Godless Brits? [Archive]

mystic brew

10-31-2005, 21:08

Right.
I'm at a loss as to how you cobble together this sequence of articles to a belief that the UK will become a part of the united states of islam.

Riots in france mean what exactly? it's hardly a mass movement.

And on the statistics front
Muslims are 2.8 % of the UK population.
it hardly seems likely that Muslims can outbreed the rest of the UK population in 20 years!
Equally 77.3% of the UK profess some theist belief. so brits are godless how?
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/equality-diversity/faith-and-religion/

The BBC World service is simply moving with the times... the world service has always broadcast across the world. But with satelite television, al-jazeera and the like appearing and gathering an increasing market share, the BBC has decided to move to a TV service that fairly and accurately reports the TV news in the region...
The world service is viewed worldwide as a genuinely unbiased news source.

and, from the article...
"It is understood that Prince Charles did not - and does not - believe that the actions of 19 hijackers should tarnish the reputation of hundreds of millions of law-abiding Muslims around the world."

Gosh, thats the UK caving in to Muslim extremism how?

and, finally, i should point out that...
"A 1996 Gallup poll reported that 71% of the United States' population believed that the government was covering up some information about UFOs" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO

UFO's over god??? The US surely deserves everything that it gets ;)

Hurin_Rules

10-31-2005, 21:08

flashlight? hell, help me find my keys and we can drive out of here!

LOL

Crazed Rabbit

10-31-2005, 21:10

He spoke warmly of the West's debt to the culture of Islam

Hmmm. I don't know about Europe, but forcing women to be virtual slaves and wear burkas hasn't caught on in the US yet.

Crazed Rabbit

ShadesWolf

10-31-2005, 21:14

Labour is at least as right as the Tories at the moment. Well in places. They seem to shift from facist to communist depending on the issue.

Labour is no way as right as the Torys....

All you have to do is look at the idea of taxation to understand that.

mystic brew

10-31-2005, 21:14

i think he might be talking about the influence on the renaissance, art, literature, maths and philosophy.

the perception that Islam is all burqas and slavery is the exact thing the Prince is trying to combat.

Ronin

10-31-2005, 21:14

Hmmm. I don't know about Europe, but forcing women to be virtual slaves and wear burkas hasn't caught on in the US yet.

Crazed Rabbit

what about math....geometry....the alphabet....have those things "caught on"? yet?.....wait...you better not answer....i´m not sure if i want to know....

Dâriûsh

10-31-2005, 21:16

I’m sharpening my scimitar right now. Europeans beware, us Muslim savages are breeding like rats and our ultimate goal is the complete overthrow of western civilization... and/or eating children... ~:rolleyes:

ShadesWolf

10-31-2005, 21:18

~:mecry:
eating children u mean u still eat children ~:eek:

mystic brew

10-31-2005, 21:19

yeah, but you are only allowed to eat our babies if they are slaughtered in sanitary conditions and in a Halal manner.

you may impose Sharia law, but the Health and safety executive will still rule!

Kanamori

10-31-2005, 21:20

The Qu'ran demands it. They are only following their religion...
~:joker:

Same old stuff.:coffeenews:

mystic brew

10-31-2005, 21:23

so the Health and Safety Executive and the Qu'ran agree?

damn.

perhaps i can find a way to undermine the coming islamic superstate with the Work and Pensions Quango.

i shall look into it

Slyspy

10-31-2005, 21:44

If anything racial tensions will explode well before religion becomes an issue. Anyway the conversion of Europe to Islam could only mean two things. First that the majority of the population are already Muslim, in which case fair enough. Secondly that Christianity has lost the battle for our souls and is a dying religion. To the Pope I say "your powers are weak, old man".

yesdachi

10-31-2005, 22:00

Dâriûsh

10-31-2005, 22:33

~:rolleyes:

I strongly suspect that Devastatin Dave’s flagrant Islamophobia may be related to his secret desire to convert.

:hide:

Tribesman

10-31-2005, 22:44

I strongly suspect that Devastatin Dave’s flagrant Islamophobia may be related to his secret desire to convert.

I wonder which other of his phobias can be explained that way~D ~D ~D

Crazed Rabbit

10-31-2005, 23:31

math....geometry....the alphabet

Islamic scholars did contribute some to math, but Greeks had already done lots of the pre-calc math, which was discovered, of course, by Isaac Newton.

Geometry, again done mainly by the Greeks.

The alphabet was invented thousands of years before Islam existed. And many were in use in Europe by 600 AD. All we use are the symbols for numbers.

Finally, none of the above are 'cultural' things. They are scientific things. Oddly enough, Islam and the Arab world has contibuted little in the way of science for the last several centuries.

Crazed Rabbit

Kaiser of Arabia

10-31-2005, 23:36

And we intervened in WWII for this?

At least the Nazis beleived in God, a twisted evil form of God, but a form nontheless ~:rolleyes:

Devastatin Dave

10-31-2005, 23:44

At least the Nazis beleived in God, a twisted evil form of God, but a form nontheless ~:rolleyes:
LOL, I guess the Nazis and Islam came from the same vine.

ShadesPanther

10-31-2005, 23:56

And on the statistics front
Muslims are 2.8 % of the UK population.

The way the media and the government puts it youd think it was 28%

and, from the article...
"It is understood that Prince Charles did not - and does not - believe that the actions of 19 hijackers should tarnish the reputation of hundreds of millions of law-abiding Muslims around the world."

Gosh, thats the UK caving in to Muslim extremism how?

Well Poor Charlie has no real political power so basically he can believe whatever he wants and it won't matter.

Crazed Rabbit

11-01-2005, 00:18

I strongly suspect that Devastatin Dave’s flagrant Islamophobia may be related to his secret desire to convert.

I wonder which other of his phobias can be explained that way

Funny. I didn't see anything about a phobia anywhere. But it seems some like to marginalize any who think differently by saying they have an irrational fear, even if they have no fear at all.

Crazed Rabbit

Kaiser of Arabia

11-01-2005, 00:21

Funny. I didn't see anything about a phobia anywhere. But it seems some like to marginalize any who think differently by saying they have an irrational fear, even if they ahve no fear at all.

Crazed Rabbit
*cough*HOMOPHOBIA*cough* :bow:

mystic brew

11-01-2005, 00:24

And we intervened in WWII for this?

At least the Nazis beleived in God, a twisted evil form of God, but a form nontheless ~:rolleyes:

again... 77% of the UK believe in a god of some kind.

and thats not a twisted kind of god.

read the real statistics before you jump in.

Crazed Rabbit

11-01-2005, 00:29

And we intervened in WWII for this?

Don't forget, we also came in to save France.

Crazed Rabbit

JimBob

11-01-2005, 00:30

Islamic scholars did contribute some to math, but Greeks had already done lots of the pre-calc math, which was discovered, of course, by Isaac Newton.

Geometry, again done mainly by the Greeks.

The alphabet was invented thousands of years before Islam existed. And many were in use in Europe by 600 AD. All we use are the symbols for numbers.

Yes our system of numbers is the only thing we got from them. And we all know that means nothing.

And remind me where algebra comes from? An Islamic mathematician named al-Jabr (hence the name, from his name also comes the word 'gibberish').

Byzantine Prince

11-01-2005, 01:08

And we intervened in WWII for this?

At least the Nazis beleived in God, a twisted evil form of God, but a form nontheless ~:rolleyes:
Yeah right! They were atheists and pagans. :knight:

Crazed Rabbit

11-01-2005, 01:30

Yes our system of numbers is the only thing we got from them. And we all know that means nothing.

And remind me where algebra comes from? An Islamic mathematician named al-Jabr (hence the name, from his name also comes the word 'gibberish').

Um..did you even read my whole post? I've highlighted the relevent parts to make it easier for you:

Islamic scholars did contribute some to math, but Greeks had already done lots of the pre-calc math, which was discovered, of course, by Isaac Newton.

Geometry, again done mainly by the Greeks.

The alphabet was invented thousands of years before Islam existed. And many were in use in Europe by 600 AD. All we use are the symbols for numbers.

And by symbols of numbers, I meant what they contributed to our alphabet, which you would have seen had you read my post.

Next time try to make relevent criticisms.

Crazed Rabbit

Kaiser of Arabia

11-01-2005, 01:35

again... 77% of the UK believe in a god of some kind.

and thats not a twisted kind of god.

read the real statistics before you jump in.
Damn, I missed that. Still, that's 23% that don't, but that's not as bad as some nations.

Yeah right! They were atheists and pagans.
Pagans. And Pagans do beleive in a form of God, or more specifically, Gods.

AntiochusIII

11-01-2005, 01:43

Kaiser of Arabia

11-01-2005, 02:37

Might I point out, good sir, that religion-bashing is not really allowed. After all, we did have all those Christians are being bashed!!!OMG1!!!1!!! complaints some time earlier, and the mods responded favourably to the requests to put an end to that.

Oh wait, Islam is not a religion because it's not Christianity!

*cough...vomits blood* Hypocrisy, eh?
Huh? I was bashing Nazi Paganism, if you can say I was bashing somthing else. And, isn't Athiesm lack of a religion and therefore not a religion? :bow:

AntiochusIII

11-01-2005, 02:39

Huh? I was bashing Nazi Paganism, if you can say I was bashing somthing else. And, isn't Athiesm lack of a religion and therefore not a religion? :bow:I'm refering to "others," not you. Those who just bashed Islam.

On a side note, WTF is going on with all these pop-ups everytime I change a page?! ~:mecry:

Nazi, in my opinion, is more occultism than paganism. They just use pagan resources.

Crazed Rabbit

11-01-2005, 03:00

Might I point out, good sir, that religion-bashing is not really allowed. After all, we did have all those Christians are being bashed!!!OMG1!!!1!!! complaints some time earlier, and the mods responded favourably to the requests to put an end to that.

Oh wait, Islam is not a religion because it's not Christianity!

*cough...vomits blood* Hypocrisy, eh?

I take it you're not accusing me, for I have made no complaints about Christian bashing.

On a side note, WTF is going on with all these pop-ups everytime I change a page?!

Try Firefox. I never get pop-ups here.

Crazed Rabbit

Quietus

11-01-2005, 03:11

Here's some atheism statistics from http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html.

The Largest Atheist Populations
Top 50 Countries
With Highest Proportion of Atheists
(Zuckerman, 2005)
Below is a list of the top fifty countries containing the largest measured percentage of people who identify as atheist, agnostic, or non-believer in God. These figures do not necessarily represent the number of people who are identify themselves as "atheists." For example, in Estonia in 2004, 49% of people surveyed said they did not believe in God. At the same time, only 11% of people in the country identified themselves as atheists.

