This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
What do people think of atheists?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
coston89
I am going to admit, after reading this thread in it's entirety, seeing the bickering of atheists and theists, that i really don't see the big deal with which side is right. Personally, I don't know if my faith is right, but I keep it because I know in my heart that it is right for me. I believe in God, that Jesus is His son and that he died for us, that all that have faith, be it Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhist, or another faith, the fact that you have faith in something and lived a good and just life is the requirements for Heaven, and only the most evil and vile of people go to Hell. I believe that most religious texts are meant to be to taken metaphorically for some stories and literally for others. I believe that both religion and science are right in the end. I know I may be wrong, and I accept that, but I follow my faith, for it feels right to me, and I encourage others to follow what feels right to them in all walks of life. Because of this philosophy, I have been called both a godless heathen at my college and a religious sheep by some of my former friends at my high school. I know the vemon of being told I was going to Hell from someone I loved. This is the only thing I just cannot understand, the need for extremists on both sides to prove the other wrong. Maybe that's what's wrong with this world, that people can't accept that others are different, that no one is the same as you. i don't know...
Sorry for the rant but I felt like I had to say this.
Post by
ShadowSerpent
There's one little thing that keeps bugging me.
If Satan is
truly
evil
, then why does he
punish
the sinners? Wouldn't he embrace and reward them?
Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way a theistic Satanist. I think it's the most ridiculous religion there is. You believe in God (good) and Satan (supposedly evil), yet you willingly worship and embrace evil? What the &*!@? Note that while theistic Satanists embrace immoral behavior, they will get *!@#ed off if you treat them in the same way. So it's not something they actually feel like it's right. If it was, they wouldn't mind being treated immorally themselves.
In my opinion, 'good' actions are not defined by what you want, or what you think others want. It's standing still and take some time to reflect what you are about to do. The bible says it, and I fully agree, never do to another what you wouldn't want to happen to yourself. (yeah I changed the words, big deal, the message is still the same).
And as for science(+technology) vs religion, I think they are both valuable to a person's live. Without science, we wouldn't have had even the simplest of tools because even picking up a rock to open a coconut is a crude form of using technology, and experimenting which rock is the best for the job and what we can do to the rock to improve it's effectiveness is a crude form of science. But without religion, we would've been lost in the dark. Nowadays with science explaining a lot of things maybe less then in the past, but there are still a lot of things left unexplained. Not to mention the hope and comfort religion gives to a lot of people.
TL;DR:
GTFO a debate if you can't be bothered to read!
Post by
blademeld
There's one little thing that keeps bugging me.
If Satan is
truly
evil
, then why does he
punish
the sinners? Wouldn't he embrace and reward them?
As per my understanding, Satan rewards sinners in life, in death it is God who punishes them.
Hell was created as a prison/punishment for Satan, the sinners are just extras to go in there.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
342791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ShadowSerpent
As per my understanding, Satan rewards sinners in life, in death it is God who punishes them.
Hell was created as a prison/punishment for Satan, the sinners are just extras to go in there.
As I read it, hell became hell due to Lucifer's actions, so you might say he "created" it. God did imprison him there, but it is his domain. And it's him that tortures the souls sent there, not god.
It's been more then ten years ago when I read the bible though, so there's a big chance I'm wrong about this. I have a memory like a sponge, it absorbs a lot but it also leaks like hell.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
It's like trying to come up with the anatomy for a dragon: they don't really exist, so people just use their imagination based on common traits dragons have shared through the stories.
Fire breathing dinosaurs?
Check.
Flying lizards?
Check.
Dragons in the sense of mythological creatures?
Nope, just slight exaggerations.
As I read it, hell became hell due to Lucifer's actions, so you might say he "created" it. God did imprison him there, but it is his domain. And it's him that tortures the souls sent there, not god.
I'm trying to stay within a rather general drescription of hell, my definition of "punishment" was the sending them to hell, not any actions associated with it.
Also, Satan enjoys suffering of others, if sinners are in hell, he no longer has a use for them other than for his personal pleasure.
Post by
blademeld
Well, it's not like bodily functions just shut off when you die. The brain can keep working, the heart can keep beating...
I believe I saw a documentary on "death" experiences where people actually were diagnosed as dead and came back to life a few minutes later
4. The uniform determination of death. The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 1980 formulated the Uniform Determination of Death Act. It states that: "An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards." This definition was approved by the American Medical Association in 1980 and by the American Bar Association in 1981.
So yes, in a seeming death, it's possible, but in a diagnosed death, it shouldn't be.
Not accounting for human error that is.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ShadowSerpent
Where do you find those? And why would people in early human history even be in contact with them? Or even have the knowledge to analyse fossils to determine that they could breathe fire?
Some species of meat eating animals have "a case of extremely bad breath" (in lack of better words). The rotting process of the meat stuck between their teeth produces gases which can ignite with a small spark. It's not actually breathing fire, more like breath catching fire, but you can see where the believe of fire breathing creatures comes from.
There are no flying lizards either, only gliding lizards. Dinosaurs evolved into what we now know as birds... primary traits pointing to that include the shape of the hips, existance of wishbones, remenants of feathers, among others.
Pterodactyl.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
Where do you find those? And why would people in early human history even be in contact with them? Or even have the knowledge to analyse fossils to determine that they could breathe fire?
There are no flying lizards either, only gliding lizards. Dinosaurs evolved into what we now know as birds... primary traits pointing to that include the shape of the hips, existance of wishbones, remenants of feathers, among others.
Slight exagerations? The skeletal structure of pretty much anything except insects would make flight impossible with 3 sets of limbs. Same thing for angels, they are biologically innefficient (by which I mean, their physical design would not work).
Now you're just making stuff up.
The reason I included the dinosaurs and flying lizards was for the "anatomy" part. There have been very reasonable depictions of dragons before.
The exaggerations didn't appear originally from the wings rather, it is thought that the tongue of lizards were seem as flames, which explains why some dragons don't have wings or some dragons are thought to be incapable of flight.
:P
Huh? I think you just proved what I was saying. Organs can function with their stored oxygen for a fair amount of time, a person would be diagnosed as dead because respiratory and circulatory functions stop.
"Irreversible"
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
Why are we arguing about dragons?
Post by
ShadowSerpent
A Prerodactyl is not a lizard... its not even a reptile. That's like saying a turtle is a lizard... but only more distant.
Excuse me?
Ohw and read my post better..
I actually said it's not breathing fire
Post by
blademeld
like, say, a Komodo Dragon's mouth? Still, not a fire breathig creature regardless.
Did you know that it was recently discovered that Komodo dragons have venom glands, not toxic residue from bateria?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/05/20/komodo.dragon.bite/?iref=hpmostpop
The fire breathing one I was referring to was another reference. It was quite the riot a couple years back, not I can't find it...
A Prerodactyl is not a lizard... its not even a reptile.
What?
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
A Prerodactyl is not a lizard... its not even a reptile. That's like saying a turtle is a lizard... but only more distant.
Excuse me?
Ohw and read my post better..
I actually said it's not breathing fire
O, so they are reptiles... I always thought they were classified as dinosaurs. In any case, they're still not lizards.Dinosaurs are reptiles.............
............
......
...
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.