Forumwarz is the first "Massively Single-Player" online RPG completely built around Internet culture.

You are currently looking at Flamebate, our community forums. Players can discuss the game here, strategize, and role play as their characters.

You need to be logged in to post and to see the uncensored versions of these forums.

Log in or Learn about Forumwarz

Civil Discussion
Switch to Role-Playing Civil Discussion
Religion The benefits or harm of the concept of 'God(s)'

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

Skyman747 Posted:

QFT, although I would say “unopen” instead. The majority of Humans will not accept new ideas, as they grew up with god and they will pbum god down to their children, thus sealing us in religions. The small percentage that don’t pbum down to their children are the only ones helping the race move along.

You do realize some people actually think about religion without blindly swallowing it their entire life?

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

Shii Posted:

While I see where they come from with the normal opiate of the mbumes view, in that there’s true morality and meaning for suffering, there’s somewhere waiting for you when you die, being good has a lasting reward, etc., I believe more that calling religion ‘a drug’ is another way of validating themselves in a world that they acknowledge has no actual meaning.

True morality and true meaning are unnecessary if the illusion of the former are there. I believe reality is in the mind of the beholder, and if that mind believes it has a full understanding of the world, it will be content. The more knowledge you acquire, the more you realize there is more you do not know.

DarkDespair5 edited this message on 01/26/2009 12:25AM

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

Of course that’s true.

Perception governs the universe. Even quantum physics states that perception gives the world its order, since the universe is a cloud of probability instead of a physical place. (Think Schrodinger’s cat)

To someone tripping on acid, the wall might be talking to him and revealing life’s mysteries. It isn’t doing the same for you in your reality, but to him, that’s what reality is. It’s entirely subjective.

Tesfan

Avatar: 17396 2011-07-31 06:49:56 -0400
3

[Team Shortbus]

Level 35 Troll

Sucks **** through a straw in the face of convention

Shii Posted:

While I see where they come from with the normal opiate of the mbumes view, in that there’s true morality and meaning for suffering, there’s somewhere waiting for you when you die, being good has a lasting reward, etc., I believe more that calling religion ‘a drug’ is another way of validating themselves in a world that they acknowledge has no actual meaning.

atheismnihilism

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

No, nihilism is believing in nothing whatsoever.

Not believing the world has no inherent meaning. You would dispute the claim that atheists don’t see the world as being anything more than a cosmic accident?

Endrin

Avatar: Boobs
2

Level 27 Camwhore

“Playmate of the Month”

Shii Posted:

No, nihilism is believing in nothing whatsoever.

Not believing the world has no inherent meaning. You would dispute the claim that atheists don’t see the world as being anything more than a cosmic accident?

I would, I was an atheist for a long time. Nature has order. IT isn’t just random and thrown together. Atheist’s do not believe in a higher being. That does not mean that they think the universe is a cosmic accident.

Tesfan

Avatar: 17396 2011-07-31 06:49:56 -0400
3

[Team Shortbus]

Level 35 Troll

Sucks **** through a straw in the face of convention

Shii Posted:

You would dispute the claim that atheists don’t see the world as being anything more than a cosmic accident?

I never said that.

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

Endrin Posted:

I would, I was an atheist for a long time. Nature has order. IT isn’t just random and thrown together. Atheist’s do not believe in a higher being. That does not mean that they think the universe is a cosmic accident.

I know a LOT of atheists that would disagree wholeheartedly with that sentiment.

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

Religion is in a sense a sandbox that artificially limits intellectual growth in order to provide a more simple and unified (although illogical) worldview that presents existence in an easy to understand form. Knowledge raises sometimes uncomfortable questions. Some people would rather compartmentalize their life and believe in a fairy tale than deal with them.

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

Interesting question:

Would you use a machine that produced flawless virtual reality (including feelings, touch, memories) according to an algorithm you design, with any randomness or lack thereof you desire?

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

Except the notion that religion is sort of inimical to intelligence or logical thought is a complete fallacy.

I believe in God and the teachings of Christ because throughout all my research of science, evolution, and other religions, I have yet to find anything that remotely proves it wrong, or even makes it seem unlikely.

I will not deny that many, many people believe Christian doctrine because they were told too and “it’s right because it is.” I’m saying that for those of us who do question, and do research and look into questions of faith and doctrine, it’s still every bit as valid.

