Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Posts by avogadro
> Ehawk wrote:
> "humans have finally matured enough to be able to handle the knowlege that we just die"
a species maturity is related to average IQ and intelligence. so now, we are back where we started! IN YO FACE AVO!!!
GO FOKKER! lol 
and who is the one thats doing it? Fokker, the person accusing me of arguing in circles...
the neanderthal wasnt assimilated and wasnt killed off, they died on their own... i dont know enough about the others, and the three examples you gave are very closely related... you dont see any more foreign species developing it, like you do with other advantageous features...
he is an infinte being, he isnt rewarded with your devotion and prayers... you're rewarded with your devotion and prayers...
"
i believe dolphins have developed consousnous. but never mind that... humans are "top-feeders" this means that our proliferation and dominance prevent other species from attaining more dominant than ourselves."
we have been able to prevent species for becoming more dominant than ourselves for how long? maybe 2k years? a tiny amount of time in terms of evolution...
"
previous logic was assertained by the logic that mankind was made in god's image and man has different piont of view, so god should too. right?"
ah, ok, i think i see what you're saying..i would simply take a look at the world. acknowledge that there are many parts that we consider bad or evil, and if an all powerful being thought so too, he would probably not of created them.... and then also it seems fairly unlikely that an all powerful being and humans would share the exact same values...
"Humans evolved consousnous' because that ability is more favourable in nature, therfore, we humans proliferated until we dominated."
we are the only species that has evolved consournous', right? if it is a favourable ability, you would think that more species would of evolved it... it would be like only 1 species of birds ever existed or something...
"f god created all life, does the H1N1 go to hell when it kills an inocent child? since when is Gods' favors exlusive to only humans? what about an animal that does not have the ability to pray, such as a cat? to they stay in purgatory for not believing?"
the typical religious review is that God created Humans in his own image; not that we physically resemble God but that we have consciousness. heaven, hell, and purgatory are states of consciousness, so only humans would go to any...
"all i'm saying, is IF god exists, would i be punished for not believing? "
you are not punished for not beleiving. God doesnt examine your life and judge you and base whether you go to heaven, hell, or purgatory based on that judgement. the current view is more like atheists or sinners are kinda like drug addicts... they are addicted to a certain lifestyle, and when death comes, they're gonna pick that lifestyle even if it damns them...
"
above all, who says God even cares about us?"
most religions do... but yes, there is no proof that God cares just like theres no proof that God exists...
"but isn't it just as likely for you to be wrong just as much as an atheist can be wrong?"
based on our limited knowledge, its hard to judge the likiness that God exists...
"given that logic, do you think that our definition of right and wrong may be totally different from God's point of view?"
i dont see what your previous logic has to do with this question, but i do agree that our definition of right and wrong might be totally different from God's....
"is it possable that all of your prayers annoy the hell out of him? and i go to heaven cuz i left him alone, and you bothered him too much and you go to hell?"
i find it hard to beleive a God would be so petty... also, if something would seriously annoy God, why would he have created it in the first place?
you dont know God's Agenda, maybe if you pray to him you get 50 virgins in your next life...
> BC Cougar wrote:
> i never said anything about a perfect world.... no one would like a perfect world, it would get boring, but a better world would have to have politicians that done things because the people as a whole wanted them, and also realise that some things weather people want them or not, violate the right of the few and refrain from it.
as the constitution says.
what i truly said that everyone has an "idea" of what they think would be a perfect world, that exist only in they're head.... but for them to be truly enlightened they would have to realize first that a perfect world cannot exist because like i said.... it would be borrrrrring
such a pathetic line of argument.... if a world is boring, it isnt perfect...
you said people's views of perfection.. most people would say in perfection there wouldnt be tainted money, malpractice suits, taxes, global warming, personal rights, censorship, racism, police brutality, ect...
ok, lets prove my claim
who here agree's that in a perfect world there wouldnt be murder? rape? cancer? heart disease? stroke? i thought so...
i too disagree 
perfection is a pretty common conecpt, the disagreement usually comes from the best way to obtain it.... people genually consider the same things as good and bad with few exceptions...
