The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Akia said:
+10 for you.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Religion: What are you?!?!
- Thread starter LordMaji
- Start date
- Status
+10 for you.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Firest0rm said:
You could have just said 12er.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
No, I am not educated enough to decisively choose one yet. I've heard great things about them all.
You know Imam Abu Hanifa and Malik Ibn Anas (may allah bless them) studied under Imam Ja'far-as-Sadiq.
Heck: Even if he said he was Maliki, Hanafi, or Hanbali, I would have still given him +10.
You know Imam Abu Hanifa and Malik Ibn Anas (may allah bless them) studied under Imam Ja'far-as-Sadiq.
Heck: Even if he said he was Maliki, Hanafi, or Hanbali, I would have still given him +10.
C- Warrior
Banned
Could you guys explain to me what / how / the fuck all these Muslim terms / phrases mean.
My girlfriend is Persian and I like to make fun of Muslims n' stuff in friendly jest, so I need the ammo. And I love calling her Arab, :lol gets her so pissed off ;p
TIA. But seriously, I'm interested at the different terminologies thrown about by the varioius claimed Muslim posters in this thread.
My girlfriend is Persian and I like to make fun of Muslims n' stuff in friendly jest, so I need the ammo. And I love calling her Arab, :lol gets her so pissed off ;p
grow up? yeah I considered that...
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
She's dating? She probably doesn't know what those terms mean... :lol
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
C- Warrior said:
Wikipedia has a good summary of the major branches of Islam:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisions_of_Islam
Think of adherents following different branches as people arguing about the colour of the imaginary elephant in their cell.
I'm kidding, forgive me
elektrotal
Member
evil as proof that god can't exist is only an issue if you're judeochristoislamic. Hinduism and its offshoots don't presume to posit that something as immence as deity could be pigeonholed into a human view of good or evil. God is simply beyond all that, encompassing the whole of everything. the western view is that God is somehow outside of creation, with a defined plan and a scale of good to evil. In the east, God is creation itself, and everything within, so the concept of going against his will, or being particularly good or evil, doesnt apply. Karma is newtonian, after all--actions beget reactions.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
elektrotal said:
False as hell. The concept of evil and God and the attributes associated with him in Islamic tradition are quite different from the Christian counterpart. The whole "The Problem of Evil" idea is a centuries old argument posed against Christian Theology. Don't pin it on Islam unless you know the Islamic concept of evil, what it believes about humanity, and how these concepts vary with respect to judeo-christian tradition.
We have our similarities, but there are some serious differences when it comes to the preciseness of the detail in beliefs.
We all believe in one god, but our perceptions greatly greatly greatly differ.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chairman Yang said:
I guess that article is okay with the basics... but wikipedia isn't really good with outlining any religious tradition, particularly Islam. They give weight to points of view that have no weight to like 99% of the Muslim ummah. I guess it's the NPOV, but my gripe with it is that it represents some crazy points of view that most people don't really acknowledge.
It's amazing that with wikipedia, like half the articles with Islam and Islamic history have neutrality disputes. That's because people are afraid of giving the Muslims "too much credit", and want to recognize "disputing point of views", regardless of their evidential weight.
But whatever, that's my point of view as a biased Islamofascist
.SpoonyBard
Banned
Cerebral Palsy said:
You anti-atheist assholes make me sick.
Cerebral Palsy
Banned
SpoonyBard said:
Sorry, Atheism is flawed for all of the same reason as insert faith based religion here.
Prove to me some sort of god does/doesn't exist. Oh, you can't? At least you have faith on your side.
SpoonyBard
Banned
Cerebral Palsy said:
Atheism doesn't make absolute claims about a god existing. Why should I?
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
The Stealth Fox said:
Interesting. Could you elaborate? I was under the impression that the Islamic God was considered omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent as well.
