# Religious Affiliation



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

I have created or am in the process of creating an organized poll about religion in order to evaluate the frequency of the various religions of people within this website. This will not determine by means of majority the superiority of a certain religion, but rather what religions are most common amongst those in the furry fandom or those who lurk in the forums of the furry fandom. Please designate what you most associate yourself with or if you cannot decide then choose other and give a description in a post.

If this thread seems too offensive (as opposed to the already offensive subject matter of religion) , please inform me or a moderator and I or they will try to fix it.

If this thread seems too close to another thread that involves a poll and organization to this extent, then please close this thread and give a link to the other thread.

If you have any other opinion that does not necessitate that you inform me or a moderator in a private message, then you may feel free to post it below for additional discussion. In fact, discussion on the topic of religion is highly recommended considering the subject matter.

Please attempt to be honest and polite, though that *is* just a bit too much to ask of users on this forum.

________EDIT__________

*Unless this gets fixed, you may either consider "Undecisive" to be Judaism or just put other and have that be Judaism.*


----------



## Icky (May 12, 2011)

I'm athiest.

inb4 everyone is athiest


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Icky said:


> I'm athiest.
> 
> inb4 everyone is athiest


 
Cool, the poll is now up so you can vote for it.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 12, 2011)

Count another atheist in.


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Alright, I chose Christian personally... but I probably should have picked other because I don't like associating myself with other super religious Christians and I'm actually borderline atheist, but I'm trying to hold on to hope.


----------



## Icky (May 12, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> Cool, the poll is now up so you can vote for it.


 
You have Agnosticism and Undecided, which essentially mean the same thing.

Oh, and you forgot Judaism :I


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Icky said:


> You have Agnosticism and Undecided, which essentially mean the same thing.
> 
> Oh, and you forgot Judaism :I


 
Ah! I can fix that right? Technically Agnosticism isn't the same thing as undecided, but it's close enough that I can just replace Undecided with Judaism.


----------



## Tabasco (May 12, 2011)

All hail Arceus.


----------



## Torrijos-sama (May 12, 2011)

Aggressive Buddhism.

So, Existentialism.


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

So... does anyone know how to fix polls?


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> So... does anyone know how to fix polls?


 I'd hate to double post, but I don't think you can edit polls in progress. So could a moderator please close this? If not we can all agree that Undecisive means Judaism, but Undecisive isn't even a word.


----------



## Commiecomrade (May 12, 2011)

Agnosticism is a decision that it's impossible to determine what religion, if any, is right. So yes, it differs from "undecided."


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Commiecomrade said:


> Agnosticism is a decision that it's impossible to determine what religion, if any, is right. So yes, it differs from "undecided."


 
So the thread *can* go on! Besides, I don't think there are many Jews here anyway.

(Sorry if you are a Jew and I have offended you)


----------



## Conker (May 12, 2011)

I went with undecided. I feel like I'm a theist of some sort that wants to make the move towards atheism but cannot. Seven years at a religious institution kinda didn't help that.

So, I've wound up believing in something, but I'm not sure what and I'm not sure why. Feels kind of like tradition now (which is arbitrary :V!) But that's where I am at. I'll say a prayer to whatever deity wants to listen I guess.

There is also some hope for the better, but man, the Christian heavens I have heard of all suck some serious balls. I really don't want that to be the afterlife.


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Conker said:


> I went with undecided. I feel like I'm a theist of some sort that wants to make the move towards atheism but cannot. Seven years at a religious institution kinda didn't help that.
> 
> So, I've wound up believing in something, but I'm not sure what and I'm not sure why. Feels kind of like tradition now (which is arbitrary :V!) But that's where I am at. I'll say a prayer to whatever deity wants to listen I guess.
> 
> There is also some hope for the better, but man, the Christian heavens I have heard of all suck some serious balls. I really don't want that to be the afterlife.


 
I'm pretty close to that. Atheism makes more sense, but years of believing in God make it really scary to back down and deny his/its existence. I feel like I'm going to hell just thinking about it.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 12, 2011)

Blues said:


> All hail Arceus.


 Your god is in my ultraball.


----------



## Conker (May 12, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> I'm pretty close to that. Atheism makes more sense, but years of believing in God make it really scary to back down and deny his/its existence. I feel like I'm going to hell just thinking about it.


 Pretty much that  I'll stick in the limbo area I am now. 

At least it feels safe.


----------



## GoldenJackal (May 12, 2011)

Is paganism considered "Primal-Indigenous?" I can see primal with my beliefs but I view them in a modern sense and my ancestors are from another country.


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Conker said:


> Pretty much that  I'll stick in the limbo area I am now.
> 
> At least it feels safe.


 
Heaven is weird. It's like a place entirely devoid of negative emotion, but also of choice. As all we know of what creates positive emotion has a basis in choice this seems impossible and scary. Heaven, however, is basically just a place where you have no choice, but you have no way of caring otherwise. If you can get past that it should be a happy place, but I should hope God would give choice eventually in some part of eternity.


----------



## Conker (May 12, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> Heaven is weird. It's like a place entirely devoid of negative emotion, but also of choice. As all we know of what creates positive emotion has a basis in choice this seems impossible and scary. Heaven, however, is basically just a place where you have no choice, but you have no way of caring otherwise. If you can get past that it should be a happy place, but I should hope God would give choice eventually in some part of eternity.


 See, I fucking hate that. It's basically God going "you're forced to suck my dick for eternity and you are forced to like it"

I'd almost rather take hell over that :\


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Conker said:


> See, I fucking hate that. It's basically God going "you're forced to suck my dick for eternity and you are forced to like it"
> 
> I'd almost rather take hell over that :\


 
I see your point, but I'm pretty sure the last thing God wants is for us to suck his dick.


----------



## keretceres (May 12, 2011)

I put Christian, though I should probably put Agnostic...  hell scared me into choosing Christianity O_O


----------



## Vukasin (May 12, 2011)

I'm more than Agnostic, but less than Christian. I guess I'm closer to Christian though, so that's what I picked.


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

Vukasin said:


> I'm more than Agnostic, but less than Christian. I guess I'm closer to Christian though, so that's what I picked.


 
Same here... I think I'm noticing a trend among Christians here...


----------



## Aetius (May 12, 2011)

ALL HAIL ATHEOS! THE GOD OF ATHEISTS!


----------



## lobosabio (May 12, 2011)

Me?  I'm a Uniterian Universalist, so I guess "other".


----------



## CannonFodder (May 12, 2011)

Crusader Mike said:


> ALL HAIL ATHEOS! THE GOD OF ATHEISTS!


 There was actually a mythological god named Atheos.
My favorite mythological god was the Euphratean god of ejaculation.


----------



## Torrijos-sama (May 12, 2011)

Actually, I change my mind....

I want all of the religions.

Now.


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 12, 2011)

Atheism isn't a religious affiliation.  Agnosticism is a form of atheism, because, after all, you don't adhere to a belief in a deity.  Buddhism is also an atheistic religion in that there is no god that Buddhists worship.
But either way, I picked atheist because I tend to think the idea of 'God' is lazy, silly, and unimaginative, and therefore sounds like an idea out of the human imagination.  I'd like to think the real answer is much more interesting and less full of incomprehensible paradoxes and arbitrariness.  Mainly because the rest of the universe seems to be very much ordered and comprehensible, so I don't see why the origin of it shouldn't fall under the same rules.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 12, 2011)

lobosabio said:


> Me?  I'm a Uniterian Universalist, so I guess "other".


 Uniterian Universalism is evidence that rather than die out a select few of religions will adapt to newer generations and evolve, meaning that either there will be one dominant religion in the world or current religions will adapt to the next generation's society or both, however the chances of neither happening are very very small.


----------



## CannotWait (May 12, 2011)

I have something really good to post but I'm too tired......


----------



## Werecatdawn (May 12, 2011)

~Votes Atheist and leaves before getting caught up in any/imminent drama~


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 12, 2011)

Raised Catholic.  :O

But I'll just go with Christian.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 12, 2011)

I am just gonna say, the poll is not detailed enough and will not show real/true statistics.


----------



## Icky (May 12, 2011)

Werecatdawn said:


> ~Votes Atheist and leaves before getting caught up in any/imminent drama~


 
What drama?


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 13, 2011)

Icky said:


> What drama?



At some point people will start flingin' opinions at each other and getting hot headed over it.  D:

But maybe it will stay a nice civil poll thread where we simply tally up numbers.  TIME WILL TELL.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Frokusblakah said:


> At some point people will start flingin' opinions at each other and getting hot headed over it.  D:
> 
> *But maybe it will stay a nice civil poll thread where we simply tally up numbers. * TIME WILL TELL.


 It's a religion thread, you can probably tell where this is going.


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> It's a religion thread, you can probably tell where this is going.


 
I forgot my " :V  ".  I'm new.  =(


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 13, 2011)

I just realized... what the hell is 'Chinese traditional religion'?  That covers a HUGE amount of things.  Unless it means something more specific that I'm not aware of.  Whoever voted for that one, what does it mean?


----------



## Azure (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I am just gonna say, the poll is not detailed enough and will not show real/true statistics.


 Uh, why not? Because we don't include wacko sects in there? Or is this about some other shit?


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 13, 2011)

Azure's trying to poke the hornet's nest already.


----------



## Azure (May 13, 2011)

M. Le Renard said:


> Azure's trying to poke the hornet's nest already.


 But, but. Yeah, you caught me.


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 13, 2011)

Azure said:


> But, but. Yeah, you caught me.


 
Somebody had to do it.  Way to take initiative.  ;b


----------



## ShÃ nwÃ ng (May 13, 2011)

Free Mason/Worshiper of John D Rockefeller the Patron Saint of Billionaires



M. Le Renard said:


> Azure's trying to poke the hornet's nest already.


 
That's what Ruhkhhuhkh gets for a vague post. I'm now half expecting him to come out and say that he worships the moon.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

ShÃ nwÃ ng said:


> Free Mason


 I know a free mason irl.
I find it funny the amount of conspiracy theories surrounding them, when reality is far less interesting.


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 13, 2011)

ShÃ nwÃ ng said:


> Free Mason/Worshiper of John D Rockefeller the Patron Saint of Billionaires
> 
> 
> 
> That's what Ruhkhhuhkh gets for a vague post. I'm now half expecting him to come out and say that he worships the moon.


 
I wouldn't mind seeing that.  Of all things to worship, the sun and the moon are good choices, since they both helped create life here.


----------



## ShÃ nwÃ ng (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I know a free mason irl.
> I find it funny the amount of conspiracy theories surrounding them, when reality is far less interesting.


 
That's precisely what they want you to believe.



M. Le Renard said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing that.  Of all things to worship, the sun and the moon are good choices, since they both helped create life here.



I think it's relegated to new age hippies into endangered cultures. That or I'm pretty sure I see it every time I enter a head shop with Dido playing.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

ShÃ nwÃ ng said:


> That's precisely what they want you to believe.


 *pops out of nowhere*
That's crazy talk, fucking looney toons.


----------



## Spatel (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I am just gonna say, the poll is not detailed enough and will not show real/true statistics.


 
Yeah the different Christian and Muslim sects might as well be different religions. At least separate Protestants and Catholics...


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Yeah the different Christian and Muslim sects might as well be different religions. At least separate Protestants and Catholics...


 Well we could list our different sects since the poll's limit is 10 options.
For instance I'm non-denominational.


----------



## Bad Voodoo (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> It's a religion thread, you can probably tell where this is going.


 
Butthurt people raging at more butthurt people?

I chose Christianity since I grew up as a Roman Catholic but I'm not really religious I'm just spiritual.

I know there is something out there, a God looking over us, I just don't completely agree with everything Christianity teaches


----------



## Bliss (May 13, 2011)

I'd like to be wiccan but it's hard because I don't believe in supernatural. :[

I will consult my witch-mother.


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 13, 2011)

Why is there no jewish?
EDIT: Oops, read the thread.


----------



## BouncyOtter (May 13, 2011)

I'm a Roman Catholic.  Correction, I am a terrible Roman Catholic.  Long story short, I have my dad to thank for driving me away from the church.


----------



## Unsilenced (May 13, 2011)

I could probably be called Agnostic but fuck that. Really. 

I'm so sick of the shit I hear all the time. 


"HERP DERP ATHIEST MEANS YOU ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY 100% ARE BEYOND-A-DOUBT CERTAIN THERE IS NO GOD! YOU HAVE JUST AS MUCH MINDLESS FAITH AS ANY RELIGIOUS PERSON! WHAT'S THAT? A DICTIONARY? HERP DERP MY DEFINITION IS BETTER!!" 

And then if you call yourself agnostic...

"HERP DERP THIS MEANS THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY 100% HAVE NO CLUE OR INCLINATION AS TO THE EXISTANCE OF GOD. YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY FEEL ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ABOUT IT. THIS MEANS ABSOLUTELY NEUTRAL. NO EXCEPTIONS. HURRRRR." 


Atheist: Without God. An atheist does not observe or worship a god. This actually includes many agnostics. 

Agnostic: One that is unsure of the existance of god, gods, dieties, what have you. They can have an inclination one way or the other, but they do not feel like they can commit fully to one idea. An agnostic can also be any religous denomination (though generally not a fundamentalist anything :v) or an atheist.


So while I am technically Agnostic (I believe that nothing is truly "knowable" in the absolute sense of the word), I am also an Atheist, because I have no real belief or even lingering suspicion.


----------



## Nymphs (May 13, 2011)

Atheism. "Science and Education for the win!"
No evidence given for a specific god or deity. I do not believe in a god, but I don't say that one thing like to a god cannot exist. I basically say that our own mortality limits us and that me must accept that. That our perception of reality is finite and that our knowledge of the universe is so minuscule that we cannot begin to say how things work using an archaic book written 2000 years ago by arabic louts who didn't have any answers to the questions of the shape of the Earth, the meaning of life, or what happens after death. I apply a lot of the same critiques to all other religions. I am not saying that Atheism is correct, but I am saying that all religions are incorrect. That is why I associate with Atheism.


----------



## Nymphs (May 13, 2011)

I am an Atheist.
There is simply just no evidence for a specific god or deity, but I am not closed off to the possibility of a god-like figure. I think that we must recognize that we are only mortal, and our own mortality is a limit. There are things we cannot understand, that may always be beyond our understanding, such as infinity. That is why I deny the fact that a bunch of inept Arabic louts two thousand years ago wrote a book that contained any truths about the questions of where the universe came from, where we go after we die, and the basic shape of the Earth. I am not saying that Atheism is correct, but certainly that religion is incorrect.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Unsilenced said:


> I could probably be called Agnostic but fuck that. Really.
> 
> I'm so sick of the shit I hear all the time.
> 
> ...


 Atleast you aren't a paradox, jeez now that I think about it I'm a walking paradox in every meaning of the word.  Short version is I've adapted moral relativism and humanism into my beliefs.


----------



## Unsilenced (May 13, 2011)

Nymphs said:


> Atheism. "Science and Education for the win!"
> No evidence given for a specific god or deity. I do not believe in a god, but I don't say that one thing like to a god cannot exist. I basically say that our own mortality limits us and that me must accept that. That our perception of reality is finite and that our knowledge of the universe is so minuscule that we cannot begin to say how things work using an archaic book written 2000 years ago by arabic louts who didn't have any answers to the questions of the shape of the Earth, the meaning of life, or what happens after death. I apply a lot of the same critiques to all other religions. I am not saying that Atheism is correct, but I am saying that all religions are incorrect. That is why I associate with Atheism.





Nymphs said:


> I am an Atheist.
> There is simply just no evidence for a specific god or deity, but I am not closed off to the possibility of a god-like figure. I think that we must recognize that we are only mortal, and our own mortality is a limit. There are things we cannot understand, that may always be beyond our understanding, such as infinity. That is why I deny the fact that a bunch of inept Arabic louts two thousand years ago wrote a book that contained any truths about the questions of where the universe came from, where we go after we die, and the basic shape of the Earth. I am not saying that Atheism is correct, but certainly that religion is incorrect.


 I know. 

You're a doublepostarian.