Country Total country
population (2004) % Atheist/
Agnostic/
Nonbeliever in God Number of Atheists/
Agnostics
Nonbelievers in God
(minimum - maximum)
Sweden 8,986,000 46 - 85% 4,133,560 - 7,638,100
Vietnam 82,690,000 81% 66,978,900
Denmark 5,413,000 43 - 80% 2,327,590 - 4,330,400
Norway 4,575,000 31 - 72% 1,418,250 - 3,294,000
Japan 127,333,000 64 - 65% 81,493,120 - 82,766,450
Czech Republic 10,246,100 54 - 61% 5,328,940 - 6,250,121
Finland 5,215,000 28 - 60% 1,460,200 - 3,129,000
France 60,424,000 43 - 54% 25,982,320 - 32,628,960
South Korea 48,598,000 30 - 52% 14,579,400 - 25,270,960
Estonia 1,342,000 49% 657,580
Germany 82,425,000 41 - 49% 33,794,250 - 40,388,250
Russia 143,782,000 24 - 48% 34,507,680 - 69,015,360
Hungary 10,032,000 32 - 46% 3,210,240 - 4,614,720
Netherlands 16,318,000 39 - 44% 6,364,020 - 7,179,920
Britain 60,271,000 31 - 44% 18,684,010 - 26,519,240
Belgium 10,348,000 42 - 43% 4,346,160 - 4,449,640
Bulgaria 7,518,000 34 - 40% 2,556,120 - 3,007,200
Slovenia 2,011,000 35 - 38% 703,850 - 764,180
Israel 6,199,000 15 - 37% 929,850 - 2,293,630
Canada 32,508,000 19 - 30% 6,176,520 - 9,752,400
Latvia 2,306,000 20 - 29% 461,200 - 668,740
Slovakia 5,424,000 10 - 28% 542,400 - 1,518,720
Switzerland 7,451,000 17 - 27% 1,266,670 - 2,011,770
Austria 8,175,000 18 - 26% 1,471,500 - 2,125,500
Australia 19,913,000 24 - 25% 4,779,120 - 4,978,250
Taiwan 22,750,000 24% 5,460,000
Spain 40,281,000 15 - 24% 6,042,150 - 9,667,440
Iceland 294,000 16 - 23% 47,040 - 67,620
New Zealand 3,994,000 20 - 22% 798,800 - 878,680
Ukraine 47,732,000 20% 9,546,400
Belarus 10,311,000 17% 1,752,870
Greece 10,648,000 16% 1,703,680
North Korea 22,698,000 15%* 3,404,700
Italy 58,057,000 6 - 15% 3,483,420 - 8,708,550
Armenia 2,991,000 14% 418,740
China 1,298,848,000 8 - 14%* 103,907,840 - 181,838,720
Lithuania 3,608,000 13% 469,040
Singapore 4,354,000 13% 566,020
Uruguay 3,399,000 12% 407,880
Kazakhstan 15,144,000 11 - 12% 1,665,840 - 1,817,280
Mongolia 2,751,000 9% 247,590
Portugal 10,524,000 4 - 9% 420,960 - 947,160
USA 293,028,000 3 - 9% 8,790,840 - 26,822,520
Albania 3,545,000 8% 283,600
Argentina 39,145,000 4 - 8% 1,565,800 - 3,131,600
Kyrgyzstan 5,081,000 7% 355,670
Dominican Republic 8,834,000 7% 618,380
Cuba 11,309,000 7%* 791,630
Croatia 4,497,000 7% 314,790

In terms of number of atheist instead of percentages, China, Japan, Russia, Vietnam, Germany, France, USA, and Britain were tops (see the second table)

Ronin

11-01-2005, 03:25

9%.....way to go......
I have just 3 words...
We´re taking over! ~D

solypsist

11-01-2005, 03:35

athiesm is, of course, a faith based religion

Quietus

11-01-2005, 03:42

athiesm is, of course, a faith based religion Negative, Mr. Solypsist. If I don't believe in Leprechauns and say they don't exist, it doesn't mean it is a faith based religion. ~:)

TheSilverKnight

11-01-2005, 03:46

Negative, Mr. Solypsist. If I don't believe in Leprechauns and say they don't exist, it doesn't mean it is a faith based religion. ~:)

But Leprechauns DO exist! Irishmen have showed me pictures ~D

Kanamori

11-01-2005, 03:47

Atheism is a faith, but it is not a religion, unless you buy into the whole "liberal conspiracy" arguments~;)

solypsist

11-01-2005, 03:48

not believing in leprachauns is not the definition of atheism. by that logic me not believing in flying pigs or haunted houses would make me an atheist, but it doesn't.

but to conciously not believe in any divine being does take a certain amount of faith that you are right. and the entirety of that movement (and subsciption to that classification) makes it a religion.

Negative, Mr. Solypsist. If I don't believe in Leprechauns and say they don't exist, it doesn't mean it is a faith based religion. ~:)

Quietus

11-01-2005, 03:49

solypsist

11-01-2005, 03:50

How do you know Leprechauns are not divine?

my breakfast cereal told me.

Byzantine Prince

11-01-2005, 03:54

Soly, it's lack of faith. I don't get the argument.

PS: Yes we are taking over. Notice all the socially superior countries have a large percentage of atheists.

Quietus

11-01-2005, 03:56

my breakfast cereal told me. ~:joker: I can invent an infinite number of divine creatures (eg. the infamous Flying Spaghetti Monster) and just because people do not believe they exist doesn't mean it is a faith-based religion.

Kanamori

11-01-2005, 04:13

1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs

Atheism qualifies under 2b (1) and 3, agnosticism does not.

1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

One could only argue under 1b (2) that it could be a religion, since it being a religion is dependent on it being religious.

1 : relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity <a religious person> <religious attitudes>
2 : of, relating to, or devoted to religious beliefs or observances
3 a : scrupulously and conscientiously faithful b : FERVENT, ZEALOUS

Atheism does not qualify as a religion, because it cannot qualify as religious.

~:joker:

Reverend Joe

11-01-2005, 04:17

:dancinglock:

solypsist

11-01-2005, 04:22

okay i'm not going to argue semantics, i've seen how those tend to go.

and so: just how british are you? (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4099770.stm)
a question that proves to be self referential (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=56333) to the forum.

Papewaio

11-01-2005, 04:29

PS: Yes we are taking over. Notice all the socially superior countries have a large percentage of atheists.

Which came first? The atheists or the lifestyle that is so nice that no one feels the need to pray?

Are the really atheists or would their tune change the moment they were put in a high pressure situation?

solypsist

11-01-2005, 04:30

"there are no atheists in foxholes."

Which came first? The atheists or the lifestyle that is so nice that no one feels the need to pray?

Are the really atheists or would their tune change the moment they were put in a high pressure situation?

Papewaio

11-01-2005, 04:31

Nor are there any straight men... oh you said foxhole....

Soulforged

11-01-2005, 04:43

And we intervened in WWII for this?

At least the Nazis beleived in God, a twisted evil form of God, but a form nontheless ~:rolleyes:
Twisted kind of God??? LOL I seriously don't know from where do you get your morals, if any, but read the bible please...In fact all the three mayor religions (Islam, judaism, christianity) are branches of a common origin. Your God is pretty twisted...~:rolleyes: For God's sake...
What is so bad, even if Europe was turning islamic, it's like changing christianity for another drug, but I prefer real drugs at least, wine will be fine.

Kanamori

11-01-2005, 04:47

you're no fun anymore.

Redleg

11-01-2005, 04:50

"there are no atheists in foxholes."

And a very true saying. I have known some who claimed to be atheists - that when we went on our first artillery raid during Desert Storm - where we were expected to have counterbattery on our postion. We were the bait you see. Everyone went to the chaplin' service and had a nice little prayer for safety before that operation. All of us - those who were christian, agnostics,and atheists all took a little comfort from the chaplin that day.

So I am normally amused by those who claim that god does not exist. I always wonder why they use the term damn after his name if they don't believe in him. Rather amusing when you think about it.~;p

Soulforged

11-01-2005, 05:02

So I am normally amused by those who claim that god does not exist. I always wonder why they use the term damn after his name if they don't believe in him. Rather amusing when you think about it.~;p
I already answered that Red ~;) . In any case if I come to say that, that doesn't make God real, because God's ideal, you accepted it, remember...Being ideal it's not different that the illusion you might have in the desert, come to think of it, it's ironic...You may try to reach for the water to drink and replenish your strenght, but you will be eating sand...

Redleg

11-01-2005, 05:11

I already answered that Red ~;) . In any case if I come to say that, that doesn't make God real, because God's ideal, you accepted it, remember.

LOL - doesn't work that way my friend. When you curse something you give credence to the idea of its existance. Why else damn god if you do not believe in his existance as a possilbity.

..Being ideal it's not different that the illusion you might have in the desert, come to think of it, it's ironic...You may try to reach for the water to drink and replenish your strenght, but you will be eating sand...

when you are attempting to reach water in the desert and you begin to see the heat waves shimmer across the sand - your mind plays a little trick and you believe you are seeing water in the distance. So you walk and walk toward the shimmering heat waves that you think are water. Your mind has convinced itself that it is indeed water - and in your mind that water exists regardless of the fact that it doesn't exist in reality.

Devastatin Dave

11-01-2005, 05:15

"there are no atheists in foxholes."
They are usually in manholes.:hide:

bmolsson

11-01-2005, 05:21

I believe that after death you end up in Internet. I believe in ICANN. I send E-mails and post in forums on a regular basis to show my faith and hope for a higher recognition. Maybe one day I get my own base domain.
Everyone has an IP. The IP is reborn. This is the evidence that our IP will exist for ever. Hail the Internet and join the force......... ~;)

solypsist

11-01-2005, 05:31

https://img186.imageshack.us/img186/8291/1104634811satan2xv.gif

yesdachi

11-01-2005, 06:02

and so: just how british are you? (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4099770.stm)
a question that proves to be self referential (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=56333) to the forum.
I think I failed the British citizenship test. Darn question 8, I thought for sure I would have to prepare for a fight in the car park if I spilled someone’s pint in a local pub.~D Oh well, better safe than sorry.

bmolsson

11-01-2005, 07:29

https://img186.imageshack.us/img186/8291/1104634811satan2xv.gif

I believe this guy is Canadian..... :hide:

Quietus

11-01-2005, 08:26

And a very true saying. I have known some who claimed to be atheists - that when we went on our first artillery raid during Desert Storm - where we were expected to have counterbattery on our postion. We were the bait you see. Everyone went to the chaplin' service and had a nice little prayer for safety before that operation. All of us - those who were christian, agnostics,and atheists all took a little comfort from the chaplin that day.

So I am normally amused by those who claim that god does not exist. I always wonder why they use the term damn after his name if they don't believe in him. Rather amusing when you think about it.~;p Not as amusing as the late Pope John Paul II relying on science, medicine and surgery to extend his life. Not to mention, accepting Evolution as well.

I believe this guy is Canadian..... Looks like a evil guy trying to summon hurricanes. ~:)

Adrian II

11-01-2005, 08:46

My breakfast cereal tells me 'things are happening' in the Backroom.
Thanks, Solypsist. ~:cheers:

Redleg

11-01-2005, 14:44

Not as amusing as the late Pope John Paul II relying on science, medicine and surgery to extend his life. Not to mention, accepting Evolution as well.

Believe in God does not equate to a dis-belief in medicine or science. So to find amusement you would have to find where initially Pope John Paul II stated that he did not believe in science, medicine, or surgery to insure a long and healthly life along with the belief in God. You find such a statement then indeed it would be amusing in the same since. Now accepting evolution is not inconsistent with being of faith either - remember our discussion of intelligent design. Again you would have to find a statement where Pope John Paul II stated that creation was the only acceptable solution and then later on stated that evolution was correct to have the same or greater level of amusing then when a athiest finds god while under stress, or uses God in a curse.