That which is good will tend to construct upon, to preserve. That which is bad will tend to destruct and corrupt. Yet how can you construct without destroying that which is/was(yes, even if it's just a pile of dirt or random building materials which cease to be distributed and individual to become part of a new whole)? In order to build a new world the old one must crumble. Even entropy, the arrow of time, has its purpose, its place. In a world of constant and inevitable change it is the interplay between these elements that gives rise to that which is inbetween absolute chaos and absolute order, to our world, to life itself. To understand the world and to be one with it, one must go beyond both good and evil, and understand the holistic whole.The Stealth Fox said:
To ask why there must be evil and not solely good, is as to ask why must there be down and not solely up, why must there be left and not solely right. Why must there be differentiation and not solely integration, why must there be negative numbers and not solely positive numbers. It is to ask Why must this coin have two sides? Yet that which is negative or positive, that which divides or multiplies, changes as it moves from one side of the equation to the other. Each of these opposites threads through the same path, it is but a difference in the direction in which they travel that distinguishes them.
CurseoftheGods
Banned
To be honest, the only reason I am an agnostic is because I am gay. I don't believe that God is cruel enough to punish two people for loving each other.
If it wasn't for that, I'd probably be a decent Muslim.
If it wasn't for that, I'd probably be a decent Muslim.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chairman Yang said:
Well, we believe in those attributes, but the way we define them is abit different. Also, some of the attributes we believe in are not necesarily elaborated in Judeo-Christian scriptures. Ugh... see, this is hwere you get into the science of kalam. Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali could answer your question very well. I don't have his book on me though.
I'll try and look up a basic explanation.
Chantcd_com
Member
Anyone who believes God doesn't exist, isn't thinking straight. If the universe was ever devoid of being (including God), nothing would have EVER come about. Something can't come from nothing -- neither can order come from chaos.
Would you believe the computer you're sitting at built itself? Of course not! How much more incredible is it to believe that the whole UNIVERSE built itself through random chance! Completely insane.
So God exists. Now if God made us, and gave us everything we have, he deserves our worship and obedience. So we should all spent AT LEAST a small % of our day investigating what religion is the true one -- or learning more about our religion, if we are convinced it is the correct one. If mathematics and science have a single, objective truth, why wouldn't religion? If God exists, he has ONE WAY he wants us to worship him, every other way would have at least SOME falsehood mixed in. If he requires that we join His Church, we had better find out which one that is!
Have you ever thought about what happens after death? Human beings alone are rational -- that is, they can make abstractions and judgements. Our mind has concepts like "justice", "being", "time", or even concepts of material things, like "tree", "dog", etc. -- all of which are not material things. A dog only knows THIS or THAT person (his owner, for instance) but he can't say, "This person has human-ness. He is one member of the species Homo Sapiens." Animals can be trained like Pavlov's dogs (because memory, emotions, etc. are faculties of a material, animal soul), but they have no abstract concepts of anything. Animals have souls, (or else their flesh would rot, and not move) but they don't have SPIRITs. A spirit is, like God, immortal. That's why the Bible says we were created in "God's image and likeness." An animal soul is corruptible -- it is the animating principle, but it is totally grounded in the material world. When the flesh can no longer support life (such as when all the blood has been drained from it), the animal soul is destroyed too. But a human being, since he can conceive of things NOT MADE OF MATERIAL, that shows that his soul is not of the material order -- it is a spirit. So after WE die, our spirit must go somewhere.
Now the Church that God approves of must have been here all along -- not just founded in 1850, 1610, etc. otherwise what of all the people that existed before then? That's why the Protestant faiths are all defective. They tout the Bible as the main rule of life but it was the Catholic Church which decided which books were in the Bible, preserved it from the beginning, and tells us that it is NOT sufficient as a rule of life. Printing wasn't invented until the 1500's, and even then only a small % of the population was literate -- so what happened to the billions of people who lived before cheap Bibles could be left in hotel lobbies?
But the Catholic Church has existed since God himself founded it. God the Son came down to earth and worked thousands of miracles to prove He was God, then He founded a Church and said that all men must join it to be saved. Incidentally, before the coming of Jesus, the One True Faith was the Jewish faith -- but Jesus Christ fulfilled the "Old Testament" (the Jewish faith) and rendered it obsolete after His resurrection. Judaism is no longer a valid way to save one's soul, since after the Resurrection of Jesus it became Talmudic Judaism, which calls Jesus a criminal instead of God the Son!
