- Joined
- Jul 13, 2014
- Messages
- 6,039
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 25
- Location
- https://gs2012.xyz
- Website
- gs2012.xyz
- XP
- 5,991
- Country
Do You Believe In God?
- Thread starter Jack_Sparrow
- Start date
- Views 109,109
- Replies 1,802
- Likes 5
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2014
- Messages
- 4,839
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 27
- Location
- Fort Gay, West Virginia
- XP
- 2,300
- Country
The first sentient being born out of a formless world which all after assume a similar construst. Though I do not know how something came to being when particle and primative form of metaphysics do not exist yet. However this does not desclude an alternative. Name was of little relevence. It is sometimes despicted as the ansector of sky fathers. I do not know of the origin of this exact myth, but in Chinese mythology a cosmic giant called pangu was born out of a formless Universe who then split the universe into two opposing forms that one becomes the fundamental of our world. He then died, like many other creators depicted in various polytheism religions, and the Only one I know of to be dispicted as alive are Ra and Vishnu. Since sentience and patterns exist, it is impossible for us to comprehand What it means to not exist.
my understanding of the void [the spirit] comes before the universe [the mind] and the body [...the body]
Our current understanding of reality makes this topic unintelligible anyway.
i also believe there is no absolute truth.
People just like to pretend that they know about reality so then they feel secure and safe.
This is why religion exists, to control people.
Last edited by exdeath255,
The Only reason I am not too convinced about this is that physical brain and alternative structure can process information and even with limited size and mass it is possible to achieve infinite provessing, kind of like nanotech. It does not take us to be in another mental world for the mind to be powerful.
I am extremely confused here! WHo are anti-theism here?
By the ways i'm strongly anti-atheist. However i work for the church. I make people believe in God so that they will sacrifice their live for me and i can do whatever i want
By the ways i'm strongly anti-atheist. However i work for the church. I make people believe in God so that they will sacrifice their live for me and i can do whatever i want
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2014
- Messages
- 4,839
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 27
- Location
- Fort Gay, West Virginia
- XP
- 2,300
- Country
Antitheism is believing that there is no God, Gods or deity.
Athiesm is not believing in God,Gods or a deity.
Note the two are different as lack of belief and believing that there isn't are different yet the two are often confused in today's society where atheism is the term that is (in my opinion wrongly) used.
Okay, I thought of the opposite. But I am pretty sure I am more of atheist than miso-theist, which I never had faith in any deity to begin with and definitely not trying to punish god (if planning to screw him before he did the same to us does not count, however I still need to figure out about Jesus).
It does bother me a lot for a deity to use mortal souls to achieve greater form (in some sense you, everything else and god together will achieve Omnipotence, kind of like Asriel, the absolute god of hyperdeath, as you become a lost soul trapped in a mind-prison of happiness).
And I do not know if the creator is actually alive, hibernating or dead. In religious Taoism there was a human who achieved the power of creator but in order to create a new universe he sacrificed his own sentience. As of personal belief the creator is long dead.
It appears we have a definitions disparity.
I usually operated under
Theist. One that believes in some form of deity, or world view handed down (Buddhism would probably count under this, as would many tribal religions) based on believing something rather than theoretically being able to prove it/demonstrate it.
Agnostic. Undecided on the matter but not necessarily a theist. Arguably the wishy washy approach.
Atheist. One that would hold gods as most cultures, religions, creation stories... would define them to not describe
Anti theist. Much like anti other things would be one opposed to theism as a concept, and would probably argue against its use in government and such like. Or if you prefer "believe what you want to believe, I don't" vs "I don't believe and it is a silly idea, I want it out of any thing that can trouble me". It would be entirely possible for an atheist to have a position on religion's role within the government and similar type things and it might even be "no way, no how" without going into anti territory too. Major overlap with the concept of militant atheist, though we can probably have another debate as to what that means (who made it, does anybody choose to identify as it rather than being labelled...).
