http://www.boydrice.com/downloads/Bo...Debate%201.mp3
I can't really decide who is worse, the stupid prowar Satanist, or the bible beater getting upset with his listeners for not sending him money.
Printable View
http://www.boydrice.com/downloads/Bo...Debate%201.mp3
I can't really decide who is worse, the stupid prowar Satanist, or the bible beater getting upset with his listeners for not sending him money.
summary plz
Confirmed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
haha, cute
Ok, satanist agrees to do a Christany evang's radio show. Satanist says all sorts of things that make him look like an ass. The kind of shit Yoshi says. Death to the week, fuck people with AIDS, fuck jesus, etc. But to make this dance of the dumbdumb heads even better, the Christan radio host is just as bad. He puts words in the guys mouth, accuses him of things he never said, calls a GIRL caller a HE for 10 minutes, and almost insults his listerners for not sending him money.
The end
EDIT: Oh yeah, that satanist guy is boyd rice, not that anyone here would know who that is.
EDIT2: LOL the christian radio host is offically the stupidest one. Two christians call him and he calls both of them chicken shit.
But that would just leave weekends.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Isn't "satanism" as LaVey preached it not really like, worshipping the devil, but simply filling your own selfish ego and desires at the expense of all others?
Yeah, it's mostly Ayn Rand bullshit with an attention whoring name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Yay? I hate religon of any form...Religon is a form of communism. They are like "god says this so do it beyotches!" And freaking religon runs our country, that's BS.... This whole gay marriage law debates are all fueled by religion....We need a second civil war to exile everyone who practices religon from the U.S. and eventually the world.
Ship em all to Antartica I say :P I mean they beleive way too many lies and fairytales.
Thanks for clearing that up. I was unaware that religion and China are quite similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
Tell us more about your fascinating worldview.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
Seriously are you guys blinded by it too?
I look at my christian relatives and friends and see them as zombies....
One preacher wrote an article of how to convert all muslims in the area to christianity so they wouldn't go to hell...
That is prejudiced, communist and stupid.
And the last time I went to church the preacher made like 50 Jew jokes and said someday the world will be without Jews. What a retard Hitler.
This guy wants a second civil war: The Gays vs The Straights?
Your mom is a retard Hitler.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
Basically...It's human rights pt.2...Have we learned anything from our past?
It's stupid that so many retards (codeword for christians / catholics) protest people being gay and even more so that they shouldn't be able to mary because the tooth fairy (god) said so.
They probably still think blacks should be slaves...I wouldn't be surprised it's the same thing. Discrimination and stuff... It really makes me want to punch every person wearing a cross in the face.
If Jesus was real then I have a space station on Mars.
Religion is like communism eh? Wrong, try again.
*Edit: and Jesus most likely was real. His story according to the Bible on the other hand...
Prove me wrong? What does religon do good?
"Your going to HELL!" is all the retards say. Religon is a political party....Why else do presidents have to hide their real feelings? Because 60% of our nation are retarded zombies who are like "OMG God says you can't say that!"
I'd kill god if he were real. Too bad huh?
Go read some Roland Barthes or Nietzsche and come back with an educated opinion...and a different avatar.
Yeah Jesus was real but I'm sure he wasn't all he was cracked up to be...I'm sure he had some prostitute mother and father who just abandoned him... Maybe he did good stuff...Maybe he deserved to die and was a criminal..
It's like King Arthur...in reality he wasn't such a legendary guy, he just became a legend (a story...like Jesus).
He's 19.. what the fuck do you expect?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
I hope I wasn't that retarded at 19.
Hard to argue with you on something this big when you can neither form a proper question or spell 'religion' properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
My money is on the guy with the omnipotent powers.Quote:
I'd kill god if he were real. Too bad huh?
Educated Opinion:
Religon ruins Science....Because of religon we beleived the Earth was the center of the universe for a few hundred years...Because the bible said so!
Because of religon the pope wanted to execute Galieo(sp) but instead he was put on house arrest for the remainder of his life.