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

DarkDespair5 Posted:

Interesting question:

Would you use a machine that produced flawless virtual reality (including feelings, touch, memories) according to an algorithm you design, with any randomness or lack thereof you desire?

Without question, at least once. How completely it impacted my social life/activities would dictate how much I ever used it again after the initial try.

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

Shii Posted:

Except the notion that religion is sort of inimical to intelligence or logical thought is a complete fallacy.

Your religion says X.

Science says Y.

What do you do?

DarkDespair5 edited this message on 01/26/2009 1:21AM

Tesfan

Avatar: 17396 2011-07-31 06:49:56 -0400
3

[Team Shortbus]

Level 35 Troll

Sucks **** through a straw in the face of convention

Shii Posted:

I know a LOT of atheists that would disagree wholeheartedly with that sentiment.

This is true. However, to jump from “a lot of atheists believe in the commonly accepted scientific theory for the beginning of the universe”, therefore “all atheists must believe life has no meaning” is a non-sequitur.

If you want an example of how it’s easily possible for atheists to live and enjoy life I suggest this short essay by penn jillette.

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

I’m not saying atheists don’t live and enjoy life, Tesfan. Now you’re making non sequiturs.

I’m saying that they try to make the most out of life because it’s fleeting, and they believe nothing else is coming afterwards. There is no great anything watching over them, so there’s no overarching meaning to life besides human morality.

Also, I have yet to see where science says X and religion says Y that can’t be reconciled. I find Christianity is more supported by science than disproved.

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

Evolution. Earth created in X days. Jesus’ supposed reincarnation.

Etc.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/DarkBibleContents.htm

DarkDespair5 edited this message on 01/26/2009 1:24AM

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

Countless paradoxes do indeed plague Christianity.

Indiana Jonas

Avatar: 13850 2011-09-21 18:58:49 -0400
13

[At Least I Never M-
ade A Failure Of A-
Website
]

Level 35 Troll

WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WW

DarkDespair5 Posted:

Countless paradoxes do indeed plague Christianity.

I’m p sure if you wanted to you could count them.

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

DarkDespair5 Posted:

Evolution. Earth created in X days. Jesus’ supposed reincarnation.

Etc.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/DarkBibleContents.ht

Evolution works just fine with Christianity.

The problem with Christians today is that they have no clue of how proper exegesis works, or how to apply hermeneutics when reading the Scriptures.

They claim everything in the Bible is literal, when it’s obvious that’s not possible. Jesus speaks in parables, obvious hyperbole in many places, some of the apostles use sarcasm, and many books are written in poetic verse and symbolism.

The creation story is symbolic. While God COULD’VE made the entire world in 6 days, it’s naive to bumume that because that’s what the literal interpretation is, that’s how it happened.

For example, the sun, moon, and stars weren’t created until the 3rd day, so until then, there would be no concept of what a ‘day’ actually was. Also, for an immortal God, the Bible frequently says things equivalent to “a million years is a blink of an eye to the Lord.”

The ‘day’ utilized in the creation epic is a literary device that allows ancient listeners to comprehend the work of a vastly powerful, supreme creator.

And no, you’re right, the resurrection isn’t accounted for by pure science. And to try to scientifically come up with a method for it would be to rob it of it’s significance and miraculousness. However, Jesus Christ was recorded as a major prophet by no less than 5 secular historians, including the Jewish historian Josephus, as well as Tacitus. Both recorded his trials, crucifixion, and burial. I’ve heard that they also record that the body disappeared from the tomb, but I’m not going to pretend I know that for sure. I’m honest with the spots of my learning I’m fuzzy on.

Evolution, on the other hand, is silly to try to disprove. We see the work of evolution going on in our own society. Look at how humans have increased in size over the last 100 years. We’re on average like 8 inches taller. Obviously, taller men get the genes pbumed on more frequently.

I was an Anthropology major for two years, so I know my evolutionary theory. And I fail to see why the laws of science and nature couldn’t have been set in place by the Creator.

DarkDespair5

Avatar: 77864 Thu Jun 04 08:28:46 -0400 2009

Level 56 Hacker

“Logic Bomber”

If everything is an analogy, then the bible is merely a creative work, a fairy tale if you must.

Even if it wasn’t, why would you accept a religious work that condones slavery and puts women in a state of submission?

DarkDespair5 edited this message on 01/26/2009 1:44AM
Internet Delay Chat
Have fun playing!
To chat with other players, you must Join Forumwarz or Log In now!