Common sense tells us that saying, "Jesus is my Savior." and then doing whatever you want is NOT sufficient. It's simply too easy! The Catholic Faith, on the other hand, says that we must follow God's law (the 10 commandments) as well has have Faith -- that is, "Faith and Works". That's why people are seeking membership in "hard" religions like Islam, Mormonism, etc. (those that actually require you to change your life). They think mainstream Protestantism is too boring -- it's too accomodating. Well, the Catholic Church has always been plenty "challenging", if you know what it actually teaches.
Also, finding the True Faith (the one religion God wants all men to join) must be accessible to all people -- it can't be a secret elitist club like the Gnostics, or the Christian Scientists. It has to be accessible to men of ALL intelligence levels, and found all over the world. That is only true of the Catholic faith. Both simple men AND geniuses can feel comfortable being Catholic.
It must be found all over the world -- it can't be a national phenomenon (Church of England, Hinduism, etc.)
Have you heard of St. Thomas Aquinas? (He lived about 1290.) He was an absolute genius, and he found nothing wrong with the Catholic faith. But he was also humble enough to serve God -- he knew that serving God was NOT degrading, since God is so infinitely great. On the contrary, serving such a great Being is a great honor.
Many of those who malign (diss) the Catholic Faith have an alterior motive for doing so -- they don't want to give up birth control, premarital sex, abortion, porn, drugs, etc. But there are many people today who are simply confused -- after all, there are SO MANY DISTRACTIONS today, that most people don't have time to sit down and sort things out. No one takes time to think anymore!
If anyone has any questions, I would be more than happy to answer them. You can e-mail me at matthew@chantcd.com
Matthew
Would you believe the computer you're sitting at built itself? Of course not! How much more incredible is it to believe that the whole UNIVERSE built itself through random chance! Completely insane.
So God exists. Now if God made us, and gave us everything we have, he deserves our worship and obedience. So we should all spent AT LEAST a small % of our day investigating what religion is the true one -- or learning more about our religion, if we are convinced it is the correct one. If mathematics and science have a single, objective truth, why wouldn't religion? If God exists, he has ONE WAY he wants us to worship him, every other way would have at least SOME falsehood mixed in. If he requires that we join His Church, we had better find out which one that is!
Have you ever thought about what happens after death? Human beings alone are rational -- that is, they can make abstractions and judgements. Our mind has concepts like "justice", "being", "time", or even concepts of material things, like "tree", "dog", etc. -- all of which are not material things. A dog only knows THIS or THAT person (his owner, for instance) but he can't say, "This person has human-ness. He is one member of the species Homo Sapiens." Animals can be trained like Pavlov's dogs (because memory, emotions, etc. are faculties of a material, animal soul), but they have no abstract concepts of anything. Animals have souls, (or else their flesh would rot, and not move) but they don't have SPIRITs. A spirit is, like God, immortal. That's why the Bible says we were created in "God's image and likeness." An animal soul is corruptible -- it is the animating principle, but it is totally grounded in the material world. When the flesh can no longer support life (such as when all the blood has been drained from it), the animal soul is destroyed too. But a human being, since he can conceive of things NOT MADE OF MATERIAL, that shows that his soul is not of the material order -- it is a spirit. So after WE die, our spirit must go somewhere.
Now the Church that God approves of must have been here all along -- not just founded in 1850, 1610, etc. otherwise what of all the people that existed before then? That's why the Protestant faiths are all defective. They tout the Bible as the main rule of life but it was the Catholic Church which decided which books were in the Bible, preserved it from the beginning, and tells us that it is NOT sufficient as a rule of life. Printing wasn't invented until the 1500's, and even then only a small % of the population was literate -- so what happened to the billions of people who lived before cheap Bibles could be left in hotel lobbies?
But the Catholic Church has existed since God himself founded it. God the Son came down to earth and worked thousands of miracles to prove He was God, then He founded a Church and said that all men must join it to be saved. Incidentally, before the coming of Jesus, the One True Faith was the Jewish faith -- but Jesus Christ fulfilled the "Old Testament" (the Jewish faith) and rendered it obsolete after His resurrection. Judaism is no longer a valid way to save one's soul, since after the Resurrection of Jesus it became Talmudic Judaism, which calls Jesus a criminal instead of God the Son!