Newsflash: Science is a tool for cultural reinforcement, just like religion. Take a look at some "scientific discoveries" from early in the century and beyond. Back then it was science that black people had smaller, misshapen skulls and that women were biologically unfit for the workplace.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
You guys are so welcoming.
i'm not as bad this douche, am I? :(
I eat poop and many agree it's a healthy and delicious snack.
This thread turned out way more entertaining than I had originally expected.
Your mom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
lol.
I am not a fan of religion, by and large.
That said, I got over this moronic phase of my anti-religion feelings when I was 16. Speed up the process, plz. "Religion is like communism and Hitler and it kicks puppies" is not insightful, meaningful, relevant, or worth discussing.
Color me misinformed, but I thought in a communist system the goverment suppressed organized religion? I recall hearing about some underground religious buildings, celebrations in the USSR back in the day.
also, I wasn't aware they found evidence that King Arthur did exist. Where is Camalot?
well, its kind of hard to judge communism just by how how it was implemented, in jsut about every attempt its quickly turned into the exact opposite of what it was supposed to be by a number of greedy people. but in general marxism didnt care much for religion because he beleived that it pacified the populice and made them complacent, but i doubt he would have outright supressed it as badly as most real world applications of communism did. My personal favorite is china, who simultaneously has a state run form of catholicism, and actively suppresses the non state run form.
one could actually make the case that Christianity does support a form of communism, im not going to bother looking up the specific verses at the moment, but the biblical accounts decribe the early christians living in a communal atmosphere, the story of the 5 loves of bread and 2 fish could be seen as a story of this, that everyone shared their personal food sources and even though they only started with 5 loves of bread and 2 fish, by the end everyone had shared enough food for the expanding group that they had 12 baskets of food.
beyond that, hay guys, whats going on here?
Jesus was a hippie.
very much so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
i just noticed this guy is from pennsylvania, please say its not near johnstown..we have suffered enough already.
Everyone was. EDIT: We also ignored all the older people who told us that we wouldn't be as retarded once we got older.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
So anyway, IP, I still don't get your point here. Was it just to point out that you felt these guys were idiots? Enlighten me, please.
Newsflash: You're wrong. Science is a tool for understanding, NOT cultural reinforcement. There are fundamental differences in science, like how bad theories (such as your ham-fisted example of eugenics) don't last because they're largely cultural mores trying to masquerade as observable science and once scrutinizied at all fall apart. Religion, on the other hand, sets mores and anyone who'd dare scrutinize gets a label like 'heretic' or 'apostate' and finds themselves more often than not burnt on a stake.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
Word.Quote:
Newsflash: You're wrong. Science is a tool for understanding, NOT cultural reinforcement. There are fundamental differences in science, like how bad theories (such as your ham-fisted example of eugenics) don't last because they're largely cultural mores trying to masquerade as observable science and once scrutinizied at all fall apart. Religion, on the other hand, sets mores and anyone who'd dare scrutinize gets a label like 'heretic' or 'apostate' and finds themselves more often than not burnt on a stake.
That's not directly relative of Communism but for the most part many "Communist" countries like the USSR and China tend to be based on totalitarian systems as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by M
I think IronPlant was just trying to be funny anyway.
I find it funny how much effort mainstream Christianity invests in trying to disprove Evolution and other such things when really none of that is ultimately detrimental to the religion and it's beliefs. A lot of religion is political in nature and some oppressive assholes tend to shape it up into their own little code of beliefs and people being people will follow them.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Of course it's detrimental to the religion! Either the Earth is 5000 years old or it isn't! Either humans developed over time from a common bipedal ape ancestor or we were fashioned in 'God's image' from clay. A rational person should not believe in something without good reasons, faith in something you know cannot be is ignorance, plain and simple. That's why fundamentalists both Christian here and Muslim over there fight against modernity, because with it comes man's greater understanding of the world, and the old superstitions of the past must be cast aside. Or reinvented.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gohron
except that fundamentalism only represents a portion of religion. Mainstream catholicism has had no problem with evolution for decades. furthermore you mention that mankind either came from bibedal apes or were made in gods image from clay. The problem is that thats not really a difference, catholicism says that God made man in his image(possesing a soul and capable of complex rational thought) from the base elements of the earth, animals as it were. no rational christian actually finds evolution to be a problem, and as i showed before , the majority of practicing scients dont have problems with religion. its only those who choose to make these synthetic divisions that harp on these issues, because they have to define themselves by these nonexistant differences.