Broadly speaking all anti theists are atheists but not all atheists would be anti theists, I am not sure if any atheists would find anti theism as a concept to be objectionable . I imagine there are ways to blur lines (I guess you could follow a strictly interpreted version of Buddhism, as opposed to a more literal one if I may confuse religion study terms) but as a broad concept go with that. You can be a theist and strongly disagree with another religion, or another interpretation of your religion, but it is not the same concept. You could also argue for some of the same things (no religion in schools/government say) whilst being a theist quite happily, it might be against interests of the religion (or it might not, if you don't grow up one it is easier to get you to another perhaps) if numbers and funds are a concern but that is a different matter.
I usually operated under
Theist. One that believes in some form of deity, or world view handed down (Buddhism would probably count under this, as would many tribal religions) based on believing something rather than theoretically being able to prove it/demonstrate it.
Agnostic. Undecided on the matter but not necessarily a theist. Arguably the wishy washy approach.
Atheist. One that would hold gods as most cultures, religions, creation stories... would define them to not describe
Anti theist. Much like anti other things would be one opposed to theism as a concept, and would probably argue against its use in government and such like. Or if you prefer "believe what you want to believe, I don't" vs "I don't believe and it is a silly idea, I want it out of any thing that can trouble me". It would be entirely possible for an atheist to have a position on religion's role within the government and similar type things and it might even be "no way, no how" without going into anti territory too. Major overlap with the concept of militant atheist, though we can probably have another debate as to what that means (who made it, does anybody choose to identify as it rather than being labelled...).
Broadly speaking all anti theists are atheists but not all atheists would be anti theists, I am not sure if any atheists would find anti theism as a concept to be objectionable . I imagine there are ways to blur lines (I guess you could follow a strictly interpreted version of Buddhism, as opposed to a more literal one if I may confuse religion study terms) but as a broad concept go with that. You can be a theist and strongly disagree with another religion, or another interpretation of your religion, but it is not the same concept. You could also argue for some of the same things (no religion in schools/government say) whilst being a theist quite happily, it might be against interests of the religion (or it might not, if you don't grow up one it is easier to get you to another perhaps) if numbers and funds are a concern but that is a different matter.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2014
- Messages
- 4,839
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 27
- Location
- Fort Gay, West Virginia
- XP
- 2,300
- Country
One question that this brings up of course is simply how does one define the terms and the views? For example I know of many people who claim to atheist yet they also practice Buddhism as they feel it is not really a religion in the strongest sense (at least compared to the Abrahamic 3) or view it more as a philosophy (which to a point is what most Japanese think since they both manly believe in Shintoism and Buddhism yet they do not think the two ideas conflict).
Another is with regards to being an agnostic when are you one? There are many people who feel more in touch in the "atheist" or anti theist camps yet claim to be agnostic simply because they believe that you can never be 100% sure of anything although it is their strong personal opinion that there is no deity or god. So when would you claim that?
The issue is when speaking of religion (or lack of) there is no universally accepted terminology in either academic field or even to regular every day people which makes these talks more confusing.
Hour and a half. That is going to be a long one, especially if the editing is going to repeat things like it has been doing at points.
Interesting first 25 minutes though. I don't want to start pulling it apart when the rest could cover something like it (as it stands he went through people as gods and is now going onto manufacturing, albeit with a somewhat shaky knowledge of modern design practices). Starting from a position like that is hardly ideal from a logical standpoint but an acceptable one. It is curious that he starts out at least with the Abrahamic religions as separate concepts when most seem to treat the previous ones as alphas or betas of that, or people following some strange remix/extension. Proving concepts with scripture it hard if you don't take the scripture as read in the first place, particularly troublesome if your definition of your god starts from there. The pen example was an odd one as well from a logical standpoint as I am not sure a quirk of linguistics carries that well in this instance, if indeed a god has to be as powerful as it is then outlined to be.
The big bang thing I have seen things like it before, even from Islamic scholars, sure I guess if you hold there to be hidden knowledge that people might not understand and read things looking to confirm it you can find lots in lots of things. On moonlight then many would hold it was known to various Greek astronomers, well known to those which might then become Islamic scholars too.
Anyway I will have to finish it later. Interesting so far though.