EDIT: And CannonFodder, if you think you're a paradox, there's a guy I'd like you to meet. He's gay, a babyfur (no not like that,) a devout christian and a card-carrying far-right libertarian.

Let me put it this way: He's gay and he supported prop 8.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 13, 2011)

Azure said:


> Uh, why not? Because we don't include wacko sects in there? Or is this about some other shit?


 
You know he's just fishing for any reason he can to disregard what this thread says. 





Conker said:


> See, I fucking hate that. It's basically God going "you're forced to suck my dick for eternity and you are forced to like it"
> 
> I'd almost rather take hell over that :\


 
"Heaven for climate, Hell for company." - Mark Twain

But seriously, What's the point of a soul if all your personality, memories, hopes, dreams, desires, and free will will be overwritten with "God is awesome.", anyway? You might as well not have one and dying is just endless euphoric oblivion.


----------



## BRN (May 13, 2011)

You missed Jediism, England's fourth largest religion.


Spoiler: statistics




Christian: 70.0%
No religion: 14.7%
Chose not to respond: 7.8%
Muslim: 3.1%
Hindu: 2.1%
Jedi: 0.7%


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 13, 2011)

I'm hindu, with a twist. I believe all religions are connected in a way and that everything is the path to everything. I believe it all stems from hindu though.


----------



## Vincent Jaeger (May 13, 2011)

I don't really hold to a specific religion, but I do like reading about them.
But if there is something, it's Atheism. I personally don't believe in any god, even if the religions can be interesting to read about.


----------



## BTA (May 13, 2011)

I'm basically still a Christian


----------



## Hateful Bitch (May 13, 2011)

church of the flying spaghetti monster :c
But really I still believe in old bog and heaven and all that rubbish because I grew up with that stuff at home, at school and obviously church, so for now it's still kind of stuck to me. And I'm alright with that. It is all totally ridiculous though.


----------



## TreacleFox (May 13, 2011)

Otherkin. :V


----------



## Maraxk Montale (May 13, 2011)

Agnostic.

Grew up as a christian because Grandparents and Parents shoved it down my throat and I took it for the lonest time and believed it mostly. Then I turned 15 and said, you guys are fucking idiots and never looked back.

However I do beilieve there is something watching us, but I don't believe it to be the deity of any specific religion. All religions are the same. Be a good person and you'll be rewarded. Except for Satanism that is....>_>. And if there really is something "up there" then theres no real reason to worship he/she/it because all its doing is watching us like we're some kind of ant farm.


----------



## Wyldfyre (May 13, 2011)

Completely unreligious, but not atheist.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (May 13, 2011)

Atheist.

Religion is stupid. But I suppose it's the only time you can not only be prejudiced but also be proud of your prejudice and expect people to respect you for it. Also can't imagine how you can be friends and chat with someone while thinking they will burn for all eternity for not worshipping who you do.


----------



## BRN (May 13, 2011)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> Atheist.
> 
> Religion is stupid. But I suppose it's the only time you can not only be prejudiced but also be proud of your prejudice and expect people to respect you for it. Also can't imagine how you can be friends and chat with someone while thinking they will burn for all eternity for not worshipping who you do.



Is religion inherently stupid, or is it just the people who make up its masses?


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (May 13, 2011)

SIX said:
			
		

> Is religion inherently stupid, or is it just the people who make up its masses?



It's inherently stupid.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 13, 2011)

SIX said:


> Is religion inherently stupid, or is it just the people who make up its masses?


 
The two are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## Xipoid (May 13, 2011)

Atheist, because I'm fucking tired of the metaphysics and pseudo-philosophy that comes my way when I talk about epistemology in regards to agnosticism.


----------



## lupinealchemist (May 13, 2011)

My faith would probably be a butchered mess of christianity and neo-paganism minus the christian sense of superiority and oppression of others.


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 13, 2011)

Pagan, but you don't actually have that bubble, and your poll is rather messed up


----------



## PieCreature (May 13, 2011)

wow you missed judaism  i know tons of jewish furs too, odd that you wouldnt even think of it.


----------



## Spatel (May 13, 2011)

How many orthodox Jews though?


----------



## Trance (May 13, 2011)

Pastafarian

Atheist.  It only takes a clear mind to be able to tell there's no divine "being" that created the universe.  Sorry if you're religious, but I can't understand how people can so illogical that they believe that.


----------



## lupinealchemist (May 13, 2011)

Trance said:


> Pastafarian
> 
> Atheist.  It only takes a clear mind to be able to tell there's no divine "being" that created the universe.  Sorry if you're religious, but I can't understand how people can so illogical that they believe that.



Usually for 2 reasons: blind faith or experiencing something that they believe science hasn't explained yet.


----------



## Tabasco (May 13, 2011)

I'm going to start a Doctor Who cult.


----------



## Heliophobic (May 13, 2011)

At least it's not another furry poll. Christian here.


----------



## Tabasco (May 13, 2011)

Grycho said:


> At least it's not another furry poll. Christian here.


 
IF FURRIES HAD A RELIGION WHAT WOULD THE DEITIES BE LIKE.


----------



## moonchylde (May 13, 2011)

Blues said:


> IF FURRIES HAD A RELIGION WHAT WOULD THE DEITIES BE LIKE.


 
Egyptian pantheon. Duh.

Agnostic pagan here. I'm pretty sure the gods exist, but I'm not sure if they're creators or the product of human imagination come to life. In any case, they all seem to hate me, so I choose not to worship them.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 13, 2011)

Blues said:


> IF FURRIES HAD A RELIGION WHAT WOULD THE DEITIES BE LIKE.



It would a mishmash of the Greek pantheon and the Egyptian pantheon, with other animal gods from other religions.
Zeus would be Fenris.
Hera would be Amaterasu.
Apollo would be Horus.
Hades would be Anubis.
Sekhmet would be Athena.
Bast would be Artemis.

I don't know whether Inari would be Aphrodite or Dionysus, though... I'm leaning toward Bacchus.

My character is a disciple of Bast, actually.


----------



## Alstor (May 13, 2011)

Deist here. I think there is some being out there that overlooks everything he created with the start of matter, and you can't understand it because you can't put it into human terms. Other religions anthropomorphize their god(s) way too much.

Whether there's a heaven and hell or a set of rules to live by, I do not know. And frankly, I don't think it cares.


----------



## lupinealchemist (May 13, 2011)

moonchylde said:


> Egyptian pantheon. Duh.
> 
> Agnostic pagan here. I'm pretty sure the gods exist, but I'm not sure if they're creators or the product of human imagination come to life. In any case, they all seem to hate me, so I choose not to worship them.



Agnostic pagan sounds a lot better than what I said.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Blues said:


> I'm going to start a Doctor Who cult.


 Someone beat you to it.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Someone beat you to it.


 
I'm gonna start a Chip and Dale: Rescue Rangers cu... never mind.


----------



## Tabasco (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Someone beat you to it.


 
MY SOUL IS THEIRS.


----------



## lupinealchemist (May 13, 2011)

And just like that, another religion thread is in the masturbatory wastebasket. Good job, FAF.


----------



## Tabasco (May 13, 2011)

lupinealchemist said:


> And just like that, another religion thread is in the masturbatory wastebasket. Good job, FAF.


 
0:3c


----------



## lupinealchemist (May 13, 2011)

Blues said:


> 0:3c


Who knows, there may be time to save it. 
Clap your hands really loud!


----------



## Tabasco (May 13, 2011)

lupinealchemist said:


> Who knows, there may be time to save it.
> Clap your hands really loud!


 
*armless wriggling* ;;


----------



## FF_CCSa1F (May 13, 2011)

Religion is outdated.


----------



## CannotWait (May 13, 2011)

I would like to believe in a loving deity that is somewhat described in "The Bible", but he was also described as a jerk and right now he's refusing to talk directly enough to mortals to disprove the very valid scientific theories that have come out and all but just outright disproved him. So if there is a God, he's relying really heavily on stupid humans to let people know he's there. You would think he would at least give people better signs that he's there before condemning them for believing in what we scientifically know to make sense.


----------



## Azure (May 13, 2011)

Xipoid said:


> epistemology


 Stop saying dirty words.


----------



## Tissemand (May 13, 2011)

I was shinto buddhist, but now I'm an penisist.


----------



## Ikrit (May 13, 2011)

satanism


----------



## FF_CCSa1F (May 13, 2011)

Ikrit said:


> satanism


 
LaVeyan or otherwise?


----------



## CannotWait (May 13, 2011)

FF_CCSa1F said:


> LaVeyan or otherwise?


 
Look at that *red collar*! Definitely LaVeyan.


----------



## Ikrit (May 13, 2011)

FF_CCSa1F said:


> LaVeyan or otherwise?


 LaVeyan


----------



## CannotWait (May 13, 2011)

Ikrit said:


> LaVeyan


 
I told you... but it was at the bottom of page four so nobody noticed.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 13, 2011)

Ikrit said:


> LaVeyan


 
LaVeyan Satanism is one of the religions I actually like, along with Wicca and RaÃ«lism (don't laugh).


----------



## CannotWait (May 13, 2011)

RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> LaVeyan Satanism is one of the religions I actually like, along with Wicca and RaÃ«lism (don't laugh).


 






This is me laughing.


----------



## Ikrit (May 13, 2011)

RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> LaVeyan Satanism is one of the religions I actually like, along with Wicca and* RaÃ«lism* (don't laugh).


 huh?
*googles*
what the fuck?


----------



## CannotWait (May 13, 2011)

RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> LaVeyan Satanism is one of the religions I actually like, along with Wicca and RaÃ«lism (don't laugh).


 
I looked up RaÃ«lism and made a cake for your beliefs.

http://myfoodlooksfunny.files.wordp...ood-photos-not-pictured-pink-slip-napkins.jpg

*:V* No hard feelings?


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 13, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> I looked up RaÃ«lism and made a cake for your beliefs.
> 
> http://myfoodlooksfunny.files.wordp...ood-photos-not-pictured-pink-slip-napkins.jpg
> 
> *:V* No hard feelings?


 
I said I liked the religion. It doesn't mean I swallow the story.

I just admire their love for pleasure and their zeal to achieve immortality in a naturalist way. Seriously, their ideas that involve genetic modification and cloning are actually useful. We should consider investing in them.

But the whole Elohim thing... no way that actually happened in real life. However out of admiration for RaÃ«lism I am making six catgirls for my fursona. (The story goes that when the aliens took RaÃ«l, they designed six "perfect" women for him.) Yeah, the hot chicks is something I like about RaÃ«lism as well. Ain't gonna lie.

Of course, I have issues with the other religions I like. I'm not a believer in magick, so Wicca is not for me. And while I like the Satanists' reverence for indulgence, it comes off as a bit pushy and violent to me. Look, I rage as much as the next guy, but seeking vengeance for everything just isn't the right thing to do.


----------



## Ikrit (May 13, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> I looked up RaÃ«lism and made a cake for your beliefs.
> 
> http://myfoodlooksfunny.files.wordp...ood-photos-not-pictured-pink-slip-napkins.jpg
> 
> *:V* No hard feelings?



your not funny

stop trying to be

no hard feelings?


----------



## CannotWait (May 13, 2011)

Ikrit said:


> your not funny
> 
> stop trying to be
> 
> no hard feelings?



T_T No hard feelings...


----------



## Discord Nova (May 13, 2011)

*puts on flame sheild* Im christian, but unlike the assholes ive met, i dont think im any better than an atheist, agnostic, etc. I really dont give a shit what you believe as long as you leave my beliefs alone, also, creationism is bullshit, theistic evolution is where its at.


----------



## Alstor (May 13, 2011)

QuinnWOLF said:


> *puts on flame sheild* Im christian,





> but unlike the assholes ive met, i dont think im any better than an atheist, agnostic, etc. I really dont give a shit what you believe as long as you leave my beliefs alone, also, creationism is bullshit, theistic evolution is where its at.


 You're fine. :3


----------



## Bloodshot_Eyes (May 13, 2011)

I'm agnostic... but of all the religions I've read about, Wicca interests me the most.


----------



## Conker (May 13, 2011)

Spatel said:


> At least separate Protestants and Catholics...


 I disagree with that. The differences between the two are there, but they aren't great enough to warrant a blatant separation; moreover, if you really feel that separated from your fellow sects of Christianity, then you are missing the point.

The point is to be a Christian and to emulate Jesus while believing that faith will get you to heaven, not to distance yourself further from fellow Christians simply because they perform the Eucharist daily instead of X amount of times per month.



			
				Mojotech said:
			
		

> "Heaven for climate, Hell for company." - Mark Twain
> 
> But seriously, What's the point of a soul if all your personality,  memories, hopes, dreams, desires, and free will will be overwritten with  "God is awesome.", anyway? You might as well not have one and dying is  just endless euphoric oblivion.


I love that Mark Twain has a quote for almost everything :3


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 13, 2011)

Azure said:


> Uh, why not? Because we don't include wacko sects in there? Or is this about some other shit?


 
Has nothing to do with that. Clearly you missed the underlying message.

Just because someone says they are [insert here] doesn't mean they really are. (And you should know where I am going with this)That is what I am getting at. Professed faith and demonstrated faith are completely different things. Anyone can say they follow anything they want.
Asking someone what they are, and asking someone if they actually follow what they believe are two very different questions.


----------



## Conker (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Has nothing to do with that. Clearly you missed the underlying message.
> 
> Just because someone says they are [insert here] doesn't mean they really are. (And you should know where I am going with this)That is what I am getting at. Professed faith and demonstrated faith are completely different things. Anyone can say they follow anything they want.
> Asking someone what they are, and asking someone if they actually follow what they believe are two very different questions.


To be fair though, many of the answers in this thread ARE answering your complaint. Plenty of people are saying "I am X but I do Y" or something of that sort. 

I understand your complaint though, but really, with only ten poll options, there are limits to what can be done :\


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 13, 2011)

Conker said:


> To be fair though, many of the answers in this thread ARE answering your complaint. Plenty of people are saying "I am X but I do Y" or something of that sort.
> 
> I understand your complaint though, but really, with only ten poll options, there are limits to what can be done :\


 
When some says they are X but they do Y, then they really are not X to begin with are they?


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> When some says they are X but they do Y, then they really are not X to begin with are they?


 Dude, there's only ten poll options.  The only viable option is if someone made another thread asking what denomination they are.  Also you can't go back and edit a poll once made.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Dude, there's only ten poll options.  The only viable option is if someone made another thread asking what denomination they are.  Also you can't go back and edit a poll once made.


 
....Again, you are missing what I am saying. Its not about the fact that there are only 10 poll options.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> ....Again, you are missing what I am saying. Its not about the fact that there are only 10 poll options.


 I get what you are saying.
However one of the main problems people have with christianity is interdenominational infighting.
In short: You are throwing gasoline onto the fire.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I get what you are saying.
> However one of the main problems people have with christianity is interdenominational infighting.
> In short: You are throwing gasoline onto the fire.


 
Wrong yet again, has nothing to do with denominations either.

Is it really that hard to see what I am getting at?


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Wrong yet again, has nothing to do with denominations either.
> 
> Is it really that hard to see what I am getting at?


 I know what you are getting at, it's just most of the time someone goes, "not all people who claim they are christian are" the next thing they start talking about is what denominations they think aren't christian.  So yes I do understand you, but I know where this conversation is heading.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 13, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I know what you are getting at, it's just most of the time someone goes, "not all people who claim they are christian are" the next thing they start talking about is what denominations they think aren't christian.  So yes I do understand you, but I know where this conversation is heading.


 
First part, sort of correct. What I am getting at, is someone can't say they are X, if they don't hold to the tenets of X. So, you could also through in not all who claim to be X are X. But, that is not really what I was getting at.

Second part, I am not talking about denominations.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> First part, sort of correct. What I am getting at, is someone can't say they are X, if they don't hold to the tenets of X. So, you could also through in not all who claim to be X are X. But, that is not really what I was getting at.
> 
> Second part, I am not talking about denominations.


 I know, but what I am getting at is even though I know what you are saying I don't want to hold this conversations because pretty soon we are going to have a flamewar on our hands.