Looks like a evil guy trying to summon hurricanes. ~:)

Not at all - it looks like the evil guy dancing because of all the amusing athiests - because by using God in a curse they are confirming his existance and damning themselves into his realm, ~:eek: ~;p

Byzantine Prince

11-01-2005, 15:21

Not at all - it looks like the evil guy dancing because of all the amusing athiests - because by using God in a curse they are confirming his existance and damning themselves into his realm, ~:eek: ~;p
Well aparently someone has no idea about the Byronic cult that wants to insult god for the sake of going to hell. ~:rolleyes:

Nevertheless, I would still rather go to that guy's realm than a place with a guy that causes hurricanes and burns down cities. When was the last time the devil is said to have done something evil, seriously. All I ever hear is that he corrupts people, but that's just a scare tactic. We all know that the devil is nothing but the reincarnation of the god Pan. I mean they look the same! Seriously Redleg! Your devil is my God of the forest scare. ~:joker:

Oh and just in case you think I actually believe in god by hypothetically stating I would not want to be with him, you seriously need to freshen up on your logic.

Dâriûsh

11-01-2005, 15:22

Funny. I didn't see anything about a phobia anywhere. But it seems some like to marginalize any who think differently by saying they have an irrational fear, even if they have no fear at all.

Crazed Rabbit Oh, my mistake.

I just thought that his hypothesis (his claim that the Muslims in Europe will increase in numbers and forcefully convert the natives to Islam) was just that.

TinCow

11-01-2005, 16:22

LOL - doesn't work that way my friend. When you curse something you give credence to the idea of its existance. Why else damn god if you do not believe in his existance as a possilbity.

So you're saying that everyone who calls another person a mother____ actually believes that the other person engages in incest? How about bastard? Since when have curse words and terms actually reflected reality?

Slyspy

11-01-2005, 17:02

Believe in God does not equate to a dis-belief in medicine or science. So to find amusement you would have to find where initially Pope John Paul II stated that he did not believe in science, medicine, or surgery to insure a long and healthly life along with the belief in God. You find such a statement then indeed it would be amusing in the same since. Now accepting evolution is not inconsistent with being of faith either - remember our discussion of intelligent design. Again you would have to find a statement where Pope John Paul II stated that creation was the only acceptable solution and then later on stated that evolution was correct to have the same or greater level of amusing then when a athiest finds god while under stress, or uses God in a curse.

Not at all - it looks like the evil guy dancing because of all the amusing athiests - because by using God in a curse they are confirming his existance and damning themselves into his realm, ~:eek: ~;p

No, thats just because it has become a habitual mode of speech. Just because I say "Oh bollocks" doesn't mean I worship them. Although I am rather fond of mine. Besides which cursing in God's name is against the commandments so why would a believer do so?

Redleg

11-01-2005, 17:50

So you're saying that everyone who calls another person a mother____ actually believes that the other person engages in incest? How about bastard? Since when have curse words and terms actually reflected reality?

Nope - just that I find atheists you take God's name in vain in the form of a curse - is very amusing since they claim not to believe in God.

Well actually if your a male and sleeping with the mother of a child - you are indeed just that. ~;p

Bastard - considering the number of unmarried couples with children - just might be a true statement ~:eek:

I normally use the curse word that fits the reality of the situation. And so do many others who still pay attention to the language that they use. Its obvious that you are not one to pay attention to what you say and where you say it. ~:joker:

Its amusing how some like to jump to conclusions - isn't ~:rolleyes:

Redleg

11-01-2005, 17:55

No, thats just because it has become a habitual mode of speech. Just because I say "Oh bollocks" doesn't mean I worship them. Although I am rather fond of mine. Besides which cursing in God's name is against the commandments so why would a believer do so?

Ah you might want to do a little research on the reason that particlur curse came about. Its fairily interesting - happens to do with cursing an individual more then the God.

Again by mentioning god in a form of swearing at an individual - shows how full of hypocrisy many atheists are. Denying his existance but using the term in a form of cursing at their fellow man, inamated objects, and even God himself. Once again rather amusing. Just notice how quick a couple of you are at trying to explain away the amusing aspects of it. ~:joker: ~:handball:

Geoffrey S

11-01-2005, 18:09

Ah you might want to do a little research on the reason that particlur curse came about. Its fairily interesting - happens to do with cursing an individual more then the God.
Didn't it have something to do with clergymen? I vaguely remember something along those lines for allowing use of the word 'bollocks' in the title of a Sex Pistols album.

TinCow

11-01-2005, 18:11

I normally use the curse word that fits the reality of the situation. And so do many others who still pay attention to the language that they use. Its obvious that you are not one to pay attention to what you say and where you say it. ~:joker:

Its amusing how some like to jump to conclusions - isn't ~:rolleyes:

I'll assume you were being sarcastic with that last line. You don't even know what my religious beliefs are, so referring to me as one of those athiests is rather presumptuous.

As for curse words, certain terms become common in society for various reasons. I happen to live in a largely Christian community and as a result many of the curses that I hear on a regular basis do indeed invoke God in some form. The use of this term by athiests is nothing more than the embracement of local terminology.

Saying that "Jesus H. Christ" should not be used by athiests is like saying that gentiles shouldn't use "shmooze" or "shmuck." People absorb the culture of those that they encounter frequently, especially when it comes to linguisitics. Athiests invoking God is no different; they are just using popular terms for expressing anger or frustration.

Ja'chyra

11-01-2005, 18:18

I was going to post but then I thought that if I did then DD would have hooked another in his fishing competition.

Dammit ~:eek: ~D

yesdachi

11-01-2005, 18:18

When I swear (which isn’t very often) it is usually out of frustration but if I am swearing at someone I will usually try and use a swear word that they might find the most offensive, regardless of its real meaning and sometimes in spite of its real meaning. So if I knew it would irritate the person I was swearing at to include the word “god” I would totally do it! ~D

Redleg

11-01-2005, 18:19

I'll assume you were being sarcastic with that last line.

Everything in this thread has been a dose of sarcasm - so I am just helping it along

You don't even know what my religious beliefs are, so referring to me as one of those athiests is rather presumptuous.

Sure it is - and since it was a sarcastic post - maybe its true maybe its wrong, and most likely I care not what your religious beliefs are. The jumping to conclusions happens to not be relevative to your religious belief - but to your statments. ~:eek:

As for curse words, certain terms become common in society for various reasons. I happen to live in a largely Christian community and as a result many of the curses that I hear on a regular basis do indeed invoke God in some form. The use of this term by athiests is nothing more than the embracement of local terminology.

Which runs counter to their statement stance in regards to God - therefore its very amusing now isn't?

Saying that "Jesus H. Christ" should not be used by athiests is like saying that gentiles shouldn't use "shmooze" or "shmuck." People absorb the culture of those that they encounter frequently, especially when it comes to linguisitics. Athiests invoking God is no different; they are just using popular terms for expressing anger or frustration.

And again makes the whole thing rather amusing because of their stated belief. Using expressions that represent something they profess not to believe in. Rather amusing - just like I initially stated. ~:rolleyes:

Redleg

11-01-2005, 18:21

I was going to post but then I thought that if I did then DD would have hooked another in his fishing competition.

Dammit ~:eek: ~D

Yes indeed he has hooked a few - and it seems so have I. Rather amusing isn't. ~D

TinCow

11-01-2005, 18:52

And again makes the whole thing rather amusing because of their stated belief. Using expressions that represent something they profess not to believe in. Rather amusing - just like I initially stated. ~:rolleyes:

True, it is difficult to argue that it is not amusing from that perspective. However, I simply disagree that it qualifies as hypocrisy as you stated above. If anything, it seems more inconsistent for non-athiests, particularly Christians, Jews and Muslims, to use the term. In all of those religions (and I'm sure in many others, but I do not know their tenets) it is considered improper to use God's name in vain.

Athiests, having no belief in a higher power, would not ascribe themselves to this rule and could in fact be said to be flaunting religion entirely by using the term. If we really want to analyze this, and that looks like what I've gotten myself into, I would have to say that it is far more appropriate for athiests to curse with "God," "Jesus," "Christ," "Jehovah" and other such terms than it is for the faithful to do so. The former are in essence daring what they do not believe in to prove itself to them while the latter are violating the laws of their religion.

Redleg

11-01-2005, 19:01

True, it is difficult to argue that it is not amusing from that perspective. However, I simply disagree that it qualifies as hypocrisy as you stated above.

Oh but it fits the meaning of hypocrisy - not by much - but just enough to make it all rather amusing. Saying you don't believe in God - but using the name in form of cursing at others.

If anything, it seems more inconsistent for non-athiests, particularly Christians, Jews and Muslims, to use the term. In all of those religions (and I'm sure in many others, but I do not know their tenets) it is considered improper to use God's name in vain.

Yes for one who claims to be religous to use the words in everyday language as a common form of cursing at your fellow man is more hypocritical then an atheist using the term.

Athiests, having no belief in a higher power, would not ascribe themselves to this rule and could in fact be said to be flaunting religion entirely by using the term.

Which makes them hypocrits - and something else. And I still laugh at them because of the obvious nature of their idiocy.

If we really want to analyze this, and that looks like what I've gotten myself into, I would have to say that it is far more appropriate for athiests to curse with "God," "Jesus," "Christ," "Jehovah" and other such terms than it is for the faithful to do so. The former are in essence daring what they do not believe in to prove itself to them while the latter are violating the laws of their religion.

And both are hypocrits in their use it in everyday language - I try to steer away from such language because it is violating the tenents of the religion.

But like I said I find the atheists you use the lords name in curses to be rather amusing, its both hypocritical and shows Solypsist's picture is correct - the Devil is dancing and very happy with the numbe of atheists that use God's name in vain
~:joker:

King Henry V

11-01-2005, 19:16

An Islamic mathematician named al-Jabr
So that's the b******* name who's responsible for all my suffering!:rifle:

BDC

11-01-2005, 19:27

Saying "God" is more a generic curse than something that carries any sort of religious weight. Maybe once, but now it's nothing more than another swear word.

Meneldil

11-01-2005, 19:35

Nice topic we have here. First, someone who report every post related to christianism as 'christian bashing' quietly explain that all Muslims are savages. Then, we have some european bashing, just for the fun of it. Finally, a bit of 'Atheism is a religion' total nonsense, supported by cheap and pointless arguments.

Maybe I could ask for it to be closed, since it seemed to work for Devastating Dave ? Or maybe it works only if you spend your time whinning ?

TinCow

11-01-2005, 19:49

Redleg

11-01-2005, 20:02

Sorry if I've contributed to anything that's disapproved of here. I was just arguing a point that I found interesting. I have a tendency to grab totally off-topic statements and turn that into a seperate debate. It pisses my wife off too.

Since atheistism is not a religion - then its more then fair to talk about a philisophy in the way we have been discussing it - either one of us has attacked the viewpoint of a religion or the philisophy in a degrading way.

However speaking of "cheap and pointless dicussion" - someone needs to take a bitter pill of their own medicine. ~:joker:

Did we offend some atheist idealogue who wants to attack religion every chance they get?~;p

Redleg

11-01-2005, 20:06

Hurin_Rules

11-01-2005, 20:15

Since atheistism is not a religion - then its more then fair to talk about a philisophy in the way we have been discussing it - either one of us has attacked the viewpoint of a religion or the philisophy in a degrading way.