No, what happened is (like I said) religion had to reinvent itself to coexisit with rational science. Science has made no such concessions, nor will it ever.
I did not merely mean that science produces bad theories based on culture, but that applicable, rational sciences lead to advances in technology or serve to promote social standards that spurred scientific research to begin with.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
23 too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Also (and more seriously) being 19 doesn't give anybody an excuse to be this ridiculously pompous.
If your opinion is so educated please sight the passage in the Bible that says the Earth is the center of the universe. I don't believe for a second science disproves religion or the other way around. Much of the Bible is obviously symbolic (and much of it not). I also I doubt us finding out that plants and animals evolve is really proof he doesn't exist. How do we know, if there is a God, that he simply didn't create the world to evolve and change?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
I'd say something cool like: "We'll see when we're dead!" but in reality there's no way to know what we'll see when we're dead. In the meantime how about trying to keep an open mind and just taking things in stride (and ask a lot of questions) without flipping the fuck out so much. Doctors theorize flipping out leads to hair loss.
Science demands the poop be eaten on a stick. Only then will nutrients be had by its gentle, coating texture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aurora
I pick up girls by telling them it's in my pants.Quote:
Originally Posted by M
Welcome to Deism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
Stupid French Revolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich
Deism was around before the French Revolution. You're thinking of Humanism.
Stupid Humans.
You're telling me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
If humans are the main species (the one god likes and that goes to heaven and practices relgion) then what happens when we are extinct? It's guranteed to happen within the next couple million years (when the sun craps out), and global warming or war will probably annihilate us much before then.
What happens when we discover alien life? Do the christians say the devil created them? I think we will find life or evidence of it outside of the Earth in the next 100 years (well we already have evidence of life on Mars.)
Animals don't go to heaven? Then why did god create them? Why didn't he make it so we wouldn't have to eat?
Why doesn't he ever show his face?
Anyway I've got to go to work but I could say more.
P.S. when the freak can I make new threads? There still isn't a 'new topic' button!!!
There really wasn't a point. I found the sound clip funny. By the end of it the christian sounded worse than the satanist who openly admitted that he thought we should kill retarded babies, and war and aids was just awesome. Something about a person being able to look stupid and hateful next to a guy who admits those kind of things, amuses me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
So I thought a few of you might find it funny too.
But it doesn't really matter. Jon of iPwn has brought joy to us all. We also got a really good picture of rosey.
heh thats a bit of a slanted way of putting it, a more accurate way of putting it is that both science and religion advance as humanity advances, new technoloies and new avenues of thought advance science and sometimes overwrites what was "proven" before by the technology of the day, and that in turn gives people a more accurate understanding of the universe and impacts how we see ourselves reletive to spirituality. so both science and religion do adapt to changes in society and technology. religion has changed some elements of its beliefs but you woudl be hardpressed to find a case where science caused a full "reinvention" of its core beliefs. most alterations in religion, like the second vatican council, were far more affected by social changes than by anything specific to science. So lets not go overboard in saying that science changed religion, it gave a clearer view of the physical world that cused peopel to reevaluate the interpretations of specific religious texts, but it didnt cause any full reinvention.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Please don't. You're not sharing any revelations that we haven't already heard many times before. "Dogs can't go to heaven so god is a doodyhead" is not an interesting argument scientifically, philosophically or theologically. It is the religious debate equivalent of "why don't we print more money so nobody will be poor?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
thats the thing, though. A changing religion isn't worth a whole lot. Why bother putting faith in something that will be differen tomarrow? You wanna marry a girl that might be a dude tomarrow? How about have a son that goes from a real bad ass to a puss? Religion evolves like that. And it sucks for it. Shit, how can something claim to be infinite, and unchanging, and the alpha and omega, and then BAM change. Things go from being historys to being fables. This gets ignored and that gets over preached.Quote:
Originally Posted by frostwolf ex
religion changes just enough to be kept around. Its like some shitty BF that pretends to quit the smack so his GF will stay around.