Interesting first 25 minutes though. I don't want to start pulling it apart when the rest could cover something like it (as it stands he went through people as gods and is now going onto manufacturing, albeit with a somewhat shaky knowledge of modern design practices). Starting from a position like that is hardly ideal from a logical standpoint but an acceptable one. It is curious that he starts out at least with the Abrahamic religions as separate concepts when most seem to treat the previous ones as alphas or betas of that, or people following some strange remix/extension. Proving concepts with scripture it hard if you don't take the scripture as read in the first place, particularly troublesome if your definition of your god starts from there. The pen example was an odd one as well from a logical standpoint as I am not sure a quirk of linguistics carries that well in this instance, if indeed a god has to be as powerful as it is then outlined to be.
The big bang thing I have seen things like it before, even from Islamic scholars, sure I guess if you hold there to be hidden knowledge that people might not understand and read things looking to confirm it you can find lots in lots of things. On moonlight then many would hold it was known to various Greek astronomers, well known to those which might then become Islamic scholars too.
Anyway I will have to finish it later. Interesting so far though.
Just because something is more powerful and more knowledgable does not make it the supreme ruler of the universe. I have seen earthquake on tv does not mean I can create giant gaps between lands.
Primordial deities have demonstrated much higher power and there has been no implication god can achieve such level. Sky father generation of olypus/ asgard/ eygptian/ many african/ middle east/ asian deities like zeus/ odin/ shu, etc. are shown at least as powerful and all of them are not there in the beginning.
Yes.
Why? Nobody would believe me in 1 million years if I told them.
I realized that since this site is a breeding ground ground for that "iso" site type of things that of course I don't expect others to be the same as me.
Why? Nobody would believe me in 1 million years if I told them.
I realized that since this site is a breeding ground ground for that "iso" site type of things that of course I don't expect others to be the same as me.
Not too much beside politics and religion.
I do believe there is a creator out there, but most likely not god. Simply able to tell about certain cosmic event does not guaranteed him actually the cause of it. And though strong for a god to make physical changes in our world, it is not impossible for a mortal to accomplish the same. All needed to be done is to make someone stronger than average human to carry out his words, and inserting something we do not have an answer (which is at least partly right, but some are made up) for so everything seems real. However this man seems more interesting than his god.
If you read my earlier post, there are certain things in his plan: Gather lots of believers -> Destroy nature + Take over the world -> End all war -> Armies get disbanded + Nature has nothing against god -> Invasion of some kind to claim everything -> God's own ascension. In not very long time his 'judgement': Maybe flood because skyfather tier can do that, maybe zombie apocalypse because he can make zombies that convert others while all their soul gets into God, maybe we are invading by his army of angels or worst of all everything just suicide. If you've played undertale, then let's just say that God is flowey and with the souls of everything single thing on earth he can become the absolute god of hyperdeath, but without us he is still omega flowey (though God at least have a soul). Since his second part is already starting, I cannot afford not to care anymore.
How about we stop thinking about "God" and start thinking about these organized religions. There are an uncountable amount of religions in the world, they all think they know the answers. Whatever you believe, is simply a matter of your geographic area, for the most part. Mormon? Odds are you were born a Mormon. Baptist? Most likely born into it. Muslim? (Good luck converting without getting your head chopped off.)
If any of these religions are correct, only one of them is correct. They all contradict each other. You roll the dice and get... Christianity, lucky you. The decision to pick Christianity was hardly a choice, but you've thought about it well and you believe it is true.
You're now looking at a 32.5% chance that you were lucky enough to have rolled the correct religion. Let's say best case scenario is that God is real, you're still probably not right, and you were born and raised in a phony cult. Odds that God is real * %of the world that follows that religion.
Maybe, just maybe you hit the jackpot, or maybe you just found a cult that exploited all your weaknesses and fullfilled your desires with lies, .
If any of these religions are correct, only one of them is correct. They all contradict each other. You roll the dice and get... Christianity, lucky you. The decision to pick Christianity was hardly a choice, but you've thought about it well and you believe it is true.
You're now looking at a 32.5% chance that you were lucky enough to have rolled the correct religion. Let's say best case scenario is that God is real, you're still probably not right, and you were born and raised in a phony cult. Odds that God is real * %of the world that follows that religion.
Maybe, just maybe you hit the jackpot, or maybe you just found a cult that exploited all your weaknesses and fullfilled your desires with lies, .
Last edited by jamieyello,
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Poll
