jaguars4ever Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I am an empirical rationalist. I go by what I can see, hear, touch, and so forth. I know God exists. I know that Lucifer (Semyaz, Satan, Bob, whatever you want to call him) exists. I worship neither one. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did you see, hear, touch, feel, or taste them? I'm very curious on this. It all sounds very naughty. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thats real hott :ph34r: can i watch? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Smart people don't believe in god... :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> God doesn't believe in smart people. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ROTFL!!!!! Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosbjerg Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 The point of science is to 1) understand how the world works 2) use that knowledge for a purpouse What is the point of religion? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What's the point of empirical science? since everything is a matter of perspective and what you see is your brains interpretation of the so called reality .. every observation becomes subjective and thus meaningless in the bigger picture! Religion and science are far apart, and you can't use the rules from either and apply them to the other .. but they do share a common ground - Faith - since science, as was previously stated, doesn't really prove anything, it just gives a good (and logic within it's own system) explanation of certain events! so it requires a bit of belief and faith as well .. Fortune favors the bald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 What does science not have to make it not a religion, that every other religion has? Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 What does science not have to make it not a religion, that every other religion has? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Probability. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Also, it's a proven fact that Catholics have a substantially smaller cranium, which obviously leads to the conclusion that they are an inferior race. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You yutz! My numbered friend, just because I am a Catholic and I am inferior does not necessarily mean that all Catholics are inferior. However, my cranium is not small. My head is huge but my brain is vacuous. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 einstein speaking, eh? Well, I'm certainly no Einstein, but since I can make use of the quote function several times in a single reply without the need to SPAM the forums with several posts in order to reply to a single post, while you seem unable to do the same, I am obviously closer to him than you. ) it's generally considered rude, btw, to do a line item dissection of somebody's post. it makes it hard to follow. so what was that about intelligence? To someone with an intelligence as limited as yours, perhaps. But replying to each statement in an orderly, quoted, non-SPAMming manner, makes for tidy, easier to follow posts. And it keeps the boards cleaner. You see, if someone just didn't want to read the crap you call posts, they would just have to skip ONE post. But the way you do it, they have to skip half the page. You yutz! My numbered friend, just because I am a Catholic and I am inferior does not necessarily mean that all Catholics are inferior. However, my cranium is not small. My head is huge but my brain is vacuous. Don't you dare question the POWARH of phrenology! - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oerwinde Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 What does science not have to make it not a religion, that every other religion has? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> An afterlife. The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaftan Barlast Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Don't you dare question the POWARH of phrenology! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hear! Hear! Finally a true gentleman with the proper comprehension of todays modern science. This forum suffers from far too many degenerates whose primitive craniums fortell of their inherently unsound fluids. Im sad to say that there is no doubt to the presence of some clearly negroid traits in your constructive faculty, mr Baley DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Child of Flame Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Hey guys. taks always wins the debates and there's no point arguing with him. He's like an internet god of logic. I think a lot of 'devoutly religious' people are gullible/unintelligent, as organized religion tends to draw those sort of people. By 'devoutly religious' I don't really mean what I would consider devoutly religious, but what people who are anti-religion, anti-god, or whatever use the term for. A more apt term would be 'devoutly gullble'. People who can't think for themselves, lack confidence, and so turn to religion as a comfort blanket of sorts. Often times (to the detriment of organized religion) these people will absorb and internalize anything someone behind a pulpit says as fact. This is sad to me. Someone devoutly religious in the true sense, should examine, question, and explore what they are told. Otherwise they're just parroting what they've been told, rather than studying the context, meaning, and history behind the word. I go to church services regularly, more for companionship and friends I've made there over the years than because I really value or get anything out of them. The times I've learned and grown the most spiritually were always in small groups, Bible Studies, or just gatherings of friends. I'd often be the devil's advocate in said groups, as I'm a fairly liberal minded person in a sea of conservatives, but I usually learned something of use from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaftan Barlast Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 taks is hardly a god of logic, he's just stubborn and firmly anchored to his beliefs :D DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 He reminds me of someone... " - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Child of Flame Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 taks is hardly a god of logic, he's just stubborn and firmly anchored to his beliefs :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nah, taks is a smart cookie, and though he's firmly anchored to his beliefs, he uses logic and reason to back them up better than any of you can claim to. The argument usually goes like this: Person X: Inflammatory, incorrect statement. taks: Pure unadulterated logic that grabs inflammatory statement, throttles it, shakes it around some more, and then grinds it down into non-existent particles. Person X: At a loss for words, flings insult at taks and makes themselves look bad. taks: Grumbles about insult, trudges on with logic. And now, once again, I'm off to school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Elite_elite Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Well, I believe in a religion because to me it makes the most sence. I don't care if studies show that religious people aren't as smart as non-religious people I will always believe in my religion. Also I have to say in general, religion is a good thing (except any violent religions). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosbjerg Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Someone devoutly religious in the true sense, should examine, question, and explore what they are told. Otherwise they're just parroting what they've been told, rather than studying the context, meaning, and history behind the word. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The irony here is that most of you use scientific theories as arguments .. but I seriously doubt that you have studied, calculated and pondered deeply over these theories yourself! so how come a devout Christian/Muslim has to put his belief in the context of science, when you accept the latter's words, and just as gullible, as the religious accept the scriptures? now you may argue that new theories arise, and you read up on those, while religion is stagnant .. but it's still the same pattern, you accept it without doing research yourself .. trusting the words of others, simply because they seem to know what they are talking about .. how is this any different, fundamentally, from devoted religious people?? Fortune favors the bald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I don't think it's the same. You don't believe in science. You are convinced of its validity by overwhelming evidence which is predicted through logical reasoning and mathematics. Okay, I admit it. I know nothing about string theory. But it seems to be a solid theory in that most of the scientific community accepts it. You may compare this to any believer swallowing what their local guru tells them, but nothing stops me from going and studying string theory, and if I can, proving it false. You can't really do the same with religion. I don't see why you would want to, anyway. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowPaladin V1.0 Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Actually I think smart people try to manipulate god into something that suits them better. Consider the current catholic debate. Which goes something along the lines of lets change the rules to fit with our new society. Which makes the whole thing a bit of a sham. Following the popes death and the new pope popping up numerous people who consider themselves Catholics were telling me how great a forward looking pope would be. And how they are practicing catholics but they dont agree with the birth control thing.. When I told them they should petition for indulgences for some reason they were not amused :D. And therein lies the problem with religion. Where as scientits dont go to war when a new theory crops up. I have to agree with Volourn. Bioware is pretty much dead now. Deals like this kills development studios. 478327[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosbjerg Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I don't think it's the same. You don't believe in science. You are convinced of its validity by overwhelming evidence which is predicted through logical reasoning and mathematics. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It still requires belief .. because you believe in the system of logic and mathematics .. science proves it self within this system, which can't be proven out of own boundries .. like religion, so therefore it requires faith as well! and to use a Holdberg's Montanus string of logic Science is therefore a Religion! Okay, I admit it. I know nothing about string theory. But it seems to be a solid theory in that most of the scientific community accepts it. You may compare this to any believer swallowing what their local guru tells them, but nothing stops me from going and studying string theory, and if I can, proving it false. You can't really do the same with religion. I don't see why you would want to, anyway. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No because if you prove something in a religion it seizes to be about faith .. and when it's about faith some people, who are addicted to logic, find it stupid .. Religion doesn't need, and is better without, the scientific approach of evidence .. Disclaimer: everything here is of course just my opinion Fortune favors the bald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 String theory is barely even a theory itself, every few months they keep on adding another demonsion and they can't find the link from quantum to relativity. its still pretty messy to say you beleive in that. id give it a few more years ATLEAST for them to support string theory more. Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 It still requires belief .. because you believe in the system of logic and mathematics .. science proves it self within this system, which can't be proven out of own boundries .. like religion, so therefore it requires faith as well!and to use a Holdberg's Montanus string of logic Science is therefore a Religion! Agreed. However, it is undeniable that science works within the parameters it's confined to. Those parameters are nothing more than the physical reality we live in. It is not absurd to think that in time those parameters may be expanded, though. However, as things are now, I don't see how that would trascend to explaining other things such as those which philosophy or religion seek to "explain". That is not what I meant. And yes, people who try to take scientific approaches to that sort of transcendental stuff are just followers of another belief. No because if you prove something in a religion it seizes to be about faith .. and when it's about faith some people, who are addicted to logic, find it stupid .. Religion doesn't need, and is better without, the scientific approach of evidence .. That's what I meant when I said that I don't see why you would want to go and prove stuff in religion. Religion and science are not opposite words as some people seem to think. That doesn't preclude the fact that some outdated dogmas have been rendered obsolete by the advances of science. @WITHTEETH: Fair enough. That was just an example. As I said, I know nothing about it. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random evil guy Posted May 5, 2005 Author Share Posted May 5, 2005 I don't think it's the same. You don't believe in science. You are convinced of its validity by overwhelming evidence which is predicted through logical reasoning and mathematics. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It still requires belief .. because you believe in the system of logic and mathematics .. science proves it self within this system, which can't be proven out of own boundries .. like religion, so therefore it requires faith as well! and to use a Holdberg's Montanus string of logic Science is therefore a Religion! Okay, I admit it. I know nothing about string theory. But it seems to be a solid theory in that most of the scientific community accepts it. You may compare this to any believer swallowing what their local guru tells them, but nothing stops me from going and studying string theory, and if I can, proving it false. You can't really do the same with religion. I don't see why you would want to, anyway. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No because if you prove something in a religion it seizes to be about faith .. and when it's about faith some people, who are addicted to logic, find it stupid .. Religion doesn't need, and is better without, the scientific approach of evidence .. Disclaimer: everything here is of course just my opinion <{POST_SNAPBACK}> math isn't something you believe in. math just is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 It's simply not reasonable to expect folks to prove a negative. It shouldn't be: prove to me that God doesn't exist. That's an unfair demand. However, I need apologize to no-one for my faith. I believe in God, but it is a matter of personal conviction. The objects of faith should never be easily proved. If they are, then faith does not exist. I won't assume that an atheist lacks a moral compass. I expect that a reasonable atheist won't assume that I lack intelligence. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophy Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I think that catholicism is the biggest sect in the world.I may believe in God,but with all the pedophiles priests and every other chretian revolting acts I just can't trust catholicism religion anymore.Like they said in South Park,christianism has gone too far,and I guess that's why almost nobody trust in it now.The "voice of God" sound just too fake.I think that in fact there may be something great around us,but that catholicism don't represent it at all.Cause if in fact we're all supposed to act like those priest and pray God every day or burn in hell,well that just suck,cause if God really loves us and forgive everything,he would forgive us if we don't have the same religion or if we don't go to church every Sunday.I guess I'm going to be buddhist.Serenity and non-violence rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaguars4ever Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I am God. Bub-bye. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Damnit! I deserve to be worshiped. ---- Science is a religion too people. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, it's not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah it is - the Religon of Faithlessness. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Incredulous Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I'm sorry for what I'm about to do. I didn't bother reading the thread, I'm just sticking my head in to say that you have the title the wrong way round. It should be: Smart gods don't believe in people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now