people online saying that anthro animals are a sin and blah blah, but it's_ quite possible_ they were trollololols.


technically all fursuit wearers are sinners.
 Leviticus 19:19 "Observe my statutes. "You are not to let your cattle breed with a  different species. "You are not to sow your fields with two different  kinds of seeds. "You are not to wear clothing made from two different  kinds of material.
and farmers. XD lololololol


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

I never really liked Protestants tbph. They always irked me.


----------



## Derin Darkpaw (May 13, 2015)

Ruethel said:


> Welcome to the great schisms of Christianity mah boi.



Then there are the apocryphal texts where Jesus tells his disciples that he is just using the myth of the messiah to get people to more readily listen to his message and that all the miracles are just tricks to get people to pay attention to him.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

I like Pope Francis; he's pretty cool for an old guy. I would totally play GTA with him.


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I like Pope Francis; he's pretty cool for an old guy. I would totally play GTA with him.


yeah i am sure he would play grab the anus with you


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 13, 2015)

This thread blew up pretty quick.

I consider myself Christian...however a lot of the facets of it don't sit well with me and it makes me uncomfortable to not believe it because if I don't then I'm "brainwashed...getting pulled in by the secular worldviews...not having enough faith" but on the other end I feel like every religion will say things like that, that I'm not allowed to look at things and wonder about them or think about them, it feels like a catch-all to keep people in the loop and condemn them for not being "the right way". I went to a church service once that essentially said "You can't justify/rationalize sin, the bible says it's wrong, it is". The funny thing though, with all these denominations nobody can agree on anything. I am so confused.

I keep hearing the same anti-homosexuality arguments over and over again, like people keep saying it's a choice. Or the same old statistic that the majority of homosexuals under the age of 18 had their first sexual experience to someone over the age of 18...which is pedophilia. (Which I don't get because A) Where is this statistic? B) It seems biased, when and what groups were surveyed C) homosexuals aren't the only ones who have been molested...this does not apply to them all) ...and then I hear the whole "Homosexuals have a higher risk of STD's" which...is because of unawareness, you can be safe and whatnot regardless. Otherwise, the only thing the bible says is just...no, just because, those people will not receive the kingdom of heaven.

I think one of the first things that annoyed me was when I went to a Christian school about a year ago, there was a passage in which stated women must wear headdresses or else it was improper, and the group of girls I was with and the leader of the study just  said "um well...it doesn't apply to us now" Why? Why is it only that? Does that mean other things don't apply??? And if it DID apply, all of them would be in sin.

I just...I'm tired of all of this madness and sidedness everywhere. I have a hard time handling what is and isn't true and what is right and wrong.

I think I'm leaving most of the extremist beliefs behind. I think at the core of it my idea of God is he created us, we're sinful...he died for us. It's best to keep in mind that this world is evil but at least there would be a higher power for us, and I think the point of life is to be happy and worship through the belief that he created all things and we're here to be happy and help one another out, right?


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

No sin carries more weight than the other, so I always laugh when somebody says I'm going to hell for being bisexual. If God hates LGBT people so much, why hasn't he killed us yet?


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> No sin carries more weight than the other, so I always laugh when somebody says I'm going to hell for being bisexual. If God hates LGBT people so much, why hasn't he killed us yet?



Noah's ark and sodom and gomorrah yo, but there was that whole rainbow promise not to kill everyone on Earth again. Ironic...

I'm pretty sure you're right about no sin carrying more weight than another, If there weren't gays at all and they didn't exist people could still go to hell for other transgressions, we wouldn't be sin free at all. Although, from what I've heard the biggest sin is denying God, as in what Peter did...if you're a Christian you shouldn't hide it I guess.


----------



## SkyeWolfofDusk (May 13, 2015)

I'll say I'm not an ordinary Christian, You probably wouldn't know I was one unless I told you. You won't see me quoting bible verses or praising God, I'm Pansexual and a huge supporter of LGBT rights, but I go to Church every Sunday and attend Youth group frequently. 

Ok, now I'm going to add some fuel to the fire. God and Jesus never directly stated Homosexuality was a sin, it was mainly Peter who preached it as a sin. And remember, this was during the time where polygamy and marrying your cousin was ay-ok. 

At the bottom line, just remember that weather you think Homosexuality is a sin or not, God loves us no matter what, and always forgives us. As long as you've given your life to him, he'll welcome you.


----------



## Troj (May 13, 2015)

I majored in Comparative Religion in undergrad, with emphases in Eastern Religions and Christian Theology.

As a youngster, I was vehemently anti-Christian, and actually started studying religion in general and Christianity in particular in order to become more skilled in debating religionists.

As I've gotten older, I've gained a deeper appreciation for how religion can be a source of evil or good, depending on how people rationalize, twist, or interpret its teachings and dictates. 

Thanks to my studies, my encounters with some inspirational Christians, and the slacktivist blog, I've gained a particular appreciation for how Christianity can actually be a very powerful force for good. 

Having realized that, at this point, I basically see Christianity the way you see your bright, ultra-talented friend who spends all day on the couch eating Doritos and playing Halo. 

When Christianity as we know it finally dies in the West, it'll have only itself to blame, because it's chosen wealth, certainty, power, domination, and self-righteous smugness--all of the things Jesus warned people about--over charity, compassion, and standing in the gap for the weak and the suffering. 

People in North America and Europe are starting to wake up to the gross hypocrisy and corruption of many prominent Christian leaders and talking heads, and they're starting to turn away from Christianity in record numbers. 

And yes, it's funny that a Satanist cares more about Christians being morally congruent, ethically upright, and theologically savvy and sound than some Christians do, but there ya go.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

The Christian God always seemed kinda cruel and arbitrary to me. Like there's all this stuff you aren't supposed to do because it's supposedly bad, but there's never any explanation of _why_ it's bad beyond "Because fuck you, that's why."


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

I think we can all agree that God in the Old Testament was a dick.


----------



## Batty Krueger (May 13, 2015)

This thread again? Fuckin jumpin jesus


----------



## Derin Darkpaw (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> The Christian God always seemed kinda cruel and arbitrary to me. Like there's all this stuff you aren't supposed to do because it's supposedly bad, but there's never any explanation of _why_ it's bad beyond "Because fuck you, that's why."



Hence why one of the major points in Gnostic Christianity is that the God of the old testament and creator of the physical universe, known as the Demiurge, is seen as at worst downright evil and sadistic and at best an ignorant and misguided creature.


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I think we can all agree that God in the Old Testament was a dick.



Except that wasn't God, that was some guidelines mankind came up with...and I think it's partially because back then they didn't know what a germ was so women were shunned during childbirth or periods to keep clean and pork is not the best healthwise...so it served the purpose of keeping people healthy but we know now the dangers of certain food not prepared right and we have better hygenic products and healthcare


----------



## Llamapotamus (May 13, 2015)

Troj said:


> And yes, it's funny that a Satanist cares more about Christians being morally congruent, ethically upright, and theologically savvy and sound than some Christians do, but there ya go.



That is pretty funny, and sad. Cool major, btw.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 13, 2015)

Batty Krueger said:


> This thread again? Fuckin jumpin jesus



This comment again? Sweet Ganesh.


----------



## Llamapotamus (May 13, 2015)

Batty Krueger said:


> This thread again? Fuckin jumpin jesus





Hakar Kerarmor said:


> This comment again? Sweet Ganesh.



By the beard of Zeus, knock it off you two!


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> No sin carries more weight than the other, so I always laugh when somebody says I'm going to hell for being bisexual. If God hates LGBT people so much, why hasn't he killed us yet?



Very true Sylox. The only sin that carries more weight than the others is not accepting Christ as Lord and Savior. That's the only one that He won't forgive in the end. If you come to Him, He forgives you of every sin you've ever committed in your life, no matter what it is. I know a middle-aged homosexual Catholic couple who can attest to that.

And God doesn't hate LGBT people at all. That's Westboro bullshit coming home to roost.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Westboro is like.... Uhg... If the Bible was a Video game, then Westburo is EA after EA breaks out of an asylum...


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

WolfNightV4X1 said:


> Except that wasn't God, that was some guidelines mankind came up with...and I think it's partially because back then they didn't know what a germ was so women were shunned during childbirth or periods to keep clean and pork is not the best healthwise...so it served the purpose of keeping people healthy but we know now the dangers of certain food not prepared right and we have better hygenic products and healthcare



I guess that's one way to ignore the flaws in that disgusting holy book :T
In my opinion god is nothing but a monster that doesn't care for us one bit.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> I guess that's one way to ignore the flaws in that disgusting holy book :T
> In my opinion god is nothing but a monster that doesn't care for us one bit.


well thats your opinion... Mine is that he cares for us, but we as humans naturally screw everything up... Humans have a history of doing that and blaming anything and everything else but ourselves and our natures.


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 13, 2015)

Llamapotamus said:


> By the beard of Zeus, knock it off you two!


Deer Pan sweet Fenrir Lord Arceus, why!?!?!


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> well thats your opinion... Mine is that he cares for us, but we as humans naturally screw everything up... Humans have a history of doing that and blaming anything and everything else but ourselves and our natures.



If it existed and cared for us then there wouldn't be so many awful things happening in the world.
Not to mentiont hat it actively favors evil over good by doing sweet FA when bad things happen to people.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 13, 2015)

It wouldn't surprise me if there's one or more passages in the Bible that could be interpreted as condemning having weird animal personas.

We will know that with certainty if fundies become aware of the fandom and start picketing cons. "GOD HATES FURRIES"


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 13, 2015)

Gryphoneer said:


> It wouldn't surprise me if there's one or more passages in the Bible that could be interpreted as condemning having weird animal personas.
> 
> We will know that with certainty if fundies become aware of the fandom and start picketing cons. "GOD HATES FURRIES"



Theres already a website saying exactly that (www.godhatesfurries.com) though its more of trolling than religious extremism


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> If it existed and cared for us then there wouldn't be so many awful things happening in the world.
> Not to mentiont hat it actively favors evil over good by doing sweet FA when bad things happen to people.


He gave us free will, so all of the bad things "he is letting happen" we are bringing on ourselves. He doesn't favor evil, bad seem to triumph because we are just fundamentally bad. Bad things happen to good people because thats how we caused the world to work. The world started off as a carefree place, then we made it into what it is now. A poop stain. We do that with everything. There are plenty of things we messed up while "bettering" ourselves. Even if one doesn't believe in the bible its not crazy talk I'm saying right now:/. We screw up every good thing we get.



Gryphoneer said:


> It wouldn't surprise me if there's one or more passages in the Bible that could be interpreted as condemning having weird animal personas.
> 
> We will know that with certainty if fundies become aware of the fandom and start picketing cons. "GOD HATES FURRIES"


Someone is bound to make it sound like there is -_- I don't doubt that.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> If it existed and cared for us then there wouldn't be so many awful things happening in the world.
> Not to mentiont hat it actively favors evil over good by doing sweet FA when bad things happen to people.



Humans are sinful by nature. That's an established fact in Christianity that has proved itself time and time again through the Garden of Eden, the events leading up to the Great Flood, Sodom, and so on. Our greed and bigotry have led to war after war after war, and according to the Bible, there are at least two major wars left to fight before the end of time. The point is, we have God-given free will and we continuously screw it up and pin ourselves against others, which leads to the crazy world we live in. God isn't some babysitter who gives us a free ride through life. He SAVES us from all the crap in the world, but only if we choose to follow Him. I think He deserves our worship, considering He created us to begin with. Every time you draw furry art, you want credit for it, right? It's much the same with God, but on a whole other level. He creates us, but a lot of people choose not to give Him credit for what He does. If it wasn't for the incredible amount of mercy He has, we'd all be cooked by now.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Humans are sinful by nature. That's an established fact in Christianity that has proved itself time and time again through the Garden of Eden, the events leading up to the Great Flood, Sodom, and so on. Our greed and bigotry have led to war after war after war, and according to the Bible, there are at least two major wars left to fight before the end of time. The point is, we have God-given free will and we continuously screw it up and pin ourselves against others, which leads to the crazy world we live in. God isn't some babysitter who gives us a free ride through life. He SAVES us from all the crap in the world, but only if we choose to follow Him. I think He deserves our worship, considering He created us to begin with. Every time you draw furry art, you want credit for it, right? It's much the same with God, but on a whole other level. He creates us, but a lot of people choose not to give Him credit for what He does. If it wasn't for the incredible amount of mercy He has, we'd all be cooked by now.



So if our constant fucking up pisses him off so much, then why doesn't he just fix us so we don't fuck up?


----------



## Articia (May 13, 2015)

God must be real if this thread has been on this long and this thread isnt a shitstorm.
(then again i didnt read the whole thing so yeah)
I personally am not a Christian per say. I believe there is a God but i dont know which so ill just be living my life and finding out when i die.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

There is no good nor evil, just power and those who are weak to seek it.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> So if our constant fucking up pisses him off so much, then why doesn't he just fix us so we don't fuck up?


Because he gave us free will, and he can't force us to change, we have to do it ourselves. It just comes back to why he saves people who actually want to be saved. They show they want to be saved by following him. Honestly any Church who is bashing behavior isn't helping anyone. The point is to help people realize what their behavior will lead to. And if they still don't want to change, we (aka Christianity) *ISN'T SUPPOSED TO SHOVE OR THOUGHTS DOWN THEIR THROATS.*â€‹ >> (glares at Westboro)

Which is why I am so chill probably. If we can't agree on this, there is no point of me fighting with you. your choice. Your life. As long as you can say the same for me we can just have a nice donut or something from Dunkin'.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> He gave us free will, so all of the bad things "he is letting happen" we are bringing on ourselves. He doesn't favor evil, bad seem to triumph because we are just fundamentally bad. Bad things happen to good people because thats how we caused the world to work. The world started off as a carefree place, then we made it into what it is now. A poop stain. We do that with everything. There are plenty of things we messed up while "bettering" ourselves. Even if one doesn't believe in the bible its not crazy talk I'm saying right now:/. We screw up every good thing we get.
> 
> 
> Someone is bound to make it sound like there is -_- I don't doubt that.



Yes it does favor evil. If it lets a rapist rape and murder a victim then it favors the free will of the rapist over the free will of the victim. Period.
Also, if you truly believe that all humans are fundamentally evil you are completely out of your fucking gord.



HaloTennis said:


> Humans are sinful by nature. That's an established fact in Christianity that has proved itself time and time again through the Garden of Eden, the events leading up to the Great Flood, Sodom, and so on. Our greed and bigotry have led to war after war after war, and according to the Bible, there are at least two major wars left to fight before the end of time. The point is, we have God-given free will and we continuously screw it up and pin ourselves against others, which leads to the crazy world we live in. God isn't some babysitter who gives us a free ride through life. He SAVES us from all the crap in the world, but only if we choose to follow Him. I think He deserves our worship, considering He created us to begin with. Every time you draw furry art, you want credit for it, right? It's much the same with God, but on a whole other level. He creates us, but a lot of people choose not to give Him credit for what He does. If it wasn't for the incredible amount of mercy He has, we'd all be cooked by now.



The whole concept of sin is an immoral concept to begin with. The idea that we somehow have to be responsible for bad ancestors is absolutely retarded.
And to go through your post one point at a time:
-The garden Eden never existed.
-There was no great flood.
-The bible is just a book that can't predict the future.
-If it only saves us if we follow it then it doesn't love us, it just wants more fans like the giant crybaby that it is.
-For all the shit it pulled it doesn't deserve worship, it deserves to be hated.
-We were not created.
-If it wants credit it should show me that it actually exists. But oh wait, it doesn't. Never mind.

And last but not least:
I am now convinced that you are absolutely bonkers.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> Yes it does favor evil. If it lets a rapist rape and murder a victim then it favors the free will of the rapist over the free will of the victim. Period.
> Also, if you truly believe that all humans are fundamentally evil you are completely out of your fucking gord.


Lemme rephrase what I meant.
Children and innocent people are not, but because of the evil in the world, and the ones you say "are favored" they shape everything else. Making people out to be evil. People are good. And I don't mean everyone individually are evil, I mean as an entire congregation of us as people. People get but hurt and resort to name calling.

And By that logic you favor all of that stuff too so :/ You are letting all of that happen as well


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> If you truly believe that all humans are fundamentally evil you are completely out of your fucking gord.



Well maybe not evil but I can tell you that we are not perfectly virtuous



If you read the story of the Ring of Gyges from Plato's Republic. The ring is a mythical artifact that allows the wearer to turn invisible at will.It is found by an ordinary shepherd, who upon discovering its powers immediately travels to the capital, seduces the queen, kills the king, takes over the kingdom, and generally acts like a very bad man. The point of the story, according to the teller, is that no man is perfectly virtuous that he could resist the temptation the rings offers: the ability to commit all kinds of evil acts and get away with them. In other words, we act like good people not out of our own inherent goodness, but because we fear retribution from the rest of society.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Because he gave us free will, and he can't force us to change, we have to do it ourselves. It just comes back to why he saves people who actually want to be saved. They show they want to be saved by following him. Honestly any Church who is bashing behavior isn't helping anyone. The point is to help people realize what their behavior will lead to. And if they still don't want to change, we (aka Christianity) *ISN'T SUPPOSED TO SHOVE OR THOUGHTS DOWN THEIR THROATS.*â€‹ >> (glares at Westboro)
> 
> Which is why I am so chill probably. If we can't agree on this, there is no point of me fighting with you. your choice. Your life. As long as you can say the same for me we can just have a nice donut or something from Dunkin'.



I still don't understand why a being of supposedly infinite power can't take away our fundamental urge to do evil. We could be perfect beings and still have free will.

And don't respond to CC, he can't be reasoned with. Just ignore him and eventually he'll go away.



Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> Well maybe not evil but I can tell you that we are not perfectly virtuous
> 
> 
> 
> If you read the story of the Ring of Gyges from Plato's Republic. The ring is a mythical artifact that allows the wearer to turn invisible at will.It is found by an ordinary shepherd, who upon discovering its powers immediately travels to the capital, seduces the queen, kills the king, takes over the kingdom, and generally acts like a very bad man. The point of the story, according to the teller, is that no man is perfectly virtuous that he could resist the temptation the rings offers: the ability to commit all kinds of evil acts and get away with them. In other words, we act like good people not out of our own inherent goodness, but because we fear retribution from the rest of society.



Is this where the inspiration for _The Lord of the Rings _comes from?


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Lemme rephrase what I meant.
> Children and innocent people are not, but because of the evil in the world, and the ones you say "are favored" they shape everything else. Making people out to be evil. People are good. And I don't mean everyone individually are evil, I mean as an entire congregation of us as people. People get but hurt and resort to name calling.
> 
> And By that logic you favor all of that stuff too so :/ You are letting all of that happen as well



If we are not all evil then why doesn't it help those who are good and who deserve help? This has nothing to do with free will! We can still have free will and not get murdered by evil people! I am not a god and even I am smart enough to figure this shit out!


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> And don't respond to CC, he can't be reasoned with. Just ignore him and eventually he'll go away.



Yeah, don't respond to that evil anti-theist who is actually making reasonable arguments that aren't based on a fairy tale. Ok. Sure. W/E.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> I still don't understand why a being of supposedly infinite power can't take away our fundamental urge to do evil. We could be perfect beings and still have free will.
> 
> And don't respond to CC, he can't be reasoned with. Just ignore him and eventually he'll go away.


Free will basically is we get to choose what we want to do, so he can't just take away that choice from us, he wants to very badly. Its sort of like how Parents of a child can't force their kid to do much after a certain age. He can only punish us or reward us when the time to comes. Just like a Parent. Which is way we are "Children of God."

And alright. I'll do just as so :3


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

sometimes i like to chill in front of my local church and yell fags Hate God, it confuses them.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

ShioBear said:


> sometimes i like to chill in front of my local church and yell fags Hate God, it confuses them.



My good sir... Teach me your ways XD


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

ShioBear said:


> sometimes i like to chill in front of my local church and yell fags Hate God, it confuses them.


