For those still wondering: little Impy probably meant 'there is a god, don't turn your back [on him] (i.e. forsake him)' when making the thread.
For those still wondering: little Impy probably meant 'there is a god, don't turn your back [on him] (i.e. forsake him)' when making the thread.
Why was it a question?
God is there to me. I don't know how you can get something out of nothing (i.e. one atom, or the entire universe) without a Supreme Being.
But Emperor calling people "kaffir" is extremely insulting and gives the impression that you think you are superior and that non-believers are dirt. God loves non-believers equally as much as believers and understands exactly why they think what they do - so labels like "kaffir" are unnecessary. Same with labels like "infidel" for polytheists.
If you think approaching the matter in this way will help the cause of Allah you are wrong. It will hurt the cause of Islam and turn more people away from it.
1. I was being ironic.
2. Did I put explicitly that I was quoting Nietzsche or using him in this context? I said "God is dead". Does it matter that Nietzsche said that? Many before and after him said that, some without even knowing him.
3. If you feel offended, know it's an irony and maybe feel free to be ironic against agnosticism and atheism.
"Romans not only easily conquered those who fought by cutting, but mocked them too. For the cut, even delivered with force, frequently does not kill, when the vital parts are protected by equipment and bone. On the contrary, a point brought to bear is fatal at two inches; for it is necessary that whatever vital parts it penetrates, it is immersed. Next, when a cut is delivered, the right arm and flank are exposed. However, the point is delivered with the cover of the body and wounds the enemy before he sees it."
- Flavius Vegetius Renatus (in Epitoma Rei Militari, ca. 390)
Come on Emperor, there's something called Freedom of Speech, which a lot of members already explained in earlier posts. Just accept that people are different, especially in the way they think and believe.
And since I assume you're Christian, remember that we're thought that God gave us FREE WILL.
A lot of firm believers died in many was too.
Uhm... I'm sure that a lot of atheists here don't really care. (Especially Mocker, still waiting for a lightning bolt )
You can't expect them to believe that and take it seriously.
So, enough with all this rambling. Your making us believers look bad
Why keep denying him? You would still deny the existence/power of a god when one shows himself to you? Hmm...Originally Posted by Stalins Ghost
Very true. +rep for youOriginally Posted by Chaigidel
Religion tries to convey peace and unity, it's just that some members have too much pride
Last edited by ~Beren~; July 06, 2007 at 03:13 PM.
Gaston, a thunderbolt for monsieur!
I agree... but I have to ask; what's the stand on people with wiccan and other pagan beliefs? It's a totally different scenario really because the pagans don't believe in god but gods and wicca doesn't have a set core ideology. Personally I have no problem with any religion or their dogmas... but I don't believe in a single god and I don't believe in a lack thereof. So why aren't both sides attacking me? haha...
Join me at dinooftheweek.blogspot.com
Oh no!
Doit se cacher avant qu'il m'obtienne !
Well, from what I hear, most Christians don't really care much. Although they have a low disposition towards them.Originally Posted by mightyfenrir
Wiccas? Never heard of them. Guess it's time to go to Wikipedia...Originally Posted by mightyfenrir
I guess because most of the conflicts are between monotheists and atheists. In fact, your the FIRST (probably the only) person I know who is a polytheist.Originally Posted by mightyfenrir
Last edited by ~Beren~; July 06, 2007 at 07:34 PM.
wiccans, pagans, etc are all just commercial spirituality just like most new age beliefs, they are directly marketed to sell things, and are in no way a valid belief system in that respect---- I can understand perhaps worshipping aspects of nature etc, because they are all aspects, just as valid as most other religions I suppose-- but wicca is purely an invention of the 70s-80s and true paganism moved its way into modern everything so I dont really think its necessary for a "pagan" religion because the "aspects" of the godhead are acknowledged by all religious devotions( in some way)
wiccans =total ********
pagans= legitimate religion (not my belief tho)
btw does a pagan classify african animist, and shamanist religions as pagan as well?
hello i'm Buddha and i believe world was created by a big flying Loquat, maybe god is a Loquat, i hope so...
btw see this ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj8ZadKgdC0
it have nothing to do with this topic, which btw its stupid, but i like the first words and i want to share them with you...