> xeno syndicated wrote:
> "Just so you know, Xeno, we don't have those lockers in America."
But you do, metaphorically speaking. Policy in general is to subvert the freedom and dignity of the individual, subvert their being considered innocent before guilty, in order to protect the majority / corporation / government, policies which are really a smokescreen for the corporation / government / military / global elite protecting itself and its own interests.
Leaving bags in lockers while shopping is merely an example. There are plenty more...
Shall we brainstorm some?
the only thing you have proven is that you know nothing of what you're talking about. you've been quite successful at that though, congratulations.
"
You go to the supermarket, and you have to lock up your bag. You go to a casino on a weekend to blow off some steam and the security are watching YOU and protecting THEMselves, not protecting you and your interests like they should be. They're watching their cctv monitors for people who might be cheating them, not pickpockets or conartists who might be cheating their customers. They don't give a #$@% about the patron anymore, ANYWHERE. "
lock up your bag? wtf are you talking about? and no, im 100% sure s large part of casino security is making sure customers arent robbed... they look for pickpockets and conartists...
he can buy a house for $50,000...
every christian is different. every muslim is different...
the individual doesnt define language, the culture does, and the culture says atheists beleive there is no God and Agnostics dont have a beleif in whether or not there is a God...
they've had DNA testing for awhile, took them this long to run it for his case?
"btw, no matter what dictionary used, no matter the differences, true definition of anything is defined by humans anyways, so this means words and there meanings evolve via popular opinion."
agreed, and dictionaries get their definitions from the culture... if someone could cite a source to provide a significantly different definition i would recognize it as a valid definition that some people use when they're not trying to win arguments on the politics forum... but a huge dictionary with only 1 version of a definition typically indicates there is only 1 widely used definition for the word... and even if someone did cite a credible source that provided a significantly different definition, they would still have to admit that my definition is a very valid definition of atheist...
"atheisms argues against the existence of god. Agnostic's have no belief either way the existence or non-existence of god"
why are you avoiding the word "belief" with atheists? you are not afraid of saying agnostics have no belief in the existence or non-existence of god, but when it comes to atheism, you have to replace "beleive" with "argues" wtf? ok, why do atheists argue against the existence of God, are they just bitchy agnostics that feel the need to tell religious people they are wrong even though they dont beleive religious people to be wrong with their beliefs? or do you consider atheists to beleive there is no God? because Fokker here claims atheists have no belief on the existence of a God, but im pretty sure thats agnostics, which you seem to agree with, but you are yet to provide a solid definition of atheism..
"i think there is a miscommunication, i will now attempt to clear things up. i believe that there is no god, period. i also believe that the idea of god(or deity) is exclusive to human imagination."
thanks for clearing that up...
well, i looked up atheist in a large, widely used dictionary, and there was only 1 definition, and that definition was "one who believes that there is no deity" now you can claim there are other lesser used, more obscure definitions that i will accept given a credible source, but a dictionary having only 1 definition and its single definition proves that the most widely accepted definition of atheist is one who believes that there is no deity...
also, if atheists dont beleive that there is no God, why would they argure that there is no God, and are you seriously saying the difference between atheists and agnostics is what they will argue over? thats bullshit. people that beleive there is no God are atheists, people that have no beleif in the existence of non-existence of a God are agnostic... you have also failed to answer my other question: if Atheist is having no beleif either way in the existence or non-existence of a God, what are people that beleive there is no God?
your own beleif in a God created by humanity is bullshit. basically the question is whether you beleive in the existence of a supreme being. and your answer is you beleive in the existence of an un-supreme being, you are simply avoiding the question...
lol @ Fokker, what balls you must have. you tell someone who used to be an atheist that his definition of atheism is wrong and yours is right and you dont even provide a source to back it up...
ok Fokker, if Atheism is having no beleif either way in the existence or non-existence of a God, what are people that beleive there is no God? and what is the difference between agnostics and atheists? also, he came nowhere near every argument i've used
http://m-w.com/dictionary/atheists
Main Entry: athe
prayer does not equal worship and praying to someone doesnt assume they are superior to you... Rain gave a good example.... alot of times people pray to loved ones that pass away. they arent worshipping them, and in many circumstances, they dont consider the person that passed away as superior... Prayer is simply an attempt at communicating spiritually...
it is pretty funny when the non-religious try to tell the religious what we beleive...