----------



## Ozriel (May 13, 2011)

Buddhist of the Nichiren variety.


----------



## Conker (May 13, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> When some says they are X but they do Y, then they really are not X to begin with are they?


 Once again, I agree, but you can deduce that from the posts themselves. 

If it really upsets you, just subtract it or something. It's not like this is an end all be all poll, it's just a general consensus of furries who saw the poll on one particular website.


----------



## Ozriel (May 14, 2011)

Guys! Not here, not now! QQ


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I know, but what I am getting at is even though I know what you are saying I don't want to hold this conversations because pretty soon we are going to have a flamewar on our hands.


 
And I am getting at, is because people can say whatever they want even if they don't really hold to their beliefs, the poll is inaccurate. So it was kinda pointless to put it up.


----------



## Aleu (May 14, 2011)

All hail Nasrudin, the leader of the Panarii.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Guys! Not here, not now! QQ


 *bats beehive*


Rukh_Whitefang said:


> And I am getting at, is because people can say whatever they want even if they don't really hold to their beliefs, the poll is inaccurate. So it was kinda pointless to put it up.


 Then what do you suggest?  A test?


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Has nothing to do with that. Clearly you missed the underlying message.
> 
> Just because someone says they are [insert here] doesn't mean they really are. (And you should know where I am going with this)That is what I am getting at. Professed faith and demonstrated faith are completely different things. Anyone can say they follow anything they want.
> Asking someone what they are, and asking someone if they actually follow what they believe are two very different questions.


 Oh, so you're a man of works then? You must be a Catholic, I'm so sorry. So basically it boils down to LALALALALA you don't really know I know better LALALALALA, etc, etc. Tell me Rukh, what do you consider a viable demonstration of faith?


----------



## TreacleFox (May 14, 2011)

We need a new thread, new poll with more options and maybe make it stickyed?


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Meadow said:


> We need a new thread, new poll_ with more option_s and maybe make it stickyed?


 Polls have a limit of 10 options.


----------



## Fenrari (May 14, 2011)

It's not so much that I'm not willing to believe that there could be a higher power as I can create hope from other sources.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> Oh, so you're a man of works then? You must be a Catholic, I'm so sorry. So basically it boils down to LALALALALA you don't really know I know better LALALALALA, etc, etc. Tell me Rukh, what do you consider a viable demonstration of faith?


 
I am not Catholic. "For by Grace you have been saved, through faith, this is not of yourselves, lest any man should boast." Eph 2:8-9

I am a man who had radically abandoned himself to follow Christ.

And, Azure, there are essential doctrines of Christianity. Regardless of denominations. Because one can be a Catholic and not be a Christian, one can be a Baptist and not be a Christian, one can be Methodist and not be a Christian. One can grow up in a Christian home and not be a Christian. Denominations have almost nothing to do with it.


----------



## Fenrari (May 14, 2011)

I still have to wonder why people get extremely defensive on the subject of religions. If someone believes differently from what you do, why make such a big deal about it?

I totally understand if they're making you uncomfortable by telling you that you'll be going to hell and trying to "save" you. But MOST people you meet (unless you live in like Montgomery, Alabama [I can be specific since I lived there]) aren't hardcore evangelicals out to make your life miserable. The majority of people are really quite nice, and anyway, it's the differences between us that makes living fun.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> One can be a Christian and not be a Christian.


 
Because only real Christians don't put sugar on their porridge. :V 



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> And I am getting at, is because people can say whatever they want even if they don't really hold to their beliefs, the poll is inaccurate. So it was kinda pointless to put it up.


 
Umm, yes. Exactly. That's the point of any poll- it's not like there's any reason to lie, so it's kinda assumed that people will actually put in an honest response with a few exceptions like votebotting.



Azure said:


> Oh, so you're a man of works then? You must be a Catholic, I'm so sorry. So basically it boils down to LALALALALA you don't really know I know better LALALALALA, etc, etc. Tell me Rukh, what do you consider a viable demonstration of faith?



Actually, I asked him a quick checklist of yes/no beliefs of various sects and it turns out Rukh's a Calvinist.



Fenrari said:


> I still have to wonder why people get extremely defensive on the subject of religions. If someone believes differently from what you do, why make such a big deal about it?


 
You have to remember, a lot of people (most fundies included) don't actually think about these sorts of things more than they have to, or if they do blindly accept regardless of contradictions or massive breaks from reality in their religious dogma. For these people, it's just a fancy way of saying "I'm scared of dying.", and any any attempts to criticize it, no matter how civil,  has similar reactions to trying to take away someone's security blanket.


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I am not Catholic. "For by Grace you have been saved, through faith, this is not of yourselves, lest any man should boast." Eph 2:8-9
> 
> I am a man who had radically abandoned himself to follow Christ.
> 
> And, Azure, there are essential doctrines of Christianity. Regardless of denominations. Because one can be a Catholic and not be a Christian, one can be a Baptist and not be a Christian, one can be Methodist and not be a Christian. One can grow up in a Christian home and not be a Christian. Denominations have almost nothing to do with it.


 Ah, so it does come down to the You're Wrong and I'm Right dealio. Funny how denominations have nothing to do with it when you cite that people who profess a faith in God and Jesus aren't considered Christians. And you never did tell me what you think a demonstration of faith constitutes.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Actually, I asked him a quick checklist of yes/no beliefs of various sects and it turns out Rukh's a Calvinist.
> 
> You have to remember, a lot of people (most fundies included) don't actually think about these sorts of things more than they have to, or if they do blindly accept regardless of contradictions or massive breaks from reality in their religious dogma. For these people, it's just a fancy way of saying "I'm scared of dying.", and any any attempts to criticize it, no matter how civil,  has similar reactions to trying to take away someone's security blanket.


 Okay now that explains alot about rukh.

Almost everyone is scared of dying, but someone cramming free thought so far back in their brain that no matter what the preacher says you take as a absolute truth is not healthy.
P.s. on a sidenote calling out a fundie in a fundamentalist church on the fact they only believe in god is because they are scared of death is a very very bad idea, which I found out personally.


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 14, 2011)

*shrugs* it goes both ways.  I see religious types shoving their religion down other peoples throats, but I also see people on the other side ridiculing religious types and stuffing how idiotic they think they are down the formers throats.  Neither side can shove off and move on from each other.

I'm pretty religious, but usually when the conversations turn into poo flinging I just walk away.  Not worth my time or theirs.  I wish more people could that =P.



Mojotech said:


> any attempts to criticize it, no matter how  civil,  has similar reactions to trying to take away someone's security  blanket.



I just had to quote this because you know that it never stays civil.  It only took a few pages before the "lol atheist because religious types are retarded sheep lolol cruise control for cool".  It always comes.   While many religious types tend to walk around with a, no pun intended, holier than thou attitude, most on the other side tend to get just as snide.  Like you just proved.  =P


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

Frokusblakah said:


> I just had to quote this because you know that it never stays civil.  It only took a few pages before the "lol atheist because religious types are retarded sheep lolol cruise control for cool".  It always comes.   While many religious types tend to walk around with a, no pun intended, holier than thou attitude, most on the other side tend to get just as snide.  Like you just proved.  =P


 
I'm sorry you took it that way, but I was being entirely serious, and that was the least insulting way I could think of at the time to put it.  Taking Christianity mythology as our example, God is an all-powerful all-knowing father figure who, naturally, is best at the "my dad can beat up your dad" game, and imagery of heaven often evokes the same "place of ultimate comfort" areas of the brain as memories of being cradled by mother or memories of the womb in infants. The religious mindset is very much a regressive state of mind.

If you want snide, I could switch my model to compare it to, say, drug addiction. with Fundamentalists being the hopeless crackheads who just want the next high but the stuff that works for normal people just doesn't work on them any more.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 14, 2011)

im an atheist.


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> I'm sorry you took it that way, but I was being  entirely serious, and that was the least insulting way I could think of  at the time to put it.  Taking Christianity mythology as our example,  God is an all-powerful all-knowing father figure who, naturally, is best  at the "my dad can beat up your dad" game, and imagery of heaven often  evokes the same "place of ultimate comfort" areas of the brain as  memories of being cradled by mother or memories of the womb in infants.  The religious mindset is very much a regressive state of mind.
> 
> If  you want snide, I could switch my model to compare it to, say, drug  addiction. with Fundamentalists being the hopeless crackheads who just  want the next high but the stuff that works for normal people just  doesn't work on them any more.


*shrugs* You could do whatever you want, I was just making a statement about it the thread and threads like it.  You can rationalize it or explain your point of view however you'd like; it's not going to make a difference to me.  I know what I believe already and I'm unconcerned with what people who don't share my opinion think of such things (I'm probably coming off as the aforementioned "holier than thou", but I seriously don't see the point in spitting opinions back and fourth with people who are likely as dug into their trench as I am into mine.  Some people seem to really enjoy that type of "discussion", but I don't care for it).  I'm sure you'll attract somebody who wants to "FITE" about it.  That or like minded people will sit around patting each other on the back and then the thread will fall off until another one pops up.

I'd rather we all just enjoy delicious cake, but this is not a thread about cake or how delicious it is.

Edit:  Also, I wasn't referring "directly" to you with the cruise control comment.  Just the general asinine nature of comments starting around page 3.  People weren't happy saying "I'm an atheist" in a poll thread, they have to proceed to belittle religious types in a manner just fishing for an argument.  But we are accused of being "the ones that do that" when people don't agree with us.  Just pointing out it goes both ways.


----------



## ShÃ nwÃ ng (May 14, 2011)

More realistic poll:

Tru Christian
Says their Christian
Going to hell
Going to hell
Going to hell
Going to hell
Going to hell


----------



## Discord Nova (May 14, 2011)

Im hoping this thread doesnt turn into a religious flame wa- FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-


----------



## PieCreature (May 14, 2011)

Spatel said:


> How many orthodox Jews though?


 

i actually know six or more orthodox jewish furries


----------



## Radiohead (May 14, 2011)

Agnostic. Unless a deity appears in my living room (preferably not in the form of burnt toast or mouse entrails) then I'm staying out of that mess.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

Frokusblakah said:


> I'd rather we all just enjoy delicious cake, but this is not a thread about cake or how delicious it is.



I'd also like to remind you my comment was aimed at the kind of people who don't actually have good reasons for believing what they believe, and not all religious people. The people with the least reason to believe react the worst to nay-sayers. And while I'm not really the argumentative type, the truth is important to me.

But in the end, yeah, being able to get along is also important. A message without social skills isn't likely to get across. Cake probably helps, especially red velvet. Food of the Gods, as it were.


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 14, 2011)

i hate religion topics on FAF, or anywhere on the internet really. a few reasons:

1. proud atheists, cool bro, you don't believe in anything, you use logic. i don't mind you doing whatever you want in your 'beliefs' but there's no reason to be all high and smug about it prancing around and chanting "religion is stupid and anyone who belives it is toopid too!"

2. SUPER CHRISTIANS!!!! i hate scrolling and seeing epic paragraphs of JESUS JESUS JESUS HELL AND BREAD! it gets terribly annoying, and though two or three of you all are pretty mature and have legitimate conversations, there are too many GO GOD GO! people who have terrible defences

3. the fact that 1 and 2 are on the same coin, and regardless of how i flip it, one of those is going to start a tidal wave of BLEEEHHH and make my brain cry



thanks for listening ^_^


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Frokusblakah said:


> *shrugs* You could do whatever you want, I was just making a statement about it the thread and threads like it.  You can rationalize it or explain your point of view however you'd like; it's not going to make a difference to me.  I know what I believe already and I'm unconcerned with what people who don't share my opinion think of such things (I'm probably coming off as the aforementioned "holier than thou", but I seriously don't see the point in spitting opinions back and fourth with people who are likely as dug into their trench as I am into mine.  Some people seem to really enjoy that type of "discussion", but I don't care for it).  I'm sure you'll attract somebody who wants to "FITE" about it.  That or like minded people will sit around patting each other on the back and then the thread will fall off until another one pops up.
> 
> I'd rather we all just enjoy delicious cake, but this is not a thread about cake or how delicious it is.
> 
> Edit:  Also, I wasn't referring "directly" to you with the cruise control comment.  Just the general asinine nature of comments starting around page 3.  People weren't happy saying "I'm an atheist" in a poll thread, they have to proceed to belittle religious types in a manner just fishing for an argument.  But we are accused of being "the ones that do that" when people don't agree with us.  Just pointing out it goes both ways.


I dug my trench with reason, religion does it with fear and tradition. There is a big difference. I never understood why people think atheists are trying to tempt them into some kind of horrible bargain with another God. We're just trying to get you to stop wasting your time and thoughts on childish things. You ain't gotta worship a damn thing, nobody is asking you for money, shit, you can even have all your own morals and values as they pertain to your life. Just keep Jesus out of my government.


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> I dug my trench with reason, religion does it with fear and tradition. There is a big difference.


 
i dug my trench with a shovel?


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Kitsune_Morric said:


> i dug my trench with a shovel?


 Wrong. E-tool.


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> Wrong. E-tool.


 
fuck the E-tool, mine was hella rusty, and so i cleaned it up and made it pretty, then the first time i needed the bitch in afghanistan IT BROKE! so i just grabbed a farmer's shovel and kicked some dirt ass!


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Kitsune_Morric said:


> fuck the E-tool, mine was hella rusty, and so i cleaned it up and made it pretty, then the first time i needed the bitch in afghanistan IT BROKE! so i just grabbed a farmer's shovel and kicked some dirt ass!


 Thank you blind people!!


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> Thank you blind people!!


 
high five for changing topics?


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 14, 2011)

Somebody mentioned religious people being victims of fear of death...

Okay, if you want to live forever, then wouldn't it make more sense to look for the actual key to immortality on Earth than to hope that an invisible man in the sky will give it you in Heaven? I think the former sounds less like a pipe dream than the latter.

RaÃ«lism is starting to make a little more sense now, isn't it?


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> Ah, so it does come down to the You're Wrong and I'm Right dealio. Funny how denominations have nothing to do with it when you cite that people who profess a faith in God and Jesus aren't considered Christians. And you never did tell me what you think a demonstration of faith constitutes.


 
Shall I get verses specifying what I am talking about? Denominations have really ni importance to me. It doesn't matter what denomination one is, as long as that person holds to the fundamental essential doctrines of the faith. Anyone who deviates from what the Bible says, then I have serious doubts about them.

You want to see the full list (Yes I have made a list) of what I believe? Fine, its right here: http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/2191689/
That is a full 12 point detailed list.





Mojotech said:


> Actually, I asked him a quick checklist  of yes/no beliefs of various sects and it turns out Rukh's a Calvinist.



And I wasn't taught any of that. Wasn't brainwashed like you always say. Because, guess what? For 10 years I walked away from Christianity. It wasn't what anyone taught me that brought me back.
Furthermore, I don't call myself a Calvinist. Never have. Why? Because there is no denomination that is absolutely correct. Nobody has it all down 100%.

*I do not break fellowship with anyone  who holds to the essentials of the faith (i.e., the Trinity, the Deity  of Christ, Jesus' Physical Resurrection, Virgin Birth, Salvation by  Grace through Faith alone, One God, and the Gospel being the death,  burial, and resurrection of Jesus) I strongly believe that God's grace  and mercy are so extensive that within the Christian community there is a  wide range of beliefs and as long as the essentials are not violated,  then anyone who holds to those essentials but differs in the  non-essentials is my brother or sister in Christ.*





Mojotech said:


> You  have to remember, a lot of people (most fundies included) don't  actually think about these sorts of things more than they have to, or if  they do blindly accept regardless of contradictions or massive breaks  from reality in their religious dogma. For these people, it's just a  fancy way of saying "I'm scared of dying.", and any any attempts to  criticize it, no matter how civil,  has similar reactions to trying to  take away someone's security blanket.


 
Has nothing to do with being scared. Not at all. There is no fear for me. At all. And I don't follow blindly. I actually do a lot of research, studying, and meditating.
 At this point and time Mojo, you really, really need to shut up with your B.S remarks about me. You attack me anytime you get, taking pot shot at me, make snide remarks, and then demand answers from me. And you of all people are anything but civil. People like you think being an ass to a Christian is being civil...
I actually have said that I check anything I hear against what Scripture says, as per what Paul actually teaches us to do. I don't listen to a preacher or a teacher without checking what they are saying. To not check and make sure basically describes the Catholic Church.