"man is god, he is everywhere, he is anybody, he knows everything..."
man does not know everything -- he discovers what is already there
man is not everywhere he is on one world
man is not anybody because we cannot safely say we are the only sentience
man is definitely not powerful considering the limit of its influence.
i think that depends on who is saying that, if you believe in god and he knows everything, he is everything, then you know everything you need.
but i don't believe in god, i like the statement just that, well god is just an excuse to everything we don't know when we don't want to think on those things...
"man is god, he is everywhere, he is anybody, he knows everything..."
there is some kind of arrogance, don't you like it?
if anything our vast knowledge has only brought us closer to how truly blind we are. wise enough to see how small we are perhaps wise enough to realize what a small corner of knowledge we have discovered.
Yeah, everyone who says that god exists says in all practicality that Brahman exist. What was this topic about?
Just some guy letting out some religious hypocrisy, you know..
Bottom line is that religion is obsolete. We know the earth is round, we know that the earth is not the center of our solar system and we have found reasonable, proved and tested, LOGICAL evidence on pretty much everything the bible claims is...
Religion is basically a 3 year old asking ones parents where babies come from... Mommy and Daddy don't really know how to explain it so they say a stork comes flying with you in a diaper.. As a 3 year old baby you'll eat it raw, but as you EVOLVE you get smarter, thoughtful and curious and it is my experience that religion don't like it when you get really curious..
"I want to know about the creation of earth" The boy says.
Priest takes bible and opens it.
"No, I want to know why that is written".
Priest takes bible, closes it and whacks boy with it on the head.
And Dear me, I would wish some members of F.A.I.T.H could come here and answer me this:
If God created the Universe, then why the heck didn't he tell us that he created [insert insane number] other systems?
And this if for those nihilistic-doomsday-foreseeing people; If we are so screwed why doesn't he help us, after all aren't we his children?
Why else would he need to? This is the only universe we live in. Why should we care about other systems? He also didn't deny (at least I think) about the creations of other systems. I mean, would you sit and listen for [insert insane number of hours] listening about all the other systems? Unless there are other aliens species (or even other humans) situated in other systems, I don't really give a damn.
I've been thinking about that as well. But then he lets us choose if we want to follow him or not. He doesn't force people. He just warns them. At least, according to Genesis with Adam and Eve. So he just sits back and watch to see who are the ones faithful and the ones who are unfaithful. Willing obedience is better than forced obedience. Also, why would God kill those who believe in him during Judgment Day? I think that the people who are sinful are the ones who are doomed.Originally Posted by Gaius julius octavinus
Last edited by ~Beren~; July 06, 2007 at 09:52 PM.
I have no problem with the concept of god. Matter cannot come from nothing.
I do have a problem with believing certain religions though, because there are so many, and with such variety, it makes it less likely that any of them are true.
Whether or not God exists will only be know to me upon my death. And I have no way to prepare to save myself from hell if it exists. I could live a "good Chritsian life" but how do I know I've practiced the right one? So I just don't care.
I will however heed your advice about not treating people of religions badly just because I disagree with them.
cra_z_guy:
But still, if I remember my religion class well, the bible never mentions the existence of other solar systems in the universe.. Did he just forget to tell us? I mean, being the father of the world/earth, isn't kind of his parental duty to tell us we have a sister (planet)?
If humanity was incarnated in one person who, according to those kind of people, are standing on the verge of death and decay/a cliff, and god was this persons father passing by then he would accordingly to your thoughts stand still and say: "Don't jump".. And then walk on.... Wtf?
Sometimes forced obedience is the better way; here the end justifies the means.
Yes, according to the bible all faithful people will receive salvation and escape apocalypse... But what interest does God have in killing all those who doesn't believe him? And if he really were to help us, then why doesn't he "visit" us? Do something that we simply can not explain and therefore must draw the conclusion that it was a divine act?
I would hate to see God pull another Noah... He has already killed the enitre population of the earth once except for Noah and his family...
What a god, what a god! A real father figure! His children doesn't corret themselves after him.. He kills them. .
Conversely, that's a bit of a fallacy to me. It begs the question: "But who created the creator?" Using the same logic, a Supreme Being couldn't have just popped into existance out of nowhere. Perhaps it evolved into its omnipotence, but that raises more questions than it answers.