"According to the Catholic church you must do all of the following in order to receive salvation:
* Confess your sins to a Roman Catholic priest.
* "Receive" all appropriate Roman Catholic sacraments.
* Believe that Grace comes only via Rome's sacraments, and only through Mary.
* Buy or earn as many indulgences as possible so as to avoid Purgatory.
* Believe that Grace can only be distributed to you by Mary.
* Attend the Roman Catholic Mass on all Sundays and holy days.
* Obey all of Rome's rules (i.e., precepts of the Church).
* Be a member of the Roman Catholic Church.
* Submit yourself to the Pope."
umm, no, thats not true... the site even contradicts itself later citing a church statement saying that Muslims can receive salvation too..
"Wtf is all this about? that has NO relevance. "
no, it does have relevance...
the Catholic church does not read blindly from that. the language the catholic church preaches in more closely fits the source i provided... it does say basically the same thing though... the language mine uses is less likely to be misinterpretted by simpletons...
"Maybe I am misinterpreting.. but are you not saying everyone is going go to heaven here?"
i did not say everyone is going to heaven in that quote.
this link seems fairly accurate about the current catholic teaching on the matter: http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2heavn.htm
"God is the infinitely good and merciful Father. But man, called to respond to him freely, can unfortunately choose to reject his love and forgiveness once and for all, thus separating himself for ever from joyful communion with him. It is precisely this tragic situation that Christian doctrine explains when it speaks of eternal damnation or hell. "
> Jack Oniell wrote:
> Then why do catholics pray to Mary?
Saints are generally good people. if you relate to a saint, it would be like a young author who is inspired by an older, successful author. a young author asks for help from the older author just like a christian might as for the help of a saint, who has gone through what they have gone through... its easier to relate to a saint, someone who was once human and struggled like we struggle, then to relate to God; we cant possibly imagine divinity.
> Simon wrote:
> "he probably doesn't even know we exist. "
Only if you believe in a non-omnipotent/omniscient god.
Pray, Rain, what do you think of Catholicism and the numerous targets of worship? I ask because the ever increasing number of saints reminds me of Paganism.
Catholics dont worship saints...
"
- Let's clarify.. What's your idea of heaven? Because I'm a little confused. You think that we die and just go to a wonderful joyous place? It has nothing to do with God?"
i have no idea what heaven is like. the Catholic church/religion does not know what heaven is like. it is generally considered a good "place". a religious person would say everything has to do with God. of coarse heaven has to do with god...
"- You seem to be contradicting your previous statement about heaven here. If we are going to heaven anyways.. wtf bother?"
first of all, why bother with what? 2nd, i never said everyone is going to heaven....
"When was the last time you were in any christian denomination of church? Have you listened to any christian music lately?"
Sunday...
"
- Oh for sure this is true. But I not only find MASSIVE flaws in Catholicism but in Christianity and the idea of any God"
then mention them, because thus far you have only demonstrated a childish understanding of Christianity...
"
- Again... If we don't need to live this plan to go to heaven... then [] it?"
we dont know his plan, so how can we go against it? maybe we are just a pretty background... how you gonna go against that? and i never said everyone is going to heaven...
"- I take slight offense to this because I am very well versed in Catholicism and Christianity. I'm point out flaws people don't want to listen to."
you dont appear very well versed in it.... you point out flaws anyone preparing to become an adult in the church would ask prior to becoming an adult...
Imperial Forum → Posts by avogadro
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.