However speaking of "cheap and pointless dicussion" - someone needs to take a bitter pill of their own medicine. ~:joker:

Did we offend some atheist idealogue who wants to attack religion every chance they get?~;p

Sorry Redleg, but I think that's a bit much.

In this thread you have accused Atheists of both 'idiocy' and 'hypocrisy' for using phrases that are part of everyday parlance. This in a thread that did not begin in acrimony or with such insulting characterizations.

Yes, some atheists go too far in critiquing religion, and in characterizing the religious as idiots.

But two wrongs don't make a right.

Redleg

11-01-2005, 20:24

Sorry Redleg, but I think that's a bit much.

It was rather mild compared to what I was going to say.

In this thread you have accused Atheists of both 'idiocy' and 'hypocrisy' for using phrases that are part of everyday parlance. This in a thread that did not begin in acrimony or with such insulting characterizations.

Ah both are descriptions used several times in other threads when speaking about Chrisitians - and one that I do not complain about when they are speaking in general terms at the philisophy of religion. Again did I use the words directed at any one individual or at the priniciple of atheist philisophy. Using the word as its is defined (word play) is all I am doing - nor is my comments degrading or inflammatory directed at the subject. Now Hypocrisy has a easy definition for one to find - and in the context I used it - you might disagree with my statement - but hypocrisy is not an inflammatory comment but a describition of how one finds an action.

Now for the term idiocy - you might want to look at the context of how it was used and what the term means - here I will help - the way in which I used it implies this thought - something notably stupid or foolish again tell me how that is not charastic of using the God or Jesus in a curse if your an atheist viewed by a Christian like myself.

Yes, some atheists go too far in critiquing religion, and in characterizing the religious as idiots.

And point out where I said somone is an idiot - since you have attempted to nickpick the term. Now defend your statement :duel: ~:joker:

But two wrongs don't make a right.

But then I haven't attacked atheists as a group - just pointing out the hypocrisy and the idiocy of one thing. :knight:

Byzantine Prince

11-01-2005, 20:34

Don't bother with Redleg. Apparently he is not smart enough to realize that saying Godamnit(or GAH!) is part of everyday speach not by choice, but by reflex. This might be ironic, but it is in no way a sign of incompetence.

I think you guys are feeding the troll, because I'm pretty sure he's doing this as a petty gaff to enrage atheists. It's pretty stupid though, I got a good laugh out of it.

Taffy_is_a_Taff

11-01-2005, 20:42

I think you'll find that Algebra is not named after Al-Jabr but from the title of a book written by Mohammed al-Khwarizmi.

The Greek Diophantus is the earliest mathematician known to have been involved in the field that would become known as algebra: al-Khwarizmi clarified and expounded upon earlier algebra, thereby clearly defining the field of algebra.

Also, there is uncertainty over whether al-Khwarizmi was a Muslim or a Zoroastrian.

Hurin_Rules

11-01-2005, 20:43

I think you guys are feeding the troll, because I'm pretty sure he's doing this as a petty gaff to enrage atheists.

I think you're right.

The feedbag is shut. :)

Redleg

11-01-2005, 21:32

Don't bother with Redleg. Apparently he is not smart enough to realize that saying Godamnit(or GAH!) is part of everyday speach not by choice, but by reflex. This might be ironic, but it is in no way a sign of incompetence.

Tsk Tsk - you would be surprised on how intelligent I am BP - however it seems that you have fallen for the same trap as the rest. Your rather amusing yourself ~:eek:

I think you guys are feeding the troll, because I'm pretty sure he's doing this as a petty gaff to enrage atheists. It's pretty stupid though, I got a good laugh out of it.

I have been laughing the whole time - ~:joker:

Devastatin Dave

11-01-2005, 22:16

**watches little Org fishies nibbling at his bait**

~D

TinCow

11-01-2005, 22:32

I don't get it. This place is specifically designed for debate for its own sake. I've lurked here for a long time and post every once in a while on threads that interest me. The one continuing trait I've noticed is that very few people post here in order to educate themselves or to convince others of something. These threads are all designed specifically to provoke debate for its own sake. As such, what's wrong with making a thread that blatantly does this? If we all come here purely to debate, does it really matter what we talk about?

solypsist

11-01-2005, 23:24

i fixed your quote to better reflect more accurate description through a less specific statement.

The one continuing trait I've noticed is that very few people post here in order to educate themselves or to convince others of something. These threads are all designed specifically to provoke.

Seamus Fermanagh

11-01-2005, 23:39

WHy not use your own words, Soly, too difficult?

Soulforged

11-02-2005, 00:19

LOL - doesn't work that way my friend. When you curse something you give credence to the idea of its existance. Why else damn god if you do not believe in his existance as a possilbity.Well many times I cursed God. Last I checked my email box or my phone messages there wasn't any response...~;)

when you are attempting to reach water in the desert and you begin to see the heat waves shimmer across the sand - your mind plays a little trick and you believe you are seeing water in the distance. So you walk and walk toward the shimmering heat waves that you think are water. Your mind has convinced itself that it is indeed water - and in your mind that water exists regardless of the fact that it doesn't exist in reality.Exactly. It's the same with God.

Slyspy

11-02-2005, 02:39

Someone who I have previously regarded as a sensible Orgah has, through his responses here, shown himself to be less than I thought. I am disappointed.

Quietus

11-02-2005, 05:03

Believe in God does not equate to a dis-belief in medicine or science. So to find amusement you would have to find where initially Pope John Paul II stated that he did not believe in science, medicine, or surgery to insure a long and healthly life along with the belief in God. You find such a statement then indeed it would be amusing in the same since. Now accepting evolution is not inconsistent with being of faith either - remember our discussion of intelligent design. Again you would have to find a statement where Pope John Paul II stated that creation was the only acceptable solution and then later on stated that evolution was correct to have the same or greater level of amusing then when a athiest finds god while under stress, or uses God in a curse.
1) Evolution and Science are totally incongruent with Faith that's why Creationism is dead and in its place is Intelligent Design (hint: ID has nothing to do with the big bang).

2) "...evolution is more than a hypothesis." - Pope John Paul II. All of a sudden Darwin is chic and trendy. ~:confused:

3). Faith and praying are not enough for Pope John Paul II to extend is life, maybe there's really no god outside your foxholes.

Not at all - it looks like the evil guy dancing because of all the amusing athiests - because by using God in a curse they are confirming his existance and damning themselves into his realm, ~:eek: ~;p So, St. Patrick's Day and Christmas makes Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer and Leprechauns real? It's all an illusion Mr. Redleg, just like your God. ~:)

Soulforged

11-02-2005, 05:16

Someone who I have previously regarded as a sensible Orgah has, through his responses here, shown himself to be less than I thought. I am disappointed.
Oh I hope *he* wasn't me...~;)

1) Evolution and Science are totally incongruent with Faith that's why Creationism is dead and in its place is Intelligent Design (hint: ID has nothing to do with the big bang).I think that you're missing his point. He's just talking about ways of saying things. There's nothing of substance, nor enough to substanciate his thoughts.

3). Faith and praying are not enough for Pope John Paul II to extend is life, maybe there's really no god outside your foxholes.Don't even go there...The christians claim that God has no real influence in material world, of course because "he" is just an idea. But it seems to be that "he" has influence when it comes to medics saving pacients using science, or to the same bible, when launching plagues over Egipt and killing his child, WOW- What a mercyful God that is!!!
Until some recent time I truly beleived in the Bible as a book of moral guidence, at least by interpretation, but after reading part of it, I now understand that you must really turn the words a lot to get something of value of that old boring book...Like the Church did for so many time.

Redleg

11-02-2005, 06:01

Oh I hope *he* wasn't me...~;)

Most likely he was refering to me - he will be disappointed futher if a certain individual ever returns to the .org.

I think that you're missing his point. He's just talking about ways of saying things. There's nothing of substance, nor enough to substanciate his thoughts.

Bingo we have a winner - give the man a nice thick cigar of his choice.

Don't even go there...The christians claim that God has no real influence in material world, of course because "he" is just an idea. But it seems to be that "he" has influence when it comes to medics saving pacients using science, or to the same bible, when launching plagues over Egipt and killing his child, WOW- What a mercyful God that is!!!

Yes indeed he should go there for many reasons - but it seems you at least understand the point of my sarcasm in this thread.

Until some recent time I truly beleived in the Bible as a book of moral guidence, at least by interpretation, but after reading part of it, I now understand that you must really turn the words a lot to get something of value of that old boring book...Like the Church did for so many time.

The bible is open to many interpations - unfortunely many have used it for motives that were not in line with the lessons in the book.

Redleg

11-02-2005, 06:05

So, St. Patrick's Day and Christmas makes Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer and Leprechauns real? It's all an illusion Mr. Redleg, just like your God. ~:)

And life is but a dream ~:cool:

Crazed Rabbit

11-02-2005, 06:57

So, St. Patrick's Day and Christmas makes Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer and Leprechauns real? It's all an illusion Mr. Redleg, just like your God.

I am reminded of a quote from C.S. Lewis:
A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.

Crazed Rabbit

solypsist

11-02-2005, 07:22

nevermind. wrong thread.

/edit

Quietus

11-02-2005, 08:16

I am reminded of a quote from C.S. Lewis:
A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.

Crazed Rabbit An interesting quote Crazed Rabbit. However, I must say, how can you feel, witness or be sure of God's glory if all you have is faith?

The Sun, you can feel, witness and be sure of.

bmolsson

11-02-2005, 09:23

Because somebody is God less, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist..... Or vice versa.... ~;)

Redleg

11-02-2005, 14:11

Because somebody is God less, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist..... Or vice versa.... ~;)

Again we have a winner - you can collect the cigar of your choice and know with satification that you are correct. :bow:

Devastatin Dave

11-02-2005, 14:48

Because somebody is God less, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist..... Or vice versa.... ~;)
great post...:bow:

Byzantine Prince

11-02-2005, 15:36

Because somebody is God less, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist..... Or vice versa.... ~;)
Oh I'm pretty sure I killed him. ~D ~:eek: :hide:

Redleg

11-02-2005, 15:58

Oh I'm pretty sure I killed him. ~D ~:eek: :hide:

Nope it was someone else that attempted to kill him - and that individual has died. ~:eek:

Soulforged

11-03-2005, 01:21

Most likely he was refering to me - he will be disappointed futher if a certain individual ever returns to the .org.

I would like to know who he was. Maybe a worthy deposit of my atheists rants... :mean:

Quietus

11-04-2005, 02:49

Because somebody is God less, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist..... Or vice versa.... ~;)
Let's suppose there's a God who created the universe. Are we also going to suppose there's a God's creator?

The Universe <--God? <--God's Creator? <-- Creator of God's Creator? <--?....

If anyone finds it hard to believe our being came together randomly, then wouldn't it be harder to believe that God's being came together randomly? ~:)

solypsist

11-04-2005, 02:54

it's beyond the ability of the human mind and our petty laws of physics to understand. that's all there is.

Let's suppose there's a God who created the universe. Are we also going to suppose there's a God's creator?

The Universe <--God? <--God's Creator? <-- Creator of God's Creator? <--?....

If anyone finds it hard to believe our being came together randomly, then wouldn't it be harder to believe that God's being came together randomly? ~:)

Redleg

11-04-2005, 02:54

Let's suppose there's a God who created the universe. Are we also going to suppose there's a God's creator?