Common sense tells us that saying, "Jesus is my Savior." and then doing whatever you want is NOT sufficient. It's simply too easy! The Catholic Faith, on the other hand, says that we must follow God's law (the 10 commandments) as well has have Faith -- that is, "Faith and Works". That's why people are seeking membership in "hard" religions like Islam, Mormonism, etc. (those that actually require you to change your life). They think mainstream Protestantism is too boring -- it's too accomodating. Well, the Catholic Church has always been plenty "challenging", if you know what it actually teaches.
Also, finding the True Faith (the one religion God wants all men to join) must be accessible to all people -- it can't be a secret elitist club like the Gnostics, or the Christian Scientists. It has to be accessible to men of ALL intelligence levels, and found all over the world. That is only true of the Catholic faith. Both simple men AND geniuses can feel comfortable being Catholic.
It must be found all over the world -- it can't be a national phenomenon (Church of England, Hinduism, etc.)
Have you heard of St. Thomas Aquinas? (He lived about 1290.) He was an absolute genius, and he found nothing wrong with the Catholic faith. But he was also humble enough to serve God -- he knew that serving God was NOT degrading, since God is so infinitely great. On the contrary, serving such a great Being is a great honor.
Many of those who malign (diss) the Catholic Faith have an alterior motive for doing so -- they don't want to give up birth control, premarital sex, abortion, porn, drugs, etc. But there are many people today who are simply confused -- after all, there are SO MANY DISTRACTIONS today, that most people don't have time to sit down and sort things out. No one takes time to think anymore!
If anyone has any questions, I would be more than happy to answer them. You can e-mail me at matthew@chantcd.com
Matthew
SpoonyBard
Banned
Nice first post. And hopefully last.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chantcd_com said:
You have a lot of balls with that statement. I can replace everything you said with my faith.
I have my religion, and you have yours.
Chantcd_com
Member
I was neither rude, nor insulting, nor illiterate.
I'd like to know what you find wrong with something as well-written as the post in question.
If you disagree with its contents, that's no grounds for removing it (or me) -- that's called censorship -- something we are taught to hate in this country.
Matthew
I'd like to know what you find wrong with something as well-written as the post in question.
If you disagree with its contents, that's no grounds for removing it (or me) -- that's called censorship -- something we are taught to hate in this country.
Matthew
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chantcd_com said:
Yes, but only a bit condescending towards people of other faiths with your kind of absolute claims.
And where did I say I wanted to censor it? I just said you really had the balls to come and state it here, on a gaming forum with people of diverse beliefs.
We live in a multicultural and multireligious society. My beliefs mandate that as long as I have a pact with this society and that I have freedom of belief, I have to obey by the law of the land. I also have to show respect and not come off as a giant... yeah.
It's called being considerate. I'm a strong believer in Allah and I love every bit of my faith, but I need not tread on other people's beliefs to show them my beliefs and why I think mine are cool.
When telling people about your faith, you are not supposed to come off strong, especially in a multireligious society. People are just going to shut you off.
Chantcd_com
Member
At the time I made the post, his response was the most recent.
Shows that this is a BUSY thread as well!
Am I making an "absolute" claim when I say that Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms make up water when combined in a 2:1 ratio? That sounds pretty dogmatic to me.
Why does EVERYONE agree that the applied sciences (e.g., Math, Science, Physics, Computer Programming, etc.) have a right and a wrong, but not religion?
As if where our souls go after death isn't more important than cold fusion, geometry, or designing the next CPU?
There's a single, objective truth for everything. I'm just repeating something that, at one time, everyone would have responded "of course, you lunatic!" but now I actually have to state it, and it's actually controversial!
Minds are being destroyed today -- the only question is how (hint: TV isn't helping)
Matthew
Shows that this is a BUSY thread as well!