Science evolves because it needs to and becuase it wants to.
The Renaissance not ring any bells? Before it the world, atleast Christendom, was a religious backwater who would make the symbol of the cross on rotted food and consider it safe for them and their children to eat. It shattered the idea of a Earth-centric universe, something that had already been done years before by the ancient Greeks, but the knowledge was surpressed by guess who? That's right, the Church.Quote:
Originally Posted by frostwolf ex
The point is that science cannot and will not be tempered to fit religion's interpretation, sure it can be bent in their direction for awhile by use of force and surpression of information, but science being truth means that the facts will always remain what they are. Religion on the other hand is very easily mutable because it doesn't rely on facts or objective truths. So, naturally, over time religion has bent itself backwards, trying to remain relevant in a world of science.
LOL, wrong. Science evolves because our understanding evolves and we get closer to the truth. Early theories that no longer support the burden of evidence are cast aside in favor of new ones. That is how science works, not because it 'wants to'.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Is it impossible to think that Science has changed just as much as Religion in order to meet cultural and social expectations? They're two sides of the same coin. We adjust the way we measure, design, and observe things just as we change fundamental religious beliefs. Science isn't some ever present force from which facts are extracted, like sap from a tree. It's something of our own creation, like religion or God, which has changed just as much as we have.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Science doesn't bring us any closer to the "truth." It's a rational way to attempt to interpret the world we live in, but in no way are our observations arbitrary. It's vain and arrogant to think that we know the truth, if there is one, because our observations can always only be subjective.Quote:
LOL, wrong. Science evolves because our understanding evolves and we get closer to the truth. Early theories that no longer support the burden of evidence are cast aside in favor of new ones. That is how science works, not because it 'wants to'.
i wasn't being literal. We want science to change, but we do not want religion to change. We want something hard and unchanging to believe in and to keep us snug at night but we want to learn more and more about the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
saying science, figurtively, doesn't want to change is like saying you don't want to learn more than is currently known.
EDIT: I'm not saying we can change science facts because of wants or desires. I'm saying science evolves and changes becuase we WANT to gain more information. People, or at least smart people, have a some what natural desire to learn about the world around them.
In the case of science, yes. Science doesn't give a fuck about social expectations. You think gravity is going to be any different if people would feel all warm and fuzzy about it one way rather than another? No. Science is about gathering evidence, testing hypotheses, and producing replicable results. Not about what people expect from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
Dead wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
No, it's a tool for finding the facts. The facts are what they are, they don't change because of 'cultural expections'. Whether or not you're in ancient Babylon or present day New York City, the fact that the planet revolves around the sun is the same. It didn't change to what it is now because we changed, the only thing that changed was our understanding. That's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
LOL, wallow in that ridiculous relativist garbage if you want. But next time you ever get violently ill or hurt so bad that you have to go to a hospital or rely in any way on scientifically developed drugs or medical techniques I want you to tell the doctor that he needn't bother, because there's no way of telling whether or not or anything around him is real.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
I'd like to think he would at least play the odds.
I guess I'm saying that my biggest problem is that you say there is an arbitrary truth, and that science is our only objective means of understanding it. For an atheist it seems odd of you to think that there is some sort of threshold for us to cross in order for us to come to "a full understanding of the universe." The way you put it, it's not unlike Nirvana or Enlightenment, or even the Rapture.
You're only helping me prove my point. I've been SAYING that science is a tool which we use to satisfy our cultural and social needs. You're taking my words a step too far. It's not that science isn't helpful just because it's not objective, just that it's not objective.Quote:
LOL, wallow in that ridiculous relativist garbage if you want. But next time you ever get violently ill or hurt so bad that you have to go to a hospital or rely in any way on scientifically developed drugs or medical techniques I want you to tell the doctor that he needn't bother, because there's no way of telling whether or not or anything around him is real.