----------



## LizardKing (May 14, 2011)

Oh good, another thread for tomatoes and tanks.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (May 14, 2011)

Other/none.


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Ahhhh, you remind me of why I love being so vocal about my sins. People like me must give you the jitters.

So your points are as follows...

1. God is sovereign.

All right. Unless it's a polytheistic sect of Christianity, which there isn't

2. Every unregenerate person is a sinner. 

Uhhhh, whut? Though I feel you in the deceitful heart bit, I never was good at the truth.

3. Not sure whats going on there. But does anybody else get the Master/Slave vibe when he's talking about God not letting us come on him without his permission?

4. Predestination. Right, jolly, moving on.

5. So basically this is where God basically said that all people are shitty and hopeless.

6. Here, God doesn't respect us.

7. Here, we are alone with Christ. Pretty sure this is a line priests used to rape kids, wink wink nudge nudge say no more say no more.

8. God loves the world and HATES THE JEWS. Seriously.

9. Here we discuss the Electoral Colleges version of salvation.

10. Zombie Jesus, etc etc.

11. God regenerates? Do I have to pay mana cost for that ability?

12. So basically, the chosen ones could be evil and horrible but predestined for CHRIST!

Rukh, you make religion fun fun fun!!


----------



## Willow (May 14, 2011)

My family is associated with Christianity. I think the specific branch is African Methodist. 

I don't practice it though.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> Ahhhh, you remind me of why I love being so vocal about my sins. People like me must give you the jitters.
> 
> So your points are as follows...
> 
> ...


 
People like you I have a deep sadness for. And your points are so far off, that its pointless to even go through them because one can clearly see you don't even want to talk. You just want to ridicule and harass.
Not participating in that Azure.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> People like you I have a deep sadness for. And your points are so far off, that its pointless to even go through them because one can clearly see you don't even want to talk. You just want to ridicule and harass.
> Not participating in that Azure.


 
There's are reason why he's ridiculing and harassing. It's the normal response to something that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

FUCK!
Thank you Rukh for starting the flamewar, this is what I was talking about.
I told you this was going to happen, but noooo you didn't listen to me.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I don't call myself a Calvinist. Never have.



Well, of course not, this way you can simply classify fellow calvinists as "Christian" and anyone who doesn't believe in Calvinism as "not christian" when asked, but are more than happy to throw them under the bus when such issues as non-trinitarian christians or christians who put sugar in their porridge or the like pop up. Much easier that way.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> You really, really need to shut up with your B.S remarks about me.


 
Rukh, those weren't aimed directly at you. What does it say about you that you think everything has to be about you? Or that apparently my tangential comment about the lack of proper levels of devotion from most christians was close enough that you thought it was aimed at you?


Edit: Actually yeah, Cannonfodder's right, let's all just try to ignore Rukh and get this topic back on track.


----------



## Enwon (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> You want to see the full list (Yes I have made a list) of what I believe? Fine, its right here: http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/2191689/
> That is a full 12 point detailed list.


If God chooses and predestines people for Heaven, then what's the point of preaching if faith is not a matter of free will?


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> FUCK!
> Thank you Rukh for starting the flamewar, this is what I was talking about.
> I told you this was going to happen, but noooo you didn't listen to me.


 
Did I start it? Go read my first post. I didn't start anything, others did. You whine and complain when others ask questions, which are not really questions but a means to start an argument. You want to stop it, then maybe talk to everyone else who knowingly tries to start flamewars because they enjoy it.





Enwon said:


> If God chooses and predestines people for Heaven,  then what's the point of preaching if faith is not a matter of free  will?


 
  Clearly you ndon't understand what predestination is actually talking about. Lets see if I can give you a basic understanding of it. Predestination and the elect is only taught to believers. And its job is  to teach humility. Basically is like this: Okay, you believe, but  remember its not because of anything you did, you didn't save yourself,  God saved you. Its to remind us that God is ultimately in control.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Edit: Actually yeah, Cannonfodder's right, let's all just try to ignore Rukh and get this topic back on track.


 Historically speaking many times christian denominations whenever society has a backlash against the general beliefs of the time they adapt.
For instance the great schism broke the catholic church's absolute control over society, when society started viewing slavery as wrong then denominations started to fight against slavery, etc well you get the point.
I think eventually it's just a matter of time until denominations take in philosophical beliefs like postmodernism and moral relativism and such.  There's actually denominations debating whether or not hell actually exist which is a sign of changing beliefs within the churches. There's denominations that support glbt rights, etc.  I think as time goes on and more and more people support gay rights the more denominations will accept them.
Such things as moral relativism can be taken in fairly easy, cause think about it, many denominations think that anybody could go to christian and that.  So it's not that big of a stretch.
tl;dr: christianity adapts _not_ go extinct.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> tl;dr: christianity adapts _not_ go extinct.


 
I'll agree to that. If Christianity, or Religion in general, is getting their act together I'm all for it, just don't expect me to congratulate them for meeting society's minimum standards.

It's actually pretty neat to look at some of the holdovers from pagan religions in Christianity at large, and I ain't just talking easter. Anubis was one of the early saints of the church, under some other name iirc


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 14, 2011)

Why is atheism always in these fuckin' polls? Atheism isn't a fucking religion.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Why is atheism always in these fuckin' polls? Atheism isn't a fucking religion.


 
Always gotta have an option for "none".


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> I'll agree to that and am all for it. If Christianity, or Religion in general, is getting their act together I'm all for it, just don't expect me to congratulate them for meeting society's minimum standards.
> 
> It's actually pretty neat to look at some of the holdovers from pagan religions in Christianity at large, and I ain't just talking easter. Anubis was one of the early saints of the church, under some other name iirc


 A way that it could be expedited is if there is another great schism in christianity, the great schism broke the catholic churches absolute control over politics and such.  If there was another one it would break the current denominations political power even further.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Historically speaking many times christian denominations whenever society has a backlash against the general beliefs of the time they adapt.
> For instance the great schism broke the catholic church's absolute control over society, when society started viewing slavery as wrong then denominations started to fight against slavery, etc well you get the point.
> I think eventually it's just a matter of time until denominations take in philosophical beliefs like postmodernism and moral relativism and such.  There's actually denominations debating whether or not hell actually exist which is a sign of changing beliefs within the churches. There's denominations that support glbt rights, etc.  I think as time goes on and more and more people support gay rights the more denominations will accept them.
> Such things as moral relativism can be taken in fairly easy, cause think about it, many denominations think that anybody could go to christian and that.  So it's not that big of a stretch.
> tl;dr: christianity adapts _not_ go extinct.



Uhm, no Cannon. Christianity is not to conform to what society says. We are not to conform to what the world thinks is right and wrong, because as a Christian, you know the world is sinful. So why then would you conform to a sinful world? Makes no sense.
Furthermore, God doesn't conform to us, we conform to Him, what His Word says. You are basically saying its okay to change with society and still be a Christian. Show me where in God's Holy Word it says that we are to conform to this world. You will not find it. You find the exact opposite.

So, I will stauntchly stand against your comment in saying that Christianity conforms to society. Because that is not Biblical, or Christianity for that matter.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Stuff.


 
Stop it already Rukh, we're trying to have a serious theological discussion here.



CannonFodder said:


> A way that it could be expedited is if there is another great schism in christianity, the great schism broke the catholic churches absolute control over politics and such.  If there was another one it would break the current denominations political power even further.


 
Things are already pretty fractious as it is with all the different sects claiming they're the only true christans and whatnot, but I think the most popular types after catholocism are mostly protestant varieties? Not sure how to break them up further unless war breaks out in the holy land (again) or something.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Always gotta have an option for "none".



Then just have an option that say's "None" just like they have on application forms.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Uhm, no Cannon. Christianity is not to conform to what society says. We are not to conform to what the world thinks is right and wrong, because as a Christian, you know the world is sinful. So why then would you conform to a sinful world? Makes no sense.
> Furthermore, God doesn't conform to us, we conform to Him, what His Word says. You are basically saying its okay to change with society and still be a Christian. Show me where in God's Holy Word it says that we are to conform to this world. You will not find it. You find the exact opposite.
> 
> So, I will stauntchly stand against your comment in saying that Christianity conforms to society. Because that is not Biblical, or Christianity for that matter.



I may believe in god, but at the risk of being flamed I don't believe in the bible.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Stop it already Rukh, we're trying to have a serious theological discussion here.
> 
> Things are already pretty fractious as it is with all the different sects claiming they're the only true christans and whatnot, but I think the most popular types after catholocism are mostly protestant varieties? Not sure how to break them up further unless war breaks out in the holy land (again) or something.


 I think the only way to break catholicism even further would be to follow how the great schism happened.  It would probably happen if the current pope chose the next pope which then the priests and that didn't support and chose their own pope in defiance.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I think the only way to break catholicism even further would be to follow how the great schism happened.  It would probably happen if the current pope chose the next pope which then the priests and that didn't support and chose their own pope in defiance.


 
Yeah, that'd do it and will probably happen again on its own, but that led to the decentralized Protestant religions, which are going to be much harder to schism because of their naturally fractious nature.

Edit: Though I guess that b rings up the question of whether or not that'd even be needed for protestants, or what it'd even DO if it happened...


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Stop it already Rukh, we're trying to have a serious theological discussion here.


 
You actually having a serious theological discussion? Thanks for making me laugh. I needed that.

You want to have a serious discussion? Then drop the asshole attitude first of all. Then maybe we can get somewhere. Until then, there is no discussing anything with you,. because you just want to argue.

Speaking of theological discussion. Whats is Common Grace? How is that different from Saving Grace? What is Election and Reprobation? And what is the difference? What is Regeneration? What is Justification? What is the Atonement? What are the offices of Christ?

I could go on. But I think you get the point. Please note, this is not me bragging about knowledge at all. I don't boast in any of this. But I am showing you, that you clearly don't know theological topics very well.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Yeah, that'd do it and will probably happen again on its own, but that led to the decentralized Protestant religions, which are going to be much harder to schism because of their naturally fractious nature.


 It'd be better to have several small fractions than one all powerful denomination.
It's not that much better, but it'd be a improvement.
On the plus side people are getting sick of the interdenominational fighting anyhow.
Honestly considering how christianity is going, I give it less than fifty years before many of the large controversial denominations start crumbling and gets replaced with mini-denominations.


----------



## Mayfurr (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> tl;dr: christianity adapts _not_ go extinct.


 


Mojotech said:


> I'll agree to that. If Christianity, or Religion in general, is getting their act together I'm all for it, just don't expect me to congratulate them for meeting society's minimum standards.
> 
> It's actually pretty neat to look at some of the holdovers from pagan religions in Christianity at large, and I ain't just talking easter. Anubis was one of the early saints of the church, under some other name iirc



The ironic thing is that despite all this evidence of change, there's still the attitude by a good chunk of believers that Christianity is "never-changing", when in fact the truth is that Christianity, like every other faith, (gasp!) _evolves..._


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mayfurr said:


> The ironic thing is that despite all this evidence of change, there's still the attitude by a good chunk of believers that Christianity is "never-changing", when in fact the truth is that Christianity, like every other faith, (gasp!) _evolves..._


 You only need to look two posts up to see this.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> It'd be better to have several small fractions than one all powerful denomination.
> It's not that much better, but it'd be a improvement.
> On the plus side people are getting sick of the interdenominational fighting anyhow.
> Honestly considering how christianity is going, I give it less than fifty years before many of the large controversial denominations start crumbling and gets replaced with mini-denominations.


 
It's kind of one of the reasons autonomous government stuff and monopolies are bad. If we don't want it in our government or businesses, we certainly wouldn't want it in our religion.

Also I don't think the sects would be so bad if it wasn't for their constant jockeying to be the one true church(tm) even though more and more disagree, or that somehow it's not a big deal despite it being bad enough they'd mistreat, ostracize, torture, kill, or damn eternally people who disagree, or other such problems. =/


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> It's kind of one of the reasons autonomous government stuff and monopolies are bad. If we don't want it in our government or businesses, we certainly wouldn't want it in our religion.
> 
> Also I don't think the sects would be so bad if it wasn't for their constant jockeying to be the one true church(tm) even though more and more disagree, or that somehow it's not a big deal despite it being bad enough they'd mistreat, ostracize, torture, kill, or damn eternally people who disagree, or other such problems. =/


 On the plus side the denominations known for doing this are so dense that they just think this generation is, "lost" and by the time they realize they just pissed everyone off it will be too late for them to change.


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Whats is Common Grace? How is that different from Saving Grace? What is Election and Reprobation? And what is the difference? What is Regeneration? What is Justification? What is the Atonement? What are the offices of Christ?



Who is John Galt?


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> Who is John Galt?


 
And what does Atlas Shrugged have anything to do with what I asked? Nothing. Moving on now.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> And what does Atlas Shrugged have anything to do with what I asked? Nothing. Moving on now.


 He was making a, "Jeopardy" joke.

-------------> Joke



You
____ground_________


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> He was making a, "Jeopardy" joke.
> 
> -------------> Joke
> 
> ...


 
I was actually making a joke about asking rhetorical questions.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> I was actually making a joke about asking rhetorical questions.


 Ah, I thought it was a jeopardy joke cause you have to reply with a question in jeopardy.


----------



## Conker (May 14, 2011)

The talk of denominations is interesting. One of my religious studies teachers said that denominations and divisions in the church will ultimately kill it--or at least really hurt the church--and then he went on and talked about how Islam is Christianities biggest threat.

But the consensus here is the opposite, and I quite like Mojo's logic:



			
				Mojotech said:
			
		

> It's kind of one of the reasons autonomous government stuff and  monopolies are bad. If we don't want it in our government or businesses,  we certainly wouldn't want it in our religion.



But the denomination changes are usually about little bickerings within the Bible and other interpretations. Catholicism has reconciliation steps, other sects don't, etc. But, ti seems the reasons the sects split are mostly do to religious politics over anything else. The fundamentals are technically the same. 

I can't remember where I was going with this now :[


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Ah, I thought it was a jeopardy joke cause you have to reply with a question in jeopardy.


 
That would be a good deduction but the host of Jeopardy does not ask questions he gives answers based on a category to which the proper response to an answer reversely would be a question.

_ALSO_
My least favorite thing about denominations is noticing that there are primarily white and primarily black *Christian* churches. Because everyone knows Jesus said "Let all the blacks and all the whites be separated lest ye not be allowed into the kingdom of heaven". :V


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Conker said:


> The talk of denominations is interesting. One of my religious studies teachers said that denominations and divisions in the church will ultimately kill it--or at least really hurt the church--and then he went on and talked about how Islam is Christianities biggest threat.
> 
> But the consensus here is the opposite, and I quite like Mojo's logic:
> 
> ...


 If you ask me if christiainity became either no longer dominated by mega-denominations or such christianity would grow in membership again or stop shrinking.

Also no islam is not the biggest threat to christianity, if you ask me personally I think islam will grow to about 3.5 billion in the future and then start to shrink as well.  It is highly unlikely with how the world is we'll ever have a single religion have complete control over society again.


----------



## Torrijos-sama (May 14, 2011)

The Nation is the only true religion of the People, and I am the prophet of Nationalism.


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

Does anyone have evidence that there is or isn't a God? I'm currently confused and I haven't seen anything substantial either way.


----------



## Conker (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Also no islam is not the biggest threat to christianity, if you ask me personally I think islam will grow to about 3.5 billion in the future and then start to shrink as well.  It is highly unlikely with how the world is we'll ever have a single religion have complete control over society again.


 Agreed. I almost wonder if the growth of Islam in...first world countries is almost a fad. I know it's growing in England, but I'm not sure if it's because of actual belief in Allah or if it's just "the cool thing to do right now." 

