The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
The Next Terrorist Target: The House Of Mouse?
Posts
Do others in your religion think its okay for you to decide such things?
The point I'm getting at is that there is no "Jew Pope". Even the structure that we do have within our relgion is generally in terms of "well, here is a spectrum of things, and as long as you fall somewhere within there, you're fine.
I'm starting to get the impression that you're developing a religion for neckbeards.
fairy dogs
if you say to me "i'm a mormon" and i ask you a bunch of questions about what you believe relative to commonly held mormon beliefs and it turns out you don't hold like any of them except ones that are generally christian and not specific to the mormon denomination
bucko i don't think you're really a mormon anymore. you can totally still call yourself one, if you like, but i am just saying that is going to confuse the shit out of people when you toss back some beers and say you don't believe in the apocalypse.
that might not matter to you, but if you don't want to be intentionally misleading about what you believe which could lead to totally pointless bullshit conversation and arguments, you may want to stop referring to yourself by a label that is used by a community you have almost zero in common with.
Like I said, the Pope would probably take issue with it.
You go further and further down the chain of command, and I'll start picking up supporters.
That's pretty much the only Law of Dave really
Dave's pretty cool with you doing whatever you want
I believe that there isnt a god and that science runs shit and stuff.
But like a christian or a muslim, it is just a belief. and while I may like to think there is 'evidence' and 'logic' which supports my belief, that is true of just about every religion.
one mans evolution is another mans turin shroud.
of course, i believe one is more compelling than another and see the other as tenuous and perhaps even archaic, but as i said, it still remains a belief.
too many atheists dont get this and think of what they believe as being fact. to me, that is more offensive and insular than half the religions out there. And you could argue forever that there are all sorts of reasons behind this and that atheism is right or whatever, but in the end who gives a shit.
In my experience atheists seem as active in spreading the word and converting people as any religion.
it is really fucked up how Darwin has almost become a kind of modern age deity for a huge number of people.
what a messed up world.
So, basically, you're wrong, but some folks will let you get away with it.
What I'm talking about is the fact that if I make Judaic interpretations, as long as I base them on proper sources, other people may disagree with me, but not with my personal authority to interpret.
It depends on the denomination! I don't think it's regarded as ok; it honestly varies by the subject and the congregation. Hell there are tons of Lutheran seccts which were made solely based on a disagreement on one or two issues.
Also this is kind of haphazard since I'm in class right now, sorry about that.
What's even more fucked up are the folks who believe that evolution and god have to be mutually exclusive.
God played Spore, FTW.
But I didn't scream and yell at you for good reason.
I skip over to raised voices and profanity when somebody's made it clear they're going to be an idiot come hell or high water.
But generally speaking I give people a couple of posts to analyze what they're saying and make sure that's the story they're stickin' with.
I.
Hate.
Creation.
"Science".
it's understood.
The point I'm making is that you'd have to start a different sect, or something, rather than in Judaism where difference of belief even in the same congregation is considered to be fine.
secular humanism, for example, is pretty rad.
being able to have ethical conduct towards your fellow man without the requirement of religious guidance or a spiritual reward/punishment system is cool with me and totally compatible with my own religious faith anyhow.
so it's all good.
then there are guys like christopher hitchins
he's basically the jerry falwell of atheism
the loud, rude, crazy guy with no sense of context who fixates on single issues and basically acts like a massive tool and makes other atheists frown and rub their foreheads
That's certainly one way of looking at it.
There are politcal and procedural benefits of having one guy at the top, as kings and dictators will be happy to explain to you. The downer being of course that you only have one guy at the top.
hey cool way to state completely obvious facts and look like a tool
i say this as a religious person
and that thing is to try to hijack science as a way to "prove" their religion
no.
stop that.
no.
bad.
you can make comparisons, sure. point out similarities between your beliefs and legitimate scientific study and theory, show connections between what you believe and current knowledge on sociology, history, culture, psychology, physics, whatever.
but don't try to say it is science, or proven by science.
Am I making any sense?
The best part about that is that Darwin believed in God.
The lutheran sects are fine with each others existence, it's just a shame that it takes that progression for them to get along.
Universe-scale Entropy is fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucked uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup.
It takes us all the way back to pre-destination versus individual choice. Which is it!?!?
Niether!
I think we've done just fine the way we are, no?
But he doesn't get to tell you how he wants it to go
He just hopes you pick the right thing, not for your benefit, but because he's got money riding on this bitch
Basically life is a giant bracket
unfortunately there have been no atheist crusades
give it time though, we'll get it done
brotherhood of steel style
Atheists who want to eradicate religion altogether, or try to "convert" religious people are just dicks.
The way I see it is that many religions, all in fact, have aspects of their teachings which are not spiritual.
Just 'good advice' if you want to put it like that. While you may sugar coat stuff with the trappings of 'God's commandments' I think you can be a little bit reductionist and say 'you know what, this is just common sense not the word of god'.
Most of them are just 'dont be a dick' reconstituted into another format.
What i believe is that because I choose to believe that there is no god and no miracles and none of that spiritual stuff doesn't mean i cant be a good person, or lead a good life.
essentially, im saying i dont need God to tell me to love thy neighbor, because ill do it on my own anyways.
I see atheism as just a very modern version of religion. in that way, yes, it is a belief system. i put my faith in humanity, not in a higher power. humans can achieve great things, wondrous accomplishments. the way i see it, why do it in the name of God and not take some credit for ourselves?
trying to prove anything about religion is beyond any of us
ahteists and fundies that say that the bible is proof of gods existence/non-existence drives me up the wall
also, atheism is a belief, not a religion
damn I sound like a hippy
if you take a pure scientific view of life and existence, that all of life is a complex (and currently impossible to fully analyze) process of different chemicals, energies, etc. interacting on levels we cannot perceive but are capable of understanding are happening even if we can't observe them, an interesting thing happens.
analyze it deep enough you can only inevitably come to the conclusion that our consciousness, sapience, all that, is illusionary. a construct of our cerebral processes just complex enough to understand what is happening, but not exactly how.
the question is, of course, what then? if free will and sapience are purely biological byproducts without meaning or purpose or the ability to truly and cognitively choose their own outcomes independant of physical and biochemical reactions, then what do you do with your life and time? do you resign yourself to it, become nihilistic, and focus only on your minimal urges until you eventually die? do you become obsessed with unlocking the secrets of how it all works in hopes of eventually resolving the quandry?
or do you simply choose not to care? do you arrive at the conclusion that you "know" your life is simply a sum of processes and products, and choose to move on with your day and enjoy life, unaffected by the cognitive dissonance of knowing that "choice" isn't a choice at all?
Yeah that one
I just ride the waves to my destination
Crank some tunes
Rock out
Have fun
uh
soviet russia
communist china
well, those are the big ones
all "check it out physics a bunch of random proteins have harnessed the power of the wind whoooooooooooooo!"