This argument only holds if you deliberately misinterpret what is meant by "truth" here as the same thing religion calls "truth." This is a case of ambiguous language, not cognitive dissonance as you're trying to paint it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
There isn't an arbitrary truth, but an objective truth. It exists outside us, beyond us. We use science to gain a closer connection to that truth in all things we study. Does that mean we'll ever truly gain ultimate understanding of everything in the universe? Doubtful, and it's the beside the point anyway. As an atheist I simply don't believe in the presence of a supreme being of any sort that either created the universe or controls it now. That's it. That's all one requires to be an atheist.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
Do I believe that science will ever truly answer all life's questions? No. Because some answers will never satisfy people. Are you satisifed with the idea that the only reason you're alive is to produce viable offspring? Or that love is just a chemical reaction? Philosophical questions are outside the realm of science for good reason. There is no scientific way to decide what is absolute 'good' or 'evil'.
Also, comparisons to Nirvana or 'Enlightenment' are incompatiable because those are a spiritual understanding. To attain spiritual understanding doesn't require evidence you can present to others or a method that others can use to repeat the results with a degree of certainty.
The comparison to the Rapture is ridiculous and doesn't make a lick of sense.
True that. Shit is the shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aurora
lol, trying pretty hard here are we? science "cannot be temppered to fit religions interpretation" because science is useless in determining the truth of religions core concepts. science has nipped specific elements of the religious heirarchy in the butt because they overstepped their bounds in trying to be the authority in elements that were scripturaly irrelivant, and entirely based on the massivley disfunctional social system in place during the middle ages. But the core concepts of religion, such as the existance of God, the existance of an afterlife, and the purpose of life,are all things that are beyond science's reach, though some liek to try to use unscientific means to pretend that science holds any real answers on these topics. So ill give you, when religious authorities step beyond their correct role, then they get corrected. The core elements of said religions are not changing, christianities core elements of salvation by jesus, for instance, do not change, medevil theories that were there as much to support monarchies as to bring any form of spiritual analogy, are and were far from core elelements of the faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
and , as for your "trying to stay relevant" comment, the understandings of faith change as the faithful themselves learn more from science, similar to the way that science itsself changes quite radically once new thinkers bring new ideas into it, at that time science and "truth" change quite rapidly. its less the bandage job you are hinting at and more of a conjoined growth of understanding of truth.
I’m starting to question how much you know about the history behind how we got modern day Christianity, or how the religion has evolved.
probably more than most people in this forum, which is why i have an appreciation of what was and was not the church's actual position on subjects, rather than what people just kind of recall from soemwhere because it supports what they think in the first place. That said, i could be forgetting relevant facts, i am human and not putting that much effort into this thread, religion threads on this forum are where people come in to yell what they think at the top of their lungs and ignore everyone else, so they are a foregone lost cause from the inception. so im just pissing away the time really because gaming discussion is pretty much useless for the next few months, and i havent seen any good movies latley.
Has anyone ever tried reading these sort of threads when their high?
I can't believe you're 19. This is the sort of obvious garbage 12-year-olds already have figured out. I know you think you're hot shit, but you're the not even the 500 millionth person to think of any of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
You're at the age that you can go to college and take a decent philosophy, anthropology or religion course. Take a couple of those, read a couple of books, and then start trying to hold intelligent debate. Until then, your observations, while valid, are about as stimulating and educated as the riddles printed on popsicle sticks.
Your first step, though? Learn how to spell religion before you decide to jump on it. Furthermore, your opinions are only relevant to fundamentalist Christianity, not religion as a whole.
You have to be voted the ability to make new threads. Since you're itching to spam your forum/site/whatever I doubt that will be any time soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
Are you serious? I want to make threads to discuss...If I wanted to spam my site I would have done so already and not wasted my time typing words and reading everything you guys type.
I haven't even been able to introduce myself.
I'm not a bad person...Sure things like religon and politics make me act like I hate everyone but I don't, and I know that I'm not the most educated on ANY topic but I still like to say what I think.
Vote Yes on Jon, you wont be dissapointed! :P
Yeah I know, it just helped take the wind out of our sails.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Nobody cares about what you have to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
A) None of these questions disprove the existence of God. If He does in fact exist we're still figuring out the rules of his game. One would assume, based on him not intervening in human affairs, that he doesn't interfere with natural progression.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
B) Don't make threads. You can barely make posts.