As long as the church and state stay separated, I don't really care what religion is the biggest though :3 

I told my teacher that organized religion itself was the biggest threat to Christianity. I'm not sure he was expecting that answer :V



			
				CannotWait said:
			
		

> Does anyone have evidence that there is or isn't a God? I'm  currently confused and I haven't seen anything substantial either way


None that I know for certain, though Dawkins tries his damndest to prove any of the "evidence" for God false in _The God Delusion_. It's actually kind of a fun book, though he sometimes lays it on a tad strong. Worth skimming if you haven't read it though.


----------



## Ikrit (May 14, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> Does anyone have evidence that there is or isn't a God? I'm currently confused and I haven't seen anything substantial either way.


  Scientology

there's my proof


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

Ikrit said:


> Scientology
> 
> there's my proof


 
How does that word prove anything. That's like saying:

Christianity.

There's my proof.


----------



## Folgrimeo (May 14, 2011)

I'm agnostic. I don't believe there's a god and attribute such things to science or chance, but sometimes I can't help but wonder if there is a god. If nothing else, then maybe a more personal being like a spiritual guardian because at times miracles do seem to happen. Like how I managed to survive a car crash (thank goodness for airbags). 

I'm sick of people using God as "he spoke through me, you must all do what I say" or "my God's more mighty than your God" or "No I can't play baseball with you, God wants me to go to church today". I don't believe God intervenes like that. Maybe once in a while he can provide advice in private, but for the most part I think he's hands-off. And while I think some people are evil enough that they deserve to be removed from society (mostly extreme evangelists who condemn other people to hell or require followers to kill themselves), people of any religion that are generally good-natured and/or ask forgiveness should be allowed into heaven. Plus I want to believe in a heaven; if your life's over, I say eat the lotus flowers and dream yourself to love and happiness and adventure.

I was baptized as Christian, so as a formality I continue to identify myself as such, even though I'm agnostic. Someone told me that Episcopalian is the only Christian denomination that allows gay marriage, so I think I'll formally identify myself as that from now on.

Also, I personally think the Bible is hogwash, stories that help establish practices for a good life using views that are now outdated. By accepting these old tales as religious truth, as the way things were and should continue to be, it seems to hold society back. It's pretty common practice to point to passages of the Bible that we regularly violate (we do like eating shrimp, we don't kill children when they disrespect us), as evidence against people who similarly use specific passages to condemn behaviors. I'll admit that someone looking at it very generally might find good tips, but I'm wary of anyone who takes it literally. Rather, I don't like people who use the holy book as a weapon.


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

Folgrimeo said:


> I'm agnostic. I don't believe there's a god and attribute such things to science or chance, but sometimes I can't help but wonder if there is a god. If nothing else, then maybe a more personal being like a spiritual guardian because at times miracles do seem to happen. Like how I managed to survive a car crash (thank goodness for airbags).
> 
> I'm sick of people using God as "he spoke through me, you must all do what I say" or "my God's more mighty than your God" or "No I can't play baseball with you, God wants me to go to church today". I don't believe God intervenes like that. Maybe once in a while he can provide advice in private, but for the most part I think he's hands-off. And while I think some people are evil enough that they deserve to be removed from society (mostly extreme evangelists who condemn other people to hell or require followers to kill themselves), people of any religion that are generally good-natured and/or ask forgiveness should be allowed into heaven. Plus I want to believe in a heaven; if your life's over, I say eat the lotus flowers and dream yourself to love and happiness and adventure.
> 
> I was baptized as Christian, so as a formality I continue to identify myself as such, even though I'm agnostic. Someone told me that Episcopalian is the only Christian denomination that allows gay marriage, so I think I'll formally identify myself as that from now on.


 
This is what I had previously heard and was wondering if anyone could validate it:

It is a universal human emotion to wonder or feel the need for a higher deistic power in life.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 14, 2011)

Folgrimeo said:


> I'm agnostic. I don't believe there's a god and attribute such things to science or chance, but sometimes I can't help but wonder if there is a god. If nothing else, then maybe a more personal being like a spiritual guardian because at times miracles do seem to happen. Like how I managed to survive a car crash (thank goodness for airbags)



I think this too. Though I like to believe a God exists as it is one of a handful of things keeping me sane at the moment. 



> I'm sick of people using God as "he spoke through me, you must all do what I say" or "my God's more mighty than your God" or "No I can't play baseball with you, God wants me to go to church today".



I hate this too, it's pathetic.



> I don't believe God intervenes like that. Maybe once in a while he can provide advice in private, but for the most part I think he's hands-off. And while I think some people are evil enough that they deserve to be removed from society (mostly extreme evangelists who condemn other people to hell or require followers to kill themselves), people of any religion that are generally good-natured and/or ask forgiveness should be allowed into heaven. Plus I want to believe in a heaven; if your life's over, I say eat the lotus flowers and dream yourself to love and happiness and adventure.



I believe the first part of this too. 



> I was baptized as Christian, so as a formality I continue to identify myself as such, even though I'm agnostic. Someone told me that Episcopalian is the only Christian denomination that allows gay marriage, so I think I'll formally identify myself as that from now on.



Mom didn't baptize me. Her reason was that she wanted me to choose what religion I wanted to follow, if I wanted to follow a religion at all.



> Also, I personally think the Bible is hogwash, stories that help establish practices for a good life using views that are now outdated. By accepting these old tales as religious truth, as the way things were and should continue to be, it seems to hold society back. It's pretty common practice to point to passages of the Bible that we regularly violate (we do like eating shrimp, we don't kill children when they disrespect us), as evidence against people who similarly use specific passages to condemn behaviors. I'll admit that someone looking at it very generally might find good tips, but I really don't like people who take the holy book literally. Rather, I don't like people who use the holy book as a weapon.



Agreed, I also think the bible is hogwash. Besides it has been re-written many times over the years so who knows what has been changed to "suit" the religions needs.


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

So, should God exist, where did he go? Did he just create humans, talk to them for a bit and leave? Why doesn't this God in all his power show without doubt that he exists to all mankind? If he is perfect and lacks nothing, why does he require worship? If he is not a cruel God, then why does he condemn people to hell for not believing in him even though he didn't give us much proof of his existence?

_EDIT_
I'm going to church tomorrow too, so my youth minister might have a fit.


----------



## Folgrimeo (May 14, 2011)

Because of that other saying that life is a test. If he popped in to say hullo, that'd ruin the experiment.


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

Folgrimeo said:


> Because of that other saying that life is a test. If he popped in to say hullo, that'd ruin the experiment.


 
But then why make hell for *all eternity*? That seems a bit much doesn't it?


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> People like you I have a deep sadness for. And your points are so far off, that its pointless to even go through them because one can clearly see you don't even want to talk. You just want to ridicule and harass.
> Not participating in that Azure.


 Don't cry for me, Argentina. I've nothing but ridicule for fools, you are right. There is no amount of wisdom that will cure you of your ignorance.


----------



## Folgrimeo (May 14, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> But then why make hell for *all eternity*? That seems a bit much doesn't it?


Please promise me you'll bring these concerns up with your youth minister. I'd love to hear what he has to say about it. What good is a religion if you can't question things about it?


----------



## CannotWait (May 14, 2011)

Folgrimeo said:


> Please promise me you'll bring these concerns up with your youth minister. I'd love to hear what he has to say about it. What good is a religion if you can't question things about it?


 
Oh I will. I kind of want to see if Christianity can keep me.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Conker said:


> Agreed. I almost wonder if the growth of Islam in...first world countries is almost a fad. I know it's growing in England, but I'm not sure if it's because of actual belief in Allah or if it's just "the cool thing to do right now."


 I know I might get flamed for this, but I think Europe will go muslim for a couple decades cause of the massive population increase and such.  Then it will recede.  The world will start freaking out about, "Islam is taking over the world" and just when it starts reaching it's peak it will stop growing and then start reversing.  IMO how islam is growing it is going through the evolution that other religions went through at a ridiculous speed.  It took christianity a millenia to reach this point.  However because of the 9/11 attacks and that and how people generalize muslims as terrorists, they are trying to show that not all of them are.  For the last decade the image of islam was osama, however now it is the people of egypt and other countries fighting for democracy.


CannotWait said:


> So, should God exist, where did he go? Did he just create humans, talk to them for a bit and leave? ... If he is perfect and lacks nothing,


 Because the world can't be any better, it can't be any worse.  You could be all powerful, all knowing and yet you would still not have the power to make people or the world better.  The truth is nobody has the power to fix this world, the reason why is it is one of those things that could never exist no matter what.  It's like the argument, "if god exists can he make a rock that he can't lift".  The reason why it couldn't exist is because that would be a paradox.


Randy-Darkshade said:


> I believe the first part of this too.


 I think I've had this happen, though I'm not sure if it was just a hallucination.  The problem it was biologically impossible.


----------



## Conker (May 14, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> This is what I had previously heard and was wondering if anyone could validate it:
> 
> It is a universal human emotion to wonder or feel the need for a higher deistic power in life.


I do believe Dawkins has something about that. He's actually got a whole chapter on it. I haven't read it in awhile though, but later I could give it a once over and post some notes. I'm not sure if his ideas are completely true, but he does try to explain it from an evolutionary standpoint.


----------



## Aleu (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Uhm, no Cannon. Christianity is not to conform to what society says. We are not to conform to what the world thinks is right and wrong, because as a Christian, you know the world is sinful. So why then would you conform to a sinful world? Makes no sense.
> Furthermore, God doesn't conform to us, we conform to Him, what His Word says. You are basically saying its okay to change with society and still be a Christian. Show me where in God's Holy Word it says that we are to conform to this world. You will not find it. You find the exact opposite.
> 
> So, I will stauntchly stand against your comment in saying that Christianity conforms to society. Because that is not Biblical, or Christianity for that matter.


 The bible may not say exactly it should conform to society, it does by being re-written over and over and over and over and over and....over.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

I just realized something, we were able to rerail this thread from bickering to a legitimate conversation.


----------



## PenningtontheSkunk (May 14, 2011)

I'm Pagan/Wicca.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I just realized something, we were able to rerail this thread from bickering to a legitimate conversation.



Give it a few minutes, itll derail again :V


----------



## Conker (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I just realized something, we were able to rerail this thread from bickering to a legitimate conversation.


 True, but I"m just drunk enough to start responding to Voldemort he who will not be named  again :[


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Conker said:


> True, but I"m just drunk enough to start responding to Voldemort he who will not be named  again :[


 I've got bad news Conker, the paternity test just came in.  Voldemort is your father, oh and by the way it turns out you are a horcrux.


QuinnWOLF said:


> Give it a few minutes, itll derail again :V


 I know you are christian, but what part?  Well you know what I mean.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 14, 2011)

Conker said:


> True, but I"m just drunk enough to start responding to Rukh he who will not be named again :[


 
fix'd that for you.

My religion is christianity but i dont think the bible is God's EXACT word,and i believe in theistic evolution. Stuff thats in the Old Testament is just sick, children getting mauled by bears for making fun a of a bald prophet!? What the FUCK!


----------



## Conker (May 14, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I've got bad news Conker, the paternity test just came in.  Voldemort is your father, oh and by the way it turns out you are a horcrux.


 Dude, I laughed so motherfucking hard. I'm sigging hte motherfucking shit out of that.


----------



## Azure (May 14, 2011)

Conker said:


> Dude, I laughed so motherfucking hard. I'm sigging hte motherfucking shit out of that.


 Don't drunk sig, don't be that guy :V


----------



## Conker (May 14, 2011)

Azure said:


> Don't drunk sig, don't be that guy :V


 I keep trying to be that guy and it won't work :[

Edit: and now it just poofed into existence. Huh.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 14, 2011)

This thread is officially derailed. :V


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

QuinnWOLF said:


> fix'd that for you.
> 
> My religion is christianity but i dont think the bible is God's EXACT word,and i believe in theistic evolution. Stuff thats in the Old Testament is just sick, children getting mauled by bears for making fun a of a bald prophet!? What the FUCK!


 Honestly considering that a king in the bible utterly fell before dying and all anybody remembered of him was all the evil he did before dying, that prophet probably was sucking satan's dick when he died.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

QuinnWOLF said:


> fix'd that for you.
> 
> My religion is christianity but i dont think the bible is God's EXACT word,and i believe in theistic evolution. Stuff thats in the Old Testament is just sick, children getting mauled by bears for making fun a of a bald prophet!? What the FUCK!


 
If the Bible contains the word of God, but is not the word of God, then we must ask which parts of the Bible are the Word of God and which are not? The problem in answering this question is that the one who seeks to do so inadvertently places himself as the judge of what is and what is not inspired and without error. But by what standard would such a person make such judgment?




Conker said:


> I keep trying to be that guy and it won't work :[
> 
> Edit: and now it just poofed into existence. Huh.


 
Sorry I kept you waiting. I was leading a service online. Just finished about 10 minutes ago.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 14, 2011)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> If the Bible contains the word of God, but is not the word of God, then we must ask which parts of the Bible are the Word of God and which are not? The problem in answering this question is that the one who seeks to do so inadvertently places himself as the judge of what is and what is not inspired and without error. But by what standard would such a person make such judgment?


 
There is stuff in the Bible that is so sick i cant possibly believe that it is ALL the word of God, besides, the Bible was edited hundreds upon thousands of times from then to now.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (May 14, 2011)

QuinnWOLF said:


> There is stuff in the Bible that is so sick i cant possibly believe that it is ALL the word of God, besides, the Bible was edited hundreds upon thousands of times from then to now.


 
You failed to answer the question.



> If the Bible contains the word of God, but is not the word of God, then  we must ask which parts of the Bible are the Word of God and which are  not? *The problem in answering this question is that the one who seeks to  do so inadvertently places himself as the judge of what is and what is  not inspired and without error.* *But by what standard would such a person  make such judgment?*


----------



## Discord Nova (May 14, 2011)

Religion thread/polls on FAF always derail into debates, dont they?


----------



## Recel (May 14, 2011)

All these arguments and debates about religion makes me think that somewhere, out in the unknown, God is siting on hes chair, hes face is buried beep in hes palms and he is weaping: "Where did I go wrong?", just because of all the crap religion and the bible was used for.


----------



## Leafblower29 (May 14, 2011)

No one probably knows, but I'm a Christian. Note how I don't go around telling people their wrong because I respect freedom of religion.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 14, 2011)

Recel said:


> All these arguments and debates about religion makes me think that somewhere, out in the unknown, God is siting on hes chair, hes face is buried beep in hes palms and he is weaping: "Where did I go wrong?", just because of all the crap religion and the bible was used for.


 I can't but shake the feeling that we are the reason why he doesn't show himself.


QuinnWOLF said:


> Religion thread/polls on FAF always derail into debates, dont they?


 Pretty much.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 15, 2011)

God obviously REALLY hates what people do with the Bible and Christianity in general.

P.S. They should TOTALLY make an Assassins Creed Brotherhood DLC in which you save little boys from the priests trying to molest them :V


----------



## Conker (May 15, 2011)

Prefacing this with a few shots of rum in me. Also, I'm removing the citations because I don't think they are relavent. Also, I like how it says "go advanced" for advanced posting. Sounds so sexual <3



			
				Rukh_Whitefang said:
			
		

> 1.) God is sovereign, good, loving, Holy, and righteous.


First, the citations I removed were all over the place. Both New and Old Testaments. Surely there's one place where all of those attributes are given? No. Hmm...

I had to look up "sovereign" because fuck big words. Kingly huh? See, I dunno if I can agree with all of those because the Old Testament makes him out to be kind of a douche. He sure doesn't seem righteous. Also, if he is all of those, then we have the whole "PROBLEM OF EVIL" show up. How can be be so awesome when evil exists? Freewill? But couldn't he have made a world where freewill exists yet evil doesn't? Surely if he's all of those things he could have...




> 2.) Every unregenerate person is a sinner, dead in his sins, possessing a deceitful heart, is full of evil, unable to understand spiritual truth, does  not seek for God, is a slave to his own sin nature, is hostile in mind and deed to God, and naturally  and rightfully are objects of God's wrath.


So, the statement is that every non Christian that doesn't obey your rules is the above, right? I suppose that is true, by your own logic of course, but that really doesn't mean us non obeyers care. 