Am I making an "absolute" claim when I say that Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms make up water when combined in a 2:1 ratio? That sounds pretty dogmatic to me.
Why does EVERYONE agree that the applied sciences (e.g., Math, Science, Physics, Computer Programming, etc.) have a right and a wrong, but not religion?
As if where our souls go after death isn't more important than cold fusion, geometry, or designing the next CPU?
There's a single, objective truth for everything. I'm just repeating something that, at one time, everyone would have responded "of course, you lunatic!" but now I actually have to state it, and it's actually controversial!
Minds are being destroyed today -- the only question is how (hint: TV isn't helping)
Matthew
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chantcd_com said:
Listen, buddy. I'm not denying that religion could be right or wrong. I've never objected to such a notion. I just think that you have to be considerate. In the United States, if you shout off stuff the harsh stuff immediately, you're going to turn people off from your message.
I think you completely misinterpreted my post. I advocated being considerate. I did not deny right/wrong or anything like that.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
I would think it is. At least the Catholics I know say so.
PhlegmMaster
Banned
Cerebral Palsy said:
Oh, so you weren't only talking about the basic Creator concept? It's an easy task, then. Of course, I can no more "prove" the non-existence of a specific God, like the Christian one, than I can "prove" the non-existence of a teapot orbiting Mars, but both are sufficiently unlikely that belief in their non-existence is warranted. After all, saying that there's a 0.0001% chance that something exists is almost exactly like saying it doesn't exist. There's actually more evidence against the Christian God than there is against the teapot, but I can show that His existence is extremely unlikely without using a shred of evidence, and without using any of the obvious logical contradictions within the Christian belief system.
Let me use an analogy. Let's say some guy posits the existence of aliens who, in the distant past, bio-engineered the first forms of proto-life on Earth (which eventually evolved into bacteria, plants, animals, etc). It's a good explanation for the origin of life on Earth, although of course it doesn't explain how the aliens themselves came to be. There's no actual evidence for them, but despite that, for some reason, some people start believing these aliens exist. It's a faith-based belief, so skeptics scoff at them, but on the other hand they admit there's no evidence against the existence of these aliens, so belief in their non-existence isn't warranted either (until more evidence for abiogenesis is found, anyway). So belief in the life-creating aliens is irrational, but not completely stupid or ridiculous. We can arbitrarily set the probability of these aliens existing at about 50%.
Then, a faction of alien-believers start claiming they know lots of stuff about the aliens: The aliens have the basic shape of a human, except they're hairless, and they have these huge black eyes, and green skin, and 12 fingers and 20 toes, and they came to be not on a planet, but in the center of a neutron star. They used to be mortal, but they've granted themselves immortality via technology. They're a benevolent species, always travelling from planet to planet to create the seeds of life, and give a helping hand to the ingelligent species they come across. Also, the aliens have promised that one day they would pick the most enlightened species of the universe and grant it immortality. Oh yeah, and they're telepaths, which is how they've communicated all this to some of their believers. Why only to some of their believers, and why do the stories told by these people differ among themselves? Who knows.
The important point here is that as long as there's no evidence for the aliens, every time we add a characteristic to the original concept of life-creating aliens (they're benevolent, they have 20 toes, etc), we make their existence more unlikely. This comes from the fact that the more characteristics a concept has, the more specific it is and the smaller the part of all possible existence it represents. So when a guess is made about the existence of a concept, the more specific it is, the less likely it is that it actually exists. What started at an arbitrary likelihood of 50% has become much, much lower; extremely close to 0%, in fact.
So while the rational position on the existence of life-creating aliens is non-belief, the only rational position on the existence of aliens with the 12 additional characteristics I described above is belief in their non-existence.
Now, replace "aliens" with "God", "proto-life" with "the universe", and the 12 characteristics with the many traits of the Christian God or Allah or whatever, and even without factoring all the evidence against these gods in the equation, I don't see how you can pretend that the probability that they exist isn't incredibly tiny.
I was raised as a Christian/Catholic.
Today I still have respect for the Catholic theology and the entire story of Christ and his teachings, but I've become disillusioned with the administration/hierarchical aspect to the Church and I'm put off by the growing amount of people that don't understand their faith and who use it as a means to discriminate against other types of people (gays, abortionists, etc.).