Personally I can't really get mad, since a lot of the louder "Christians" cause this to happen.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Free will basically is we get to choose what we want to do, so he can't just take away that choice from us, he wants to very badly. Its sort of like how Parents of a child can't force their kid to do much after a certain age. He can only punish us or reward us when the time to comes. Just like a Parent. Which is way we are "Children of God."
> 
> And alright. I'll do just as so :3



You are saying that like it's a fact. But can you actually prove any of that?  I mean, "god works in mysterious ways", and yet you claim to know all of that?


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Free will basically is we get to choose what we want to do, so he can't just take away that choice from us, he wants to very badly. Its sort of like how Parents of a child can't force their kid to do much after a certain age. He can only punish us or reward us when the time to comes. Just like a Parent. Which is way we are "Children of God."
> 
> And alright. I'll do just as so :3



So basically he's not all-powerful then, if he can't revoke that choice? And why couldn't he revoke the urge to do bad things without revoking free will? Basically, why couldn't it be that we had the ability to do evil, just not the desire?


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> You are saying that like it's a fact. But can you actually prove any of that?  I mean, "god works in mysterious ways", and yet you claim to know all of that?


I'll respond to this because its a legitimate question. I personally never use that excuse, unless they want me to prove how "miracles" work. I haven't heard that excuse for anything in all the churches I have went to, except when it came to comforting someone after a tough time and loss. If people use that excuse to try and explain what I just explained, they have no idea what they are talking about.


----------



## ShioBear (May 13, 2015)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> My good sir... Teach me your ways XD


its easy. start making music and drawing sexy cartoons smoke weed and be really gay.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> I'll respond to this because its a legitimate question. I personally never use that excuse, unless they want me to prove how "miracles" work. I haven't heard that excuse for anything in all the churches I have went to, except when it came to comforting someone after a tough time and loss. If people use that excuse to try and explain what I just explained, they have no idea what they are talking about.



Of course it's a weak argument. It's like admitting that religion actually can't explain anything at all.
Still waiting for that evidence for everything that has been said here by the way. Like this whole creation thing? That would be nice.

Anyway, it's getting late in the civilized part of the world and I want to go visit some lemurs again tomorrow. I'll just listen to some music and then go to bed.

If the dark is just a thought
Then the light is in your mind
The lies we tell ourselves
Will ruin the world with time

Did you feel the way I felt
Did you kneel the way I knelt
Or did you look up and stare
Waiting for your acts of prayer

Won't you listen to reason.
Will you open your eyes
It's a wonder what you'll find with an open mind
You might be surprised

Damn this song is good...

But in all seriousness, this thread is really starting to piss me off. It's been a while that posts here made me hate religion even more.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> So basically he's not all-powerful then, if he can't revoke that choice? And why couldn't he revoke the urge to do bad things without revoking free will? Basically, why couldn't it be that we had the ability to do evil, just not the desire?


Evil urges come from listening to the Devil/demons/evil spirits. As I meant before, we aren't born evil, society was just molded to be evil, and these things combined cause this to happen to us. He is all powerful, but as he has done with other things, he limits himself through promises he makes. (ie Rainbows to represent he won't kill us all with flooding) So yeah... Limits his own infinite power. But could still do it if he chose to break his promises. Which he won't do, because he doesn't break his promises. And if he DID break his promises, he would be lying, and he isn't the type of God to do that.

Honestly, we don't have a desire to do evil. we just fall into temptation and end up doing it. So its more of a inner battle of humanity. The more that lose, the worse humanity gets. But God is there to help us along the way if we need it and are wanting him to help us get on the right path.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Evil urges come from listening to the Devil/demons/evil spirits



Not real.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Evil urges come from listening to the Devil/demons/evil spirits. As I meant before, we aren't born evil, society was just molded to be evil, and these things combined cause this to happen to us. He is all powerful, but as he has done with other things, he limits himself through promises he makes. (ie Rainbows to represent he won't kill us all with flooding) So yeah... Limits his own infinite power. But could still do it if he chose to break his promises. Which he won't do, because he doesn't break his promises. And if he DID break his promises, he would be lying, and he isn't the type of God to do that.
> 
> Honestly, we don't have a desire to do evil. we just fall into temptation and end up doing it. So its more of a inner battle of humanity. The more that lose, the worse humanity gets. But God is there to help us along the way if we need it and are wanting him to help us get on the right path.



So then why not destroy the evil things that make us do bad things if he doesn't want us doing bad things?


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> So then why not destroy the evil things that make us do bad things if he doesn't want us doing bad things?


He is, he said he when we could tell he would. If you ask me personally, I just think he is hoping we as a people change so more and more people are saved. Because that is what he wants Christians to do. Help spread love and all the goody gumdrop things, in an attempt to help people remain under God so when he does come, he doesn't have to kill as many of his children.


----------



## RedSavage (May 13, 2015)

In the philisophical sense, I do not believe that there are good or bad or evil people. We're just people who do good and bad things. That's all there is to it really.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

RedSavage said:


> In the philisophical sense, I do not believe that there are good or bad or evil people. We're just people who do good and bad things. That's all there is to it really.



I have a fundamental belief that nothing is entirely one thing. People are good and evil, not just one or the other. "Good" people can do bad things. "Bad" people can do good things. What matters is whether or not they choose to do those things and why.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> so when he does come, he doesn't have to kill as many of his children.



So you are saying that it loves us... But that it would also kill its own children... And you still think it deserves to be worshipped...
You know, we had many threats about religion on this forum so far. All of them were awful, all of them made me mad because some people said some very awful shit in those.
And yet here _you_ are, being all high and mighty about us and that we are an awful species because we keep destroying ourselves, but that monster in the sky that would kill all of us *just for not following it* deserves to be worshipped.
Do you really not realize how fucked up that is? That it makes no freaking sense AT ALL?
I am stunned. I am absolutely gobsmacked.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> So you are saying that it loves us... But that it would also kill its own children... And you still think it deserves to be worshipped...
> You know, we had many threats about religion on this forum so far. All of them were awful, all of them made me mad because some people said some very awful shit in those.
> And yet here _you_ are, being all high and mighty about us and that we are an awful species because we keep destroying ourselves, but that monster in the sky that would kill all of us *just for not following it* deserves to be worshipped.
> Do you really not realize how fucked up that is? That it makes no freaking sense AT ALL?
> I am stunned. I am absolutely gobsmacked.


I thought you were going to go listen to music mister. If you don't know how to debate nice don't debate at all. I'm not talking about your "making actual sense" whatever, I'm talking about how you word everything. Following him implies you are following the rules he set in place. He is supposed to be our leader. The reason he is so strict is because letting things slide results to chaos. So he has these set rules if we don't follow he has to send us to where we belong in the end when he destroys the world. Good night to you.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> I thought you were going to go listen to music mister. If you don't know how to debate nice don't debate at all. I'm not talking about your "making actual sense" whatever, I'm talking about how you word everything. Following him implies you are following the rules he set in place. He is supposed to be our leader. The reason he is so strict is because letting things slide results to chaos. So he has these set rules if we don't follow he has to send us to where we belong in the end when he destroys the world. Good night to you.



So what about other religions?


----------



## RedSavage (May 13, 2015)

This conversation was much too civil for CaptainCool. So now he must derail everything with just how he is completely and utterly baffled anyone would follow such a faith, subtly questioning and insulting the intelligence of anyone who is a believer, and then display his euphoria at being such an enlightened man of science and philosophy.  


-tips fedora- 

_RIP thread, m'lady._


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

RedSavage said:


> This conversation was much too civil for CaptainCool. So now he must derail everything with just how he is completely and utterly baffled anyone would follow such a faith, subtly questioning and insulting the intelligence of anyone who is a believer, and then display his euphoria at being such an enlightened man of science and philosophy.
> 
> 
> -tips fedora-
> ...



I have no idea but that made me laugh XD


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> So then why not destroy the evil things that make us do bad things if he doesn't want us doing bad things?



You make legitimate arguments unlike CC, who challenges us to prove God's existence when he bases the entire creation of the universe on ever-changing theories made by scientists, one of which has slowly been migrating towards Christianity anyway.

Anyway, Naosrain is right about the destruction of evil. The End Times were referenced multiple times by prophets within the Bible and Jesus himself before truly being spelled out in Revelation. John, the last remaining disciple of Jesus, was exiled to Patmos after being convicted of false crimes. During his exile, God sent him a dream detailing the final days of Earth and showing him His ultimate plan for taking out Satan once and for all, which takes place sometime in the future, although we can't know when exactly, as Jesus said in Matthew before His Crucifixion. In the dream (Revelation) John witnessed God smite the Antichrist's kingdom and evil itself with plagues and wars, culminating in Satan's 1000-year imprisonment, temporary release, the re-corruption of much of mankind, and the Final Judgement, in which He throws Satan, the Antichrist, and all of his followers into a Lake of Fire for all eternity.

But back to CC, all of mankind can't know with 100% certainty that the Bible is true and that God exists. I believe it was designed that way on purpose to:
1. Give us free will, as absolute proof would take that away.
2. Show God who is really loyal to Him.
The lack of proof is why we have FAITH and BELIEF. I BELIEVE God's Word is true and that we should follow Jesus. You BELIEVE that several major events in the Bible never happened and that God doesn't exist, but where is your proof? You have none, and I have none. I have FAITH that God's Word is true, and you don't, and that's okay, because we have free will.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

RedSavage said:


> This conversation was much too civil for CaptainCool. So now he must derail everything with just how he is completely and utterly baffled anyone would follow such a faith, subtly questioning and insulting the intelligence of anyone who is a believer, and then display his euphoria at being such an enlightened man of science and philosophy.
> 
> 
> -tips fedora-
> ...



It's a trilby, get your facts straight :V
Also, what about the suble insults towards non-believers? I mean, I'm a non-believer. I don't follow any sort of god in any sort of way. To me Naosrain's post about god killing its children at the end means that I deserve to die just for not following it. And to me that is a threat.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> You make legitimate arguments unlike CC, who challenges us to prove God's existence when he bases the entire creation of the universe on ever-changing theories made by scientists, one of which has slowly been migrating towards Christianity anyway.
> 
> But back to CC, all of mankind can't know with 100% certainty that the Bible is true and that God exists. I believe it was designed that way on purpose to:
> 1. Give us free will, as absolute proof would take that away.
> ...



Did you just imply that science is nonsense...?

And oh yes, the old argument that only those who are loyal to it can see god... I'm not buying it. Something is either real or it's not. And if it's real there is proof for its existence.
And you know what faith is by definition? A complete lack of evidence. And if there is no evidence then it's not worth believing in, it's a waste of time.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> It's a trilby, get your facts straight :V
> Also, what about the suble insults towards non-believers? I mean, I'm a non-believer. I don't follow any sort of god in any sort of way. To me Naosrain's post about god killing its children at the end means that I deserve to die just for not following it. And to me that is a threat.


Well I'm sorry that you find it that way. But Its more of a warning. He isn't going to kill you out right, it will happen when the world ends. He is gong to send all who follow Satan to hell as HaloTennis said. Rn i can't word right cause my tablet pen came in and I am estatic

Actually Faith's definition is "[FONT=arial, sans-serif-light, sans-serif]complete trust or confidence in someone or something." the definitions after that come from people such as yourself.[/FONT]


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Well I'm sorry that you find it that way. But Its more of a warning. He isn't going to kill you out right, it will happen when the world ends. He is gong to send all who follow Satan to hell as HaloTennis said. Rn i can't word right cause my tablet pen came in and I am estatic



THAT IS STILL A THREAT! You are ok with me being tortured forever just because I don't follow your religion! What on earth is wrong with you?!


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

And not just those who directly follow Satan, but those who side with sin and don't ask for forgiveness as well, as sin is Satan's creation. Just wanted to make that distinction before CC uses that for a comeback.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> THAT IS STILL A THREAT! You are ok with me being tortured forever just because I don't follow your religion! What on earth is wrong with you?!


I'm not okay with it, but I can't force you to change. I can't force you to do anything.


----------



## zanian (May 13, 2015)

Nothing is more hilarious than a creationist


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> And not just those who directly follow Satan, but those who side with sin and don't ask for forgiveness as well, as sin is Satan's creation. Just wanted to make that distinction before CC uses that for a comeback.



I don't care about who goes to hell for what. You are still perfectly fine with people being tortured and burned forever!


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

Chill CaptainCool

Refer to this awesome quote from Astrium



Astrium said:


> I usually try to debate rather than argue. Stay civil, prevent facts and opinions in a logical way, and above all recognize that at the end of the day, you'll have your beliefs and I'll have mine.



Hugs and Kisses


----------



## RedSavage (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> It's a trilby, get your facts straight :V
> Also, what about the suble insults towards non-believers? I mean, I'm a non-believer. I don't follow any sort of god in any sort of way. To me Naosrain's post about god killing its children at the end means to me that I deserve to die just for not following it. And to me that is a threat.



Grow up, CC. Are you really at the point of, "B-but THEY said that--"

No one is threatening you, or subtly hinting at it. You're twisting your perception of it for the sake of argument. You, on the other hand, really go out of your way to eloquently call Christiabs dumbasses for their beliefs without actually saying so. It gets to be pretty tiring, and it always introduces unwarranted aggression into an otherwise civil discussion. 

I'm asking you to grow up because, quite frankly, you make athiests look bad. You confirm the fact that the vocal majority are self-righteous, sarcastic, pretentious prats, and go out of their way to justify it.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Well obviously this thread is starting to go downhill. Unless it changes for the better.Debates are just turning into whatever this mess coming out of this is -_-;
And RedSavage and you too Mizazuki and Astrium, you guys are pretty chill thanks for that


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> I'm not okay with it, but I can't force you to change. I can't force you to do anything.



But you still accept it as the right thing because your religion says so!


----------



## RedSavage (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Well obviously this thread is starting to go downhill. Unless it changes for the better.Debates are just turning into whatever this mess coming out of this is -_-;



If you ignore CC it's been a good convo of anecdotal discussion of faith and lack thereof.



CaptainCool said:


> But you still accept it as the right thing because your religion says so!



Why would you give a fuck if you dont think its true? 
This is the equivalent of not believing in witches, but being aghast, offended, and appalled when one casts a spell on you thar they claim makes you grow two noses. But you never fo, but you yell anyways. 

Grow. The fuck. Up.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

I honestly believe that people go the Heaven or Hell they believe in. Good Muslims get their 72 virgins. Good Hindus get reincarnated as something better. Good Christians go to Heaven. And atheists just kinda cease to exist, I guess...


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> I honestly believe that people go the Heaven or Hell they believe in. Good Muslims get their 72 virgins. Good Hindus get reincarnated as something better. Good Christians go to Heaven. And atheists just kinda cease to exist, I guess...


I guess, me personally I could never really like Muslim faith. Because the only thing I heard about them is that Men get the virgins and women just get nothing. Unless there is actually something for women up in Muslim belief.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

RedSavage said:


> Grow up, CC. Are you really at the point of, "B-but THEY said that--"
> 
> No one is threatening you, or subtly hinting at it. You're twisting your perception of it for the sake of argument. You, on the other hand, really go out of your way to eloquently call Christiabs dumbasses for their beliefs without actually saying so. It gets to be pretty tiring, and it always introduces unwarranted aggression into an otherwise civil discussion.
> 
> I'm asking you to grow up because, quite frankly, you make athiests look bad. You confirm the fact that the vocal majority are self-righteous, sarcastic, pretentious prats, and go out of their way to justify it.



I find it funny that I should grow up when they are the ones still believing in fairy tales.
And did you even follow the last couple of posts? They both pretty much just admitted that they are perfectly fine with the idea of a non-believer like me burning forever because I  am not a member of their club.
I was right, this thread really did make me hate religion even more than before.


----------



## RedSavage (May 13, 2015)

See? Childish.

Your behavior speaks for itself.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> I find it funny that I should grow up when they are the ones still believing in fairy tales.
> And did you even follow the last couple of posts? They both pretty much just admitted that they are perfectly fine with the idea of a non-believer like me burning forever because I  am not a member of their club.
> I was right, this thread really did make me hate religion even more than before.



*facepaw* oyyyyyy

I would like to take this time to thank the Christians, agnostics, atheists, and everyone else who did their best to keep this civilized. This wasn't supposed to be a debate thread, but with the exception of one glorious idiot, it's been a good one just the same. I gotta say I've come out of this thread loving the Fandom even more, because while we follow different faiths or have a lack thereof, we can still be civilized in our discussions and debates. I feel honored to be among such level-headed people. Thank you.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

zanian said:


> Nothing is more hilarious than a creationist



I love messing with them, it's so fun to see them squirm and fume with rage as you debate them. For even more fun, toss some science and numbers there way and watch them spontaneously combust.


----------



## BlitzCo (May 13, 2015)

Is the ego stroking I mentioned earlier occurring in this thread?


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> *facepaw* oyyyyyy
> 
> I would like to take this time to thank the Christians, agnostics, atheists, and everyone else who did their best to keep this civilized. This wasn't supposed to be a debate thread, but with the exception of one glorious idiot, it's been a good one just the same. I gotta say I've come out of this thread loving the Fandom even more, because while we follow different faiths or have a lack thereof, we can still be civilized in our discussions and debates. I feel honored to be among such level-headed people. Thank you.



Thanks for calling me glorious.
But honestly, how do you expect me to react when you are calling science stupid and then condemning me to eternal torture in hell? Have you ever thought about that?
I don't hate you personally. But I hate religion and the stupid and extremely hurtful shit it makes you say. And the sad thing is that you don't even realize it...


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> Is the ego stroking I mentioned earlier occurring in this thread?


Sort of... But more from the other side because of a few, the rest of us are actually having a nice debate as Red pointed out.


----------



## Kalmor (May 13, 2015)

Alright guys lets keep this calm.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I love messing with them, it's so fun to see them squirm and fume with rage as when you debate them. For even more fun, toss some science and numbers their way and watch them spontaneously combust.



I am convinced that a very big part of religious people are only religious because they are not capable of understanding simple scientific concepts.



Kalmor said:


> Alright guys lets keep this calm.



How about making them apologize for threatening me with eternal torture? Is that in the forum rules? :V


----------



## RedSavage (May 13, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> Is the ego stroking I mentioned earlier occurring in this thread?



Yea


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> Thanks for calling me glorious.
> But honestly, how do you expect me to react when you are calling science stupid and then condemning me to eternal torture in hell? Have you ever thought about that?
> I don't hate you personally. But I hate religion and the stupid and extremely hurtful shit it makes you say. And the sad thing is that you don't even realize it...



Look who's got a guilty conscience. I didn't even name who I was referencing.


----------



## BlitzCo (May 13, 2015)

Relevant to this topic:


----------



## Kalmor (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> How about making them apologize for threatening me with eternal torture? Is that in the forum rules? :V


If it was a direct threat or insult then report it and it will be dealt with.

As for this point forward, keep things civil.

edit: This goes for boths sides, not just CC.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 13, 2015)

What the hell happened here?


----------



## CaptainCool (May 13, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Look who's got a guilty conscience. I didn't even name who I was referencing.



I don't feel guilty at all. I think religion is evil and I stand by that opinion.
I simply wanted to clarify that I don't think _you_ or anyone in this thread is evil or stupid. I just think you are horribly missguided and I feel sorry for you.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> What the hell happened here?



It's the work of the Devil!


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> I don't think _you_ or anyone in this thread is evil or stupid. I just think you are horribly missguided and I feel sorry for you.



The feeling is mutual.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> What the hell happened here?



The thread slowly imploded.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> It's the work of the Devil!



Aye. We have a witch!



Astrium said:


> The thread slowly imploded.



That's the vibe I'm getting too. It seems Christianity (and religion as a whole) was already a touchy subject to begin with.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> That's the vibe I'm getting too. It seems Christianity (and religion as a whole) was already a touchy subject to begin with.


Its not even from us its from a few Atheists :/ Everyone else has had a pretty civil conversation.


----------



## Kalmor (May 13, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> That's the vibe I'm getting too. It seems Christianity (and religion as a whole) was already a touchy subject to begin with.


