The Religion Poll

What Religion are you?

  • Christian

    Votes: 21 25.9%
  • Atheist

    Votes: 34 42.0%
  • Satanist

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 25 30.9%

  • Total voters
    81
i just figured i might as well put something here, since you all seem to be getting on so well.
the thing that bugs me about religion is the idea that you should have 'faith', believe something that makes no sence because...well, i don't know? a lot of other people do? isn't that gullability, conformity, inability to make your own descicion based on what you've seen...surely what you can see in the world doesn't suggest a god.
anyway, there's my opinin, feel free to mock me now
 
Damn I hate it when I miss a day :erk: ohhh well

I have a question for anyone that thinks they can answer it. If God created time, space, and everything else than what did he/she exist in? Just doing nothing in nothing? This is one of the reasons that I can't believe in God Creating everything.

Also After Armageddon If you believe in God and warshiped him/her and all that your suppost to go to some paradise where everything is good, but you have to think can you actually have good without evil? Well those are my thoughts what about yours.
 
Originally posted by Opth_001
Damn I hate it when I miss a day :erk: ohhh well

I have a question for anyone that thinks they can answer it. If God created time, space, and everything else than what did he/she exist in? Just doing nothing in nothing? This is one of the reasons that I can't believe in God Creating everything.

Also After Armageddon If you believe in God and warshiped him/her and all that your suppost to go to some paradise where everything is good, but you have to think can you actually have good without evil? Well those are my thoughts what about yours.

Space and time are a priori intuitions which we use to shape our interpretation of the universe. They are not facts about it. God as creator is simply 'that upon whom' that very creation is contingent. It is trivial to ask spacio-temporal questions about the nature of one whom by definition must not be dependant or subject to those considerations; whether you believe 'God as creator' to be a consistant concept or not.

'Doing nothing' is contingent upon time because it depends a priori upon change.

'In nothing' is contingent upon the ituition of pure space, because it depends a priori upon extension with which to call nothingness.

These two considerations are trivial

For good to be dependant upon evil assumes a relational theory of 'good' which cannot be assumed. Is good a primary unanalysable feature? If so, then it clearly cannot be dependant upon anything. If good is a quaility which all 'good' things must share in, then it must have a priori existence. If 'good' is simply synonomous with the will of God and God has necessary existence (as most theists believe) then it, itself, exists necessarily.

That's my thoughts.
 
If after you die you return to nothingness I would have never existed at all. To have to live a long bullshit painfilled hard existance, die, and become nothing. I cant accept that.

You may not be able to accept it... but it's the most likely reality. I won't claim to say it's the only possibility, but more likely than not, it is. I was thinking about some things lately, partly related to some of the stuff Satori had mentioned.

One of the good conciousness hypothetical situations is this:

The technology is now high enough to scan your brain into a "body" of electronics, be it a virtual world, a mechanical body, or another biological one. The question arises that if you scan yourself in, and your body is destroyed as it is scanned in, is that new "you" really you? If you believe in a soul or something like that you'll say "No, the soul died with the body" Does the new "you" have a soul though? Will you meet all the copies of you in the afterlife? I'm assuming most of us here don't buy the soul thing anyways. I lately thought about this and realized that conciousness is just an illusion the brain has created, it doesn't matter if "the same" conciousness is in the new copy of you or not, it's all an illusion anyways. Right now you think you are conscious, what is consciousness more than your body experiencing the instant and then having it stored in your memory? When you die, your body ceases functioning, and the illusion ends. There doesn't need to be a point to life, the only point to life is how evolution made us strive to survive and reproduce, once you're prime is reached your body starts dying and aging, you either reproduced or you didn't, whatever, that's all the point to life was.
 
This technology you speak of simply doesn't exist! even if it did, a soul, by any well recognised definition is not a spacial thing, so it needn't be affected.

No, it does not, but in 100 years, very possibly.

Ok, Joe goes in to the uploader place, his brain is scanned and sent to the new "body", as this happens, his old body is incinerated, so he died techically, but in another way he didn't die because his exact brain complete with memories is in the new body, if you believe in a soul, you'd probably say the soul went on to the afterlife when Joe's body was incinerated, get it?
 
Originally posted by Opth_001
I have a question for anyone that thinks they can answer it. If God created time, space, and everything else than what did he/she exist in? Just doing nothing in nothing? This is one of the reasons that I can't believe in God Creating everything.

Also After Armageddon If you believe in God and warshiped him/her and all that your suppost to go to some paradise where everything is good, but you have to think can you actually have good without evil? Well those are my thoughts what about yours.

Well, thats a good point yet their is a counterpoint..... i know Christians, because i am friends with some and most all my family is, and mainly they dont care about those things, they have faith. I dont have any faith in christianity (or any other religion), because personaly i do want truth, but some people just have a strong faith in it and they dont need truth. Also, they believe there is evil but "the power of god will destroy it all".... i know, it sounds cheesy but its true.

And about reincarnation, i just dont believe that. I dont think any of us.... NOT ONE OF US could ever comprehend what true life after death is.... there is no possible way that we could understand life after death through text, such as the bible. I think it is to complex for words and the only truth and ways to explain it is seeing it for yourself..... thats what i think atleast. anyway, goodbye.
-derek
 
being satanist is being technically atheist as well. if you're a satanist you do not believe in god or satan for that matter. the only god is your own personal god
 
Originally posted by Opth_001
I have a question for anyone that thinks they can answer it. If God created time, space, and everything else than what did he/she exist in? Just doing nothing in nothing? This is one of the reasons that I can't believe in God Creating everything.

Yes, but if you believe in the big bang (or anything for that matter), what existed before that? Where did anything come from? The question is the same, regardless of what you believe. If you can't comprehend that God could have existed 'before', then how can you comprehend that anything, space for example, existed 'before'.

I've heard this many times from christian friends, debating science and the big bang etc. They say it is flawed, because if the big bang created everything, how could anything have existed beore that. Strangely enough, when you turn the question back on them and ask how god could have existed, they say, 'oh, he always existed'. WTF? If that's feesable, then why could there not have been something before the big bang, or whatever the hell other theory you subscribe to? But they never conceed that point. Can anyone say brainwashed?
 
Originally posted by TempleGod
being satanist is being technically atheist as well. if you're a satanist you do not believe in god or satan for that matter. the only god is your own personal god

thats what ive been saying for the first 3 pages....... but they do have their differences (which i explain somewhere on page 3 or 2). anyway, goodbye.
-Derek
 
I've heard this many times from christian friends, debating science and the big bang etc. They say it is flawed, because if the big bang created everything, how could anything have existed beore that. Strangely enough, when you turn the question back on them and ask how god could have existed, they say, 'oh, he always existed'. WTF? If that's feesable, then why could there not have been something before the big bang, or whatever the hell other theory you subscribe to? But they never conceed that point. Can anyone say brainwashed?

The difficulty is that to account for the origin of the universe on a purely materialist ontology will eventually end up being unsuccessful with just physics. Physics is the study of the universe as it is now. It can't successfully ask transcendental questions about the universe by appeal to contingent principles of it. The big-bang theory can, at best, provide a point at which the 'laws' of physics become intelligable/applicable. It can't provide any sufficient reason for itself having happened. That, however, is what a theory of God attempts to do.
 
Agreed. But saying one thing is feasable and dismissing the other as impossible leaves me uneasy, particularly in this case when they are basically just different ways of looking at the same thing.