Because maybe He didn't change. Maybe our theories about Him are wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
What they're saying is that religion can be abused by a few misguided, or ill willed people. Science can be used as a tool to do the same, as he pointed out with the "scientific" fact that women were biologically unfit for the workplace, or black people had misshapen monkey skulls for heads. All of that was science at one point. Both science and religion have been mended by insecure men who were too stupid to figure out that acknowledging a woman's power in the world does not diminish his own. It all boils down to big fucking idiots controlling people to their big fucking idiotic (and wrong) ideals.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
To penalize religion for this and simply say science is making a few errors in search of the truth is completely one sided. Both religion and science are trying to discover truths about something (sometimes the same something).
I <3 you guys for entertaining me at work
Deism is the shit. Don't fuck with it man.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
Stupid French. On a related note it was kind of funny to hear the french commentators yell out "MAY POUR QUOI? MAY POUR QUOI?!" when Zidane headbutted that italian player in the World Cup Finals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich
heheheQuote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
Fucking Christ. This isn't Star Trek.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
I think what he is trying to say is communists invented religon
If the reason you complained about not being able to make threads was because you wanted to start a thread introducing yourself, then do us all a favor and don't bother posting here anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
Agreed. Nobody cares about introduction threads. If you're interesting, you'll get noticed, and if you're not, then an introduction thread wouldn't go over well anyway because who wants to read a thread about an uninteresting person?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowdisease
that could be said for everyone on this board except for NeoZ and Josh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Organized religions do not have theories. Especially ones that claim to have devine guidance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
Why does this thread surprise anyone? If you're a bible thumper, a pinko, or both, you believe in complete bullshit that will never work. The two groups should join forces to make the most spectacular failure of a society in the history of the world... well, except france.
where was anyone suprised?
Yes they do, dumb shit. Look up St. Thomas Aquinas and other theologians. Look up the Talmud!Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
The fact is that the most brilliant Christian minds of the Middle Ages spent all day in a monastery postulating asto the nature of God, the relationship he has to Man, and a million other questions not answered in the Bible. Just because modern Baptist morons take everything in the good book as fact doesnt mean that everyone always has.
A postulation isn't a theory. Unless I missed the part of history where a church measured god, or killed people after certain sins to see which level of hell they went to, no the church does not have theories.
Theories are not just rational guesses.
"A theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation."
And even if you want to use the stupid redneck definition of theory, where it is just a rational guess, organized religions still don't have them. You brought up the Catholic church, who if you haven't forgotten backs up everything that becomes a part of their religion with the devine will of God. I don't know about you, but the will of God is hardly a "rational guess.”
That is one of the reasons they have a serious problem admitting anything that they have done is wrong. It discredits their claim to have devine providence.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
We don't do that here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
My vote can only be purchased with rape dollars.Quote:
Vote Yes on Jon, you wont be dissapointed! :P
Is this how you treat all your new members? "Don't post anymore"
Dude just because of one topic and a few posts, that is not fair...
Fine I'm introducing myself here:
My name is Jon and I'm from middle of nowhere, Pennsylvania... I'm 19 and attending Penn State-York in the Fall for English. I plan to be a writer someday or possibly a teacher (though it's the least likely of my career options).
I love to read and write and my English teachers were always my favorite. My favorite books is probably The Hobbit. Right now I'm reading The Big Bang (Simon Singh), A Brief History of Time (Stephen Hawking), The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (almost done), Idiot! (Johnny Damon), Juiced (Jose Canseco), WWII For Dummies and every now and then I try to take a chunk out of The 9/11 Comission Report.
My favorite video games are Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy III, Tiger Woods 06, Oblivion (PC) and Top Spin.
My favorite movies are Star Wars IV-VI, Rocky I-IV, Robocop, any Nicolas Cage film (especially National Treasure and Windtalkers), Sin City and Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang.
My favorite bands are Tool, Pink Floyd, Panic! At the Disco, Brand New, Hurt, NoFX and Modest Mouse.