Literally every thread about religion has been locked here at some point.

Lets just say that the probability of a religion thread getting closed increases exponentially with time. :V


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

Hey y'all, do you have a moment to talk about Jesus Christ?


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> Aye. We have a witch!
> 
> 
> 
> That's the vibe I'm getting too. It seems Christianity (and religion as a whole) was already a touchy subject to begin with.



XD a witch 
To some it's touchy, to others it isn't. To each their own. Most of us are civilized in this thread though. All in all, I would call it a good debate.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

I used to come from a forum that disallows topic regarding religion/politics. Now I know why


----------



## Kalmor (May 13, 2015)

Again, people, be civil and stop taking sly shots at each other.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Anyway, everyone has also helped boosted my confidence in the FA community XD I never thought something like this was possible for so long. Thanks for that.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

Lets talk about our lord and savior Jesus Christ instead of taking shots at people.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Lets talk about our lord and savior Jesus Christ instead of taking shots at people.


Bruh.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

Alright well I was out of line with the deleted message above. I do apologize for that. Let's move on.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> Bruh.



Do you accept Jesus as your lord and savior?


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Do you accept Jesus as your lord and savior?



Lord* and Savior* thank you very much


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

Yep  lol


----------



## zanian (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Hey y'all, do you have a moment to talk about Jesus Christ?



I thought his name was Jebus?


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

Tim Tebow would be proud of you all for accepting the Lord in your life.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

guys keep it Civil as Kalmor said. -_-;;


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> guys keep it Civil as Kalmor said. -_-;;



After the first mod warning, we generally transition from serious to silly since we know the thread's most likely about to get locked anyway.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 13, 2015)

What's wrong with being silly in threads? We shouldn't always be serious.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> What's wrong with being silly in threads? We shouldn't always be serious.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIrtSDVbz0s


----------



## Kalmor (May 13, 2015)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> What's wrong with being silly in threads? We shouldn't always be serious.


I do agree, but sometimes the silliness derails the thread past the point of no return hence the locking.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Astrium said:


> After the first mod warning, we generally transition from serious to silly since we know the thread's most likely about to get locked anyway.





Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> What's wrong with being silly in threads? We shouldn't always be serious.


 I don't mind having fun and being silly, but when people just start using it as a way to bash something even though we are supposed to move on its just sort of salt in the wound.


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

Alright I have a serious question, well more observation: 

I get that in religion, abortion is wrong and that stem-cell research is unethical and wrong, but what about the female in the case of abortion? Why aren't their feelings thought of, but the unborn child's is? With Stem-Cells, why aren't the potential gains ever considered when it comes to religious folks? You could potentially cure some diseases and ailments with stem cells, why do you want others to suffer?


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

It's not like we don't think of the mother, but I feel abortion is morally wrong because it takes away the life of an innocent child. Think about it this way: 9 months of the mother's life versus 80+ years of the child's life. You have a very good point with stem cell research, but they can be extracted from adults as well.


----------



## Naosrain (May 13, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Alright I have a serious question, well more observation:
> 
> I get that in religion, abortion is wrong and that stem-cell research is unethical and wrong, but what about the female in the case of abortion? Why aren't their feelings thought of, but the unborn child's is? With Stem-Cells, why aren't the potential gains ever considered when it comes to religious folks? You could potentially cure some diseases and ailments with stem cells, why do you want others to suffer?


Unless people who argue that and give me a scripture reason for it being wrong, I don't see why people have to throw the Bible at it. You see most of the things I see they are just saying they are murdering an innocent child and God had a plan for it. Well God knows everything so he knew it was going to happen thus no one is ruining anything -_-; Another thing is they are trying to take someone else's free will when God himself doesn't do that. So I have a touchy thing when it comes to that. Stem Cells people just use the whole "playing God" excuse. Thats another thing I personally don't agree with. So no not all of us think about things such. Just the loud ones.


----------



## Astrium (May 13, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> It's not like we don't think of the mother, but I feel abortion is morally wrong because it takes away the life of an innocent child. Think about it this way: 9 months of the mother's life versus 80+ years of the child's life. You have a very good point with stem cell research, but they can be extracted from adults as well.



Technically, the fetus isn't "alive" yet if you can legally have it aborted. That being said, I do consider it ending a life before it can begin. On thr other hand, by that definition, masturbation is too. And I believe that the reason _why_ a woman gets an abortion is a very important factor as well. Basically, my position on abortion is complicated and I believe the law is perfect just the way it is.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 13, 2015)

It's more of a moral issue than a religious issue, but I can see why some people would think it was.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 13, 2015)

Really, CC it's time for atheists to change tactics. It's obvious that some people feel spirituality is important to their everyday life. 

Which is why I'm ok with religion these days. ;3 I just want them to reform the bad parts. (Homophobia, believing in demons and other nonsense boogiemen, denying women rights, acting like priests know better than any other person, etc.) 

It's important that we acknowledge the parts that are beneficial while eliminating the negative ones. After all,  Christianity has changed before. :V


----------



## Sylox (May 13, 2015)

To me a baby is alive when it's outside of the womb, until then the relationship between the mom and baby is pretty much akin to a Host-Parasite relationship.


----------



## jtrekkie (May 13, 2015)

So this is going fairly well. More or less.

I'm another Christian, also a protestant. I used to be an agnostic for a while but I got over that.



Butters Shikkon said:


> believing in demons and other nonsense boogiemen


I have a nice story for that.



Sylox said:


> To me a baby is alive when it's outside of the womb, until then the relationship between the mom and baby is pretty much akin to a Host-Parasite relationship.



But then leeches are still alive. In fact you can take a zygote and implant it in any body, the placenta will attach normally and grow. It is an independent entity from the start.


----------



## Naosrain (May 14, 2015)

Really the whole abortion thing is just no one can agree on when a baby is considered a baby and not a weird fetus thing. So people just throw the bible at the entire idea of abortion. (even though they should only step in if someone tried to kill a baby when its obvious its a human being with a soul and not some pink weird thing that looks like something from a scifi movie) ... But yeah that problem is just conflicting morals.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 14, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> Really, CC it's time for atheists to change tactics. It's obvious that some people feel spirituality is important to their everyday life.
> 
> Which is why I'm ok with religion these days. ;3 I just want them to reform the bad parts. (Homophobia, believing in demons and other nonsense boogiemen, denying women rights, acting like priests know better than any other person, etc.)
> 
> It's important that we acknowledge the parts that are beneficial while eliminating the negative ones. After all,  Christianity has changed before. :V



The problem is that people will always act based on their beliefs.  And in my opinion society has become too complex to be making decisions based on a 2000 years old social construct... 
Abortion is actually a great example for this! Religious people deem it immoral, but up to a certain point we aren't even talking about a human. 
Every person should always have the right to decide what is happening to their body. And that includes women being allowed to terminate the pregnancy. 
However, I think at a certain point we can call the unborn bastard a human. An embryo is just a blob of mostly unorganised stem cells. But a fetus is pretty much done. It's just growing and getting more a defined. But I still think a woman should keep her right to decide over her own body even at that point. 
And naturally if there is a medical emergency that is threatening the life of the woman abortion should always be allowed. 
The issue here is simply that religious people ate forcing their own flawed morals on others. It is just insane that religious Conservatives are actactually saying that a rape victim should keep the child of the rapist. That is messed up... 
It also means you are imposing your beliefs on others. If you are a Christian and you are against abortion that's fine. But then don't complain about non-christians being ok with it and keeping them from making decisions over their own body.


----------



## Sylox (May 14, 2015)

> If you get raped, that means god wanted you to get raped.



Boy I really detest Evangelicals in this country.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (May 14, 2015)

Imagination Activate!

dun dun dun dun dun swosh~ swosh~ swosh~ swosh~ pew~ pew~

If everyone is religious there would be a spike in population.
The Church does not agree with condoms nor abortion but that's fine... more people to have sex with XD


----------



## Sylox (May 14, 2015)

At least one of the Duggar's children will end up gay; statistics says so.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 14, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> The problem is that people will always act based on their beliefs.  And in my opinion society has become too complex to be making decisions based on a 2000 years old social construct...
> Abortion is actually a great example for this! Religious people deem it immoral, but up to a certain point we aren't even talking about a human.
> Every person should always have the right to decide what is happening to their body. And that includes women being allowed to terminate the pregnancy.
> However, I think at a certain point we can call the unborn bastard a human. An embryo is just a blob of mostly unorganised stem cells. But a fetus is pretty much done. It's just growing and getting more a defined. But I still think a woman should keep her right to decide over her own body even at that point.
> ...



Indeed. Which is why I advocate reforming the religions that have negative things such as this and eliminating those hateful, bigoted, backwards, violence inducing, minority hating, arrogance spreading, brainwashing elements. 

No one is sacrificing cows anymore? Know why? Reformation. Hardly anyone in the Catholic Church is shitting on Divorce nowadays know why? Reformation. 

I also think this is the only way you can tame Islam btw. There are people who are so very fundamentalist and who fear that atheists are trying to ban their religion in some mad scheme sent by Satan. Now if you are a sweetheart and talk rationally with religious people, you might get a better chance at them understanding you and realizing how their ancient beliefs are not suited for this current time period. 

Or you can just keep pushing that rock up hill forever, never moving an inch and losing so many friendships and opportunities to create a conversation of mutual understanding. 

@Trekkie: You must regale us sometime.


----------



## Naosrain (May 14, 2015)

I just say let us eat cake. and move on.


----------



## Troj (May 14, 2015)

Sylox said:


> At least one of the Duggar's children will end up gay; statistics says so.



...if they haven't already, and are just deeply closeted. 

Well, and given that she's well past the recommended child-bearing age, eventually, they'll have a kid that'll look like it came out of a Cronenberg movie, which is even sadder.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 14, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> You make legitimate arguments unlike CC, who challenges us to prove God's existence when he bases the entire creation of the universe on *ever-changing theories* made by scientists, one of which has slowly been migrating towards Christianity anyway.



Oh goody, that old chestnut. Anybody remember Joe the Plumber? In '10 or '12, long after his 15 minutes were up, he gave an interview where he outed himself as a born-again. He held up a Bible and said to the interviewer that he preferred his Christian sect of choice over science because the teachings of the Bible remain constant...

Nevermind the fact Biblical teachings are one of the biggest "shifting absolutes" around - who stones their drunken teen offspring or excuses the Holocaust because one Biblical tribe is explicitly stated to have burned their enemies to the last man? - the defining trait of science to be self-correcting in the face of empirical evidence, to better reflect and explain physical reality, makes it inherently superior to the static doctrines of the Bible that stem from a time where men could keep women and slaves as cattle. Only goes to show the deep-rooted fear and contempt for social change, for progress conservatives are subject to.

Plus, "ever-changing" makes it sound like those eggheads change their mind on a daily basis and do a 180 wrt. to their subjects. Newsflash, the Big Bang theory has been pretty stable for the last 90 years, the only changes being modifications which elementary particles sprang up so and so many nanoseconds into the existence of the universe and how many stages there were for the expanding universe based on advancing observations.

And by the way, the guy who first came up with the Big Bang? _A Catholic priest. _


----------



## jtrekkie (May 14, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> Really the whole abortion thing is just no one can agree on when a baby is considered a baby and not a weird fetus thing. So people just throw the bible at the entire idea of abortion. (even though they should only step in if someone tried to kill a baby when its obvious its a human being with a soul and not some pink weird thing that looks like something from a scifi movie) ... But yeah that problem is just conflicting morals.



It's more of how you arrive at those morals. Religion has a lot to do with that (the foundation you're working up from, what things you see as important, etc.) Probably the most sane thing Zoroaster ever said was, "if you don't know if a thing is good or evil, do not do it!" He was concerned with always doing good. That's only really evident in the cases where it seems arbitrary, because if there aren't any obvious repercussions you could do anything you please.



CaptainCool said:


> Thanks for calling me glorious.
> But honestly, how do you expect me to react when you are calling science stupid and then condemning me to eternal torture in hell? Have you ever thought about that?
> I don't hate you personally. But I hate religion and the stupid and extremely hurtful shit it makes you say. And the sad thing is that you don't even realize it...



The point is that they do care about you. If they didn't they would just ignore you.


Sylox said:


> Boy I really detest Evangelicals in this country.



That's called fatalism, and it isn't unique to Christianity or religion at all. 

@butters 

I jumped the gun there. I don't have in ghost stories, it's personal and not suitable for a forum.


----------



## Sylox (May 14, 2015)

People like trekkie are why I don't really hate religion at all, I just hate the goobers that use it to preach hate. Honestly, religion does have a place in society, but it needs to be reformed and get with the times.


----------



## Saiko (May 14, 2015)

The fact that science changes is why it's more reliable than the Bible. It's sensitive to new information while the Bible specifically says not to add onto it. Being consistent is useless if you're wrong, and your opposition updating its stance does not improve your credibility.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 14, 2015)

Right & wrong only exists in the eyes of it's beholder. 

Because something is wrong for you, doesn't mean it's wrong for somebody else. However, we don't chose our own ideas of right & wrong. We let someone else decide for us.


----------



## Saiko (May 14, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> Right & wrong only exists in the eyes of it's beholder.
> 
> Because something is wrong for you, doesn't mean it's wrong for somebody else. However, we don't chose our own ideas of right & wrong. We let someone else decide for us.


Right and wrong in what context? Morality?


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 14, 2015)

Saiko said:


> Right and wrong in what context? Morality?



All things. Context simply doesn't matter.
(Gotta go to the doctor. I'll read your response when I can)


----------



## Saiko (May 14, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> All things. Context simply doesn't matter.
> (Gotta go to the doctor. I'll read your response when I can)


Uhhhhh yeah, context definitely does matter. If "right and wrong" refers to correctness, then there are a great many propositions which are demonstrably correct or incorrect for everyone. Of particular note are contradictions and tautologies, propositions which cannot be true or cannot be false. A contradiction cannot be right for anyone, and a tautology cannot be wrong for anyone. If the context is something less strict, like morality, then we have more individual freedom. Note that even a proposition about morality can still be tautological or contradictory, adding another layer of needed context.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 14, 2015)

Relevant.  (Atleast for Americans)


----------



## PastryOfApathy (May 14, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> Relevant.  (Atleast for Americans)



>The Young Turks


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 14, 2015)

PastryOfApathy said:


> >The Young Turks



 One question.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 14, 2015)

Sylox said:


> People like trekkie are why I don't really hate religion at all, I just hate the goobers that use it to preach hate.



I prefer to cut out the middle man and look down on everyone who preaches hate, no matter what groups they belong to.


----------



## Filter (May 14, 2015)

Depends on the person. Some are nicer than others. Painting such a large cross section of the population with the same brush would feel wrong to me.


----------



## SparkyWolf (May 15, 2015)

Welp, I'm an Atheist and very late to this thread so I ain't got a clue why I should bother...


----------



## PastryOfApathy (May 15, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> One question.



Nah, they just annoy the shit out of me.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 15, 2015)

PastryOfApathy said:


> Nah, they just annoy the shit out of me.



They can be very smug from time to time and I don't agree with them on everything, but I like that they talk about things you wouldn't hear on Mainstream Media.


----------



## Sylox (May 15, 2015)

Ahh the YT...the bastion for Progressive propaganda. When I want to barf I'll either watch that or Sean Hannity pretend to be a reporter.


----------



## PastryOfApathy (May 15, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> They can be very smug from time to time and I don't agree with them on everything, but I like that they talk about things you wouldn't hear on Mainstream Media.



I prefer NPR. They tend to cover more _obscure_ stories minus the smugness and irritating liberal yuppiness.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 15, 2015)

Thing is, you hear all the time now about just how early a fetus is viable and can feel pain, and it gets earlier and earlier with every report. I think God is trying to tell society something with those findings.
Most religious conservatives (like me) say that abortion should be illegal, but exceptions can be made for victims of rape, incestuous pregnancies, and for pregnancies that are severely detrimental or potentially fatal for the mother. The vast majority of people on both sides of the aisle agree with those exceptions. The difference is that liberals support the woman's right to choose whether or not to end a pregnancy for whatever reason. It seems clear-cut on the face of it, but liberals rarely take into account the life of the child. They may advocate for the woman's right to choose, but who advocates for the baby's right to live?


----------



## Deleted member 93706 (May 15, 2015)

Wow.  The abortion debate is happening here.  Okay.

Late-term abortions should only be legal if the life of the mother is in imminent danger.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 15, 2015)

And when I referenced a scientific theory that is moving towards the Bible's story of creation, I WAS talking about the Big Bang. It used to be that scientists believed that the universe expanded and contracted over and over again, and that there was no definite beginning to it. Now, even atheist scientists agree that the universe had a finite beginning and expanded in stages relatively consistent with the creation story in Genesis.


----------



## Deleted member 93706 (May 15, 2015)

Physics major here.

The BB theory is losing steam.  The background gravity wave distortions just aren't there.


----------



## Taikugemu (May 15, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> who challenges us to prove God's existence when he bases the entire creation of the universe on ever-changing theories made by scientists, one of which has slowly been migrating towards Christianity anyway.



*rolleyes*


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 15, 2015)

Saiko said:


> Uhhhhh yeah, context definitely does matter. If "right and wrong" refers to correctness, then there are a great many propositions which are demonstrably correct or incorrect for everyone. Of particular note are contradictions and tautologies, propositions which cannot be true or cannot be false. A contradiction cannot be right for anyone, and a tautology cannot be wrong for anyone. If the context is something less strict, like morality, then we have more *individual freedom*. Note that even a proposition about morality can still be tautological or contradictory, adding another layer of needed context.



Point.


----------



## Astrium (May 15, 2015)

I hate the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice". They way oversimplify a very complicated issue.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 15, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Thing is, you hear all the time now about just how early a fetus is viable and can feel pain, and it gets earlier and earlier with every report. I think God is trying to tell society something with those findings.
> Most religious conservatives (like me) say that abortion should be illegal, but exceptions can be made for victims of rape, incestuous pregnancies, and for pregnancies that are severely detrimental or potentially fatal for the mother. The vast majority of people on both sides of the aisle agree with those exceptions. The difference is that liberals support the woman's right to choose whether or not to end a pregnancy for whatever reason. It seems clear-cut on the face of it, but liberals rarely take into account the life of the child. They may advocate for the woman's right to choose, but who advocates for the baby's right to live?



If you're so into taking the life of the baby into account, why would you allow abortion in the case of rape?


----------



## CaptainCool (May 15, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Thing is, you hear all the time now about just how early a fetus is viable and can feel pain, and it gets earlier and earlier with every report. I think God is trying to tell society something with those findings.
> Most religious conservatives (like me) say that abortion should be illegal, but exceptions can be made for victims of rape, incestuous pregnancies, and for pregnancies that are severely detrimental or potentially fatal for the mother. The vast majority of people on both sides of the aisle agree with those exceptions. The difference is that liberals support the woman's right to choose whether or not to end a pregnancy for whatever reason. It seems clear-cut on the face of it, but liberals rarely take into account the life of the child. They may advocate for the woman's right to choose, but who advocates for the baby's right to live?



To me it isn't about the baby's right to live, but about the mother's right to decide what's happening to get body. 
Also, what about young teenagers who get pregnant and who just aren't ready to be a mom yet? Should they be allowed to abort?

Also, I don't think religious arguments should be relevant when it comes to abortion. That is a personal belief that other people might not share. Why should an atheist pregnant woman care about religious arguments?



HaloTennis said:


> And atereferenced a scientific theory that is moving towards the Bible's story of creation, I WAS talking about the Big Bang. It used to be that scientists believed that the universe expanded and contracted over and over again, and that there was no definite beginning to it. Now, even atheist scientists agree that the universe had a finite beginning and expanded in stages relatively consistent with the creation story in Genesis.


That does not mean that they are moving towards the bible story of creation at all. 
Also, no one is sure yet if the universe had an actual beginning or not.