I do have a problem with "God's wrath" when your first point has God as a loving good deity. It would seem that "loving" and "wrathful" are binary oppositions. 



> 3.) Because of their sinful condition, the unregenerate do  not and cannot freely choose to believe the gospel and that they cannot come to God unless it has been granted to  them from the Father who appoints them to eternal life and grants that they believe.


See, isn't this a paradox though? You can only go to God if he so wishes it. I kinda forgot how this was a paradox. I know it is though. IT SO FUCKING IS. I know there is something fucked up with this, but I might have to get back to it at a later time.

So, if they cannot freely accept the gospel without God, where does free will come in? Shouldn't the gospel lead to God and not the other way around? If God has to grant everything, once again, where does free will come from? So, one needs to believe in God by first believing in God? That doesn't make sense. If I don't believe in God, but need God to believe in God, then how will I ever believe in God if I don't believe in God? 



> 4.) God in His love and mercy and out of the kind intention of His own  will, from before the foundation of the world,  elected, chose, and predestined some of the lost to salvation.* Predestination and the elect are there to teach those who believe, that they didn't save themselves. Its to teach humility.*


But, in the above, you said we need God to to be appointed, yet here you're saying a group of humans are to do it. I don't get that. Also, isn't it kind of boastful and narcissistic to elect yourself as one of the "predestinationed." Also also, how do you know if you are one of those people? Perhaps you just THINK you are. What if your God is wrong or not true? I mean, how can someone have humility and still label themselves as some crusader for Christ?



> 5.) God's sovereign predestination was not based upon God looking into  the future to see who would pick Him (this would mean that God learned)  for no one would pick Him because they are slaves to their sinful  natures, full of evil, enemies of  God, with nothing good dwelling in them, hateful,  disobedient, and enslaved to their lusts.


So, no one can pick God, only God can pick people. But does he pick everyone? What if I'm that booger he decides to not pick? Isn't God at fault there? And if God picks all his boogers well, how come not all of them get ejected from his nose? (that is an awesome metaphor and you need to acknowledge that).

Listen, I know that Christianity believes that salvation is all up to God, but that doesn't mean there aren't logical holes within that argument. Holes that I"m not sober enough to talk about mind you.



> 6.) The elect's believing is based solely on the grace of God, not the will of man, and not based upon any  foreseen goodness in man. If God elected based upon the  foreseen goodness or choice of someone, then God would be a respecter of  persons since He would be showing favoritism based on something in the  sinner. God's decisions are according to His own will, according to His  own purpose, because God is not a respecter of persons.


If God doesn't respect me, why should I respect him? Seems like he's just abusing his own power now. That's not cool. 



> 7.) Furthermore, those who receive Christ are justified by  faith alone, through grace alone, in Christ alone.


That, I can agree with. The Bible preaches that, and I understand this message to be true based on the Bible's teachings.



> 8.) God loves the world, not just the Jews, and gave His Son as a propitiation, not only for the Jews to whom the Son was sent, but also for the whole world, both Jews and  Gentiles.


He destroyed the motherfuck out of the world with a flood in the Old Testament, but uh, okay. I agree with everything else though.

Sometimes I question the Bible's definition of "love"



> 9.) As many as receive Christ do so because they have been  appointed to eternal life, granted that they believe, granted that they repent, and caused to be born  again, not by their own wills.


This reminds me of number three that I know is wrong somehow but I can't recall why. If it's all up to God, where's free will come in, or something. It's by my own will that I believe in God, or something. I dunno. Something wrong here.



> 10.) The atoning work of Jesus who is God in flesh, who became sin on our behalf, who bore our sins in  His body on the cross, who died, was buried, and rose from  the dead, in the same body that He died in, whose sacrifice was sufficient to save all,  But not all will be saved, Jesus only laid His life down for his  sheep.


I think that sentence is grammatically incorrect. Jesus only laid down his life for his sheep? I thought he laid down his life for everyone, but it's up to those to become his sheep. Or something. You make this out like Jesus laid down his life for an elite few, but I'm not sure that's correct. He died for the whole world, but the whole world won't choose him. But he didn't die for just a select few, he died for everyone, but only a select few will appreciate his death. Or something. 



> 11.) God first regenerates the hearts and minds of the unsaved so that  they are then able to respond to the gospel message and then, by faith,  they receive Christ as is evidenced in the fruit of the Spirit and that they are born again not of their own wills, but of  God's will who has caused them to be born again.  Because salvation is by faith, water baptism is not necessary for  salvation. Thats not saying baptism isn't  important though.


This one goes to 11! Not sure what the point is of this one though. I think this is a contradiction though. They are able to respond to the gospel message by faith, but they are the ones who have to have faith. Yet, you say it is by God's will that they have faith. So if God doesn't will it, they don't have faith. So, it's not up to the person but to God. So why doesn't God just choose everyone? 



> 12.) Because the salvation of the elect is completely grounded in  Christ, they cannot fall away.


I'm not sure that's true. Just as an atheist can become a Christian, so can a Christian become an atheist. Hell, I'd bet most atheists grew up in religious households. I myself was made to attend a religious school for seven damn years. 

Humans have free will. Even if those are "elect[ed]" by God can choose to not respond or to fall away.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 15, 2011)

Conker said:


> I'm not sure that's true. Just as an atheist can become a Christian, so can a Christian become an atheist. Hell, I'd bet most atheists grew up in religious households. I myself was made to attend a religious school for seven damn years.
> 
> Humans have free will. Even if those are "elect[ed]" by God can choose to not respond or to fall away.


 
That is so true.

Predestination: Im not sure if that is even real, I mean COME ON, God chooses who believes in him and who gets to burn in hell? NO!


----------



## Wolfy2449 (May 15, 2011)

rilegions r simple stypid... Onle foolz who cun be fouled 2 beleve in wut it dosnt eksist beleve in sach stypid tinks


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 15, 2011)

Conker said:


> The talk of denominations is interesting. One of my religious studies teachers said that denominations and divisions in the church will ultimately kill it--or at least really hurt the church--and then he went on and talked about how Islam is Christianities biggest threat.



Islam is also really full of different sects- All the major world religions have them. Christianity is the largest religion, (Totalling about 30% of the world population), so it has the most.



QuinnWOLF said:


> Religion thread/polls on FAF always derail into debates, dont they?



It helps if you ignore the fundies. (Hint- their names begin with R.) - The thread was going so well until you responded to one of them.



Conker said:


> I had to look up "sovereign" because fuck big words. Kingly huh?



It's fundie-speak for "all powerful".  The actual traits of nobility are, sadly, not there.



Conker said:


> See, isn't this a paradox though? You can only go to God if he so wishes it. I kinda forgot how this was a paradox. I know it is though. IT SO FUCKING IS. I know there is something fucked up with this, but I might have to get back to it at a later time.



You pretty much hit it on the head.  It's a paradox inasmuch as it claims free will in the equation, but that doesn't have anything to do with it. (This is present in all Christianity in that the entire christian system of atonement is a type of coercion, but as you can see even worse in Calvinism.)



Conker said:


> You make this out like Jesus laid down his life for an elite few, but I'm not sure that's correct.


 
To a Calvinist, that's how it works. Only people who are saved worship. People who worship and then fall away never had faith in the first place. If Yahweh planned to save someone, and they turned out not saved, that would mean his plan, and by association himself, had a flaw and we can't have that. So of course, he picks only people who'd be saved in the first place to be saved.


----------



## Unsilenced (May 15, 2011)

I think it was Newton that first formulated that every religion thread must invariably lead to walls of text that have very little to do with anything.


----------



## GoldenJackal (May 15, 2011)

Still haven't voted. Still don't know if solitary non-denominational modern paganism is considered Primal-Ingeniousness or Other.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 15, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> It's fundie-speak for "all powerful".  The actual traits of nobility are, sadly, not there.


 
What, in-breeding and mega-lo-mania?


----------



## Smart_Cookie (May 15, 2011)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> What, in-breeding and mega-lo-mania?


 
Chivalry, Nobility, Leadership ability, and that awesome hapsburg chin!


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (May 15, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Chivalry, Nobility, Leadership ability, and that awesome hapsburg chin!


 
That doesn't sound like Caligula at all.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 15, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Islam is also really full of different sects- All the major world religions have them. Christianity is the largest religion, (Totalling about 30% of the world population), so it has the most.


 Islam just passed Christianity up membership wise.


----------



## hermit_4-b (May 15, 2011)

I went with indecisive, i was raised christian but rebelled against my parents frequently during the process, which led to some rather unique dinner conversations, along with me trying to find faith on my own, I'm still in that area, undecided on where to go with my spiritual beliefs, with a few points I know I believe in but nothing solid enough to me that I'd lean towards one religion. I'm of the opinion that most religions teach a good amount of decent morals at some point, as most revolve around you being a kind, respectful, and well behaved person though.I also have somewhat of a scientists mind if you will, which makes the decision all the more difficult for me.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 15, 2011)

hermit_4-b said:


> I went with indecisive, i was raised christian but rebelled against my parents frequently during the process, which led to some rather unique dinner conversations, along with me trying to find faith on my own, I'm still in that area, undecided on where to go with my spiritual beliefs, with a few points I know I believe in but nothing solid enough to me that I'd lean towards one religion. I'm of the opinion that most religions teach a good amount of decent morals at some point, as most revolve around you being a kind, respectful, and well behaved person though.I also have somewhat of a scientists mind if you will, which makes the decision all the more difficult for me.



Where is it stated that to have beliefs you MUST follow a religion? It isn't. Just be yourself and follow what YOU believe. That is all I do.


----------



## CannotWait (May 15, 2011)

Well I *had* chosen Christian, but thanks to the enlightenment I've received here I'm pushing atheism or at least a hard agnosticism.


----------



## Stratto the Hawk (May 15, 2011)

I'm agnostic. Thank God (irony :V) that I wasn't raised in a religious household and that the only exposure that I got to such things was through nights over at my friends' houses and the occasional dose of vacation bible school (again with friends).


----------



## CannonFodder (May 15, 2011)

I for some reason just remembered that trading spouses episode with the fundamentalist christian family and the anti-christian atheist family, ah that was a good episode and funny.


----------



## Folgrimeo (May 15, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I for some reason just remembered that trading spouses episode with the fundamentalist christian family and the anti-christian atheist family, ah that was a good episode and funny.


If that was the one with the loud screaming lady... it sadly went too far and was incredibly uncomfortable and sad to watch.

But I remember an episode of... Wife Swap I think... where a Christian family trades with a gothic lazy family-oriented family. While the goths weren't perfect (dirty dishes stacked everywhere, entire house was a pigsty), they were far preferable in personality to the dry never-smiling Christian family. Also on the Christian family side, the son was lazy and disobedient, and the father just refused to have anything to do with the show. Refused to change or consider change, said the women have to do the work (and then say behind their backs that they're doing it in a girly way). The other family even tried telling the stubborn father that part of the point of the show is to get exposed to different views and to try changing. Nope, no dice. And the Christian mother, although she seemed to lighten up and appreciate the goth family, HAPPILY went back to her stubborn husband. Sad.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 15, 2011)

Folgrimeo said:


> If that was the one with the loud screaming lady... it sadly went too far and was incredibly uncomfortable and sad to watch.


I don't where I'm getting this imagery from, but I was imaging the show staff behind the scenes going, "Hey bro, bet you fifty bucks the atheist dad goes apeshit and kills them before the other family.", "I'll take that action"


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 15, 2011)

Am I the only hindu?


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (May 15, 2011)

Paul'o'fox said:


> Am I the only hindu?


 
Well, I'm not Hindu, Paul, but if we get together we can both experience Nirvana.


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 15, 2011)

RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> Well, I'm not Hindu, Paul, but if we get together we can both experience Nirvana.


 ._.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

athiest for life, CHRISTAIN GO TO HELL lol xD


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> athiest for life, *CHRISTAIN* GO TO HELL lol xD


 Christain, what happens when jesus ejaculates.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

Paul'o'fox said:


> Christain, what happens when jesus ejaculates.


 
jesus cannot come lol, every sperm is sacred xD


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> jesus cannot come lol, every sperm is sacred xD


 If every sperm is sacred, it just mean jesus ejaculates whenever everyone cums, making more christains on his robe.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

Paul'o'fox said:


> If every sperm is sacred, it just mean jesus ejaculates whenever everyone cums, making more christains on his robe.


 
 no he jus cant come lol


----------



## Conker (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> athiest for life, CHRISTAIN GO TO HELL lol xD


 I suppose by page ten we were bound to have a dumbass atheist show up to make the group look bad.


----------



## Paul'o'fox (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> no he jus cant come lol


 Way to pick up a joke.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 15, 2011)

Conker said:


> I suppose by page ten we were bound to have a dumbass atheist show up to make the group look bad.


 Now you know how christians feel every time rukh posts.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

Conker said:


> I suppose by page ten we were bound to have a dumbass atheist show up to make the group look bad.


 
dont be rude, also i reported you!


----------



## CannonFodder (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> dont be rude, also i reported you!


 http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/82762-Unofficial-Newcomer-s-Guide-to-Furaffinity-Forums
Fucking read this.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/82762-Unofficial-Newcomer-s-Guide-to-Furaffinity-Forums
> Fucking read this.


 well okay, but he insalted me for no good reason, which is un called for, i beleive i am in my rite in saying this is not appropriate


----------



## Aleu (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> well okay, but he insalted me for no good reason, which is un called for, i beleive i am in my rite in saying this is not appropriate


 Saying Christians to go to hell is highly inappropriate in this thread. You brought it on yourself. Stop bitching.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> well okay, but he *insalted *me for no good reason, which is un called for, i beleive i am in my rite in saying this is not appropriate



Lol, in-salted.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

Aleu said:


> Saying Christians to go to hell is highly inappropriate in this thread. You brought it on yourself. Stop bitching.


 
i am perfectly rite to express my opinoin on large groups, this is like they do in the news every morning, however insulting a single person is not ok


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 15, 2011)

Aleu said:


> Saying Christians to go to hell is highly inappropriate in this thread. You brought it on yourself. Stop bitching.



Why not? Christians often tell people to do this. :v



narutonfuzzi said:


> i am perfectly rite to express my opinoin on  large groups, this is like they do in the news every morning, however  insulting a single person is not ok


 
Telling people to "GO TO HELL" is not an opinion, it's a statement of what you want them to do.


----------



## narutonfuzzi (May 15, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Why not? Christians often tell people to do this. :v
> 
> 
> 
> Telling people to "GO TO HELL" is not an opinion, it's a statement of what you want them to do.


 
i jus tell them bcause i think they are bad, it dosent mean they should go to hell, beside that was the joke bcause they are christain lol...


----------



## Conker (May 15, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Now you know how christians feel every time rukh posts.


 Difference is one of them is just another shitty troll and the other is serious


----------



## Commiecomrade (May 15, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> i am perfectly rite to express my opinoin on large groups, this is like they do in the news every morning, however insulting a single person is not ok


 
He is also has his own right to express his opinion that you're an offensive asshole.

And also, he's right. Besides, if you're expressing your opinion for everyone in a group, you're actually insulting (based off of some 5 second research) over 2 billion people. So you're two billion times more of a cunt than you think he is.

By the way, I know you're a troll. You're not doing a very good job hiding it. I've never seen you place a single productive post. Everything you do is inflammatory.


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 16, 2011)

see what i mean? my last post was on pg 7, suddenly this place has gone NUTS! and it's already to 11


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (May 16, 2011)

narutonfuzzi said:


> i jus tell them bcause i think they are bad, it dosent mean they should go to hell, beside that was the joke bcause they are christain lol...


 
Wait. You say Christians should go to Hell. You think they are bad. Then you say it doesn't mean they shouldn't go to Hell.

I don't get it D:


----------



## Kitsune_Morric (May 17, 2011)

Nightfire Tiger said:


> Wait. You say Christians should go to Hell. You think they are bad. Then you say it doesn't mean they shouldn't go to Hell.
> 
> I don't get it D:


 
no, narutonfuzzi said "doesn't mean they SHOULD go to hell" for starters, so that might lessen the confusion... or at least for myself when i read YOUR post :V

BUUUUUT, telling a christian to go to hell is funny i guess, so is telling a kid they're adopted >_<


----------



## Bloodstainwrench (May 17, 2011)

I voted atheism, 

I had always been an atheist, alwways have, always will.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 17, 2011)

Bloodstainwrench said:


> I voted atheism,
> 
> I had always been an atheist, alwways have, always will.