I like to play golf when I get the chance (which hasn't been often since I work nightshift). I work third shift at a conveince store / gas station. Not a bad job, the one I work at (Sheetz) is in the top 10 places to work in Pennsylvania. It's nice..
So that's me.
Sorry if I came off as an idiot. I wont talk about religion (there you go, thanks for teaching me how to spell it) anymore.
Ban please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
wow, just wow, please, for your sake and our sake, please take some course in college where they actually teach you something about the history of religion, your ignorance on the subject is breathtaking.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
and its divine, the word is divine.
Dude, just stop. These guys aren't going to let up. If you want to become an efficient poster, lurk for a bit, notice no one really adds anything to topics, and post your mom jokes alot. You'll be a hit.
TNL ate my post.
pfftQuote:
Originally Posted by frostwolf
<3
It doesn’t take a religious historian to know that religion does not meet the second requirement of a theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by frostwolf ex
You can not test anything in regards to it empirically, aka evidence that is observable by the senses.
Religion by its very purpose, defaults it's self out of the realm of theories. It exists to answer those questions beyond the empirical.
Don’t be so stuffy and arrogant. You’re the one who wanted to bring science into this, so you have to accept its definition of a theory and not the one stupid fundies use.
If you disagree, fine. But prove me wrong. Implying I need to take a class or read this or that does nothing to help your argument.
Find me instances where religion (and not just people in the religion) has changed because of testable empirical experiments. You can reference from any religion, though I'd prefer a form of Christianity because that is what we are really talking about here.
Goddamn dude, no one gives a shit. What do you think this is an online dating forum. Who are you trying to proposition? Mc Buttcheeks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon of iPwn
I'm not available right now, if that is what he is aiming for.
ok now you are going insane with the semantics. first, i was not the one that brought up science, Gozen did, i was playing this thread off as a joke. second look up the word theory, it applies to more than just the strict scientific definiton, it also refers to theories arrived at by deductive reasoning. have you ever taken a philosophy class? this really should not be this hard, when people are discussing things that are beyond the scope of deduction from strict scientific method, they still are discussing theories. Some words actually have..gasp..more than one definition, and its not the "fundie" one as you so eloquently put it, its a widely accepted definition when refering to philosophy, which i reiterate, discusses things that are not directly applicable to the scientific method.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
but my comment about taking a class in religious history is because you make these bizarre and inaccurate statements such as that "the catholic church backs up everything that becomes part of it as the divine will of god". now, thats a fairly bizarre and ignorant statement and shows that you really have no idea what you are talking about, which makes having a coherent discussion somewhat difficult.
Yes, but when you discuss something, you stick to the meaning used by the person who brought it up. In this case it would be gozen. Considering his stance, I imagine he was talking about the scientific meaning of the word.Quote:
Originally Posted by frostwolf ex
I don't think you'd be so smarmy if I walked into a thread talking about some girl's ass and started talking about how I saw a donkey just the other day.
I've read the Catholic Church’s catechism. I have both the old one and the new on the book shelf behind me. Both say, long windedly, that the church is right because the church is right. Both claim that the church has a holy connection with God, giving it authority.Quote:
Originally Posted by frostwolf ex
Sorry thought this was a place for almost intelligent discussion............. I'm probably wrong though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetman
If I want to be active on a forum I think it's best to get to know the people or else it's pointless.
You can get to know people without stupid ass introductions. For instance, I know that you're a l33t speaking 19 year-old who doesn't know shit about shit.
buttcheeks is making fair enough points, most of the theological things I was discussing are more appropriately termed philosophical arguments - I am not a student of philosophy so I cannot say how "theoretical" the arguments are, but I do know the great Christian scholars (like the aforementioned Aquinas) produced work as rigorous as the greats of philosphy.
I was just trying to make the point that questions like the ones idiots like John of iPwn were asking have been asked, and have been answered. Its just that moron Christian haters (and, to be fair, most Christians today) don't care about that - they just wallow in their ignorance and repeat that shit because it's cool. They don't care about learning the actual history and evolution of Christian thought.