----------



## Saiko (May 15, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> Point.


So we're in agreement that morality has some amount of subjectivity... But that was not my point. I was saying that you need to clarify the context of what you said because there are interpretations of it where there is little to no subjectivity.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 15, 2015)

Saiko said:


> So we're in agreement that morality has some amount of subjectivity... But that was not my point. I was saying that you need to clarify the context of what you said because there are interpretations of it *where there is little to no subjectivity.*



Let's start with that.

At what point does subjectivity overlap objectivity? Who is to say that one is strictly within it's own bounds?

It's like if I was to say:

One plus one is 2, but everyone else says that it's equal to three. Then we have to question whether or not either side is wrong. Am I wrong because I do not follow their belief that it's equal to three? Or are they wrong because 'irl' we know the answer is 2 & not 3.

Trying to explain this the best I could


----------



## Traven V (May 15, 2015)

A couple of people told me something once about religion/belief, when  someone comes to you and tells you that their belief is absolute then  turn the other way.
The biggest thing I have with some christians is  that they think their religion is absolute, it's the answer to  everything and they push that on others, on people in difficult  situations, on the hopeless, on children that have no choice. They hate on others and when they refuse their belief they say they are persecuting them.
Also some christians don't even read the bible, I've read the bible and honestly they're doing it all wrong.
Don't get me wrong there are christians that do a lot of good, I just think the whole belief is over bearing and seizes it's power from fear.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 15, 2015)

Traven V said:


> The biggest thing I have with some christians is  that they think their religion is absolute, it's the answer to  everything and they push that on others, on people in difficult  situations, on the hopeless, on children that have no choice.



That is literally the basic principle how every religion spreads


----------



## jtrekkie (May 15, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> That is literally the basic principle how every religion spreads



That's how every idea spreads.


----------



## Allskito (May 15, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> That is literally the basic principle how every religion spreads


I've been doing this Bible study that is centered out of my parent's church and the most recent section was on evangelism. The little booklet they give out for each section of the study more-or-less said that someone cannot be convinced to believe in Christianity by reason or argument, instead God has to make someone able to believe. 
The implications of this are... disturbing.


----------



## Traven V (May 15, 2015)

jtrekkie said:


> That's how every idea spreads.


Not science. It's too broad to say that's how every idea is spread anyways. if it has evidence to back it up, it speaks for itself, one doesn't have to say "This is the absolute truth". 



CaptainCool said:


> That is literally the basic principle how every religion spreads


Not every, i don't think Buddhist's do and Taoist's and some other Indian beliefs.
IMO if you know you're right you don't have to convince others to the point of almost forcing them (or forcing them, which has been seen in the past to the point of believe or die) to see your belief as the absolute truth.

Which brings me to another point, I'm weary of any religion that states "They are the absolute truth" because there is no growth in that, it's a standstill and it creates fanatics in the worst way. Just look at the country where this religion originated from, they are so convinced they are right over just variations of their belief they won't stop killing each other.


----------



## jtrekkie (May 15, 2015)

Traven V said:


> Not science. It's too broad to say that's how every idea is spread anyways. if it has evidence to back it up, it speaks for itself, one doesn't have to say "This is the absolute truth".



Let me rephrase, if you have a body of idea's that you think are wrong you can't believe in them (with a couple special cases in philosophy.) This still holds for science; there are certain assumptions that have to be made that cannot be proven (mostly about perception and about how you can find things out.) They used to be debated but they aren't anymore, it isn't worth the effort.


----------



## Maugryph (May 15, 2015)

Traven V said:


> Not science. It's too broad to say that's how every idea is spread anyways. if it has evidence to back it up, it speaks for itself, one doesn't have to say "This is the absolute truth".



I guess you never  heard of a paradigm shift.


----------



## GamingGal (May 15, 2015)

Allskito said:


> I've been doing this Bible study that is centered out of my parent's church and the most recent section was on evangelism. The little booklet they give out for each section of the study more-or-less said that someone cannot be convinced to believe in Christianity by reason or argument, instead God has to make someone able to believe.
> The implications of this are... disturbing.



Yep, welcome to Christian reasoning. God has to "touch you soul" for you to be able to believe, but you also have to have an open and willing heart to the concept. You have to "feel" it in your heart, the desire to believe in God or something like that. Which begs the question why God has to reach out, to make someone able to believe, if He wants everyone to be saved. And then there is the whole final unpardonable sin which is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnationâ€”because they said, â€œHe has an unclean spiritâ€ (Mark 3:28-30)) which is basically the point God peaces out and gives up, which makes no sense to me if He wants everyone to be saved. Of course, any good Christian will tell you that it's your fault He has given up because you were too far gone to be saved at that point >.>


----------



## Saiko (May 16, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> Let's start with that.
> 
> At what point does subjectivity overlap objectivity? Who is to say that one is strictly within it's own bounds?
> 
> ...



Egh, I think where you're heading with this is epistemological skepticism, which is a valid philosophy to have. However it still has its limits, your example falling outside of them because it's a mathematical situation. Math generally lies out of reach of skepticism because it is based upon the same logic that skepticism assumes to be true. I can go into more detail later if you want.



Allskito said:


> I've been doing this Bible study that is centered out of my parent's church and the most recent section was on evangelism. The little booklet they give out for each section of the study more-or-less said that someone cannot be convinced to believe in Christianity by reason or argument, instead God has to make someone able to believe.
> The implications of this are... disturbing.


Well... They're not too far off. I think it's generally agreed that you can't just choose to believe something. You have to be convinced. They're just adding another layer of cause and effect, just like the doctor was able to save your life because God blessed you.


----------



## Allskito (May 16, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> It's like if I was to say:
> 
> One plus one is 2, but everyone else says that it's equal to three. Then we have to question whether or not either side is wrong. Am I wrong because I do not follow their belief that it's equal to three? Or are they wrong because 'irl' we know the answer is 2 & not 3.


In mathematics, we all agree upon the meaning of certain symbols(numerals and operators) so we can communicate mathematical ideas. In your example, the statement "one plus one equals three" would only be true if your hypothetical person was defining three as equivalent to two. Your hypothetical person would not be wrong in his statement that "one plus one equals three," but he would be using a different definition of three than what is accepted. So the math is objective, but our assigned meanings to the symbols are subjective.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 16, 2015)

How to start a flame war on the internet: Mention religion. Namely, Christianity. Now, I am an atheist, but I don't mind if people are using religion to keep themselves going and help improve the lives of those around them. But the moment religion is used to justify attacks on other people's beliefs, things get really stir crazy. No one likes being wrong, so everyone goes berserk, and the argument goes nowhere. Also, you can't take everything in the Bible literally. Even before I became an atheist, I liked to think of the creationism story as symbolic of the world developing through time, with earth slowly developing more complex lifeforms. Science and religion can easily coexist if people weren't so closed minded.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 16, 2015)

LazerMaster5 said:


> Namely, Christianity.



Nah, Islam is one you hear a lot about these days too. And given it's growth rate we might hear more of it in the future. (Along with atheism :>)


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 16, 2015)

That reminds me of earlier today, when I was in the main lobby for the Mineplex minigame server in Minecraft and some idiot thought all Muslims were radical terrorists. He also thought Fox News was a good, trustworthy source of information. He wouldn't listen to the others who were proving him wrong.


----------



## Summerbun (May 17, 2015)

I'm a Christian and I'm just overall neutral on things like sexuality and abortion. Whatever your beliefs, I'm fine with them as long as you don't shove them in my face.


----------



## TheMetalVelocity (May 17, 2015)

Summerbun said:


> I'm a Christian and I'm just overall neutral on things like sexuality and abortion. Whatever your beliefs, I'm fine with them as long as you don't shove them in my face.


 I salute you.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 17, 2015)

I'm a gay atheist and I'm pretty chill with Christianity if you just leave people alone and don't tell me that the act of me kissing my lover or raising a family or being sexual or having rights is "in your face". If you do, we might have some problems. XD


----------



## HaloTennis (May 17, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> I'm a gay atheist and I'm pretty chill with Christianity if you just leave people alone and don't tell me that the act of me kissing my lover or raising a family or being sexual or having rights is "in your face". If you do, we might have some problems. XD



Then we'll get along just fine


----------



## Astrium (May 17, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> I'm a gay atheist



A gaytheist?


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 17, 2015)

Astrium said:


> A gaytheist?



*I**t **h**a**s **a **c**e**r**ta**i**n** r**i**n**g **t**o **i**t**.* 

Here's  a fun image about it too.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 17, 2015)

Summerbun said:


> Whatever your beliefs, I'm fine with them as long as you don't shove them in my face.



Such a shame that to far too many people. simply expressing or even having a belief or interest is considered 'shoving it in my face'.


----------



## Tao (May 18, 2015)

I'm not Christian but I went to Catholic school, which kinda sucked. After Catholic school I learned how different other Christians were from Catholics. Kinda freaky.


----------



## Traven V (May 19, 2015)

jtrekkie said:


> Let me rephrase, if you have a body of idea's  that you think are wrong you can't believe in them (with a couple  special cases in philosophy.) This still holds for science; there are  certain assumptions that have to be made that cannot be proven (mostly  about perception and about how you can find things out.) They used to be  debated but they aren't anymore, it isn't worth the effort.



Agreed, theory is important, imagination, fantasy as well. I was quick to comment on that. Still I say, through science at least they are reaching for a greater understanding and creation. With Christianity it's "Believe this or God will hate you and you will be sentenced to eternal damnation" smile and then say I will pray for you. (or shun, kill or alienate people, and make them feel bad for being human)



Maugryph said:


> I guess you never  heard of a paradigm shift.


Sry about that X3

Really believe what you want but if you believe in Christianity read the bible, read it! Don't go off a preacher, they don't tell you the whole truth.


----------



## Astrium (May 19, 2015)

shteev said:


> I'm sorry but I can't take you seriously when you go ahead and tell me not to shove my views in your face when you go ahead and let your beliefs and stances be known up front and foremost.



I feel like there's a difference between letting your beliefs be known and shoving them in someone's face.


----------



## Sylox (May 19, 2015)

Did you hear? There is a war against Christians in a majority Christian nation.


----------



## Astrium (May 19, 2015)

shteev said:


> Explain to me what "shoving beliefs in one's face" exactly is. Is it typing them out and physically covering someone's face with them? No? Is it simply owning one's beliefs and making them known?
> 
> Then tell me how Summerbun's "anything goes as long as ur not annoying to me lmao" mentality and their instant mention of it as soon as they entered the thread is not exactly that.
> 
> I'm not trying to be a bitch but it seems like people like to go ahead and say that someone is "shoving views around" as soon as said views do not align with those of the person complaining



The way I see it, simply saying "I have an opinion..." is, well, kinda the point of having an opinion. It becomes shoving it down someone's throat when people feel the need to bring that opinion up in every conversation and try to relate everything to it. For example, that crazy fundamentalist lady on YouTube that thinks Monster has a bunch of secret Satanic imagery on it. Sometimes a shitty energy drink is just a shitty energy drink, not everything is related to your beliefs. Also, when people say "Your opinion is wrong because it is not the same one I have." I make jokes about people's opinions being wrong fairly often, but I don't actually believe an opinion can be wrong. It's an opinion, it's subjective.


----------



## Sylox (May 19, 2015)

Ohh god everything is "satanic" nowadays..."Ohh look at those images in Katy Perry's music video...devil worshiper and apart of the Illuminati."


----------



## Barbados Aster (May 19, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Ohh god everything is "satanic" nowadays..."Ohh look at those images in Katy Perry's music video...devil worshiper and apart of the Illuminati."



Blame the Call of Duty fans. They made that, made the Shrek is Love thing popular, and a bunch of other ridiculous stuff.


----------



## Troj (May 20, 2015)

Sylox said:


> Ohh god everything is "satanic" nowadays..."Ohh look at those images in Katy Perry's music video...devil worshiper and apart of the Illuminati."



You have no idea. That kind of rhetoric is at an all-time trickle compared to the 80's and early 90's, when so much as uttering the word "Satanic" could actually have legal consequences down the line.

Ya'lls need to look up Hal Lindsey, Mike Warnke, Pat Pulling, Johanna Michaelsen, McMartin Preschool, the PMRC, and "Turmoil in the Toybox."

But, over time, I think many people got burned out on fundies crying "wolf" all the time (and causing a lot of hurt and harm in the process), and I think a lot of fundies learned that calling something "Satanic" usually only served to make people *more* curious about it.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 20, 2015)

Barbados Aster said:


> Blame the Call of Duty fans. They made that, made the Shrek is Love thing popular, and a bunch of other ridiculous stuff.



No bro, it was the Illuminati.


----------



## Sylox (May 20, 2015)

I just don't get the Illuminati thing and never will. Logically a group of that magnitude with the millions of members its claimed to have cannot exist simply because humans are social creatures and have a need to interact with others, so the secret would have slipped out by now. If you want to believe that a group that died out hundreds of years ago is running the world, go for it, just keep it to yourself.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 20, 2015)

I know. It's bullshit, alongside with all the stereotypes about freemasons. Hell, I might become one myself. They have a lodge right down the street from where I live.

But still, might as well keep the joke going haha


----------



## jtrekkie (May 20, 2015)

There is a large presence of "satanists" here in NM, mostly concentrated in a few key areas. They are still breeding children for human sacrifice, among other things.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 20, 2015)

jtrekkie said:


> There is a large presence of "satanists" here in NM, mostly concentrated in a few key areas. They are still breeding children for human sacrifice, among other things.



Remind me to never move to NM


----------



## Troj (May 20, 2015)

All of that is a laughable urban myth. During the Satanic Panic, some hucksters went as far as to claim that ALL of the missing children in America (plus _more _than had actually been reported) had been killed by Satanists, while others just offered implausible stats on the millions of "breeder babies" that had been birthed on the downlow for sacrifice. 

When people questioned these wonky stats, the hucksters would reply that, well, nobody had found the bodies and/or reported some of these children missing because there were _portable crematoriums_, and because the police, school teachers, and the government were _all_ in on it.

That's why we need to always remember a useful little concept called "Occam's Razor." 

Naturally, when the _Church of Satan_ came forward to declare that Satanism is an atheistic philosophy that explicitly forbids harming children or animals, people would just pooh-pooh them and say that they either weren't the REAL Satanists, or that they were a front for the REAL Satanists. 

When you look at the actual crime data, you find that it's fundamentalist Christians, New Agers, and Muslims who are _much_ more likely to ritually or religiously abuse and kill children.

Most self-described devil worshippers who commit crimes don't even have a clear or coherent theology beyond "Slayer rules," "My parents suck so hard dude," and "With the blood in the shed it's a lonely view."

Oh, and I've met several Freemasons, too, and they strike me as being utterly, absolutely benign.


----------



## jtrekkie (May 20, 2015)

Troj said:


> All of that is a laughable urban myth. During the Satanic Panic, some hucksters went as far as to claim that ALL of the missing children in America (plus _more _than had actually been reported) had been killed by Satanists, while others just offered implausible stats on the millions of "breeder babies" that had been birthed on the downlow for sacrifice.
> 
> When people questioned these wonky stats, the hucksters would reply that, well, nobody had found the bodies and/or reported some of these children missing because there were _portable crematoriums_, and because the police, school teachers, and the government were _all_ in on it.
> 
> ...



I've witnessed it firsthand. My birth parents were involved in one such scheme, which is why I was adopted in the first place.


----------



## Astrium (May 20, 2015)

jtrekkie said:


> I've witnessed it firsthand. My birth parents were involved in one such scheme, which is why I was adopted in the first place.



Are... Are you Kimmy Schmidt?


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 20, 2015)

Troj said:


> Satanic stuff



I like the point you make about Fundamentalists being the ones who are more likely to ritually/religiously abuse and kill children. I remember all through the early 90's you would hear whispers of "Satanists" who would cut off kid's heads and such. Kinda silly looking back on it. 

Satanic is such a cool word too. We need to make it positive. Like: "Man, Troj your posts are so _*Satanic*_~"


----------



## Nikolinni (May 21, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I just don't get the Illuminati thing and never will. Logically a group of that magnitude with the millions of members its claimed to have cannot exist simply because humans are social creatures and have a need to interact with others, so the secret would have slipped out by now. If you want to believe that a group that died out hundreds of years ago is running the world, go for it, just keep it to yourself.



I did hear an interesting take on The Illuminati from a friend - to them "The Illuminati" is merely what she uses to refer to the most richest/most powerfulest at the current era/time/whatever.


----------



## Troj (May 21, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> I like the point you make about Fundamentalists being the ones who are more likely to ritually/religiously abuse and kill children. I remember all through the early 90's you would hear whispers of "Satanists" who would cut off kid's heads and such. Kinda silly looking back on it.
> 
> Satanic is such a cool word too. We need to make it positive. Like: "Man, Troj your posts are so _*Satanic*_~"



Of course, I agree . I won't object to folks telling me my posts are Satanic .

When I briefly counseled survivors of religious abuse, 99% of those folks had been raised fundamentalist Christian. Many had stories that would curl your toes.

There are devil worshippers, but the funny thing about them is that they largely derive their loosey-goosey beliefs and practices from what _Christians_ and the _media_ say "Satanists" do.

If you try to go back to the source, so to speak, you find that a lot of so-called "Satanic" sources are either fabricated and fictional, or that they don't call their particular schtick "Satanism."

 Meanwhile, the Satanic Bible immediately shuts yo ass down at the pass when it comes to worshiping literal supernatural entities, sacrificing babies, committing crimes, or slaughtering animals. 

So, the more Mike Warnke and Geraldo Rivera shoot their mouth off about "Satanists" raping babies, vandalizing churches, and sacrificing puppies, the more ideas they give to pissed-off teenagers, disenfranchised psychopaths, and paranoid schizophrenics. 

It's a bit like how, when the media paints furries as deranged sex perverts, we get more deranged sex perverts knocking at our door, looking just to have deranged perverted sex. 

When it comes to conspiracies and plots, the sad irony is that people ignore the real ones, because the Tuskeegee Syphilis experiments, Operation Ajax, the bombing of Black Wall Street, and even just the ways ever-expanding corporations are influencing law and policy for their own benefit are less sexy and less fun to think about than what powerful shape-shifting lizard people are supposedly doing in the Bohemian Grove when they aren't blowing up the Twin Towers.


----------



## jtrekkie (May 21, 2015)

There were satanists long before LeVay and they remain active along side the other occult religions. Denying their existence does a disservice to peaceful peoples. 

Also new age is a catch all and means very little. It even includes forms of paganism.


----------



## Troj (May 21, 2015)

Eh, debatable, especially given that a lot of "historical Satanists" didn't actually self-describe as _Satanists_ per se, or the accounts of them are muddled and muddied. Even today, people who worship or honor "dark" entities often don't call themselves _Satanists.
_
Most of the devil-worshipping "Satanists" I've encountered in my life have been criminals or idiots whose belief system mostly consisted of "I'll make them all pay, using what I've learned from Deicide albums."

But, I'm definitely biased here, and I'm willing to cop to that. I try to be fair and accurate, but I definitely have a "slant" on these issues that I'm not particularly willing to compromise on. That definitely frustrates people who'd prefer me to be more tolerant and ecumenical in my attitudes.

"New Age" is definitely a loose, broad term that potentially encompasses a wide array of beliefs and practices, yes. Some people under that big umbrella are religiously-motivated child abusers, IMHO.


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (May 21, 2015)

All this satanist talk reminds me of that hilariously awful tract about Dungeons and Dragons.

I'm a Christian but I will never understand how anyone can think tracts are a good idea to use for proselytizing. All they're good for is propaganda to scare small children with.


----------



## Astrium (May 21, 2015)

GarthTheWereWolf said:


> All this satanist talk reminds me of that hilariously awful tract about Dungeons and Dragons.
> 
> I'm a Christian but I will never understand how anyone can think tracts are a good idea to use for proselytizing. All they're good for is propaganda to scare small children with.



I thought you were linking this and I was about to yell at you for calling it awful. My bad.