 That's what I used to say also.


----------



## PieCreature (May 17, 2011)

meh im agnostic. i cant really believe the bible or the old testament. just doesnt seem realistic at all to me. the old testament i can believe in SOME of it though i guess 8x but whutever~


----------



## Mooda (May 17, 2011)

I guess I could call myself a Christian, the only reason I go to church is mostly just to keep everyone happy. Its not all that bad If the preacher doesn't break out in a "REPENT YE SINFUL MORTALS! REPENT OR FOREVER BURN IN THE FIRES OF DAMNATION FOR ALL ETERNITY!!" style sermon.


----------



## SlushPuppy (May 17, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> Heaven is weird. It's like a place entirely devoid of negative emotion, but also of choice. As all we know of what creates positive emotion has a basis in choice this seems impossible and scary. Heaven, however, is basically just a place where you have no choice, but you have no way of caring otherwise. If you can get past that it should be a happy place, but I should hope God would give choice eventually in some part of eternity.



Buddhist nirvana (in the Theravada sense) is a place of gods and higher thought. however, even a god and enlightened being can gum up their 'pure' thought and descend from Nirvana. So it's not an eternal state, just like the bottom rungs of existence are not a permanent state of being.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 17, 2011)

Mooda said:


> I guess I could call myself a Christian, the only reason I go to church is mostly just to keep everyone happy. Its not all that bad If the preacher doesn't break out in a* "REPENT YE SINFUL MORTALS! REPENT OR FOREVER BURN IN THE FIRES OF DAMNATION FOR ALL ETERNITY!!"* style sermon.



For some reason I pictured that being read by a black preacher. I blame TV.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 17, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> For some reason I pictured that being read by a black preacher. I blame TV.


 That's racist!
Actually I imagine that being read by fred phelps.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 17, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> That's racist!
> Actually I imagine that being read by fred phelps.



No, it wasn't. I only pictured a black preacher doing it because I have seen them on TV.


----------



## Bliss (May 17, 2011)

I see the grand scale. I pictured an american. <

Oh yes, I am a jedi knight from now on.


----------



## Discord Nova (May 17, 2011)

I totally pictured a southern baptist saying that


----------



## Mr Fox (May 17, 2011)

I LIKE JEBUS


----------



## Fling (May 17, 2011)

I became Christian after being agnostic for a while =]


----------



## Aleu (May 17, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> For some reason I pictured that being read by a black preacher. I blame TV.


 Actually, it'd be more like

"REPENT-AH YE SIN-AH-FUL MORTALSS-AH!"
 and such


----------



## CannotWait (May 17, 2011)

POINTLESS, Do Not Read!
I have come up with some new theories, but they aren't developed enough to post and I doubt their original. They mostly have to do with my confused philosophy that was apparently less than intelligent enough to discuss.... so *why* did I post this post?


----------



## CannonFodder (May 18, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> POINTLESS, Do Not Read!
> I have come up with some new theories, but they aren't developed enough to post and I doubt their original. They mostly have to do with my confused philosophy that was apparently less than intelligent enough to discuss.... so *why* did I post this post?


 Cause you think you have some new groundbreaking theory when in reality it's not that interesting and you will get laughed at?


----------



## Calemeyr (May 18, 2011)

non-practicing buddhist/agnostic existentialist...you know what I don't even know what I believe. Except SCIENCE!!! I believe in its glory!!!


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 18, 2011)

Atheist. But some people, actually people on here, keep me from embracing it. I don't want to be a self-righteous snob who seeks out Christians so I can tear them down because I have a superiority complex.


----------



## Azure (May 18, 2011)

Dude, that's the best part of Atheism. Fuck being nice, we've been polite about this whole religion bit for the past countless millenia, it's time for it to be over.


----------



## Heliophobic (May 18, 2011)

I was waiting for this thread to be made. I _knew_ the average furry was atheist!



Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Atheist. But some people, actually people on here, keep me from embracing it. I don't want to be a self-righteous snob who seeks out Christians so I can tear them down because I have a superiority complex.


 
Same... but vice versa.


----------



## Lobar (May 18, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Atheist. But some people, actually people on here, keep me from embracing it. I don't want to be a self-righteous snob who seeks out Christians so I can tear them down because I have a superiority complex.


 
I know, if only I had a little humility I wouldn't care about things like raped children, the erosion of science and medicine, or the problems in Africa (just to name a few) and then you wouldn't have to worry about your non-confrontation issues.


----------



## CynicalCirno (May 18, 2011)

I'm Jewish, but I don't believe in any god.

Seems like a waste of time and effort to me, believing in such an entity.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> Dude, that's the best part of Atheism. Fuck being nice, we've been polite about this whole religion bit for the past countless millenia, it's time for it to be over.


 Atheism doesn't have any requirements or such, it's just a disbelief in god/s, deities, etc.  It's not like there's some boogie man that goes around hurting people that don't follow your mindset.


Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Atheist. But some people,  actually people on here, keep me from embracing it. I don't want to be a  self-righteous snob who seeks out Christians so I can tear them down  because I have a superiority complex.


 Your the sort of atheist I have respect for.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 18, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Atheist. But some people, actually people on here, keep me from embracing it. I don't want to be a self-righteous snob who seeks out Christians so I can tear them down because I have a superiority complex.



I bet those who act like this online probably wouldn't do it irl.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (May 18, 2011)

Agnostic is the best fit. I don't know, so I don't pretend to.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 18, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> I bet those who act like this online probably wouldn't do it irl.


 Lobar admitted this to me.

Btw, it's called the John Gabriel's greater internet dickwad theory.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 18, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Lobar admitted this to me.
> 
> It's called the John Gabriel's greater internet dickwad theory.



Lol. I have heard of that. I'm not enough of a dickwad. Well, except to noobs, and even then I am soft on noobs in comparison to some people.

I actually couldn't care less what religion someone is, as long as no one tries to shove it down my neck. I have a friend who's Pagan, I know a woman who is christian who's an acquaintance, she is the neighbour to another friend of mine. I'll be friendly to anyone, regardless of what religion, or even country they are from.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 18, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Lol. I have heard of that. I'm not enough of a dickwad. Well, except to noobs, and even then I am soft on noobs in comparison to some people.
> 
> I actually couldn't care less what religion someone is, as long as no one tries to shove it down my neck. I have a friend who's Pagan, I know a woman who is christian who's an acquaintance, she is the neighbour to another friend of mine. I'll be friendly to anyone, regardless of what religion, or even country they are from.


 I like having discussions on the topic of religion and that irl, what I find ironic is that with a extremist christian you can atleast reason with them, but with a extremist atheist disagreeing in their eyes makes you automatically wrong.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 18, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I like having discussions on the topic of religion and that irl, what I find ironic is that with a extremist christian you can atleast reason with them, but with a extremist atheist disagreeing in their eyes makes you automatically wrong.



When I was a kid my family used to have such discussions at dinner time.


----------



## SnowFox (May 18, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I like having discussions on the topic of religion and that irl, what I find ironic is that *with a extremist christian you can atleast reason with them,* but with a extremist atheist disagreeing in their eyes makes you automatically wrong.


 
Uh sorry WHAT?

When has this ever happened?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 18, 2011)

SnowFox said:


> Uh sorry WHAT?
> 
> When has this ever happened?


 
Go look up "TheAmazingatheist" on Yt.


----------



## Azure (May 18, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Atheism doesn't have any requirements or such, it's just a disbelief in god/s, deities, etc.  It's not like there's some boogie man that goes around hurting people that don't follow your mindset.


Yeah, because many major religions didn't view us as heretics for thousands of years, even recently. You don't like nonconfrontational folks because they don't disturb your fairy tale. Inaction is still an action taken, it shows that you don't give a fuck and have no principals. Standing for nothing in life brings no one justice or solace.



Randy-Darkshade said:


> I bet those who act like this online probably wouldn't do it irl.


 Get to know me. I've been shitting on religion in public forever.


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> Get to know me. I've been shitting on religion in public forever.



I've always had a really hard time shitting in public.  :V


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 18, 2011)

Frokusblakah said:


> I've always had a really hard time shitting in public.  :V



Thanks, you and Azure have just reminded me of a fucked up dream I had the other night, which I'd rather forget about.


----------



## CannotWait (May 18, 2011)

I suppose since I don't believe in God now I have to say Science Dammit or Science H. Logic instead of Jesus H. Christ.


----------



## Frokusblakah (May 18, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> I suppose since I don't believe in God now I have to say Science Dammit or Science H. Logic instead of Jesus H. Christ.



It doesn't matter what you say when swearing as long as you put your heart into it.  :b


----------



## Spatel (May 18, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Atheist. But some people, actually people on here, keep me from embracing it. I don't want to be a self-righteous snob who seeks out Christians so I can tear them down because I have a superiority complex.


 
I don't feel that atheists are under any obligation to be better people or more civilized debaters than their christian opponents. That's setting unreasonable expectations, when we know one side will never reciprocate kind gestures. I think it's more pragmatic to focus on being correct and winning arguments than it is to present one's self as a sophisticated computer, liberated from human flaws.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 18, 2011)

SnowFox said:


> Uh sorry WHAT?
> 
> When has this ever happened?


 Look up the amazingathe- darn you Randy!


Azure said:


> Yeah, because many major religions didn't view us as heretics for thousands of years, even recently. You don't like nonconfrontational folks because they don't disturb your fairy tale. Inaction is still an action taken, it shows that you don't give a fuck and have no principals. Standing for nothing in life brings no one justice or solace.


 ---->Point


You
---ground-------

I was just saying that cause someone is a atheist doesn't mean they have the same attitude towards religion as you.


----------



## Azure (May 18, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> ---->Point
> 
> 
> You
> ...


 The notion that you think you've ever made a point is pretty hilarious. And no, they might not, but I won't be caught standing idly by.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> The notion that you think you've ever made a point is pretty hilarious. And no, they might not, but I won't be caught standing idly by.


 You: *shakes beehive*
Me: *bees don't care*


----------



## Punnchy (May 18, 2011)

A good rule I've seen on slightly smaller forums that has worked out pretty well is you don't discuss politics or religion, the trolling and back and forth banter I've currently scanned is the reason why.


----------



## Icky (May 18, 2011)

Punnchy said:


> A good rule I've seen on slightly smaller forums that has worked out pretty well is you don't discuss politics or religion, the trolling and back and forth banter I've currently scanned is the reason why.


 Hah. Trolling.

You're funny.

-If we aren't allowed to banter back and forth, what the fuck is the point of a discussion forum?


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 19, 2011)

Lobar said:


> I know, if only I had a little humility I wouldn't care about things like raped children, the erosion of science and medicine, or the problems in Africa (just to name a few) and then you wouldn't have to worry about your non-confrontation issues.



 Non-confrontational? Hey, aren't you the one who refused to condemn the killing of a 13 year old boy? Aren't you also the one who condemns the killing in the name of a made up being, but yet condones the killing of others in the name of a made up human concept? Will you reply? No. Why? Because you have never given me a reply when I bring up the killing of the Romanov family. Why that, too? Because you do think the murder was righteous, and it proves that I was right about you, and that was that you are a militant atheist. 

So in the end you're in a catch 22. Either you sacrifice what you believe to prove me wrong and condemn the Russian Revolution and acknowledge the atrocities that Communists and Communism has brought, or- or, you don't and you look like a hypocrite and lair who condones murder and violence to achieve dominance over his fellow man.

But nah, you have another choice that's been working pretty good with you lately and that ignoring my questions.



Spatel said:


> I don't feel that atheists are under any  obligation to be better people or more civilized debaters than their  christian opponents. That's setting unreasonable expectations, when we  know one side will never reciprocate kind gestures. I think it's more  pragmatic to focus on being correct and winning arguments than it is to  present one's self as a sophisticated computer, liberated from human  flaws.


 
And good thing the latter is very few.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 19, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Non-confrontational? Hey, aren't you the one who refused to condemn the killing of a 13 year old boy? Aren't you also the one who condemns the killing in the name of a made up being, but yet condones the killing of others in the name of a made up human concept? Will you reply? No. Why? Because you have never given me a reply when I bring up the killing of the Romanov family. Why that, too? Because you do think the murder was righteous, and it proves that I was right about you, and that was that you are a militant atheist.
> 
> So in the end you're in a catch 22. Either you sacrifice what you believe to prove me wrong and condemn the Russian Revolution and acknowledge the atrocities that Communists and Communism has brought, or- or, you don't and you look like a hypocrite and lair who condones murder and violence to achieve dominance over his fellow man.
> 
> But nah, you have another choice that's been working pretty good with you lately and that ignoring my questions.


 You're kinda wasting your time, I tried to argue with him about that very topic before and he pulled the same shit to me also.  When I finally got a answer out of him, he bastardized history in order to save face.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 19, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> You're kinda wasting your time, I tried to argue with him about that very topic before and he pulled the same shit to me also.  When I finally got a answer out of him, he bastardized history in order to save face.


 
I know. But what can ya do?


----------



## Azure (May 19, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Non-confrontational? Hey, aren't you the one who refused to condemn the killing of a 13 year old boy? Aren't you also the one who condemns the killing in the name of a made up being, but yet condones the killing of others in the name of a made up human concept? Will you reply? No. Why? Because you have never given me a reply when I bring up the killing of the Romanov family. Why that, too? Because you do think the murder was righteous, and it proves that I was right about you, and that was that you are a militant atheist.
> 
> So in the end you're in a catch 22. Either you sacrifice what you believe to prove me wrong and condemn the Russian Revolution and acknowledge the atrocities that Communists and Communism has brought, or- or, you don't and you look like a hypocrite and lair who condones murder and violence to achieve dominance over his fellow man.
> 
> ...


 Whew, words in mouth much? Killing in the name of communism is just as bad as killing in the name of anything. Though they weren't killing in the name of religion, just statism. Atheism has nothing to do with it, never has, never will. You're just awfully bad at arguing any kind of coherent point, and providing nothing but your sad anecdotes in return as evidence. How about the thousands of children killed in the name of Christ? Or Islam? Tell me why communism is such a different ideal? Make a point instead of just flaming away. Oh. wait. You won't. Your next post will be the same shit ever, and I'm sure old CF will have something completely uninsightful, unrelated, and worthless to contribute.


----------



## Lobar (May 19, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Non-confrontational? Hey, aren't you the one who refused to condemn the killing of a 13 year old boy? Aren't you also the one who condemns the killing in the name of a made up being, but yet condones the killing of others in the name of a made up human concept? Will you reply? No. Why? Because you have never given me a reply when I bring up the killing of the Romanov family. Why that, too? Because you do think the murder was righteous, and it proves that I was right about you, and that was that you are a militant atheist.
> 
> So in the end you're in a catch 22. Either you sacrifice what you believe to prove me wrong and condemn the Russian Revolution and acknowledge the atrocities that Communists and Communism has brought, or- or, you don't and you look like a hypocrite and lair who condones murder and violence to achieve dominance over his fellow man.
> 
> But nah, you have another choice that's been working pretty good with you lately and that ignoring my questions.


 
I, too, could come up with a Sophie's Choice scenario to put to you and smack you around with whatever response you put forward, but it wouldn't prove anything.  Nor does your little game here prove anything.  Never in history has there been a clean revolution, are you really going to stand here and declare none of them should have ever happened?  Is your hubris such that you actually feel qualified to make that call for everyone?  And the only place religion even has in your quandary is in being the source of the concept of the Divine Right of Kings, the vile doctrine that thrust such political power on a boy in the first place, without which there would have never even been a thought to kill him.



CannonFodder said:


> You're kinda wasting your time, I tried to argue with him about that very topic before and he pulled the same shit to me also.  When I finally got a answer out of him, he bastardized history in order to save face.





Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> I know. But what can ya do?


 
You two should get a room.