The Universe <--God? <--God's Creator? <-- Creator of God's Creator? <--?....

If anyone finds it hard to believe our being came together randomly, then wouldn't it be harder to believe that God's being came together randomly? ~:)

How funny - it seems you still don't get it?

You don't need science to answer a question about belief.

Byzantine Prince

11-04-2005, 03:07

Nope it was someone else that attempted to kill him - and that individual has died. ~:eek:
Ok then let me answer that question again in a different way, because it seems you don't understand what 'killed god' means.

Because somebody is God less, it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist..... Or vice versa....
Yes it does. To the person that was raised to believe in god, he has to be the one to kill him off his world. To the person that will never hear about god, he will never have to the honour of having to kill god, just like he wouldn't have the honour to kill any other made up entity.

Soly, you must understand what I mean, after all your name is just a mispelled 'solipsist'. Only the person himself can acquire first hand knoledge of his own existence, and that said person cannot do the same for anything else wether it has an essense or not.

Redleg

11-04-2005, 03:15

Ok then let me answer that question again in a different way, because it seems you don't understand what 'killed god' means.

Do tell ~D

Maybe there is more then one definition for the word Kill - how many meanings does it have?

:duel:

AntiochusIII

11-04-2005, 03:23

Do tell ~D

Maybe there is more then one definition for the word Kill - how many meanings does it have?

:duel:Ah, don't presume you do not know, Redleg, you are wiser than that. ~;)

Nietzche intended this as a metaphor in the first place. To "kill" God is to dispel one's own beliefs in "God." He believes (believed?) it to be the improvements of man, I gather, to rely no longer on such notions.

OMG I'm stealing BP's job.

Edit: After your post below, I must say I won't add you further in your joke! :P

Seamus Fermanagh

11-04-2005, 03:28

Back to the issue of bing "Godless."

Listening to the O'Reilly Radio Factor this evening, he noted that the number of adults listing themselves as weekly church-goers in European nations was very small. 3% in Denmark, 5% in Sweden and Finland, 10% or fewer in France, The Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, and Luxembourg. This is symptomatic of these countries having become secular to the point where a majority of the citizenry have discarded religion.

While this does not guarantee that more of those individuals would now label themselves as being "Godless," I suspect that its a fair bet that atheism is on the rise as well. Perhaps Great Britain is following this trend?

bmolsson

11-04-2005, 03:41

Let's suppose there's a God who created the universe. Are we also going to suppose there's a God's creator?

The Universe <--God? <--God's Creator? <-- Creator of God's Creator? <--?....

If anyone finds it hard to believe our being came together randomly, then wouldn't it be harder to believe that God's being came together randomly? ~:)

It all originate from the Quantum and all the Q's there. That is common knowledge...... ~:cheers:

Byzantine Prince

11-04-2005, 03:45

Redleg

11-04-2005, 03:52

Nietzche intended this as a metaphor in the first place. To "kill" God is to dispel one's own beliefs in "God." He believes (believed?) it to be the improvements of man, I gather, to rely no longer on such notions.

Really - do tell me some more ~;p

I have had several philisophy classes - most of them way before BP was even a thought in his parents minds. I am fully aware of what Nietzche meant with his philisophy - however it makes for a good joke when the need arises.

Redleg

11-04-2005, 03:54

The more godless people will become the closer we will be to having a superman arise among us.

So Clarke Kent is soon coming to earth to save the world. How fun - maybe I will live long enough to see that - not.

~;p

Byzantine Prince

11-04-2005, 03:55

Redleg is what's known as an annoying self-important higher-then-thou-so-I'm-going-to-joke intellectual.

Redleg

11-04-2005, 03:57

Redleg is what's known as a annoying self-important higher-then-thou-so-I'm-going-to-joke intellectual.

Actually I am known as something else. Which is more then you could ever be. ~:eek:

Want to trade insults - I am pretty good at it. Been doing it a lot longer then you have been around in the world. ~;p

Care to play? :duel:

Byzantine Prince

11-04-2005, 04:06

No, I don't play with kids. Why don't you go in your room and play with yourself for a while and then come back with a less pompous attitude.

Redleg

11-04-2005, 04:11

The more godless people will become the closer we will be to having a superman arise among us.

Okay smart guy take a wild guess who tried to bring about Nietzche's Superman philisophy? ~:rolleyes:

Oh wait he might just be another hero of yours.....~:rolleyes:

Redleg

11-04-2005, 04:19

No, I don't play with kids. Why don't you go in your room and play with yourself for a while and then come back with a less pompous attitude.

Speaking of pompous - you might want to check out what the definition of pompous is. The individual who demonstrated that first in this thread was yourself. Here let me quote you since it seems you have a misunderstanding of what the word means, along with what kill means. ~;p

Oh I'm pretty sure I killed him.

Until you thought to assume I was serious with my comments - I was just being sarcastic - You might want to get over yourself first Nietzche is not the be all philisophy that every one must subscribe to.

Byzantine Prince

11-04-2005, 04:24

Speaking of pompous - you might want to check out what the definition of pompous is. The individual who demonstrated that first in this thread was yourself. Here let me quote you since it seems you have a misunderstanding of what the word means, along with what kill means. ~;p
WOW, more childishness. I would expect someone from the army to be a little more mature in his insults. ~:joker:

Until you thought to assume I was serious with my comments - I was just being sarcastic - You might want to get over yourself first Nietzche is not the be all philisophy that every one must subscribe to.
You don't know anything about me. You can't know what I else I read or don't read. Everything you just said is just more juvenile remarks.

Papewaio

11-04-2005, 04:28

BP that can apply the other way round. What we see of patrons on these boards is like what we see of an iceberg above water.

Most of them are far more well developed characters then they appear in their forum masks.

Soulforged

11-04-2005, 04:30

Papewaio

11-04-2005, 04:34

Well I can say you that I'm as stupid as I sound...~;)

And with that ironic statement I dub thee an Australian. ~:cheers: :bow:

Redleg

11-04-2005, 05:06

WOW, more childishness. I would expect someone from the army to be a little more mature in his insults. ~:joker:

Oh you would like colorful insults - Oh I still just playing right now - I can get really colorful if I desire.
Something along the lines of pox ridden, used by sailors and your genetic make-up if you so desire.

But since this is a forum with several age groups - I will keep the insults and the comments consistent with your age group - one for the general audience to be able to read.

You don't know anything about me. You can't know what I else I read or don't read. Everything you just said is just more juvenile remarks.

Actually I haven't even begun to assume that I know what you read and don't read - nor did I state that. You must have a problem with your ability to read - here try the sentence again - should I break it down in a more simple form verus a run on sentence.

Until you thought to assume I was serious with my comments, I was just being sarcastic. Now you do realize what sarcasm is? Should I explain sarcasm to you since it seems you have a harder time understanding it then I.

You might want to get over yourself first, Nietzche is not the be all philisophy that every one must subscribe to.

Notice what this sentence states - oh wait you seem to think it states about what you read or don't read. Hmm - it seems you can't read english very well - I wonder if your in special education or learning english as a second language? Now there less then a genius Byzantine Prince where is my assumption on what you read or don't read. There is only one assumption made by me in this thread about your stated philisophy in this thread and its soley based upon two statements that you made.

(I could bring out the reference were you talked about killing everyone that doesn't agree with a certain political philisophy - you remember that discussion now don't you - but we will save that for now.)

Oh I'm pretty sure I killed him

and

The more godless people will become the closer we will be to having a superman arise among us.

Now my statement soley refers to these two statements made by yourself - and that Nietzche is not the be all philisophy that everyone must acknowledge or subscribe to. Not an assumption about what you read or don't read at all. But an assumption about what your two little statements here mean.

Now if your going to pretend to be an intellectual, try to understand what is written before you attempt to attack someone else's intelligence because you don't like their comments.

How wait - lets see you decided to pass the first round in this little childish exchange - wait for it now Byzantine Prince

Redleg is what's known as an annoying self-important higher-then-thou-so-I'm-going-to-joke intellectual

Bingo we have a winner - again care to play - I am just warming up after being at work - maybe that is something you will come to understand when you grow a little older and get out from underneath your parents care.

I wonder if you answered the question about Superman yet? Well I shall check and see after I post this one. As I figured - I wonder if you know who used Nietzche's philisophy to create a race of supermen? It really is rather simple to answer. spoiler alert - I am engaged in just a tad bit of hyperbole with this but not what someone is bound to think

Byzantine Prince

11-04-2005, 05:52

Alright Redleg let's see what we have here. I'm getting kind of bored though so make your responces terminatory. *yawn*

Oh you would like colorful insults - Oh I still just playing right now - I can get really colorful if I desire.
Something along the lines of pox ridden, used by sailors and your genetic make-up if you so desire.
Nope, I wasn't looking for colourful. I was looking for grown up insults. Nice ability to read. How ironic.

I would expect someone from the army to be a little more mature in his insults.

But since this is a forum with several age groups - I will keep the insults and the comments consistent with your age group - one for the general audience to be able to read.
Another petty insult on your part. You know well that I am the same age group as you in general(legal) terms.

Actually I haven't even begun to assume that I know what you read and don't read - nor did I state that.
You stated that I thought Nietzsche was the be all of philosophy that every should subscribe to, yes? This is simply wrong, because you don't know that Nietzsche is the be all philosophy in my opinion. Maybe you don't understand meaning of sentences very well.

You must have a problem with your ability to read - here try the sentence again - should I break it down in a more simple form verus a run on sentence.
Try spelling properly before insulting people's language abilities.

Hmm - it seems you can't read english very well - I wonder if your in special education or learning english as a second language?
Oh so now you are insinuating I could be retarded? How nice. ~:rolleyes:

Now if your going to pretend to be an intellectual, try to understand what is written before you attempt to attack someone else's intelligence because you don't like their comments.
I did not attack your intelligence. I did call you pompous, but then I followed by intellectual.

As I figured - I wonder if you know who used Nietzche's philisophy to create a race of supermen?
You showed your colours my friend.

Redleg

11-04-2005, 06:12

Alright Redleg let's see what we have here. I'm getting kind of bored though so make your responces terminatory. *yawn*

How nice - is that because you have no ability to stay up late - must be getting close to you bed time.

Nope, I wasn't looking for colourful. I was looking for grown up insults. Nice ability to read. How ironic.

Well it seems you have the ability to understand sarcasm - next time try reading verus assuming.

Another petty insult on your part. You know well that I am the same age group as you in general(legal) terms.

Oh I got more.

You stated that I thought Nietzsche was the be all of philosophy that every should subscribe to, yes? This is simply wrong, because you don't know that Nietzsche is the be all philosophy in my opinion. Maybe you don't understand meaning of sentences very well.

Well neither do you it seems - but it did get you to respond now didn't.

Try spelling properly before insulting people's language abilities.

Not at all - maybe you should trying reading a little more.

Oh so now you are insinuating I could be retarded? How nice. ~:rolleyes:

insinuating - hardly - I clearly stated it.

I did not attack your intelligence. I did call you pompous, but then I followed by intellectual.

LOL now you can't read your own posts.

You showed your colours my friend.

Nope - you showed yours in wanting supermen to come about - how does it feel to subscribe to Nazism.