----------



## Troj (May 21, 2015)

Do people pass out Chick tracts in earnest anymore? I occasionally collect them, because they're somewhat rare, and always hilarious and horrifying. Is Jack Chick even still alive?


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (May 21, 2015)

Troj said:


> Do people pass out Chick tracts in earnest anymore? I occasionally collect them, because they're somewhat rare, and always hilarious and horrifying. Is Jack Chick even still alive?



My dad still passes them out. They're horrible~ lol


----------



## Batty Krueger (May 21, 2015)

Satan says what?


----------



## CaptainCool (May 22, 2015)

So I had a very pleasant conversation with some younger jehovah's witnesses today. They were standing in front of my store.
They once again had that stupid flyer about life not being a coincidence... When I asked them about it the dude confused evolution and abiogenesis. I explained the difference to him and hey look at that! He was actually interested and got my point that those are two entirely different subjects in biology! That was a first! XD
We then talked about ethics and society, and we essentially agreed that we would be better of if people would start working for the good of others instead of working for their own good. We also agreed that personal religious beliefs that are being forced on others are one of the biggest problems that we have right now.
It is good to know that you can actually talk to these people as long as they are open minded. When you talk to the older ones their arguments amount to "You are wrong because I don't believe in that" which kills every conversation and some times results in a pretty heated argument...

However, I don't really trust him. He said that he doesn't want to spread his beliefs or make others believe in it as well. But then why is he standing on the street with a handcart and a ton of fliers on a friday afternoon, dressed like a door to door salesman? It makes no sense.
Oh well, at least he now knows there are atheists out there who don't want to pick a fight with religious people all the time and who try to do good because they feel like it's the right thing to do. :T


----------



## Astrium (May 22, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> So I had a very pleasant conversation with some younger jehovah's witnesses today. They were standing in front of my store.
> They once again had that stupid flyer about life not being a coincidence... When I asked them about it the dude confused evolution and abiogenesis. I explained the difference to him and hey look at that! He was actually interested and got my point that those are two entirely different subjects in biology! That was a first! XD
> We then talked about ethics and society, and we essentially agreed that we would be better of if people would start working for the good of others instead of working for their own good. We also agreed that personal religious beliefs that are being forced on others are one of the biggest problems that we have right now.
> It is good to know that you can actually talk to these people as long as they are open minded. When you talk to the older ones their arguments amount to "You are wrong because I don't believe in that" which kills every conversation and some times results in a pretty heated argument...
> ...



I'm not 100% sure since I haven't actually seen a Jehovah's Witness in person in over ten years, but I think they have some sort of requirement where they have to go out and distribute flyers.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 22, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> He said that he doesn't want to spread his beliefs or make others believe in it as well. But then why is he standing on the street with a handcart and a ton of fliers on a friday afternoon, dressed like a door to door salesman? It makes no sense.
> Oh well, at least he now knows there are atheists out there who don't want to pick a fight with religious people all the time and who try to do good because they feel like it's the right thing to do. :T



I don't think you've seen many Jehovah Witnesses. That's part of their religion, they knock on the door, and if you wish to speak to them they will speak. They want to teach, not impose.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

And why do they talk to people? Because they want to spread their religion. Which is why I still don't like them. 
Many of their core beliefs are morally* unacceptable, like refusing blood from others in an emergency. 

*My phone autocorrected morally to musky. Oh my :3


----------



## HaloTennis (May 23, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> And why do they talk to people? Because they want to spread their religion. Which is why I still don't like them.
> Many of their core beliefs are morally* unacceptable, like refusing blood from others in an emergency.
> 
> *My phone autocorrected morally to musky. Oh my :3



Your hatred for religion has seriously made me wonder why you bothered coming to this thread at all. And at least refusing blood, stupid as it is, only affects their own lives. The people in that denomination know what they're signing up for.


----------



## ShioBear (May 23, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> I don't think you've seen many Jehovah Witnesses. That's part of their religion, they knock on the door, and if you wish to speak to them they will speak. They want to teach, not impose.



as much as i hate religion i like the jehovah guys because you only have to say no once and they politely leave you alone


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Your hatred for religion has seriously made me wonder why you bothered coming to this thread at all. And at least refusing blood, stupid as it is, only affects their own lives. The people in that denomination know what they're signing up for.



Actually, the refusing blood crosses a line for me. They don't just refuse it for themselves but also for their children.


----------



## Rassah (May 23, 2015)

Sylox said:


> I just don't get the Illuminati thing and never will. Logically a group of that magnitude with the millions of members its claimed to have cannot exist simply because humans are social creatures and have a need to interact with others, so the secret would have slipped out by now. If you want to believe that a group that died out hundreds of years ago is running the world, go for it, just keep it to yourself.



What's crazy is that the Illuminati were actually anti-church, anti-authoritarian, pro-rights group. Their name comes from "to illuminate," specifically to illuminate the mind and bring it out of the dark oppression of the church and "dark ages." They were basically the modern day version of atheist anarchists (or libertarians/ancaps). Of course, the powers that be can't have any of that, so they painted them as evil power-hungry religious extremists worshiping Satan or something (basically the OPPOSITE of what they were), and that belief stuck in people's minds. Pretty much how libertarians/anarchists are portrayed as cold, violent, chaotic, authoritarian heathen types by the media now, despite that being the opposite of what they are. The more things change, the more they stay the same...



Saiko said:


> Actually, the refusing blood crosses a line for me. They don't just refuse it for themselves but also for their children.



I'm conflicted about this. On the one hand, "Innocent children!" on the other hand, they are taking their own stupid out of the gene pool.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Your hatred for religion has seriously made me wonder why you bothered coming to this thread at all. And at least refusing blood, stupid as it is, only affects their own lives. The people in that denomination know what they're signing up for.



It's ok, you are new. You will get it when you are older.
Also, they aren't just doing it for themselves as Saiko said. They would let their kids die in the name of their fairy tale.



Saiko said:


> Actually, the refusing blood crosses a line for me. They don't just refuse it for themselves but also for their children.



Yup, exactly.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

Saiko said:


> Actually, the refusing blood crosses a line for me. They don't just refuse it for themselves but also for their children.


Some parents are dumbases and do stupid stuff that affects their children. Some women smoke while they're pregnant, muslims and jews circumcise their children, some refuse to get their children vaccinated,...etc. still this is their decision and only affects them and their children


----------



## Troj (May 23, 2015)

Blocking a child's access to education or medical care for religious reasons does strike me as a form of abuse, personally.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 23, 2015)

Troj said:


> Do people pass out Chick tracts in earnest anymore? I occasionally collect them, because they're somewhat rare, and always hilarious and horrifying. Is Jack Chick even still alive?


Some guy dropped a couple off once at the theater I sometimes work at. The one portrayed Jesus as God, making everything. The other was comparing demons to fleas and had some hilarious portrayals of things. Imagine demons siding with your boss on certain things and scientists being demons themselves. Pretty silly, if nothing else.


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> still this is their decision and only affects them and their children


I don't care if it just affects the parents, but their children are helpless. I find it despicable that religion can be used to legally justify a harmful, or even lethal, medical decision for a child who may not even grow up to be religious. These are permanent decisions that leave a kind of "brand" on the child with absolutely no consideration for their future self.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 23, 2015)

Rassah said:


> What's crazy is that the Illuminati were actually anti-church, anti-authoritarian, pro-rights group. Their name comes from "to illuminate," specifically to illuminate the mind and bring it out of the dark oppression of the church and "dark ages." They were basically the modern day version of atheist anarchists (or libertarians/ancaps). Of course, the powers that be can't have any of that, so they painted them as evil power-hungry religious extremists worshiping Satan or something (basically the OPPOSITE of what they were), and that belief stuck in people's minds. Pretty much how libertarians/anarchists are portrayed as cold, violent, chaotic, authoritarian heathen types by the media now, despite that being the opposite of what they are. The more things change, the more they stay the same...



*quizshow buzzer sound* Sorry, wrong answer. Better luck next time!

The Illuminatenorden was a secret society based on Freemasonry and therefore inherently hierarchical. Founded by a Bavarian professor of church law and philosophy and comprised of his students they worked towards secularization and a democratic state, they were no authoritarian atheists who wanted to outlaw religion or had delusions about a utopian leaderless, anarchist society. And seeing as they were Enlightenment advocates of the first hour, they couldn't be more removed from being libertarian as libertarianism violates key Enlightenment principles.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> still this is their decision and only affects them and their children



If you think it is ok for parents to make a decision based on a fairy tale that can put the lives of their children in danger you are morally bankrupt and entirely delusional.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

Saiko said:


> I don't care if it just affects the parents, but their children are helpless. I find it despicable that religion can be used to legally justify a harmful, or even lethal, medical decision for a child who may not even grow up to be religious. These are permanent decisions that leave a kind of "brand" on the child with absolutely no consideration for their future self.


and what do you say when stupid decisions made by their parents have nothing do with their religion or lack of religion?
Some parents do stupid stuff with or without having a religious background to justify their stupidity.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> If you think it is ok for parents to make a decision based on a fairy tale that can put the lives of their children in danger you are morally bankrupt and entirely delusional.


that's that a fairytale is your opinion. People have the right to believe what they want and more importantly science has yet to prove or disprove god. so whatever your or a religious person thinks is your or their personal opinion. Science hasn't yet answered that question.


----------



## Rassah (May 23, 2015)

Gryphoneer said:


> The Illuminatenorden was a secret society based on Freemasonry and therefore inherently hierarchical. Founded by a Bavarian professor of church law and philosophy and comprised of his students they worked towards secularization and a democratic state, they were no authoritarian atheists who wanted to outlaw religion or had delusions about a utopian leaderless, anarchist society.



You are assuming libertarians or anarchists oppose hierarchies (you're thinking communists or anarcho-communists). They don't. And Illuminati was more of a split from Freemasonry, since Freemasons still require a belief in a higher power (why I'll never be a Freemason). The Illuminati's goals were to oppose superstition, obscurantism, religious influence over public life and abuses of state power. At least that's what the organization was founded on. Eventually some of those in charge got a bit overzealous, but the general goal of getting rid of abusive powers of the church and state always remained. And what the hey? Who wants to outlaw religion?



Gryphoneer said:


> And seeing as they were Enlightenment advocates of the first hour, they couldn't be more removed from being libertarian as libertarianism violates key Enlightenment principles.



Ok, I'll bite, how does "libertarianism violates key Enlightenment principles?" (especially considering that "The term libertarian was first used by late-Enlightenment free-thinkers to refer to the metaphysical belief in free will, as opposed to determinism.")


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> that's that a fairytale is your opinion. People have the right to believe what they want and more importantly science has yet to prove or disprove god. so whatever your or a religious person thinks is your or their personal opinion. Science hasn't yet answered that question.



I wasn't talking about science. I was saying that it is disgusting to put people's lives in danger because of your fairy tale beliefs.
Also, that it isn't just a fairy tale is _your_ opinion.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

You can't prove or disprove something without having anything to back it up with namely with facts or science. So you can't actually state that other people's beliefs are a fairytale.
People already make bad decisions even if religion itself plays not part in make a decision. I know about a lot of fails by some patents and religion had nothing to with it.
btw you failed when you assumed that I have an opinion if god a fairytale as I'm actually an agnostic and I know that for now it's impossible to know if god exists or doesn't


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> btw you failed when you assumed that I have an opinion if god a fairytale as I'm actually an agnostic and I know that for now it's impossible to know if god exists or doesn't



Then why are we even having this conversation? I am an agnostic atheist myself. I do know that it isn't impossible for some sort of higher power to exist. But the religions humanity has come up with over the years? Yeah, those are fairy tales. 100% certain on that one.


----------



## Rassah (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> You can't prove or disprove something without having anything to back it up with namely with facts or science. So you can't actually state that other people's beliefs are a fairytale.



Uh.. yeah you can. If they made it up without basing it on anything factual, observable, testable, or, you know, "reality," then it's a made up fairy tale. Even if you can't prove that the made up fairy tale isn't real somehow.


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> and what do you say when stupid decisions made by their parents have nothing do with their religion or lack of religion?
> Some parents do stupid stuff with or without having a religious background to justify their stupidity.



Without more context, I can't say much about those parents besides their presumably being ignorant. There are too many different justifications to account for in your question for anyone to address it. That's partly why I only spoke on religious justifications.



ZerX said:


> that's that a fairytale is your opinion. People have the right to believe what they want and more importantly science has yet to prove or disprove god. so whatever your or a religious person thinks is your or their personal opinion. Science hasn't yet answered that question.


Science doesn't need to answer that question. It only needs to show that <x> will help the child while <y> will hurt the child, the context of help and hurt being in this world/universe/whatever.

That being said, I'm going to have to back out on this one. Unfortunately, I suddenly can't figure out how to argue my point without a gaping hole in the reasoning. I've not changed my stance any, though.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 23, 2015)

Rassah said:


> You are assuming libertarians or anarchists oppose hierarchies (you're thinking communists or anarcho-communists).


Y'know, for a guy who really likes to lecture people on the Big Important Issues Of Life, you're very weak in the basics.

Anarchists advocate leaderless societies, it's right in their name: _an-archos_ = without leaders.

Communists are all about _class_less societies, but the majority doesn't favor _flat _hierarchies (except the anarcho-communist fringe you mentioned). That's why they formed Soviets, i.e. local councils, to organize the worker masses to build communist states.

Therefore the Illuminati never were anarchist; no classical secret society is as they all adopted the _pyramidal _hierarchy of Masonic lodges, with a Grandmaster at the top and several tiers of Minervals beneath him.




> The Illuminati's goals were to oppose superstition, obscurantism, religious influence over public life and abuses of state power.


Lol, that's copypasted from Wikipedia's article on the Illuminati!

If the depth of your knowledge is that shallow it's no wonder you're so prone to being vociferously wrong!




> And what the hey? Who wants to outlaw religion?


You must be new to the Internet.

Armchair atheist warrior kiddies from Reddit over Youtube to this very forum seriously suggest religion should be banned. Thing is, this has been done before; it was called the Soviet Union and nobody liked it very much.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

@cc
The core belief with all human religions is the existence of a god or a higher power so if we assume that god actually exists their core belief still stands and isn't possible to say that beliefs are wrong or a fairytale while at the same time their core belief is right or still stands. You actually first need to disprove their core belief to be able to say it's a fairytale. Disproving just some aspects of religion itself doesn't disprove core beliefs on which a  certain religion is based on.


----------



## Rassah (May 23, 2015)

You know, for someone who doesn't subscribe to the philosophy, and apparently doesn't understand it, you sure insist on being an expert on it.



Gryphoneer said:


> Anarchists advocate leaderless societies, it's right in their name: _an-archos_ = without leaders.




an-achos is without *rulers*, not "without leaders." Anarchists, or at least anarcho-capitalists (one step from libertarians) understand that leaders and hierarchies have to exist, especially in business, since that's the only way to get anything done beyond a basic agrarian society, where we only have farmers, blacksmiths, tailors, etc. They just believe that association with such hierarchies should be completely voluntary, and those leaders shouldn't be able to impose their rule on others.




Gryphoneer said:


> Communists are all about _class_less societies, but the majority doesn't favor _flat _hierarchies (except the anarcho-communist fringe you mentioned). That's why they formed Soviets, i.e. local councils, to organize the worker masses to build communist states.



Actually, they are for classless societies with flat hirearchies. They believe in worker ownership of the means of production (workers own the factories), and everyone being equal. Soviets (along with Chinese, Korean, Cuban, and all others that originated from USSR) believed that to achieve that style of communism you first need a strong communist government, along with local councils, and that eventually, as people's psychology, and the country's economy, adjusts, those governments and councils can dissolve, and the country can become a true communist utopia. Soviet government and councils were only a "necessary" means to an end.



Gryphoneer said:


> Therefore the Illuminati never were anarchist; no classical secret society is as they all adopted the _pyramidal _hierarchy of Masonic lodges, with a Grandmaster at the top and several tiers of Minervals beneath him.



You don't think ancaps have hirearchies? Or libertarians? Of the businesses they exalt?



Gryphoneer said:


> Armchair atheist warrior kiddies from Reddit over Youtube to this very forum seriously suggest religion should be banned. Thing is, this has been done before; it was called the Soviet Union and nobody liked it very much.



Soviet Union didn't ban religion. Neither did North Korea. They just replaced faith and worship of god, with faith and worship of party and glorious leader. It's still the same religion. And I don't know of any anarchists or libertarians that want to "outlaw" anything, since that kinda goes against the whole premise.

If instead of focusing on "muslim extremists" we focused on conservatism, dogma, theocracy, and despotism, which would include extremist mulsims, extremist christians, extremist communists and dictators, and all other harmful mass delusions, then maybe we'd be able to get somewhere.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 23, 2015)

As an atheist, I am perfectly fine with people having their religion, as long as they don't let the old world values held within cloud their judgement. And I find it funny watching people arguing and trying to prove whether or not there is a god. It's a matter of faith, honestly.


----------



## Rassah (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> The core belief with all human religions is the existence of a god or a higher power so if we assume that god actually exists their core belief still stands and isn't possible to say that beliefs are wrong or a fairytale while at the same time their core belief is right or still stands. You actually first need to disprove their core belief to be able to say it's a fairytale.



If their core belief isn't based on anything concrete or factual, why does it have to be disproven? The default/initial state of anything is "false" until you prove it to be true.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> @cc
> The core belief with all human religions is the existence of a god or a higher power so if we assume that god actually exists their core belief still stands and isn't possible to say that beliefs are wrong or a fairytale while at the same time their core belief is right or still stands. You actually first need to disprove their core belief to be able to say it's a fairytale. Disproving just some aspects of religion itself doesn't disprove core beliefs on which a  certain religion is based on.



You can't prove a negative. It is _their_ job to prove that their beliefs are true if they expect others to share them. It's called the burden of proof.
And until they can't do that I'll call all religions fairy tales.


----------



## Troj (May 23, 2015)

Rassah said:


> Soviet Union didn't ban religion. Neither did North Korea. They just replaced faith and worship of god, with faith and worship of party and glorious leader. It's still the same religion. And I don't know of any anarchists or libertarians that want to "outlaw" anything, since that kinda goes against the whole premise.
> 
> If instead of focusing on "muslim extremists" we focused on conservatism, dogma, theocracy, and despotism, which would include extremist mulsims, extremist christians, extremist communists and dictators, and all other harmful mass delusions, then maybe we'd be able to get somewhere.



I essentially agree with this point. We need to attack fundamentalism (or whatever you wish to call it) at its roots, and practically all toxic ideologies and movements that I can think of share some common features that I can see.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

Rassah said:


> Uh.. yeah you can. If they made it up without basing it on anything factual, observable, testable, or, you know, "reality," then it's a made up fairy tale. Even if you can't prove that the made up fairy tale isn't real somehow.


Science now has way more tools and understanding than what people had back then and different scientists have different opinions about the existence of god. Science itself for now tells us that for now it's impossible to answer that question. Science doesn't assume anything until something can be proven or disproven.


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> @cc
> The core belief with all human religions is the existence of a god or a higher power so if we assume that god actually exists their core belief still stands and isn't possible to say that beliefs are wrong or a fairytale while at the same time their core belief is right or still stands. You actually first need to disprove their core belief to be able to say it's a fairytale. Disproving just some aspects of religion itself doesn't disprove core beliefs on which a  certain religion is based on.


No, that's just wrong. There are actually a number of atheistic religions, an example being some forms of Buddhism. You are describing the definition of theism, and theism itself cannot be proven either true or false. The nature of a religion, whether theistic or atheistic, is to establish a set of core beliefs in addition to the deistic claim. Usually these core beliefs are about the nature of the deity in question, and these can sometimes be used to prove a religion, or at least instances of it, as false.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 23, 2015)

Extremists in any religion are toxic. Everything in moderation, as ignorance breeds fear breeds hate breeds violence.


----------



## Astrium (May 23, 2015)

O-kay. It might be time for me to call the mods on this one before things _really _â€‹get out of hand.