----------



## Llamapotamus (May 19, 2011)

*reading with a bag of Fritos*
You heard me right, fuck the bowl of popcorn...

Anyway, I see no point in being an atheist and trying to reason against those whose belief is faith-based. Logical arguments against faith are an exercise in futility because the two are incompatible. Besides, the majority of religious people are good people who mean well anyway. So, an agnostic I shall remain.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 19, 2011)

Lobar said:


> I, too, could come up with a Sophie's Choice scenario to put to you and smack you around with whatever response you put forward, but it wouldn't prove anything.  Nor does your little game here prove anything.  *Never in history has there been a clean revolution*


 There have been a couple revolutions with almost no deaths, but they are rare and far between.


----------



## Azure (May 19, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> There have been a couple revolutions with almost no deaths, but they are rare and far between.


So, never in history.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 19, 2011)

Azure said:


> So, never in history.


 A revolution with so few deaths they can be counted on your hands is remarkable.


----------



## Azure (May 19, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> A revolution with so few deaths they can be counted on your hands is remarkable.


 So, never in history.


----------



## Bliss (May 19, 2011)

I only believe in Gerald Gardner and the Mother Tree. If you don't you're all wrong and heretics without morals and principles and just don't get it. 

'Cause you can't see the truth like I have and the others who have read the book.
Those who try to prove me wrong are metaphysically raping the Triple Goddess and making the deer cry bloody tears. :<


----------



## CannonFodder (May 19, 2011)

Azure said:


> So, never in history.


 A million deaths in a violent revolution > a couple of guards accidentally being shot in a revolution


----------



## Azure (May 19, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> A million deaths in a violent revolution > a couple of guards accidentally being shot in a revolution


 So, never in history. Not to mention all the dirt that ever leads up to one.


----------



## CannonFodder (May 19, 2011)

Azure said:


> So, never in history. Not to mention all the dirt that ever leads up to one.


 Trying to exterminate a entire group of people =/= "OH FUCK! I forgot the safety!"


----------



## Azure (May 19, 2011)

Ugh, ad nauseum.


----------



## Carnie (May 19, 2011)

Why is time cube not an option?


----------



## CannotWait (May 19, 2011)

I went to my church today (a broken group of three teenagers including myself) and told them I don't believe in God. They though I was joking at first, but then started making arguments.

First off they asked me what was in the Bible. I replied "words". They asked "the words of what?". I said "man". Then they pointed out a verse in the Bible that asks God for guidance as if that was proof. I read it, but it obviously did not prove God's existence.

Next they began to ask where my basis for the lack of existence in God came from. I told them it was a video that I saw that convinced me logically:
(this  is the video I am referring to, but I didn't have sufficient enough technology to show it to them)
From there they told me there are videos that prove God exists. One of them began describing to me how doctors were astounded by the healing of a woman who was once blind at a church revival. I told them it was astounding, but it was probably a scam and even if it wasn't then that phenomenon does not justifiably prove God's existence, it just defines a peculiar happening that does not yet have explanation.

Third they told me that they both came from depression, drug addiction, thoughts of suicide, cutting, and generally hell on earth and that their recovery was proof of God. I didn't say anything, because I knew their irrationality would make it appear insensitive if I told them that their recovery was possible without the work of a deity and in no way proves his existence.

It ended there with them telling me to come back next Thursday and me saying I'll come back with more arguments.

Does anyone have any argument suggestions, because I'm not sure I can present something rational that will cause them to actually for a decent opinion.


----------



## Llamapotamus (May 19, 2011)

CannotWait said:


> I went to my church today (a broken group of three teenagers including myself) and told them I don't believe in God. They though I was joking at first, but then started making arguments.
> 
> First off they asked me what was in the Bible. I replied "words". They asked "the words of what?". I said "man". Then they pointed out a verse in the Bible that asks God for guidance as if that was proof. I read it, but it obviously did not prove God's existence.
> 
> ...


 
I refer you to my previous post in this thread that states you cannot argue against faith with logic because the two are incompatible. If they believe that a god is the reason they cleaned up and have better lives, let them and be happy for them. Don't go telling them it's just a crutch by arguing against that.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 20, 2011)

Lobar said:


> I, too, could come up with a Sophie's Choice scenario to put to you and smack you around with whatever response you put forward, but it wouldn't prove anything.  Nor does your little game here prove anything.  Never in history has there been a clean revolution, are you really going to stand here and declare none of them should have ever happened?  Is your hubris such that you actually feel qualified to make that call for everyone?  And the only place religion even has in your quandary is in being the source of the concept of the Divine Right of Kings, the vile doctrine that thrust such political power on a boy in the first place, without which there would have never even been a thought to kill him.



First off, no you couldn't. You're a pretty dumb person who can't argue on his own and is dependent on the group for support, and when they are not there, you put up a snarky, sarcastic personality to hide your insecurities. Or maybe you're that way because you're fat, I don't know. 

And my point isn't whether revolutions are good or bad or if Communism is evil, but yes I do condemn all violent revolutions. But my point is that you condone violence when you think it's righteous, but condemn it when others use violence or some other form of coercion. Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?


----------



## Lobar (May 20, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> First off, no you couldn't. You're a pretty dumb person who can't argue on his own and is dependent on the group for support, and when they are not there, you put up a snarky, sarcastic personality to hide your insecurities.



Ahahahaha.  And right after you and CF were rubbing dicks together on the previous page, this is extra-hilarious.  Anyways I'm pretty sure I have a solid enough reputation for logical reasoning and intellectual honesty on these forums to let it stand on its own here.



Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> And my point isn't whether revolutions are good or bad or if Communism is evil, but yes I do condemn all violent revolutions. But my point is that you condone violence when you think it's righteous, but condemn it when others use violence or some other form of coercion. Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?


 
I don't condemn violence unilaterally, but I take a viewpoint somewhat similar to that of Nelson Mandela on violence: it should be avoided when possible, but if your goals can't be solved without it and they are noble enough to outweigh the cost, it can be justified.  Now, I'll admit to not having studied the Russian Revolution of 1917 enough to debate the necessity of executing the Tsar, but I will say that if it was necessary, then the nature of the concept of the Divine Right of Kings also made it necessary to eradicate the entire bloodline, and that's on religion's hands, not Lenin's.  Furthermore, if it was just to execute the Tsar, then the unfortunate political link binding his family's fate with his own doesn't change that.

And before you ask, I do not see the use of violence in eliminating religion ever becoming necessary or worth the cost.


----------



## Azure (May 20, 2011)

Exactly. It'll die eventually, just give it time.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 22, 2011)

Lobar said:


> I don't condemn violence unilaterally, but I take a viewpoint somewhat similar to that of Nelson Mandela on violence: it should be avoided when possible, but if your goals can't be solved without it and they are noble enough to outweigh the cost, it can be justified.  Now, I'll admit to not having studied the Russian Revolution of 1917 enough to debate the necessity of executing the Tsar, but I will say that if it was necessary, then the nature of the concept of the Divine Right of Kings also made it necessary to eradicate the entire bloodline, and that's on religion's hands, not Lenin's.  Furthermore, if it was just to execute the Tsar, then the unfortunate political link binding his family's fate with his own doesn't change that.
> 
> And before you ask, I do not see the use of violence in eliminating religion ever becoming necessary or worth the cost.



So it's okay to kill someone because they got labeled by someone else? That does not make it okay to kill. And as for  Nelson Mandela? Don't quote such ignorant bile again. Auhg. What a horrible quote.  It's not okay to kill, because, well, it's wrong and it breeds more violence. And goals? What kind of goals? I say again, you can not kill someone because you think your cause is more righteous.


----------



## Lobar (May 22, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> So it's okay to kill someone because they got labeled by someone else? That does not make it okay to kill. And as for  Nelson Mandela? Don't quote such ignorant bile again. Auhg. What a horrible quote.  It's not okay to kill, because, well, it's wrong and it breeds more violence. And goals? What kind of goals? I say again, you can not kill someone because you think your cause is more righteous.


 
Only through guerilla violence could Mandela and the ANC finally end apartheid, will you condemn him as a terrorist?


----------



## Mayfurr (May 22, 2011)

Lobar said:


> Only through guerilla violence could Mandela and the ANC finally end apartheid, will you condemn him as a terrorist?


 
Not to mention the various Resistance moments in occupied countries during WW2 against Germany and Japan...

The sad fact is that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - and in the case of Al Qaeda, managing to pull off _both_ designations from the _same_ country over thirty-odd years.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 23, 2011)

Lobar said:


> Only through guerilla violence could Mandela and the ANC finally end apartheid, will you condemn him as a terrorist?



Yep. All. I've heard it from all militants from all colors: "you just got to kill them all. Man, woman and child." Then we have debates on here on why people do what they do.


----------



## Thou Dog (May 24, 2011)

I found it amusing that, in one of the recent furry polls, over 10% of respondents said they were Jewish. There are, what, fifteen million Jewish people in the entire world (ballpark, seven billion)? I find it very hard to believe that the cross-section of the furry population would differ significantly in ethnicity or religion from the general societies from which furries are drawn.


----------



## Thou Dog (May 24, 2011)

Mayfurr said:


> Not to mention the various Resistance moments in occupied countries during WW2 against Germany and Japan...
> 
> The sad fact is that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - and in the case of Al Qaeda, managing to pull off _both_ designations from the _same_ country over thirty-odd years.


 and in Pakistan, _both at the same time_.


----------



## Lobar (May 24, 2011)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Yep.


 
Then I at least stand with good company.


----------



## Kruelty (May 24, 2011)

'Other'

It makes me sad that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not in fact have his own bullet. Yarr.


----------



## Nineteen-TwentySeven (May 25, 2011)

Other, antitheist. Fuck you all. :V


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (May 25, 2011)

Lobar said:


> Then I at least stand with good company.


 
What ever is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## Cocobanana (Jun 25, 2011)

Yup, Christianity and secret Christianity (agnosticism) have a higher percentage than atheism. Sucks.


----------



## Wreth (Jun 26, 2011)

Cocobanana said:


> secret Christianity (agnosticism)


 
I'm sorry?


----------



## CannotWait (Jun 26, 2011)

Wreth said:


> I'm sorry?


 
Yeah, seriously. What do you mean?


----------



## Namba (Jun 26, 2011)

I am a Christian. Btw agnostic means you think there might be a god but you're not sure... Not exactly following what's meant by "secret Christianity". Could you explain?


----------



## Elinith (Jun 26, 2011)

Agnosticism is usually portrayed as somebody who is caught between intellectual argument against the Bible, the things in religion that they do not agree with and the familiarity with religion, comfort that religion brings, and Pascal's Wager.

At least, that's what I find.



Cocobanana said:


> Yup, Christianity and secret Christianity  (agnosticism) have a higher percentage than atheism. Sucks.


 
And shit like this is why I'm not happy with you.


----------



## Azure (Jun 26, 2011)

Agnostics are Atheists with no fucking balls. Pick a side, faggots, standing around saying "It's not my problem, I don't know" doesn't help anyone, not even yourself. Do society a solid and get behind something.


----------



## Elinith (Jun 26, 2011)

Azure said:


> Agnostics are Atheists with no fucking balls. Pick a side, faggots, standing around saying "It's not my problem, I don't know" doesn't help anyone, not even yourself. Do society a solid and get behind something.


 
Such a train of thought suggests that bisexuals are gay people with no fucking balls, who can't pick a side, who stand around indecisive, and somehow are a detriment to society.

But perhaps one would see such an analogy as a stretch, or a fallacy. Let me ask you a question, then.

How does somebody's indetermination personally affect you to such a level that it irks you? How does it affect society? Agnosticism isn't something someone tends to go around preaching or pushing in somebody else's face. It's not something that affects one's actions, beyond that of theistic motivations. If somebody brings it up over and over again, just tell 'em to knock it off, much like a preachy protestant or an argumentative atheist.

In my opinion, those who are in the *extreme sides* of the theistic scale, those theistic tend to be intolerant and overly stubborn, while those who are atheists tend to be pretentious assholes, and are moreso a detriment to society than somebody who can't make up their mind.

If you don't like indecision, then there's a lot more that you should be mad at.


----------



## Azure (Jun 26, 2011)

And then Dave Chapelle fucked a volcano. Seriously, let me ask you a question. What drives a person to consider both bodies of evidence, and decide on neither? Pascals Wager always was a load of shit, it's the easiest blood thing in the world to get past. I'm saying that there are better things you can do with you time besides NOT DECIDING, like getting around to a decision. I'm not preachy, I just don't accept bad reasons for obvious shit. And it's always easy to holler EXTREMIST at atheist people who aren't afraid to speak their mind. Better to be hated, IMO, at least I'm clear about what I believe. But as long as you don't donate money to churches, I think we can be square. Religion isn't a fluid thing, the evidence for it hasn't grown one bit, it's shrank to become infinitesimal in size.


----------



## Wreth (Jun 26, 2011)

I'm agnostic, with the belief that any logical arguement beats a religious expectation when it comes to rights and legalities.


----------



## Thatch (Jun 26, 2011)

Azure said:


> Agnostics are Atheists with no fucking balls.



And what if I say that an agnostic is a more less insecure (a)theist?



Azure said:


> Pick a side, faggots, standing around saying "It's not my problem, I don't know" doesn't help anyone, not even yourself. Do society a solid and get behind something.


 
For what reason? You DON'T know. There's absoltely no way for you to know one way or another, it's all just guesswork and wishful thinking. Taking a side tells that you think you DO, and that's stupid.
How does saying "God exists/doesn't exist" help anyone? So far it only provides more conflict that does not end up strenghtening either side, thus completely pointless.

IMO feeling you have to take a side just to give yourself the illusion of having any influence with your life is the more pussy-like. You have no idea and no control over what happens after you die, deal with it.


----------



## Elinith (Jun 26, 2011)

Azure said:


> Seriously, let me ask you a question. What drives a person to consider both bodies of evidence, and decide on neither?



A number of factors, which determines on what the person is considering. I would believe indecision is something that happens quite often in politics.

But if you want to focus purely on religion...

It boils down to an admission that we can't prove what happens when we die. You just can't. Death and the notion of an afterlife is something that I believe is beyond human comprehension. It's not something we can truly wrap our minds around. It's not something you can prove or disprove.



Azure said:


> Pascal's Wager always was a load of shit, it's the easiest bloody thing in the world to get past.



For people who can easily dismiss the notion of hell, yes, it certainly would be.



Azure said:


> I'm saying that there are better things you can do with you time besides NOT DECIDING, like getting around to a decision.



Contemplation is a bad thing? Different people enjoy doing different things. Contemplation happens to be something I enjoy. You consider it a waste of time. I say, â€œtime you enjoy wasting, was not wasted.â€



Azure said:


> II'm not preachy, I just don't accept bad reasons for obvious shit. And it's always easy to holler EXTREMIST at atheist people who aren't afraid to speak their mind. Better to be hated, IMO, at least I'm clear about what I believe.



I thought I tried hard to come off as passive as I could in that post. I wasn't attacking you. But I guess I did. Somehow.



Azure said:


> But as long as you don't donate money to churches, I think we can be square.



Tithing was never something I was keen on.



Azure said:


> The evidence for it hasn't grown one bit, it's shrank to become infinitesimal in size.


 
Please tell my mother, she keeps throwing this book at me.


----------



## Cocobanana (Jun 26, 2011)

Most 'agnostics' I talk to have come from Christian backgrounds, and it seems more like they don't want to look stupid in front of their atheist friends than they're actually anything but non-practicing Christians. Sure there are many more agnostics than the ones who I've met in my travels, but I'd be really surprised if anyone from another religious background considered themselves agnostic. Given all the subdivisions of Christianity I'm surprised they're not listed on the poll too like Baptist and Catholic and Methodist because apparently while they believe in the same god they argue an awful lot about the specifics which they believe are the key into heaven.

The 'secret Christian' thing was meant as a joke, albeit a mostly useless one. Chances are, if I'm saying something that sounds idiotic, I already know it so there's no reason to point it out and it's meant to make you laugh and feel better about yourself.


----------



## ramsay_baggins (Jun 26, 2011)

Necro.


----------