Have a wonderful day.

to the Moderators: Oh yes extreme hyperbole I know - but hell it works for me - you may now give me my just deserved warning and inablity to edit for my slam on this little knucklehead.

Quietus

11-04-2005, 08:23

How funny - it seems you still don't get it?

You don't need science to answer a question about belief. And you wonder why Atheism is exploding. People want knowledge, answers, solutions and the truth, not mind-control techniques.

it's beyond the ability of the human mind and our petty laws of physics to understand. that's all there is. I can say the exact same thing about Leprechauns.

It all originate from the Quantum and all the Q's there. That is common knowledge...... ~:confused:

Ser Clegane

11-04-2005, 09:12

I can't believe that I just had to read through these last couple of posts...

Redleg & BP you two now owe me 15 minutes of enjoyable lifetime :stare:

I expect that this "conversation" is over now and encourage you to use other devices (PM or chat room) the next time you feel the urge to slate each other.

Thanks :bow:

Ser Clegane

Redleg

11-04-2005, 14:34

And you wonder why Atheism is exploding. People want knowledge, answers, solutions and the truth, not mind-control techniques.

Oh atheism doesn't provide that now does it. Just look at how many don't think, don't want knowledge, and have no concept of what truth is - and many of them claim to be atheists also.

And no I don't wonder why atheism is exploding - the reasons can be seen if one wants to look. And some of it is for what you just stated - and their are other reasons but I will let you attempt to figure it out with your desire to worship science.

Notice how many so called atheists jumped to the defense of atheistism as a philisophy without bothering to actually read the sarcasm in my posts. Replacing one belief system with a blind following of another belief system does not make one search for truth, knowledge, answers, solutions or even truth. Its just replacing the belief system of a higher power with another one.

I can say the exact same thing about Leprechauns.

A prime examble of exactly what I just said. Solypsist gave a good answer - and instead of countering it with knowledge - you counter it with something else. But it seems you have a problem with sarcasm when its directed at atheistism - but want to use it as a counter to a his post.

~:confused:

Oh it was a rather simple pun - and one that was easy to understand.

Soulforged

11-05-2005, 00:49

Oh atheism doesn't provide that now does it. Just look at how many don't think, don't want knowledge, and have no concept of what truth is - and many of them claim to be atheists also. An atheist can have problems with alcohol. It's the same thing. The person always will leave his life under the control of some sustance or idea. I choose drawing perhaps, Redleg uses religion...Well all goes in tastes...But you're right atheism does not gives you automatic knowledge, but it's true that it opens a new door to see some truths that you previously denied in name of faith.

And no I don't wonder why atheism is exploding - the reasons can be seen if one wants to look. And some of it is for what you just stated - and their are other reasons but I will let you attempt to figure it out with your desire to worship science.We don't worship science Red, we attack it to make it stronger. That's a esencial difference between old relgion and science...

Notice how many so called atheists jumped to the defense of atheistism as a philisophy without bothering to actually read the sarcasm in my posts. Replacing one belief system with a blind following of another belief system does not make one search for truth, knowledge, answers, solutions or even truth. Its just replacing the belief system of a higher power with another one.That's certainly true. I don't beleive that the "truth" can be only founded on science by itself, but I don't think that religion contributes a lot. Phylosophy does a fine work, but as you seem to replace relgion with phylosophy then I don't see any problem. Truth, as you say, is beyond the human capacity, so the human must look above his simple flesh to seek it.

Redleg

11-05-2005, 01:08

An atheist can have problems with alcohol. It's the same thing. The person always will leave his life under the control of some sustance or idea. I choose drawing perhaps, Redleg uses religion...Well all goes in tastes...But you're right atheism does not gives you automatic knowledge, but it's true that it opens a new door to see some truths that you previously denied in name of faith.

Faith in God does not equate to an inablity to research and seek knowledge. Nor does it mean you are denying truths because of your faith. The one truth that faith in God that might escape you is how the Universe was created. One of Faith will always believe God had a hand in it.

We don't worship science Red, we attack it to make it stronger. That's a esencial difference between old relgion and science...

You missed the sacrasm in the post again - it was not directed at atheists in general but an individual in particlur. ~:cool:

That's certainly true. I don't beleive that the "truth" can be only founded on science by itself, but I don't think that religion contributes a lot. Phylosophy does a fine work, but as you seem to replace relgion with phylosophy then I don't see any problem. Truth, as you say, is beyond the human capacity, so the human must look above his simple flesh to seek it.

Religion is and can be a philosophy of life, just like anyother philosophy it can be distorted. Just by claiming your an atheistist does not exempt you from this distortion of philisophy. Now I used a bit of hyperbole, (well more then a bit) to show just that in an offensive way - but the point stands on its own merits. Even those who claim to follow a philisophy can distort there philisophy to the point it becomes a religion, and then use it to justify their actions both good and bad.

Quietus

11-05-2005, 02:41

Oh atheism doesn't provide that now does it. Just look at how many don't think, don't want knowledge, and have no concept of what truth is - and many of them claim to be atheists also.

And no I don't wonder why atheism is exploding - the reasons can be seen if one wants to look. And some of it is for what you just stated - and their are other reasons but I will let you attempt to figure it out with your desire to worship science.

Notice how many so called atheists jumped to the defense of atheistism as a philisophy without bothering to actually read the sarcasm in my posts. Replacing one belief system with a blind following of another belief system does not make one search for truth, knowledge, answers, solutions or even truth. Its just replacing the belief system of a higher power with another one. You and Faith suppress curiosity hence you drive away people from religion, to atheism. Again, If God created the universe, who created God? Who created God's creator?

A prime examble of exactly what I just said. Solypsist gave a good answer - and instead of countering it with knowledge - you counter it with something else. But it seems you have a problem with sarcasm when its directed at atheistism - but want to use it as a counter to a his post. If I say Leprechauns are beyond physics, what do YOU say?

Oh it was a rather simple pun - and one that was easy to understand. Quantum mechanics and Quarks are bold strokes which didn't address the question if God has a creator, etc. etc.

edit: broad strokes, not bold. :P

Quietus

11-05-2005, 02:47

Faith in God does not equate to an inablity to research and seek knowledge. Nor does it mean you are denying truths because of your faith. The one truth that faith in God that might escape you is how the Universe was created. One of Faith will always believe God had a hand in it.

You missed the sacrasm in the post again - it was not directed at atheists in general but an individual in particlur. ~:cool:

Religion is and can be a philosophy of life, just like anyother philosophy it can be distorted. Just by claiming your an atheistist does not exempt you from this distortion of philisophy. Now I used a bit of hyperbole, (well more then a bit) to show just that in an offensive way - but the point stands on its own merits. Even those who claim to follow a philisophy can distort there philisophy to the point it becomes a religion, and then use it to justify their actions both good and bad.So, you know God's "intentions" and "thoughts" through the bible yet God is still beyond man's understanding. Ironic.

Redleg

11-05-2005, 03:14

You and Faith suppress curiosity hence you drive away people from religion, to atheism.

LOL - Faith does not suppress curiosity - I am curious about a lot of things and I go exploring the wonders of knowledge. My pursuit of knowledge is not hampered by my faith in God.

Again, If God created the universe, who created God? Who created God's creator?

A question to ponder throughout the ages - an answer is based upon one's own philisophy.

If I say Leprechauns are beyond physics, what do YOU say?

Leprechauns are beyond physics - they are into the metaphysical based upon what one believes. And if I was to use the term "Little People" what would you say that means.

Quantum mechanics and Quarks are bold strokes which didn't address the question if God has a creator, etc. etc.

Again you seem not to be able to understand puns and sarcasm - maybe you should refrain from discussing religion and politics, and stick only to science.

So, you know God's "intentions" and "thoughts" through the bible yet God is still beyond man's understanding. Ironic

How ironic that you once again attempt to place words in my typing that is not there. DId I once say I understand what God's thoughts and intentions are - I am not even about to go into that direction since its not possible for my mind or soul to fully understand what God's thoughts and intentions are. I am not God, nor am I anyother individual but myself - I can only know my thoughts and intentions. I can make assumptions about what I believe to be truth, or what I believe to be someone else's thoughts and intentions - but I can not "know" what the actual thoughts and intentions are until they are revealed to me. Frankly God granted me freewill - so that I can think for myself - not for me to know what his thoughts are intentions are.

So again find where I state that I know what God's intentions and thoughts are - a claim that a simple christian as myself would never make. I can only know what I believe God would want me to do in regards to living a moral life and a charitable one. That does not prevent me from being curious or wondering about the meaning of life.

Byzantine Prince

11-05-2005, 03:26

Well it seems you have the ability to understand sarcasm - next time try reading verus assuming.
Next time try spelling 'versus' properly.

Oh I got more.
Yes, well you ARE full of it.

Well neither do you it seems - but it did get you to respond now didn't.
Meh, I just enjoy bashing you.

Not at all - maybe you should trying reading a little more.
Reading more? Try going back to grade school and learning to spell and form sentences.

insinuating - hardly - I clearly stated it.
I'm hardly in any special classes, but I'm sure you need to be.

LOL now you can't read your own posts.
LOL, do you enjoy making a fool of yourself?

Nope - you showed yours in wanting supermen to come about - how does it feel to subscribe to Nazism.
~:rolleyes:

By the sounds of it you read Nietzsche so badly that you can't even keep your facts straight. Nazi is a short almost slang word for NSDAP. Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

Notice the word Socialist, and the word Arbeiter(worker). Now anyone who has read Nietzsche knows that he was strictly against any equality between people's and a fervent opponent of socialism in all it's forms. He also states that his superman is not a warrior but an artist. The Dionysian artist, the Anti-Christ.

If anything Nietzsche belongs to the Romatics, who admired the ancient greek aristocratic secular state of Athens and those of the Italian Rennaisance.

Quietus

11-05-2005, 03:29

LOL - Faith does not suppress curiosity - I am curious about a lot of things and I go exploring the wonders of knowledge. My pursuit of knowledge is not hampered by my faith in God. Yet, you don't want imagine if God has a creator etc., etc.

A question to ponder throughout the ages - an answer is based upon one's own philisophy. So, do you believe in God's creator? Yes or no?

And do you have faith in God's creator? Yes or no?

Leprechauns are beyond physics - they are into the metaphysical based upon what one believes. And if I was to use the term "Little People" what would you say that means. Are Leprechauns equally real as your God?

Again you seem not to be able to understand puns and sarcasm - maybe you should refrain from discussing religion and politics, and stick only to science.

How ironic that you once again attempt to place words in my typing that is not there. DId I once say I understand what God's thoughts and intentions are - I am not even about to go into that direction since its not possible for my mind or soul to fully understand what God's thoughts and intentions are. I am not God, nor am I anyother individual but myself - I can only know my thoughts and intentions. I can make assumptions about what I believe to be truth, or what I believe to be someone else's thoughts and intentions - but I can not "know" what the actual thoughts and intentions are until they are revealed to me. Frankly God granted me freewill - so that I can think for myself - not for me to know what his thoughts are intentions are.

So again find where I state that I know what God's intentions and thoughts are - a claim that a simple christian as myself would never make. I can only know what I believe God would want me to do in regards to living a moral life and a charitable one. That does not prevent me from being curious or wondering about the meaning of life. In short, is the Bible the word of God? Yes or no. If so, then since you read and even quote the Bible, then you know God's "intentions" and "thoughts".