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Science now has way more tools and understanding than what people had back then and different scientists have different opinions about the existence of god. Science itself for now tells us that for now it's impossible to answer that question. Science doesn't assume anything until something can be proven or disproven.


That's because the nature of theism is supernatural. Science has little to no relevance to it by default. The burden of proof becomes relevant when one tries to persuade or enforce supernatural claims on a skeptic. Science becomes relevant when supernatural claims are applied to natural phenomena.


----------



## Rassah (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Science now has way more tools and understanding than what people had back then and different scientists have different opinions about the existence of god. Science itself for now tells us that for now it's impossible to answer that question. Science doesn't assume anything until something can be proven or disproven.



Actually that's not true. Science always assumes that something doesn't exist, or is null, or is impossible, until the opposite can be shown true. Otherwise we'd have to believe in EVERYTHING, from trolls, to unicorns, to magic, to teapots orbiting the sun, and that would just not be practical at all.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 23, 2015)

The Flying Spagetti Monster seems like a cool guy.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

Rassah said:


> Actually that's not true. Science always assumes that something doesn't exist, or is null, or is impossible, until the opposite can be shown true. Otherwise we'd have to believe in EVERYTHING, from trolls, to unicorns, to magic, to teapots orbiting the sun, and that would just not be practical at all.


Proving that trolls, unicorns,..etc stuff doesn't isn't hard for science as science has a very good understanding how stuff on earth works, while on the other hand science has very little understanding how stuff in deep space and how the whole universe works, also most laws that apply to this world don't necessary apply to the universe.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Proving that trolls, unicorns,..etc stuff doesn't isn't hard for science as science has a very good understanding how stuff on earth works, while on the other hand science has very little understanding how stuff in deep space and how the whole universe works, also most laws that apply to this world don't necessary apply to the universe.



True, but that doesn't make the existence of gods any more or less likely. My point is, there could be a general higher power in or maybe even behind the universe. This higher power could also not have anything to do with us. We don't know. We _can't_ know.
However, on earth the same thing that counts for trolls, unicorns and other magical creatures also counts for the gods humanity has invented. There is no evidence for any of those creatures or gods and therefore it is foolish to fully believe in them as most religious people do.


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> science has very little understanding how stuff in deep space and how the whole universe works, also most laws that apply to this world don't necessary apply to the universe.


No... leaving Earth doesn't have any effect on the physical laws that apply. It only adds constraints such as aerodynamics, and those constraints would apply in other environments as well. Because Earth is a part of the universe, any phenomenon that occurs here must apply to the rest of it in some manner. The problem is identifying exactly how it applies.


----------



## jffry890 (May 23, 2015)

Protestant.  What's up, bro?



TheMetalVelocity said:


> Apparently, there's a lot of them.



Going back to the beginning of the thread on this one.

I find that hard to believe since gay/bi furries are the majority of the fandom and I would imagine they would be rabidly against religion of all forms since that seems to be what I perceive.


----------



## Astrium (May 23, 2015)

jffry890 said:


> I find that hard to believe since gay/bi furries are the majority of the fandom and I would imagine they would be rabidly against religion of all forms since that seems to be what I perceive.



Actually, apparently there are more straight furries than gay/bi ones, although it doesn't always feel that way.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

Saiko said:


> No... leaving Earth doesn't have any effect on the physical laws that apply. It only adds constraints such as aerodynamics, and those constraints would apply in other environments as well. Because Earth is a part of the universe, any phenomenon that occurs here must apply to the rest of it in some manner. The problem is identifying exactly how it applies.


Actually it does.

_Laws of physics 'are different' depending on where you are in the universe

    Laws we know may be 'like local by-laws' say scientists
    Hints universe is bigger than we think - possibly infinite
    Other parts of the universe may be hostile to life_
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2056018/Laws-physics-change-depending-universe.html

Also time in space is different depending where in the universe where you are presently located.


----------



## Astrium (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Actually it does.
> 
> _Laws of physics 'are different' depending on where you are in the universe
> 
> ...



I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Daily Mail is notâ€‹ a legitimate source. Try again.


----------



## jffry890 (May 23, 2015)

Astrium said:


> Actually, apparently there are more straight furries than gay/bi ones, although it doesn't always feel that way.



I read a survey somewhere that it was like 1/3 straight people.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Actually it does.
> 
> _Laws of physics 'are different' depending on where you are in the universe
> 
> ...



Please don't use the news as a source for actual science...


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2015)

jffry890 said:


> I read a survey somewhere that it was like 1/3 straight people.



As far as I know it's pretty even. The last surveys pretty much all said it's 1/3 straight, 1/3 bisexual and 1/3 gay.


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Actually it does.
> 
> _Laws of physics 'are different' depending on where you are in the universe
> 
> ...


Nope, you and those articles are misconstruing the results of the experiment. What they are reporting is variation in alpha, the fine-structure constant, which... in theory should be constant. This would not mean that those parts of the universe obey different laws. Instead, they follow the same law with a parameter being different. The importance of this result is in our needing to explain why alpha would change and then identifying the implications of this. Note that the possibility of alpha being variable has been considered for quite a while already.

A similar result might be the speed of light, c, being variable. This does not mean that some places don't follow E = mc^2. They just get a different value for E depending on c. They still follow the same law as here. Again, note that theories for a variable speed of light already exist.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 23, 2015)

Troj said:


> Blocking a child's access to education or medical care for religious reasons does strike me as a form of abuse, personally.



Gotta say I agree with that. If a JW is refusing blood for himself or herself, that's one thing, but refusing it for a child is abuse. Same with faith healing. Faith is a very strong thing, but God also provided us with the intelligence to create modern medicine for a reason.


----------



## jffry890 (May 23, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Faith is a very strong thing



Indeed. One could argue that faith in God is what got humanity to where it is today.  Of course there are the totally ignorant ones who has a terminally ill child and refuse to get simple medical care that could save the child's life.  They're few and far between, but those are the dangerous ones we need to worry about.  Your average church-goer is not so dependent on their faith that they're blind to the realities of the world.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 23, 2015)

jffry890 said:


> Indeed. One could argue that faith in God is what got humanity to where it is today.  Of course there are the totally ignorant ones who has a terminally ill child and refuse to get simple medical care that could save the child's life.  They're few and far between, but those are the dangerous ones we need to worry about.  Your average church-goer is not so dependent on their faith that they're blind to the realities of the world.



I am so tempted to sig that right now...
You definitely hit the nail on the head with that one.


----------



## ZerX (May 23, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> Please don't use the news as a source for actual science...



http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100909004112.htm


----------



## Saiko (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100909004112.htm



*facedesk facedesk facedesk facedesk facedesk facedesk facedesk facedesk*
If you had even a minuscule understanding of what they're actually talking about, you'd know that this "laws of physics vary" bullshit is just headlines. Even the quotations in the article prove my point. That is an incorrect usage of the term "scientific law," and they are not saying that different places follow different scientific laws. They are saying that our current theories do not correctly predict phenomena in certain situations. This means our theries do not encompass all of the scientific laws that govern the universe, all portions of which follow those laws.

Edit:

BEHOLD! I present to you a public link to the actual paper in question! May I bring your attention to section 7.2? http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.4758v1.pdf


> *7.2 Implications*
> The dipole-like variation in Î± presented here, if confirmed, would be a detection of new physics at the most fundamental level. It would directly demonstrate the existence of a preferred frame in the universe; it may be that this anisotropy could be detected in other cosmological measurements. Additionally, it would demonstrate that the Einstein Equivalence Principle is only an approximation.
> 
> Some consider that the universe is fine-tuned for life (see for instance Davies 2003), in that the values of the fundamental constants appear to be set in such a way that small variations (of order a few percent) in some fundamental constants would seemingly make some ingredients for life as we understand it (e.g. requiring water) unstable. If the fundamental constants vary throughout space, this has the potential to resolve this possible fine-tuning problem: the universe need not be globally fine-tuned for life. Instead, Earth may simply be located in a region of space where the constants are amenable to life. This may imply the existence of regions where the constants take on values where life as we understand it is not possible.



At no point does this paper say "this place follows different laws from that place." Instead, we have a parameter that is itself indicative of a new law that we have not yet identified but is universally applicable such that the variations in alpha are predictable.


----------



## Mayfurr (May 23, 2015)

ZerX said:


> Some parents are dumbases and do stupid stuff that affects their children. Some women smoke while they're pregnant, *muslims and jews circumcise their children*


... which is *basically performing bodily mutilation without consent* and is pretty horrible.



ZerX said:


> some refuse to get their children vaccinated,...etc. still this is their decision and only affects them and their children



Not that one. Refusing to have your kids vaccinated when there's no medical reason to not do it _*does*_ affect other people, not just the kids. Because then the un-vaccinated kids not only undermine "herd" protections for those who _can't_ get vaccinated, they also basically turn into the equivalent of a biological weapon when they DO come down with stuff like measles.


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 23, 2015)

Someone told me that the lGBT only makes up a minority, and according to http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...b9f4b0-092f-11e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html

says they only make up 3% of the (US) population...Im not good at looking up sources so if theres a better one feel free to get it

Granted, wikipedia did say these surveys pose the flaw of being under reported based on the touchiness of the subject, and far more people report same sex attraction rather than identifying as a sexuality. 

So...is it a minority then?


----------



## Astrium (May 23, 2015)

WolfNightV4X1 said:


> Someone told me that the lGBT only makes up a minority, and according to http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...b9f4b0-092f-11e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html
> 
> says they only make up 3% of the (US) population...Im not good at looking up sources so if theres a better one feel free to get it
> 
> ...



I suppose on how you define LGBT. If you count having any degree of attraction toward someone of the same sex, bisexuality wins by a landslide. If you only count people that actually act on that attraction, then heterosexuality is the largest group by far.

And the underreporting thing is true. My class took a survey a few months back and one of the questions asked what the applicant's sexuality was. I put "heterosexual/straight" because people are still kinda homophobic around these parts (they're cool with lesbians but there's a reason I only know one openly gay boy in my entire school) and I thought the teacher was reading them and that I might have to answer some awkward questions.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 24, 2015)

Astrium said:


> I suppose on how you define LGBT. If you count having any degree of attraction toward someone of the same sex, bisexuality wins by a landslide. If you only count people that actually act on that attraction, then heterosexuality is the largest group by far.
> 
> And the underreporting thing is true. My class took a survey a few months back and one of the questions asked what the applicant's sexuality was. I put "heterosexual/straight" because people are still kinda homophobic around these parts (they're cool with lesbians but there's a reason I only know one openly gay boy in my entire school) and I thought the teacher was reading them and that I might have to answer some awkward questions.



If you live in Appalachia as I do, they hate lesbians too. It's just the gals that hate them more. (I've seen too much homophobic shit) 

Also, I think the entire world is more bisexual, but people have been so deeply shamed and made to fear their same sex arousal that they deny it to their core. That 3 percent thing makes me laugh because not long ago they claimed it was 1 percent. XD

I think it's more like 50.


----------



## Curtisboy (May 24, 2015)

Back to the topic post

For me religion in general is a joke, that's my own opinion and I never shove that opinion on other people, UNLESS they shove their religiousness on me in the first place of course. When it comes to being a Christian, or even a Muslim or Buddhist and so on, as long as the person is comfortable being both religious and a furry, there's no problem in my opinion


----------



## ShioBear (May 24, 2015)

Curtisboy said:


> Back to the topic post
> 
> For me religion in general is a joke, that's my own opinion and I never shove that opinion on other people, UNLESS they shove their religiousness on me in the first place of course. When it comes to being a Christian, or even a Muslim or Buddhist and so on, as long as the person is comfortable being both religious and a furry, there's no problem in my opinion


 Buddhism isn't a religion. modern misrepresentations of Buddhism that  include the reincarnation myth and the total misreading of karma could  be categorized as such but it is not true Buddhism. karma just means  surround yourself with good things and good people so good vibes is your  experience. note that the whole my name is earl / christian eye for an  eye lollipop for lollipop nonsense. if you were to research the original  true Buddhist practice you will see it is not religion for budda is not nor  was he ever a god and not worshiped as such.


----------



## Astrium (May 24, 2015)

ShioBear said:


> Buddhism isn't a religion. modern misrepresentations of Buddhism that  include the reincarnation myth and the total misreading of karma could  be categorized as such but it is not true Buddhism. karma just means  surround yourself with good things and good people so good vibes is your  experience. note that the whole my name is earl / christian eye for an  eye lollipop for lollipop nonsense. if you were to research the original  true Buddhist practice you will see it is not religion for budda is not nor  was he ever a god and not worshiped as such.



I wouldn't say a religion necessarily has to have a god, although Buddhism always did strike me as more of a philosophy than as a religion.


----------



## Curtisboy (May 24, 2015)

ShioBear said:


> Buddhism isn't a religion. modern misrepresentations of Buddhism that  include the reincarnation myth and the total misreading of karma could  be categorized as such but it is not true Buddhism. karma just means  surround yourself with good things and good people so good vibes is your  experience. note that the whole my name is earl / christian eye for an  eye lollipop for lollipop nonsense. if you were to research the original  true Buddhist practice you will see it is not religion for budda is not nor  was he ever a god and not worshiped as such.



Globally it is considered to be a religion, although I am aware of the point you're making. And I'm in the midst of learning the Buddhist life. It's a lot like Confucianism where its a lot of philosophy.


----------



## Sylox (May 24, 2015)

The thing w/ Atheism is that there are alot who love to shove their views into the faces of Christians. They won't admit that however.


----------



## Rassah (May 24, 2015)

I'll admit shoving my atheist views into the faces of Christians. I shove my more educated and informed views in many faces of idiots who believe stupid made-up stories, be they Christians, Muslims, anti-vaxers, anti-GMO types, 9/11 conspiracy types, creationists, etc. I believe if we don't ridicule stupid beliefs, they will continue to propagate, and society will be worse because of it.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 24, 2015)

Rassah said:


> II admit shoving my atheist views into the faces of Christians. I shove my more educated and informed views in many faces of idiots who believe stupid made-up stories, be they Christians, Muslims, anti-vaxers, anti-GMO types, 9/11 conspiracy types, creationists, etc. I believe if we don't ridicule stupid beliefs, they will continue to propagate, and society will be worse because of it.



Hate to break it to you, but the religious have and always will outnumber the "educated" and "informed". So when you say these ideals will "continue to propagate" across the world, fight it all you want, but you've already lost that war. Nice way to call us stupid, by the way. How typical...and you wonder why Christians get defensive.


----------



## Sylox (May 24, 2015)

And here I thought you'd be a Truther and an Anti-Vaxer Rassah.


----------



## ShioBear (May 24, 2015)

Curtisboy said:


> Globally it is considered to be a religion, although I am aware of the point you're making. And I'm in the midst of learning the Buddhist life. It's a lot like Confucianism where its a lot of philosophy.


globally the people who consider it a religion are the people ignorant to the fact that it is not.


----------



## Troj (May 24, 2015)

The main problem that I see vis-a-vis spiritual religions is that when someone argues a point using concepts, examples, or data points that can be observed and tested in reality, then everyone can come to the table, weigh those arguments, and present their own testable arguments and data points if they disagree.

When we slip into the realm of the subjective, then whether blue is "the best" colour could last all eternity and never be resolved. But, in most cases, people can agree to disagree which is the best or the worst movie, TV show, colour, or cuisine--and even if they can't, heads usually don't roll over it!

Likewise, when someone supports a belief, ethic, or opinion with "because Jesus/Allah/Thor tells me so," there's nothing to "grab" physically or test empirically. 

Add to that the fact that most people are taught to have a kind of respect or reverence for *BELIEFS,* especially spiritually- or religiously-based ones. When someone says that they BELIEVE gay people are Nazi pedophile dogfuckers, or that women must cover themselves from head-to-toe to protect their purity, or that Levora is an abortifacent, people get so tied up in being "respectful" that they can't bring themselves to say, "Uh, there's no fucking evidence for that in reality, and I don't care what your 6,000-year-old book or headmates say."

So, that's the main thing that worries me about religion.

Outside of that, I certainly don't think non-religious or non-spiritual people are somehow immune to being snookered by charismatic leaders, getting swept up in toxic mass movements, or swallowing stupid beliefs unquestioningly. Materialists, atheists, and so-called "skeptics" can be just as stupid, just as ideologically-driven, and just as dangerous as religious or spiritual people can.

There may come a day where America becomes predominantly atheistic, agnostic, apathetistic, and/or anti-religious--and I welcome that day--but it doesn't mean that people will magically become smarter, kinder, or less insane in the process. It just means that we'll have new delusions and new toxic ideologies to fight.


----------



## Rassah (May 24, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Hate to break it to you, but the religious have and always will outnumber the "educated" and "informed". So when you say these ideals will "continue to propagate" across the world, fight it all you want, but you've already lost that war.




The war was "lost" thousands of years ago. Now, atheist/nonbeliever is the fastest growing religious affiliation. Thanks to the internet opening up access to information and allowing people to ask controversial questions and discuss in safety of relative anonymity. Before, believers only had their church, family, and religious friends to talk to. So, religion is actually losing that war. And I didn't call you stupid, I called you ignorant, which is basically anyone who believes silly things without evidence.



Sylox said:


> And here I thought you'd be a Truther and an Anti-Vaxer Rassah.



Nah, I'm a scientist, so I'm all about logic and sh*t. Why do you think I'm what I am?


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 24, 2015)

Rassah said:


> The war was "lost" thousands of years ago. Now, atheist/nonbeliever is the fastest growing religious affiliation. Thanks to the internet opening up access to information and allowing people to ask controversial questions and discuss in safety of relative anonymity. Before, believers only had their church, family, and religious friends to talk to. So, religion is actually losing that war. And I didn't call you stupid, I called you ignorant, which is basically anyone who believes silly things without evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, I'm a scientist, so I'm all about logic and sh*t. Why do you think I'm what I am?




Just gonna add an excerpt from the book _Evangical Theology by Karl Barth

'Ever since the fading of it's illusory splendor as a leading academic power during the Middle Ages, theology has taken too many pains to justify it's existence. It has trued too hard, especially during the 19th century,  to secure for itself at least a small but honorable place in the throne room of general science. This attempt at self-justification has been no help to its own work. The fact is that it has made theology, to a great extent, hesitant and halfhearted; moreover, this uncertainty has earned theology no more respect for it's achievements that a very modest tip of the hat"_

Mind you, this book was published in 1963.


----------



## Naosrain (May 24, 2015)

what is this thread even about anymore...


----------



## HaloTennis (May 24, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> what is this thread even about anymore...



Hell if I know. It got derailed real fast and that was it.


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 24, 2015)

Guys, cant we all just get along?


----------



## WolfNightV4X1 (May 24, 2015)

Oh but also fun fact not just religion but any values or beliefs right or wrong, if attacked and ridiculed, are far more likely to grow stronger against adversity than to dwindle away. Hence why peace between different values and beliefs allows people to come and go more freely and more likely to change their opinion

just my two cents...nobody slay me.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 24, 2015)

WolfNightV4X1 said:


> just my two cents...nobody slay me.



*Slays* 

There. Slayed.


----------



## Astrium (May 25, 2015)

WolfNightV4X1 said:


> Oh but also fun fact not just religion but any values or beliefs right or wrong, if attacked and ridiculed, are far more likely to grow stronger against adversity than to dwindle away. Hence why peace between different values and beliefs allows people to come and go more freely and more likely to change their opinion
> 
> just my two cents...nobody slay me.



!slay WolfNightV4X1

I was a _GMod _moderator, I know my shit. Now GTFO before I have to !ban you.


----------



## Rassah (May 25, 2015)

WolfNightV4X1 said:


> Oh but also fun fact not just religion but any values or beliefs right or wrong, if attacked and ridiculed, are far more likely to grow stronger against adversity than to dwindle away.



Eh, depends on the value. Of your beliefs are based on some logic or reason, you learn how to defend them better. If they are not, you typically just get more and more upset and hysterical, and either come up with some silly ways of keeping yourself deluded (yay creationists!) or start questioning yourself. No atheist who used to be a christian got that way without having their beliefs seriously questioned.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 25, 2015)

Naosrain said:


> what is this thread even about anymore...