Recently I've become attracted to Eastern philosophies much more.
I would say that I'm in the early stages of being a Taoist, there's still much I don't know about Taoism, but it's a kind/peaceful philosophy which appeals greatly to me. I studied Buddhism for a long while, but I didn't like the idea that it thought of life as suffering.
Today I still have respect for the Catholic theology and the entire story of Christ and his teachings, but I've become disillusioned with the administration/hierarchical aspect to the Church and I'm put off by the growing amount of people that don't understand their faith and who use it as a means to discriminate against other types of people (gays, abortionists, etc.).
Recently I've become attracted to Eastern philosophies much more.
I would say that I'm in the early stages of being a Taoist, there's still much I don't know about Taoism, but it's a kind/peaceful philosophy which appeals greatly to me. I studied Buddhism for a long while, but I didn't like the idea that it thought of life as suffering.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
Chantcd_com said:
No offense, but you need less church and more school.
PhlegmMaster said:
They pretend all the time. I actually think they pretend harder when they know it's unlikely.
CurseoftheGods
Banned
SpoonyBard said:
:lol
Chantcd_com
Member
Anyone who has become addicted to this vice will tell you how it affected their life.
It dulls the mind, lessens the appetite for spiritual things, and the selfishness and pleasure-seeking it represents has led to, in this country, millions of babies being aborted (killed).
It's part of a "package deal" -- TV shows, way of dressing, way of acting, etc. -- if you cut out the temptations, you can easily live as a single man without indulging in this vice.
Do you know where the word "virtue" comes from? The Latin "virtus" meaning "power". Virtue is not something for sissies -- it means manliness, strength.
It takes a real man -- much strength, self-control, etc. to avoid this vice. Those who can't control themselves are to be pitied, not admired.
Who is more masculine? A poor slob who can't control himself, or a man who uses his mind, ingenuity, and willpower to do what he believes is right? I think we all know the answer. Doing the easier thing doesn't make you stronger or better!
BTW, I apologize if I come off strong -- but I have a great zeal for the truth. I'm just telling things like they are. I embrace the truth even when (especially when) it means great inconvenience for me.
A man needs ideals and principles -- something to fight and die for. If he's given no ideals, he will find some! (they probably won't be very good...)
Matthew
It dulls the mind, lessens the appetite for spiritual things, and the selfishness and pleasure-seeking it represents has led to, in this country, millions of babies being aborted (killed).
It's part of a "package deal" -- TV shows, way of dressing, way of acting, etc. -- if you cut out the temptations, you can easily live as a single man without indulging in this vice.
Do you know where the word "virtue" comes from? The Latin "virtus" meaning "power". Virtue is not something for sissies -- it means manliness, strength.
It takes a real man -- much strength, self-control, etc. to avoid this vice. Those who can't control themselves are to be pitied, not admired.
Who is more masculine? A poor slob who can't control himself, or a man who uses his mind, ingenuity, and willpower to do what he believes is right? I think we all know the answer. Doing the easier thing doesn't make you stronger or better!
BTW, I apologize if I come off strong -- but I have a great zeal for the truth. I'm just telling things like they are. I embrace the truth even when (especially when) it means great inconvenience for me.
A man needs ideals and principles -- something to fight and die for. If he's given no ideals, he will find some! (they probably won't be very good...)
Matthew
Ideally, a civilized and respectful conversation about atheism, agnosticism, theism, pantheism, etc. can actually be very fruitful and good for all participants.
Borrowing from Plato's idea of the 3 parts of the soul, it is unfortunate that what happens is that when most people talk about those touchy topics, they simply let their spirited steed (passions, emotional inclinations) and appetitive steed (fleshly/carnal desires) control or overwhelm their charioteer (reason/rationality).
Pierre Hadot, a philosopher, once commented that steeds are properly good, but they alone without the charioteer are bad.