Lastly, so is God beyond human understanding?

Kanamori

11-05-2005, 03:34

Yet, you don't want imagine if God has a creator etc., etc.

Then, said being is not God. By definition, it is the ultimate being and creator of all. He defines His own existence.

Lastly, so is God beyond human understanding?

Since I exist, I can know some part of Him, at least. Simply, the concept of God is that of a being whose nature includes the truth of everything, since I know that I have been wrong, I can conclude that I cannot know the entirety of God.

Redleg

11-05-2005, 03:44

Yet, you don't want imagine if God has a creator etc., etc.

So because someone who believes in God is the creator has no imagination concerning a possible creator for God - then he has no imagination nor curiosity? zWell it seems you have a very narrow defination of what is required for curiosity and imagination

So, do you believe in God's creator? Yes or no?

The answer is I believe in God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

And do you have faith in God's creator? Yes or no?

Same answer as above.

Are Leprechauns equally real as your God?

Are you equally real? Again if one believes in Leprechauns who am I to say that they can not believe in the existance of Leprechauns - do you believe in the Little People?

In short, is the Bible the word of God? Yes or no.

The New Testiment is the recording of the life of Jesus Christ by man. The Old Testiment is the recording of the early history of the Jewish people, the lessons of the people, and the Word of God where it is recorded - there is no short answer to your question.

If so, then since you read and even quote the Bible, then you know God's "intentions" and "thoughts".

And once again that is not how all Christian belief functions. Try again

Lastly, so is God beyond human understanding?

Correct God is beyond our understanding. However the lessons of Jesus Christ are not.

Soulforged

11-05-2005, 03:54

Faith in God does not equate to an inablity to research and seek knowledge. Nor does it mean you are denying truths because of your faith. The one truth that faith in God that might escape you is how the Universe was created. One of Faith will always believe God had a hand in it.I didn't say it equates to inability, it equates to less sight. For example if you throw away the fact that Jesus resurrected, and actually take in the biological rules, every one should admit that this is the "Truth". However a believer will take the first one, and I agree, it's faith, though seeing faith always in place of the evident is truly and obstacle. Many could just see through it, and accept God for what it's, an idea...

Religion is and can be a philosophy of life, just like anyother philosophy it can be distorted. Just by claiming your an atheistist does not exempt you from this distortion of philisophy. Now I used a bit of hyperbole, (well more then a bit) to show just that in an offensive way - but the point stands on its own merits. Even those who claim to follow a philisophy can distort there philisophy to the point it becomes a religion, and then use it to justify their actions both good and bad. As long as you accept that metaphysics is at the service, on it's knees, of materiality, then I've no problems. But careful with turning God into an actual being, because for what I read that's the idea I'm getting.

Redleg

11-05-2005, 03:57

Next time try spelling 'versus' properly.
Naw I will give you something to focus on - since it seems to be the only comeback you got.

By the sounds of it you read Nietzsche so badly that you can't even keep your facts straight. Nazi is a short almost slang word for NSDAP. Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

Notice the word Socialist, and the word Arbeiter(worker). Now anyone who has read Nietzsche knows that he was strictly against any equality between people's and a fervent opponent of socialism in all it's forms. He also states that his superman is not a warrior but an artist. The Dionysian artist, the Anti-Christ.

If anything Nietzsche belongs to the Romatics, who admired the ancient greek aristocratic secular state of Athens and those of the Italian Rennaisance.

Then you need to study a little history it seems plus what was actually written and stated in the thread.

Nope - you showed yours in wanting supermen to come about - how does it feel to subscribe to Nazism

Now take a wild guess to where Hilter and company got some of their warped little ideas from - I will give you a clue it wasn't directly from Nietzsche - but from what they wanted to believe his philisophy stated.

Now go back and review the thread and see if you can figure out what the message in that is. Your a smart guy sometimes - you just might figure it out.

Another clue based upon what you have written - soley an assumption based upon that.

You seem to have a problem with religion but you fail to see how any philisophy can be misused by man.

Redleg

11-05-2005, 04:06

I didn't say it equates to inability, it equates to less sight. For example if you throw away the fact that Jesus resurrected, and actually take in the biological rules, every one should admit that this is the "Truth". However a believer will take the first one, and I agree, it's faith, though seeing faith always in place of the evident is truly and obstacle. Many could just see through it, and accept God for what it's, an idea...

The message in the resurrection is what is important - the reality of the events will always be in question. However that does not detract from faith in the message.

As long as you accept that metaphysics is at the service, on it's knees, of materiality, then I've no problems. But careful with turning God into an actual being, because for what I read that's the idea I'm getting.

God is who and what he is - that is beyond my ability to say. I know that my soul is important in my belief system. Therefor God exists on the same level as my soul. I believe that all living beings have a soul - and when the body dies the soul lives on. Not to hard to understand.

Now for a slightly different verison also based upon religous thought - and one that I subscribed to before I became a better human being. The Physical earth is the relm of man - my soul however must be able to answer to God upon my departing the physical world of man. The earth is where the steel of man is tempered in the trails of life. If you have no soul you have no life.

Quietus

11-05-2005, 04:13

So because someone who believes in God is the creator has no imagination concerning a possible creator for God - then he has no imagination nor curiosity? zWell it seems you have a very narrow defination of what is required for curiosity and imagination You've suppressed your own thinking of God's creator due to Faith.

The answer is I believe in God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. But do you believe God has a creator? Simple yes or no.

Same answer as above. Would you have faith in this creator of God? Simple, yes or no.

Are you equally real? Again if one believes in Leprechauns who am I to say that they can not believe in the existance of Leprechauns - Since both God and Leprechauns are both metaphysical, can they speak to each other? Yes or no?

do you believe in the Little People? Humans, yes.

The New Testiment is the recording of the life of Jesus Christ by man. The Old Testiment is the recording of the early history of the Jewish people, the lessons of the people, and the Word of God where it is recorded - there is no short answer to your question. So when humans recorded the word of God, these words contain his "thoughts" and "intentions". And the man at that location understood God.

And once again that is not how all Christian belief functions. Try again So, you don't believe the Bible is the word of God?

Correct God is beyond our understanding. However the lessons of Jesus Christ are not. Yet, his words are magically in the Bible. Where did Jesus Christ's lessons come from? Why listen to Jesus Christ, he's just a man.

Byzantine Prince

11-05-2005, 04:16

Now take a wild guess to where Hilter and company got some of their warped little ideas from - I will give you a clue it wasn't directly from Nietzsche - but from what they wanted to believe his philisophy stated.

Here's some history:

The theorists and planners of National Socialism included General Karl Ernst Haushofer, a German geographer who exercised much influence in German foreign affairs. The German editor and party leader Alfred Rosenberg formulated Nazi racial theories on the basis of the work of the Anglo-German writer Houston Stewart Chamberlain. To the German financier Hjalmar Schacht fell the task of formulating and carrying out much economic and banking policy, and the German architect and party leader Albert Speer was a major figure in overseeing the economy just before the end of World War II (1939-1945).

Nietzsche had nothing to do with any of that. His writings weren't even popular until after the war, as I stated previously. You are wrong. Accept it, you keep proving to me that you are not smart at all. Just another loudmouthed ex-soldier.

Another clue based upon what you have written - soley an assumption based upon that.

You seem to have a problem with religion but you fail to see how any philisophy can be misused by man.
Your first statement makes no sense. Your second is not in your favor to state.

Oh and It's philosophy!

EDIT: I'm going to stop posting on this thread. Your responces have (for a long time) become so trite, desperate and pathetic, it's almost depressing....

Sorry Ser, I know this must have been a headache for you.

Soulforged

11-05-2005, 04:33

The message in the resurrection is what is important - the reality of the events will always be in question. However that does not detract from faith in the message.You're wrong Red, the reality is evident, and that's when faith blinds, when the believer actually thinks that God's power is more than an idea that can be shaped in the human mind, but as all the ideas has no single influence on real world, until the man uses his hand. Reality is selfevident, all dies, and never recovers. A biologist could explain it better. To the atheist the conclusion should be that, to the believer it's not in question also, because faith acts in the way of knowledge, it should give you the security of those events, even if reality sais it didn't happen that way. So looking at it from both points of view, the answer is that there's no question.

God is who and what he is - that is beyond my ability to say. I know that my soul is important in my belief system. Therefor God exists on the same level as my soul. I believe that all living beings have a soul - and when the body dies the soul lives on. Not to hard to understand. It's much more harder than you think actually, perhaps to me but... The idea of God could always escape your comprehension, because the same human spirit and it's "mysterious ways" are hard to understand. Kant himself said that the essence of things could never be comprehended. Thus the human struggles to comprehend his own essence looking at his ideal being, the God, the One, that goal, that idea is so clouded, that you're right, you can never comprehend it. It shows itself every time that there's a catastrophic event, and we don't understand why is that the human can do that...Those same questions reflect in the construction of God. Following the same doctrine displayed by the Bible, well it's better to say the doctrine created by the Church, not all living beings have a soul, only the human. It's because the human was created at the image of God. If the soul lives on is because this ideal image of the being that you achieved to be, that memory of you that stands within the society will continue to be remembered and perhaps recorded. Doing good and achieving heaven refer exactly to that idea, being remembered, being someone. But there's a difference between stating that your soul remains as a memory, to saying that the soul actually stands where your body is no more.

Now for a slightly different verison also based upon religous thought - and one that I subscribed to before I became a better human being. The Physical earth is the relm of man - my soul however must be able to answer to God upon my departing the physical world of man. The earth is where the steel of man is tempered in the trails of life. If you have no soul you have no life.I believe in the soul, but not as the giver of life. It's just, to me, one of the faces of the same mind, a way in wich our fear, hopes and our relationship with society, expresess itself and tries to change the same human being. However your confusing soul with life, the lion has no soul but has a life, the soul differenciates us from the rest of the animals, but life is one of those results of millions of years of evolution, it comes to us in the form of matter, it's not an idea, like the soul is. Life ends with death, however that "soul" can pass to the next human who will have you in his memory. Soul ends with hell, it's the total nothing, though nobody will be ever present to suffer such a thing, nor apreciate the bleasing of being remembered, well only if you achieve heaven in life, wich is possible.

bmolsson

11-05-2005, 04:35

The answer is I believe in God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

But, but... That makes you and infidel..... ~:grouphug: ~D

Redleg

11-05-2005, 04:47

Here's some history:

Care to bet - how about explaining why Hitler had Thus Spoke Zarathustra issued to every soldier?

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was notoriously unread and uninfluential during his own lifetime, and his works suffered considerable distortion in the hands of his sister Elisabeth, who managed his literary estate and twisted his philosophy into a set of ideas supporting Hitler and Nazism (Hitler had Thus Spoke Zarathustra issued to every soldier in the German army). By far his most often quoted utterance--seldom understood--is "God is dead," which placed his thought beyond the pale for many readers.

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/hum_303/nietzsche.html

Yet I think no one who lived in the Third Reich could have failed to be impressed by Nietzsche's influence on it. His books might be full, as Santayana said, of "genial imbecility" and "boyish blasphemies." Yet Nazi scribblers never tired of extolling him. Hitler often visited the Nietzsche museum in Weimar and publicized his veneration for the philosopher by posing for photographs of himself staring in rapture at the bust of the great man.