I believe a group thread for fans of Christian Slater.

Boy, he sure is AWESOME! <3 <3 <3


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 25, 2015)

Rassah said:


> Eh, depends on the value. Of your beliefs are based on some logic PR reason, you learn how to defend them better. If they are not, you typically just get more and more upset and hysterical, and either come up with some silly ways of keeping yourself deluded (yay creationists!) or start questioning yourself. No atheist who used to be a christian got that way without having their beliefs seriously questioned.




I dunno. I have a hard time of understanding that energy exists despite it not being able to be created or destroyed, likewise mass. For the beginning of the universe (and it's parallels) there's too little understood about the initial spark to make any assumption on how anything is put into existence. I surely do not believe that life would appear without reason, and how specific would that particular life form be! Something in non-existence, cannot use it's own will to bring itself into creation. And yes, it's understood that the existence of God is questioned by His own, but this depends on somebodies perception and understanding of  "God".


----------



## Rassah (May 25, 2015)

Well, regarding the initial spark, we had a theory that it just spontaneously happened, and we actually confirmed that theory with the Large Hadron Collider, where such mini Big Bang sparks were happening constantly (as well as spontaneous mini black holes). Every time it happened, it exploded out an equal amount of matter and antimatter. And that's what we observe in our universe as well. So, with regards to the question of "How can you get something from nothing," if you take all the matter and antimatter in the universe and sum it all up (put it together), it will all cancel each other out like some giant cosmic math function, and add up to zero, or nothing. In other words, the "being unable to be created or destroyed" is still true, its just that for every created thing an opposite gets created to bring the total equation back to nothing, and we live on one side of that nothing.

With regards to the energy and mass thing, that's a rather more complicated interrelationship between speed, time, gravity, etc. Admittedly, it's been a while since I studied that, so I'm not confident enough to explain it correctly.

As for life and reason, in a way that's kind of the default natural state. Imagine if you had a big box of magnets, and you threw them all up in the air and let them land all over the floor. You'll notice that all of them fall of the floor forming a complex intricate pattern, with their ends lined up with each other in large arcs and concentric circles. This isn't because the patterns were designed by someone, despite them being so specific. It's just the result of nature finding the most optimal patterns after energy was applied, the patterns being nearest locations along magnetic lines of flux, and energy being you tossing those magnets up into the air. For life its the same, except the energy being applied is coming from the sun (or for some life from geothermal sources deep on the ocean floor), and the patterns coming from basic chemistry, and more complex interactions between species.

It's actually a very interesting, complex, and fun world if you take the time to learn and understand it. Way more interesting than the explanation the bible comes up with (especially with regards to how you can use gravity and speed to screw with time and perception of physical space.


----------



## ShioBear (May 25, 2015)

Rassah said:


> Well, regarding the initial spark, we had a theory that it just spontaneously happened, and we actually confirmed that theory with the Large Hadron Collider, where such mini Big Bang sparks were happening constantly (as well as spontaneous mini black holes). Every time it happened, it exploded out an equal amount of matter and antimatter. And that's what we observe in our universe as well. So, with regards to the question of "How can you get something from nothing," if you take all the matter and antimatter in the universe and sum it all up (put it together), it will all cancel each other out like some giant cosmic math function, and add up to zero, or nothing. In other words, the "being unable to be created or destroyed" is still true, its just that for every created thing an opposite gets created to bring the total equation back to nothing, and we live on one side of that nothing.
> 
> With regards to the energy and mass thing, that's a rather more complicated interrelationship between speed, time, gravity, etc. Admittedly, it's been a while since I studied that, so I'm not confident enough to explain it correctly.
> 
> ...


yeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaah BAM drop that science son!


----------



## Volkodav (May 25, 2015)

Listen i hate Christianity as much as the next guy but cant they have a single thread for themselves to talk about Jengus


----------



## ShioBear (May 25, 2015)

Volkodav said:


> Listen i hate Christianity as much as the next guy but cant they have a single thread for themselves to talk about Jengus


we could call it the cultist thread! praised be jigengus!


----------



## BlitzCo (May 25, 2015)

Has this thread turned into a train wreck while I was gone?


----------



## Astrium (May 25, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> Has this thread turned into a train wreck while I was gone?



This thread was always a train wreck.


----------



## BlitzCo (May 25, 2015)

From what I can get from this thread. Christian furries do exist, but the rest of the fandom hates them.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 25, 2015)

ShioBear said:


> yeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaah BAM drop that science son!



I'm not even mad. I'm glad he taught me something. I appreciate the knowledge dearly.

With all this highschool and whatnot, my pursuits are secondary.


----------



## Volkodav (May 25, 2015)

Let the Jengus lovers have their own thread

[yt]ES3Rnq_iOS0[/yt]


----------



## MaximizedNOVA (May 25, 2015)

I doubt that the rest of the fandom hates Christian furs. That's a very extreme statement to make. There are alot of people who have tolerance or just not care about the Christians around them.


----------



## Troj (May 25, 2015)

I adore the Christian furs I know. They're all lovely people.


----------



## GamingGal (May 25, 2015)

I don't hate Christian furs, I just have issues with Christians in general >.>


----------



## BlitzCo (May 25, 2015)

Considering like how 65% of the fandom are atheistic...


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 26, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> Considering like how 65% of the fandom are atheistic...



And being an atheist means hating all Christians... why?


----------



## ShioBear (May 26, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> I'm not even mad. I'm glad he taught me something. I appreciate the knowledge dearly.
> 
> With all this highschool and whatnot, my pursuits are secondary.


i just like when people science  i get excited


----------



## JegoLego (May 27, 2015)

i feel like being raised by a Christian family has been really harmful for me at times, and it's probly one of the reasons i have depression...


----------



## BlitzCo (May 27, 2015)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> And being an atheist means hating all Christians... why?



high amount of atheists = larger amount of atheists that attack religious people just to stroke their egos


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 28, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> high amount of atheists = larger amount of atheists that attack religious people just to stroke their egos



Answer the question.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 28, 2015)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> And being an atheist means hating all Christians... why?



Because Dawkins says so.

Hatred is an effective tool to make the masses accept your marching orders. Smash-the-Church New Atheists aren't at all interested in promoting traditional atheist ideals to create an Enlightened, more livable society, they just want to take the clergy's place among the elite, replacing deacons and popes with thought leaders and such. If you read about their views on gender issues and culture politics, it becomes increasingly clear it's a case of "Meet the new boss, same as the old".


----------



## Luki (May 28, 2015)

The widespread rep of "jerk" or "insensitive" atheists seem to get is really frustrating sometimes.
I always avoid religious topics, but it still kind of hurts when people generelize things like this.

Being religious does not make you a good or a bad person, and neither does being an atheist.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 28, 2015)

Gryphoneer said:


> Because Dawkins says so.



Dawkins speaks for all atheists the same way Ray Comfort speaks for all Christians.


----------



## Swift Shadowfire (May 28, 2015)

MaximizedNOVA said:


> I doubt that the rest of the fandom hates Christian furs. That's a very extreme statement to make. There are alot of people who have tolerance or just not care about the Christians around them.



you should go to furryteens, they HATE Christian furs. i was banned bc of it.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 28, 2015)

Swift Shadowfire said:


> you should go to furryteens, they HATE Christian furs. i was banned bc of it.



Just when I was about to join that site


----------



## BlitzCo (May 28, 2015)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> Answer the question.



 I was saying that if a certain fandom has a large amount of atheists, naturally there would be a large amount of atheists that would attack religious people just for being religious.

Although this may seem contradictory to what I said earlier, I wasn't saying that all atheists hate christians, I was making an exaggeration.


----------



## Blackberry Polecat (May 28, 2015)

JegoLego said:


> i feel like being raised by a Christian family has been really harmful for me at times, and it's probly one of the reasons i have depression...



That's pretty sad. :c
I hope you can get help and that your family take your feelings seriously. Hopefully you can forgive them one day, too.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 28, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> I was saying that if a certain fandom has a large amount of atheists, naturally there would be a large amount of atheists that would attack religious people just for being religious.
> 
> Although this may seem contradictory to what I said earlier, I wasn't saying that all atheists hate christians, I was making an exaggeration.



Wanna know why most atheists lash out at religious people? Because they keep saying awful things without realizing it.


----------



## BlitzCo (May 28, 2015)

That's hardy a reason for an atheist to send me a hateful PM on another forum. Especially when I said nothing that was awful or hateful.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 28, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> That's hardy a reason for an atheist to send me a hateful PM on another forum. Especially when I said nothing that was awful or hateful.



As I said, often religious people don't realize when they say awful things.
Like claiming how great your god is and that people will go to heaven after a big disaster in which many people died. Or the fact that religions teach helplessness, that we should just let bad things happen because we can't do anything about it anyway.

What did you say that triggered that message? Maybe it really was awful but you just didn't realize it.


----------



## Blackberry Polecat (May 28, 2015)

CaptionCool, it's quite possible the person who PM'd him was just a jerk...


----------



## BlitzCo (May 28, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> What did you say that triggered that message? Maybe it really was awful but you just didn't realize it.



I said that "not all religious people fit into the stereotypes that you believe". A few hours later, this guy who was banned before for being a douche told me to "go get your head bashed in by a cross and drink holy water with anti-freeze in it". He got ban hammered permanently for it.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 28, 2015)

Blackberry Polecat said:


> CaptionCool, it's quite possible the person who PM'd him was just a jerk...



True, I'm just checkin'  I'm also curious.



BlitzCo said:


> I said that "not all religious people fit into the stereotypes that you believe". A few hours later, this guy who was banned before for being a douche told me to "go get your head bashed in by a cross and drink holy water with anti-freeze in it". He got ban hammered permanently for it.



Yup, he was just a jerk.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 28, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> Yup, he was just a jerk.



Hammer Jerky!


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> Like claiming how great your god is and that people will go to heaven after a big disaster in which many people died.



I can't wrap my head around how you think that's awful or hateful. Please explain.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 28, 2015)

The book of Revelations is a tricky book.  The Apocalypse isn't defined as 'random horsemen come to fuck your shit up'. It's an interesting question to ask "What is the Apocalypse to you?"


----------



## Blackberry Polecat (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> I can't wrap my head around how you think that's awful or hateful. Please explain.



Three thousand people die, but someone yells how it's a miracle from God/angels that one little girl trapped under rubble didn't die. It is pretty insensitive. (especially when it's implied that God is responsible for natural disasters in the first place)


----------



## Astrium (May 28, 2015)

Blackberry Polecat said:


> Three thousand people die, but someone yells how it's a miracle from God/angels that one little girl trapped under rubble didn't die. It is pretty insensitive. (especially when it's implied that God is responsible for natural disasters in the first place)



I think he was referring to the Rapture...


----------



## CaptainCool (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> I can't wrap my head around how you think that's awful or hateful. Please explain.



See, this is what I mean...
Here is an example. Recently a Germanwings Airbus A320-211 crashed in the Alps. A representative of the local church (no idea if they were catholic or protestants, but it doesn't really matter) claims that the whole thing isn't so bad. The 150 people who died are supposedly with god now so it's all a-ok! We just need to believe really really hard now and everything will be fine.

But here the thing: These people are dead. They are gone, forever. And here is this old fart making claims about this asinine nonsense that we are gonna see them again. Fun fact: We are not. Because they are dead.
And he even had the audacity to use this situation to explain how great his god is! The very same being that did *JACK SHIT* to save these people! Why did it do jack shit? Because it isn't freaking real, that's why!

That is what I am talking about. People making asinine claims that can potentially hurt people quite a lot and abusing awful situations as advertisement for their religion.
I swear, if one of my family members dies and someone tells me that I'm gonna see them again if I was a good person so I can go to heaven as well I will push their shit in. Hard.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 28, 2015)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> Dawkins speaks for all atheists the same way Ray Comfort speaks for all Christians.



Sure, I know this and you know this. But how many Christians, how many laypeople know this? The New Atheists do everything in their power to become the face of atheism, to raise their influence and grow in numbers, so far with resounding success. They're not any better than the malign side of believers they like to rail against. 

There's the ugly cult of personality around the Four Horsemen and other NA heads that's every bit as foul as the obsequiousness of True Believers towards their gurus; the in-your-face confrontationalism; the I'm-smarter-than-you-because-I-agree-with-NA-leader-X snobbery;  loud proclamations about following Logic! and Rational! Thinking!, accompanied by a degree of groupthink and unwillingness to  change one's mind that is trumped only by religious fundamentalists;  and, lately, a willingness to engage in public shaming and other vicious  social networking practices any time someone says something that  doesn't fit their opinions, all the while of course claiming to  protect free speech at all costs.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 28, 2015)

Listen closely, when you mourn for the dead, you hinder your own ability to move forward.

Everyone, including me, are selfish human beings that don't want people to go. We have funerals, we cry for these people. But you have to realize, that they're already dead, we can't go back and save them. We're only human beings, we're not omnipotent. 

If you don't like the way he expresses his feelings about God, you're not obliged in any way to listen or even care. 

You can say God doesn't exist, but everyone follows a god whether you like it or not.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 28, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> ]
> 
> You can say God doesn't exist, but everyone follows a god whether you like it or not.



The only god that exists for mankind is that of their own comfort. Sad but true.


----------



## Naosrain (May 28, 2015)

I'm just going to leave and come back when this isn't a forum of Christians vs Atheists vs Other Religions. I don't see why people can't just accept people are different and move on to helping this thread get back to the actual point of it. Which was none of what is happening rn.


----------



## Troj (May 28, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> The book of Revelations is a tricky book.  The Apocalypse isn't defined as 'random horsemen come to fuck your shit up'. It's an interesting question to ask "What is the Apocalypse to you?"



The Book of Revelation was the last to be included in the canon, and apparently made it into the canon by only a single vote. Many theologians throughout history--including Calvin and Luther--have openly dissed the book.

Most reputable scholars interpret it as John of Patmos' essentially-coded message to Christians living under Rome during the 1st century, assuring them that they would someday know justice and experience peace.

Christian Futurists who interpret Revelation as a prophetic text which tells of the apocalypse to come have a hard row to hoe, because of the text's buggo-crazy surrealist imagery, and because the book names a lot of now-dead ancient empires, alludes to also-dead tyrants, and refers to geographical regions that aren't all that important in the grand geopolitical scheme o' things.

If you want to know what this looks like on paper, just read the Left Behind series, and marvel at its clusterfuckery. 

Fred Clark of the Slacktivist blog has done some really insightful, fun deconstructions of the LB series, and what's wrong with them from both a writing standpoint and a theological standpoint.

If you want to see what intelligent, ethical, thoughtful Christianity looks like in general, I highly recommend checking out the Slacktivist blog.


----------



## Astrium (May 28, 2015)

Troj said:


> If you want to know what this looks like on paper, just read the Left Behind series, and marvel at its clusterfuckery.



Even better, watch the Nic Cage movie.


----------



## Troj (May 28, 2015)

Its predecessor is pretty hilarious, too, because of Cam-Cam.

I would say that the original LB movies are BETTER than the books, and that's in light of the fact that they're still bad.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> See, this is what I mean...
> Here is an example. Recently a Germanwings Airbus A320-211 crashed in the Alps. A representative of the local church (no idea if they were catholic or protestants, but it doesn't really matter) claims that the whole thing isn't so bad. The 150 people who died are supposedly with god now so it's all a-ok! We just need to believe really really hard now and everything will be fine.



Wow I actually agree with CC for a change. I haven't heard about this guy, but I can already tell he's delusional. Death is a tragedy, even more so when some psychopathic idiot takes 150 people down with him because he was depressed. That is not OK, and any sane person will tell you that, Christian or not. 

But there is one thing: I don't know how many Christians died on that plane, but maybe their families were given a little comfort by knowing their loved one was with God. That doesn't make his or her death any less tragic, but it can help cushion the blow.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Wow I actually agree with CC for a change. I haven't heard about this guy, but I can already tell he's delusional. Death is a tragedy, even more so when some psychopathic idiot takes 150 people down with him because he was depressed. That is not OK, and any sane person will tell you that, Christian or not.
> 
> But there is one thing: I don't know how many Christians died on that plane, but maybe their families were given a little comfort by knowing their loved one was with God. That doesn't make his or her death any less tragic, but it can help cushion the blow.



I like to think they are in Allah's heaven. Or maybe even Sovngarde. With all the mead they can drink and all the dovah they can slay. 

That's an afterlife.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

Blackberry Polecat said:


> Three thousand people die, but someone yells how it's a miracle from God/angels that one little girl trapped under rubble didn't die. It is pretty insensitive. (especially when it's implied that God is responsible for natural disasters in the first place)



Uh now I don't see your point at all. Why wouldn't you call the survival of a little girl in such a tragic event a miracle? It doesn't make any of the other deaths any less tragic, but I think that little girl's story would maybe, gee I don't know, give somebody else some hope??? Just sayin'.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Uh now I don't see your point at all. Why wouldn't you call the survival of a little girl in such a tragic event a miracle? It doesn't make any of the other deaths any less tragic, but I think that little girl's story would maybe, gee I don't know, give somebody else some hope??? Just sayin'.



Not the point.
The stupid thing about this is that somehow 3000 people dying is just an awful tragedy, but when one person survives they were miraculously saved by god.
Now here is the question: If god can save one person, why didn't it save the other 3000 as well? Bonus points if you can tell me why the tragedy had to happen to begin with if god actually is capable of actively helping us.
Because if god can help us but just doesn't there is only one reason why it isn't doing it: Because it doesn't want to.


----------



## Willow (May 28, 2015)

Most of my family is Christian but I don't really follow it aside from believing in some higher power, spirits,etc. On average I only go to church like twice a year and it's mostly just to make my grandma happy. 



CaptainCool said:


> Wanna know why most atheists lash out at religious people? Because they keep saying awful things without realizing it.


Not to say that religious people don't say really insensitive things but when you lash out at someone for saying something they don't realize is insensitive, it kinda makes you look like a dick


----------



## Volkodav (May 28, 2015)

Lol ok im p sure that adult humans should know better than to say things that athiests call them out for
mainly homophobic shit


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

We can't know why God didn't choose to save the others for sure. I'm not in His head. I'm guessing this is 9/11 we're referencing? 

God never puts it in someone's head to murder someone else. Satan does that. God and Satan are at war over every single soul in existence, each trying to pull you one direction. God is obviously the better option because not only did His son die for us, but He also loves us and created us. All Satan wants to do is rip you away from God and worship the ways of mankind instead, even if you don't literally worship Satan himself, because if you don't worship God, Satan gets you in the end anyway. The reason Satan wants to steal you from God is because he is so arrogant that he thinks he can prove the Bible wrong and destroy God in the end with his sheer numbers. Satan will ultimately fail at this.

God is not forceful when it comes to pulling you towards Him, because He has given us the right to decide for ourselves if we trust Him. If we do, then He blesses us with eternity in heaven and the salvation of our souls. But if we openly refuse His salvation and instead lean to our own understanding alone, then Satan has the ability to control your actions through the power of suggestion, because God will not protect you unless you ask for his protection (free will). Satan compels terrorist organizations like the Nazis and ISIS to rise up and slaughter millions of people in the name of mankind. Now, like most people will tell you, there is only one unforgivable sin, and that is to refuse God. Even a Nazis responsible for slaughtering hundreds could have come to God before his death and been saved. We can't begin to comprehend that kind of forgiveness or mercy, which is why we can't comprehend the mind of God. If we knew everything about God and his decisions, then we would be God ourselves.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 28, 2015)

It's funny how that Satan shit is what a lot of new age Christians think. 

It used to be that they would just go the "Original Sin" route where everyone was naturally a jackass without God's/Christ's intervention. Now its the boogieman trying to steal your soul like Slenderman. 

I kinda preferred the Original Sin thing to that.