Borrowing from Plato's idea of the 3 parts of the soul, it is unfortunate that what happens is that when most people talk about those touchy topics, they simply let their spirited steed (passions, emotional inclinations) and appetitive steed (fleshly/carnal desires) control or overwhelm their charioteer (reason/rationality).
Pierre Hadot, a philosopher, once commented that steeds are properly good, but they alone without the charioteer are bad.
PhlegmMaster
Banned
Musashi Wins! said:
Yes, but I was talking to a presumably rational agnostic.
There is so much wrong with this post.Chantcd_com said:
1) Since when was masturbation inherently addicting?
2) Why is masculinity an inherent good quality? And does your statement not imply that use of the mind, "ingenuity, and willpower" are solely attributes of men? Likewise, women can't have virtue? I guess sexism just comes with the territory of Catholicism...
3) Linking masturbation to abortion is just ridiculously illogical.
Chantcd_com
Member
PhlegmMaster said:
How did a void universe become one teeming with planets, suns, etc.? How does lack of existence become existence, and how does chaos become order?
"Nemo dat quod non habet." or, "No one gives what he doesn't have". You can't pass on something greater than yourself. I can't teach anyone to play the piano, since I can't play it. A bunch of random atoms can't somehow congeal to form something complicated that would require an intelligence to design it.
You can't go to Radio Shack and buy a bunch of random transistors, capacitors, wires, etc. and put them in a popcorn maker and have it spit out a P4 gaming machine.
Yet people convinced by the "evolution theory" believe something even more incredible -- that a bunch of atoms came together to form living things.
Where there is design, there is a designer. The PC on your desk was designed by some intelligence, that's obvious to anyone with a brain.
Matthew
BlackClouds
Member
Christian, Seventh-Day Adventist I suppose. That's the only denomination that has ever made the bible make sense to me.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Chantcd_com said:
You're not telling things like they are.... you're telling things that you parents or your culture (religion) have told you. This is not knowlege. It is dogma.
Chantcd_com
Member
Dan said:
1. All sins become habits, if we let them. Especially those which bring physical pleasure.
2. Masculinity IS an inherently good quality, if you're a man. Likewise, God meant for women to be feminine. We weren't talking about women here, so I simply wasn't focusing on them. We do need to keep to SOME kind of focus if we are to get anywhere. I am assuming that most people on this board are men -- based on the behavior I'm observing, everyone's names, etc.
Ingenuity and willpower are certainly needed by women too. But the issue was what makes a good man, since most of us here are men (or adolescent men).
Is my argument so convincing, that you must resort to setting up "straw men" and resort to "ad hominem" (personal) attacks?
3. It's quite logical. It's selfishness that causes people to not be able to "do without sex" during the fertile period and/or deal with the sacrifices that children cause. Artificial birth control allows you to do whatever you want, and not have to sacrifice. So if something happens (either birth control not used, or it fails) the same mentality is there -- "I must have my pleasure" so abortion is seen as a solution. It's all part of a hedonistic (pleasure worshipping) way of life.
Not all masturbators are pro-abortion, but abortion is the logical consequence that it leads to.
Matthew
Chantcd_com
Member
demon said:
Your little puny brain (like my puny brain) can't imagine a being that existed from all eternity, nor can we understand what it's like to be the source of your own existence. If we did, we'd be God!
Why do we expect God to be something we can comprehend? (Comprehend comes from the Latin, comprehendere, "to grasp") If we could understand God from every angle, know what it would be like to be Him, etc. we would have to be God -- our minds would have to be infinite.
Have you ever stopped to consider that if you could "wrap your mind around" God, you would have to BE God? See, we assume that humans are God these days -- we think we're the highest being, we can do everything, etc. -- but actually, it takes some humility to remember that we're only creatures. God is infinite, self-existing from all eternity, and He created us. We cannot fully understand Him.
Did you know that the knowledge that God must exist is something man, with his unaided reason, can discover? Just by thinking (philosophy), he can come to that conclusion. (That there must be a "First Cause".) So it's not just a matter for Faith and religion. Of course, to know ABOUT God, what he asks of us, etc. is the purpose religion serves (it's very important) but just to know THAT GOD EXISTS is something our brains can grasp by ourselves.
- Status