There was some ground for this appropriation of Nietzsche as one of the originators of the Nazi Weltanschauung. Had not the philosopher thundered against democracy and parliaments, preached the will to power, praised war and proclaimed the coming of the master race and the superman--and in the most telling aphorisms? A Nazi could proudly quote him on almost every conceivable subject, and did. On Christianity: "the one great curse, the one enormous and innermost perversion... I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind.... This Christianity is no more than the typical teaching of the Socialists." On the State, power, and the jungle world of man: "Society has never regarded virtue as anything other than as a means to strength, power, and order. The State unmorality organized... the will to war, to conquest and revenge... Society is not entitled to exist for its own sake but only as a substructure and scaffolding by means of which a select race of beings may elevate themselves to their higher duties... There is no such thing as the right to live, the right to work, or the right to be happy: in this respect man is no different from the meanest worm." (Women, whom Nietzsche never had, he consigned to a distinctly inferior status, as did the Nazis, who decreed that their place was in the kitchen and their chief role in life to beget children for German warriors. Nietzsche put the idea this way: "Man shall be trained for war and woman for the procreation of the warrior. All else is folly." He went further. In Thus Spake Zarathustra he exclaims: "Thou goest to woman? Do not forget thy whip!"...) And he exalted the superman as the beast of prey, "the magnificent blond brute, avidly rampant for spoil and victory."

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/TCEH/Nietzsche.html

Nietzsche's philosophy did not reach the Nazis untainted by tendentious interpretation. Elisabeth had forced her mother to transfer the property rights and guardianship of the incapacitated Nietzsche in 1895 (Macintyre, 155). Elisabeth became her brother's "chief apostle" with exclusive rights to his work (Kaufmann, 5). The impact of this transfer of rights was assessed in Kaufmann's 1974 interpretation of Nietzsche's work. Kaufmann attributed the roots of what he calls the "the legend of Nietzsche" to Elisabeth, who laid the groundwork for Nietzsche to be interpreted in a literal, Darwinist sense (Kaufmann, 8). Through censorship and editing, Nietzsche's philosophy had been made ambiguous and incoherent, allowing loose interpretation. This ambiguity prompted Nazi interpreters to choose a context that supported Nazi literature and prophesy.

http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/133p/133p04papers/MKalishNietzNazi046.htm

Oh there are other links in history books - but since this is an internet discussion I will only just these 3 hits from the first 20 hits - there were many in German also - but since I can not read German I will leave it for you to read them.

Nietzsche had nothing to do with any of that. His writings weren't even popular until after the war, as I stated previously. You are wrong. Accept it, you keep proving to me that you are not smart at all. Just another loudmouthed ex-soldier.

Well it seems you should now be taking your foot out of your mouth.

Your first statement makes no sense.
Try actually reading it

Your second is not in your favor to state.

Your assuming that I don't understand the problems christianity or any religion has created. That would be a false assumption on your part.

Oh and It's [I]philosophy!

I know - I do that on purpose just for you.

EDIT: I'm going to stop posting on this thread. Your responces have (for a long time) become so trite, desperate and pathetic, it's almost depressing....

Sorry Ser, I know this must have been a headache for you.

Ah it seems you don't have the ability to trade insults at each other after all. Where is Tribesman when I need someone with a little talent for passing insults at me that actually sometimes work.

Soulforged

11-05-2005, 04:52

Ah it seems you don't have the ability to trade insults at each other after all. Where is Tribesman when I need someone with a little talent for passing insults at me that actually sometimes work.It will be a pleasure to do that if you let me, maybe I could replace Tribesman.~D

Redleg

11-05-2005, 04:54

You're wrong Red, the reality is evident, and that's when faith blinds, when the believer actually thinks that God's power is more than an idea that can be shaped in the human mind, but as all the ideas has no single influence on real world, until the man uses his hand. Reality is selfevident, all dies, and never recovers. A biologist could explain it better. To the atheist the conclusion should be that, to the believer it's not in question also, because faith acts in the way of knowledge, it should give you the security of those events, even if reality sais it didn't happen that way. So looking at it from both points of view, the answer is that there's no question.

This is because you have no faith - so you can not see the "truth" that I see, just like I can not see the "truth" that you wish me to see.

It's much more harder than you think actually, perhaps to me but... The idea of God could always escape your comprehension, because the same human spirit and it's "mysterious ways" are hard to understand. Kant himself said that the essence of things could never be comprehended. Thus the human struggles to comprehend his own essence looking at his ideal being, the God, the One, that goal, that idea is so clouded, that you're right, you can never comprehend it. It shows itself every time that there's a catastrophic event, and we don't understand why is that the human can do that...Those same questions reflect in the construction of God. Following the same doctrine displayed by the Bible, well it's better to say the doctrine created by the Church, not all living beings have a soul, only the human. It's because the human was created at the image of God. If the soul lives on is because this ideal image of the being that you achieved to be, that memory of you that stands within the society will continue to be remembered and perhaps recorded. Doing good and achieving heaven refer exactly to that idea, being remembered, being someone. But there's a difference between stating that your soul remains as a memory, to saying that the soul actually stands where your body is no more.

Call me an infidel - because I don't follow the Catholic Church doctrine.

I believe in the soul, but not as the giver of life. It's just, to me, one of the faces of the same mind, a way in wich our fear, hopes and our relationship with society, expresess itself and tries to change the same human being. However your confusing soul with life, the lion has no soul but has a life, the soul differenciates us from the rest of the animals, but life is one of those results of millions of years of evolution, it comes to us in the form of matter, it's not an idea, like the soul is. Life ends with death, however that "soul" can pass to the next human who will have you in his memory. Soul ends with hell, it's the total nothing, though nobody will be ever present to suffer such a thing, nor apreciate the bleasing of being remembered, well only if you achieve heaven in life, wich is possible.

A decent philosophy - or should I mis-spell it wrong again?

Redleg

11-05-2005, 04:55

It will be a pleasure to do that if you let me, maybe I could replace Tribesman.~D

Only if you have to make me think of a comeback - I like a challenge and Tribesman is always a challenge.

Redleg

11-05-2005, 04:56

But, but... That makes you and infidel..... ~:grouphug: ~D

In more ways then one ~D

Soulforged

11-05-2005, 05:06

This is because you have no faith - so you can not see the "truth" that I see, just like I can not see the "truth" that you wish me to see.There's only one truth, that's certain. However there's never a question only. When there's a question there's also an asnwer in science. When there's a question in faith, there's no faith, or there's no question.

Call me an infidel - because I don't follow the Catholic Church doctrine.And thus my final thought comes back again. Why, then, do you call yourself a Christian? However the majority of this paragraph was directed towards any faith, it's a thesis of Hegel, very interesting. It shows the creation of God, it's caracteristics, and so on...

A decent philosophy - or should I mis-spell it wrong again?Well don't mistake me. I'm a materialist, all I'm doing is show to you how the phenomenums of social life appear in one of their forms, and how we humans give definitions and form to the things that have any. In the end the brain is just the brain, and memory is just a result of particles stored in it.

Only if you have to make me think of a comeback - I like a challenge and Tribesman is always a challenge.The truth is that I've to go, and really I cannot achieve that knowledge on history or that level of sarcasm, so you'll have to call Tribesman.~:cheers:

Redleg

11-05-2005, 05:15

There's only one truth, that's certain. However there's never a question only. When there's a question there's also an asnwer in science. When there's a question in faith, there's no faith, or there's no question.

Then you haven't gone to the church that I went to - I questioned the preacher all the time. One should question their faith - it leads to either a strengthing of the faith - or a weakening depending upon the answer that you yourself come to. Religous Faith is the same as any other philosophy it is all in what you want to believe in.

And thus my final thought comes back again. Why, then, do you call yourself a Christian? However the majority of this paragraph was directed towards any faith, it's a thesis of Hegel, very interesting. It shows the creation of God, it's caracteristics, and so on...

I call myself a Christian because I believe in Jesus Christ died on the cross for my sins. Because I believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. But that does not make me a drone that can not think for himself. God granted man Freewill - we can think and believe how we want to.

Well don't mistake me. I'm a materialist, all I'm doing is show to you how the phenomenums of social life appear in one of their forms, and how we humans give definitions and form to the things that have any. In the end the brain is just the brain, and memory is just a result of particles stored in it.
The truth is that I've to go, and really I cannot achieve that knowledge on history or that level of sarcasm, so you'll have to call Tribesman.~:cheers:

With age comes wisdom and the ability to use biting sarcasm at your oppenent. :bow:

gaelic cowboy

11-06-2005, 17:53

Well I for do not agree that europe will end up islamic for one reason and one reason only "Eastern Europe" the new acession countries will eventually pull up there ecomonies to levels comparable to western europe the model is Ireland. This should cause a signiicant spike in population of both orthodox and catholic religons or maybe that should be people who are culturally these religons. While religous observance is down in ireland its still higher than other places and it is a deeply embedded cultural mark of our nation same goes for say poland hungary etc etc etc etc. The problem at the moment is Islam is growing fast according to statistics but this mask the really low base they are starting form accross europe as a whole. The Islamophobia in europe may be strange to americans but I think its stems from long held cultural bias this should allow devious politicians an excuse to exclude Turkey from the EU. That would stem the problem for a while. Right now only the 3 EU nations allow unrestricted movement fromthe accession countries. Living and working alongside many Polish I find the irattional French attitude to the polish plumber as laughable. Plus if were really that godless we will hardly convert to an even stricter religon. Actually thats something that puzzles me greatly why do people convert from established religon to these sects which are stricter. All they really need to get something say from christian religon is to follow it but they seem to equate the rituals as the be all and end all??????

AntiochusIII

11-06-2005, 21:42

Redleg

11-07-2005, 04:19

Hmm, Redleg, pardon me but I'd say you do have a problem. Trying to win petty arguments with insults may equate to wit with words, but not wisdom of mind. With age comes either wisdom or the disintegration of wisdom--and an increased level of pride on his or her own wisdom, real or not.

Again did I say I was perfect - or didn't have a problem. Tsk tsk a petty arguement on your part here. Maybe you shouldn't step into it if your not following the whole discussion.

Biting sarcasm has its purpose, but not what you're doing, at all. Biting sarcasm is for Socrates to teach Athens a lesson, or Juvenal to reflect Rome's dark side for later generations, not to win petty arguments about...nothing.

Again a meaningless comment given that you probably didn't follow the whole discussion. Here let me break out of being sarcastic to something you might be able to understand.

Religion is not about nothing - Religion has had a lot of influence in the world both good and bad. Nietzsche has also had a lot of influence on the world both good and bad. Several philosophies have had the same effect on the world in varying degrees - however only the idiocy arguement of the atheists attack religion and refuse to acknowledge that many philosophies have the same issues. Now if you can't follow that particuler point then I will have to resort to another method of writing.

It's neither fun nor great at all, at least to many observers, who'd undoubtedly view "Redleg" the forum member as a lower person than he once was before they see those "petty insults."

:bow:

Oh how that hurts. ...., Not.. Should I go running away with my tail stuck between my legs because some might think less of me. LOL - it would mean that I cared about their opinion of me in the first place. Which for the most part would not be true. I would say that you place to much value on what I say on an internet discussion then.

I tell you what when people quit attacking any religion - then I won't argue with atheists about how hypocritical they normally are with their attacks on religion.