----------



## Willow (May 28, 2015)

Volkodav said:


> Lol ok im p sure that adult humans should know better than to say things that athiests call them out for
> mainly homophobic shit


Hence why we said without realizing it. Most homophobic people know exactly what they're saying when they say it


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

Butters Shikkon said:


> It's funny how that Satan shit is what a lot of new age Christians think.
> 
> It used to be that they would just go the "Original Sin" route where everyone was naturally a jackass without God's/Christ's intervention. Now its the boogieman trying to steal your soul like Slenderman.
> 
> I kinda preferred the Original Sin thing to that.



Same difference. Who convinced Adam and Eve to commit the original sin? Satan disguised as a snake.


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 28, 2015)

Willow said:


> Hence why we said without realizing it. Most homophobic people know exactly what they're saying when they say it



You'd be surprised.



HaloTennis said:


> Same difference. Who convinced Adam and Eve to commit the original sin? Satan disguised as a snake.



Not quite. 

Satan is not in Jewish lore. Christianity comes from the Jewish traditions. That was literally a talking snake. (Which is why God punished it by making it crawl on its belly) 

It just sounded retarded so Christians changed it to a "disguise" for Satan. It sounds less pagan.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

Original evil=Satan


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Original evil=Satan



Please do not make me facepalm. 

Original sin is disobedience to God/Yahweh. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is the more symbolic figure of that than the snake. It represents freethinking and independence. The entire idea of Christianity is complete devotion to the Lord. 

You are not that educated on your religion. (Much like the majority of today's Christians. Why do I know so much about it? Because I used to love it so. Most Atheists are the ones who learned the most about the religions they once were taught.)


----------



## Willow (May 28, 2015)

If we're being completely honest here, then I think it's worth mentioning that Satan =/= absolute evil. And he really doesn't care if people follow him or not. 



Butters Shikkon said:


> You'd be surprised.


Kids holding "God hates Fags" signs don't count :V



HaloTennis said:


> Original evil=Satan


Adam is actually Original Sin.


----------



## JegoLego (May 28, 2015)

The postmodernism is strong with this thread...


----------



## Astrium (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> We can't know why God didn't choose to save the others for sure. I'm not in His head. I'm guessing this is 9/11 we're referencing?
> 
> God never puts it in someone's head to murder someone else. Satan does that. God and Satan are at war over every single soul in existence, each trying to pull you one direction. God is obviously the better option because not only did His son die for us, but He also loves us and created us. All Satan wants to do is rip you away from God and worship the ways of mankind instead, even if you don't literally worship Satan himself, because if you don't worship God, Satan gets you in the end anyway. The reason Satan wants to steal you from God is because he is so arrogant that he thinks he can prove the Bible wrong and destroy God in the end with his sheer numbers. Satan will ultimately fail at this.
> 
> God is not forceful when it comes to pulling you towards Him, because He has given us the right to decide for ourselves if we trust Him. If we do, then He blesses us with eternity in heaven and the salvation of our souls. But if we openly refuse His salvation and instead lean to our own understanding alone, then Satan has the ability to control your actions through the power of suggestion, because God will not protect you unless you ask for his protection (free will). Satan compels terrorist organizations like the Nazis and ISIS to rise up and slaughter millions of people in the name of mankind. Now, like most people will tell you, there is only one unforgivable sin, and that is to refuse God. Even a Nazis responsible for slaughtering hundreds could have come to God before his death and been saved. We can't begin to comprehend that kind of forgiveness or mercy, which is why we can't comprehend the mind of God. If we knew everything about God and his decisions, then we would be God ourselves.



Wait a minute, _how is the one who killed his own son the good guy?_


----------



## HaloTennis (May 28, 2015)

Jesus sacrificed Himself. He could have easily overpowered and vaporized the Roman guards if He wanted to, but He didn't because He knew He must make the sacrifice to satisfy the growing wrath of God.


----------



## Willow (May 28, 2015)

Astrium said:


> Wait a minute, _how is the one who killed his own son the good guy?_


From what I understand, Jesus sacrificed himself


----------



## Butters Shikkon (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Jesus sacrificed Himself. He could have easily overpowered and vaporized the Roman guards if He wanted to, but He didn't because He knew He must make the sacrifice to satisfy the growing wrath of God.



He was also extremely merciful and wouldn't just "vaporize" people. That's the best part of his character.


----------



## ShioBear (May 28, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Jesus sacrificed Himself. He could have easily overpowered and vaporized the Roman guards if He wanted to, but He didn't because He knew He must make the sacrifice to satisfy the growing wrath of God.



technically as the myth states he is god and god is him so its a suicide and that's against the religion


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 28, 2015)

Religion and logic are largely incompatible. 
Some of the things in Christianity make for some wicked ideas for stories and songs and stuff, though. This is most noticeable in the world of power metal.


----------



## Volkodav (May 29, 2015)

Jesus committed seppuku so that we could live without the constant fear of the devil taking us away


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Original evil=Satan



But Satan isn't real either...

I think it's so sad that you just believe in this crap without even thinking about it. You just accept it to be true. Which is another thing I hate about religion, it makes you stop thinking for yourself.


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (May 29, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Original evil=Satan



Eh... I'm with Butters on this one. I don't believe the devil is sitting on our shoulder whispering to us to sin. Gives too little credit to our own free will and natural disposition towards evil. But to those that do believe the devil is interested in damning us all~ I leave this quote <:

"_It is wonderful how much time good people spend fighting the devil. If they would only expend the same amount of energy loving their fellow men, the devil would die in his own tracks of ennui._"


----------



## Astrium (May 29, 2015)

So if Satan is supposedly evil, then why does he punish evil? Logically, wouldn't he reward those who do evil?


----------



## Volkodav (May 29, 2015)

Satanism is better than Christianity. Yall ever read up on satanism? Dude is awesome


----------



## HaloTennis (May 29, 2015)

Astrium said:


> So if Satan is supposedly evil, then why does he punish evil? Logically, wouldn't he reward those who do evil?



Satan is a major league trickster. All he wants is foot soldiers for his fight against God. He'll entice you with anything to get you to stay away from God, but the reality is you're not gonna have a good time come the End Times.


----------



## HaloTennis (May 29, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> But Satan isn't real either.



Wow, what an argument. Bravo.

And religion doesn't get you to stop thinking for yourself in most cases. Only some people live that way, and yeah, that's bizarre. Some do believe that believing in science at all is the same as leaning to your own understanding over God's, and that's incorrect imo. God created science as well, which has given us the ability to create and to understand.


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 29, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> God created science as well, which has given us the ability to create and to understand.



For the sake of argument, this is a major what-if. This is only true if the other person believes that God is real.

You'd need to talk to an evangelist (one who teaches God, not the Word) to believe this, not a theologist.

-Edit- 



Astrium said:


> So if Satan is supposedly evil, then why does he punish evil? Logically, wouldn't he reward those who do evil?



He doesn't punish evil, God does. Satan also doesn't reward evil, only those who follow him.

I don't believe most Satanists follow the current Satan. Maybe 'Lucifer'. That would make more sense.


----------



## JegoLego (May 29, 2015)

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."


----------



## Troj (May 29, 2015)

The whole question of why Jesus chose to die on the cross instead of, say, magically vaporize the Romans and the Pharisees has befuddled and bedeviled theologians for centuries.

One early theory is that Jesus paid himself as a "ransom" to Satan, or otherwise defeating Satan spiritually. Of course, this introduces the whole problem of Satan somehow having the upper hand on God.

Irenaeus suggested that Jesus' sacrifice was meant to undo or reverse Adam's first sin, and he was among the first people to draw a link between Jesus and Adam.

In line with what HaloTennis just said, Anselm basically saw Jesus as a kind of sacrificial lamb that was offered up to God to satisfy God's sense of honor.

Penal-Substitution took Anselm's ideas, and then shifted the focus from honor to justice and/or love, by saying that Jesus took on the sins of humankind, and subsequently, the punishment for those sins.

My favorite atonement theory, personally, is where Jesus intended his death to serve as a kind of moral model for _humanity_, so that they would come to a better understanding of God's love and mercy. This theory is generally attributed to Abelard.

Fred Clark often elaborates on this Moral-Example Theory beautifully in some of his blog posts. Essentially, his interpretation of Christian teaching is that on the day Jesus died, it appeared as if the prevailing moral, social, and natural order of the universe had prevailed. But, on Sunday, Jesus rose from the dead, thereby defeating Death, Sin, Suffering, and the unchallenged supremacy of the powerful and the mighty. Jesus' death and resurrection are meant to serve as a beacon of hope for the world, sending a message that suffering is not eternal and absolute, that worldly might and wealth won't have the final word, and that evil will not triumph in the end.

Most of the traditional atonement theories leave me cold, because most of them paint God as a Pharisaical bean-counter who requires that all accounts be balanced "because reasons," or a crazy mofo who thirsts for blood and hungers for vengeance. 

Many atonement theories also inadvertently insinuate that Satan's the man (goat?) in charge at some level, which is probably not the message Christians want to send.

As for Satan, the ancient Hebrews considered Ha-Satan a kind of prosecuting attorney working for God. My understanding is that present-day Jews still largely hold to this view. In the Bible, the word _satan_ is used much more often to refer to a _human_ enemy or opponent.

Christians were the ones who transformed Satan from God's left-hand accuser into God's evil enemy, and a number of scholars believe that this was due to the influence of Zoroastrianism. (I can sniff around for citations if people need them there.)

A number of scholars, theologians, and laypeople have also suggested that the snake in Genesis was just a snake, and/or that Lucifer in the Isaiah is actually King Nebuchanezzar, so the idea that the snake and Lucifer are both Satan is actually a bit controversial!


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Wow, what an argument. Bravo.
> 
> And religion doesn't get you to stop thinking for yourself in most cases. Only some people live that way, and yeah, that's bizarre. Some do believe that believing in science at all is the same as leaning to your own understanding over God's, and that's incorrect imo. God created science as well, which has given us the ability to create and to understand.



It wasn't an argument, it was a statement. As long as you can't prove that Satan is real I can just say that it isn't real. Same counts for god.
...And it also counts for your argument about science... No, god did not create science. Or can you prove that it did?


----------



## ShioBear (May 29, 2015)

Astrium said:


> So if Satan is supposedly evil, then why does he punish evil? Logically, wouldn't he reward those who do evil?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPLeAvtMcik


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 29, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> ...And it also counts for your argument about science... No, god did not create science. Or can you prove that it did?



I don't _think_ you got the point of that statement. If you're a person who believes that a being created the universe, the science that we 'made' is our way of understanding that creation.

So indirectly, that being made science.


----------



## Troj (May 29, 2015)

Well, when you decide that your deity cares personally about baseball games and sends hurricanes because people are gay, you end up having to wrestle with the question of why the deity also permits and/or does bad things.

To be a little less flippant and snarky here--since not everyone thinks the above, of course--when your god is intimately involved with the minor machinations of the universe, then you're faced with the legitimate problem of why bad things happen to good people, or why they happen at all.

But, most people are also uncomfortable with the idea of a god that is impersonal, distant, and who doesn't care.

The question of whether God "created" science or exists in a universe where it already existed is a potentially intriguing one. Reminds me of the little problem (often overlooked) of whether God "created" morality/ethics, or ethics and morality pre-date and/or exist independent of God. 

(I mean, it's personally irrelevant to me either way, since I'm atheist.)


----------



## jtrekkie (May 29, 2015)

Put a more interesting way, I think, "are mathematics invented or discovered?"


----------



## -Sliqq- (May 29, 2015)

Troj said:


> Well, when you decide that your deity cares personally about baseball games and sends hurricanes because people are gay, you end up having to wrestle with the question of why the deity also permits and/or does bad things.



What? Sorry, but I felt that was a assumption about me because of what I choose to follow. What some people preach are just.... bad.

The thing is, when we're discussing the will of God, bad doesn't exist, and every action that happens comes for a reason, whether it be hidden or loud. It's His motive, not mine. 

I couldn't fathom the power of His works and we can only try so hard to understand it. Another thing that needs to be said, is that the 'good person' doesn't exist. To say such is to ignore that he/she is fully innocent and has no reason to endure a single pain.

If we cannot understand what His will is, and have no understanding of the omnipotent, who's to say that any issue of His is minor?

_(Your last statement felt like a 'lockdown' or 'checkmate' to see if whether or not I'd follow your footing and pacing btw)_


----------



## Troj (May 29, 2015)

That's probably the best and fairest answer of all, Sliqq. It's perfectly cool to say "I don't know," and more people could probably stand to say it more often.

You're also right that another possible answer is that there's a bigger picture that we just can't see or understand--but, of course, when you're talking to grieving people in particular, you have to be careful with that one, to avoid sounding like you're minimizing their pain. (One of my pet peeves is when people use "It's all part of the plan" to distance themselves from people's suffering.)

What irritates me, personally, is when people claim to know the mind or the preferences of God, which was what I was being snarky about. 

Lots of public figures and politicians basically project their own minds outwards, and those chickens come home to roost when something tragic, unfair, or unexpected happens in the world.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 29, 2015)

-Sliqq- said:


> I don't _think_ you got the point of that statement. If you're a person who believes that a being created the universe, the science that we 'made' is our way of understanding that creation.
> 
> So indirectly, that being made science.



You are right, but there is a difference between
"God created science."
and
"I believe god created science."

The second one is a personal belief. I can say that I don't believe that person and that's about it.
But the first one, which is how he wrote it, is written as if it was a universal fact. If it is a universal fact that god did create science then he has to be able to prove it. Otherwise it is not a fact and therefore not true.


----------



## BlitzCo (May 29, 2015)

Still wondering why this thread is still going.


----------



## Maugryph (May 29, 2015)

BlitzCo said:


> Still wondering why this thread is still going.



There is quite a few atheist furs on this forum and some will take every opportunity to vent their frustrations about religion. I can't blame them for being angry considering the bad track record religion has had in general. At first it starts as a discussion but it always ends up being a over gloried circle jerk, on both sides of the argument.


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 29, 2015)

All hail our dark Lord Satan!


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (May 30, 2015)

LazerMaster5 said:


> All hail our dark Lord Satan!



Relevant!


----------



## HaloTennis (May 30, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> You are right, but there is a difference between
> "God created science."
> and
> "I believe god created science."
> ...



Alright so prove "But Satan isn't real either."
Then prove "God did not create science."

There is no concrete proof for either side. The reason why that is is that if we had irrefutable proof that God does indeed exist and created us, then that would in effect take away our ability to decide for ourselves whether or not He exists. Our free will wouldn't exist. There is a reason it is called "faith" and "belief". People like me believe God exists and have faith in Him. We don't know for sure if He is there, but we choose to believe He is.


----------



## Saiko (May 30, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> But the first one, which is how he wrote it, is written as if it was a universal fact. If it is a universal fact that god did create science then he has to be able to prove it. Otherwise it is not a fact and therefore not true.


This is not how truth works. A fact can be thought of as a proposition which is known to be true. A truth is just that - a proposition that is true. The truth of a proposition is separate from our knowing it to be true. Though you are correct that "god created science" is not a fact because it has not been proven, it technically could still be true.



HaloTennis said:


> There is no concrete proof for either side. The reason why that is is that if we had irrefutable proof that God does indeed exist and created us, then that would in effect take away our ability to decide for ourselves whether or not He exists. Our free will wouldn't exist. There is a reason it is called "faith" and "belief". People like me believe God exists and have faith in Him. We don't know for sure if He is there, but we choose to believe He is.


Meanwhile, this is not how free will or belief works. Our belief in the proposition "god exists" has no bearing on whether the proposition is true. Additionally, we do not have the ability to choose to believe or disbelieve a proposition; we have to be convinced of it. This is why you cannot just start believing in Santa Claus while I cannot just start believing in a god. As such, not only is free will separate from the truth of the proposition; but it's not even relevant to our belief in it. Furthermore, knowledge of a god or lack thereof would not hinder our free will because there are other things over which we can exercise that will, such as whether or not to post in this thread. Supposing one knew the Christian god existed, the bible itself claims that free will exists alongside knowledge of a god's existence in the story of Adam and Eve.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 30, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Alright so prove "But Satan isn't real either."
> Then prove "God did not create science."
> 
> There is no concrete proof for either side. The reason why that is is that if we had irrefutable proof that God does indeed exist and created us, then that would in effect take away our ability to decide for ourselves whether or not He exists. Our free will wouldn't exist. There is a reason it is called "faith" and "belief". People like me believe God exists and have faith in Him. We don't know for sure if He is there, but we choose to believe He is.



You made claims that CC rejects. It's up to you to provide evidence.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 30, 2015)

HaloTennis said:


> Alright so prove "But Satan isn't real either."
> Then prove "God did not create science."
> 
> There is no concrete proof for either side. The reason why that is is that if we had irrefutable proof that God does indeed exist and created us, then that would in effect take away our ability to decide for ourselves whether or not He exists. Our free will wouldn't exist. There is a reason it is called "faith" and "belief". People like me believe God exists and have faith in Him. We don't know for sure if He is there, but we choose to believe He is.



That's not how it works. You made the claim that god created science and that SatÃ¡n exists. I rejected that claim. Unless you can't prove either of those that is where the discussion ends.
It's called the burden of proof .


----------



## JegoLego (May 30, 2015)

No one got my movie reference...


----------



## Rassah (May 30, 2015)

Gryphoneer said:


> the I'm-smarter-than-you-because-I-agree-with-NA-leader-X snobbery;  loud proclamations about following Logic! and Rational! Thinking!, accompanied by a degree of groupthink and unwillingness to  change one's mind



How does one change one's mind about rational logical thinking and facts???


----------



## HaloTennis (May 30, 2015)

CaptainCool said:


> That's not how it works. You made the claim that god created science and that SatÃ¡n exists. I rejected that claim. Unless you can't prove either of those that is where the discussion ends.
> It's called the burden of proof .



And if you paid any attention to the second half of the post you quoted, you'll see that I said that there is no definitive proof that God even exists. The difference between you and me is that I choose to believe He is there, that He created the universe, and that He gave us the ability to understand His creations, while you reject Him and instead believe strictly in scientific theories and a string of coincidences that led to our existence. We believe different things and that's that.


----------



## Gryphoneer (May 30, 2015)

Rassah said:


> How does one change one's mind about rational logical thinking and facts???



By reading books other than from Dawkins, Hitchens or Yudkowsky and subsequently realizing that what they sell to True Believers has nothing to do with rationalism as it's understood by the rest of humanity.

It's alarming how many Internet armchair atheists have no fucking clue what they're talking about and only parrot the slogans of their gurus. Logic doesn't translate to "correct thinking" or "anti-deist worldview". Guess what, logic has been used to try to prove the existence of God, from the Middle Ages all the way to the 20th century!


----------



## LazerMaster5 (May 30, 2015)

This thread has given me brain cancer. Please let it die.


----------



## Troj (May 31, 2015)

Maugryph said:


> There is quite a few atheist furs on this forum and some will take every opportunity to vent their frustrations about religion. I can't blame them for being angry considering the bad track record religion has had in general. At first it starts as a discussion but it always ends up being a over gloried circle jerk, on both sides of the argument.



You can't blame people for being angry at unfairness and injustice, but you can (and I do) blame them for spewing or spraying that anger at people who actually don't deserve it.

Most Christians aren't really part of "the problem," and a number of Christians are actively trying to be part of _the solution._ They really don't deserve to be dogpiled every time they bring up the fact that they're Christian or that they believe in God.

_I'm_ even guilty of jumping to conclusions about people's beliefs and values, and then trying to argue with them about shit they don't even personally believe or do.

That's not cool, and it's not fair.

My other feeling is that arguing about whether God exists or not is pointless and futile. You can argue about the _type_ of deity that is likely or unlikely to exist, maybe, and that discussion can potentially lead to interesting and useful places, but the "does a higher power exist period" debate usually ends in tears and a stalemate, because atheists and theists each come to the table with a dramatically different set of values, paradigms, schemas, and assumptions.

At the end of the day, what matters is how people live their lives.


----------



## Shankmeister (Jun 2, 2015)

Adventist Christian! Same boat as the guy/gal above!


----------

