[Serious] Debate: Religion(s)

  • Thread starter Thread starter [FF]TeddyBear
  • Start date Start date
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Who says the stories about Jesus are true? Maybe they wrote them down as a normal story, to amuse people.
What if the Bible wasn't meant to be believed, wasn't meant to be literal, but just meant as amusement for people, just like Harry Potter is now? (Couldn't think of anything else)

The people weren't too smart at that time.
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

There was a guy named Jesus back then, but no evidence of his powers. :P Don't know then, pretty good notice Snicker.
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

No evidence of a guy named Jesus ether, Mauri. It's been like 2 year-, no, 20 yea-, no, two hundred ye- NO! It's been thousands of years. Telling me anything is certain after that time is just ridiculous. And as Snickers said, they weren't too bright back then.

The only reason people don't think witches are real is because science proved it wrong - if there was no science, we would still believe that there are witches hiding in the hills waiting to torture little children as they come near. However, ignorance is bliss. People don't not want to believe that there is some place you go for eternal happiness after you die.

2 said:
Translated from original future language, may not be word perfect:

"HOLY SHIT DADDY! You mean people actually believed there was a MASSIVE FUCKING ASS BEING that CREATED THE UNIVERSE AND EVERYTHING IN IT and he made 10 rules and gave them to 1 person (who was probably crazy) and then told everyone to kill each other to be purified? HOLY SHIT then fucked some virgins brains out with his MASSIVE ASS COCK and forgot to ware protection and then she had a kid who could WALK ON WATER WITHOUT WATER SHOES LIKE MINE? OMG then he created WINE FROM WATTER WITHOUT A PARTICLE MUTATOR? Kings gave him presents because he was under a star? I WANNA BE UNDER A STAR DADDY! He taught at TWELVE? 12 deciples, betrayed, and then a bunch of crazy ass jews KILLED HIM BY SHOVING NAILS THROUGH HIS HANDS AND FEET AND LETTING HIS BLEED TO DEATH? OMFG! What? Then he... CAME BACK TO LIFE AFTER THREE DAYS OMG ZOMBIES!

That sounds soo much like Horus of 3000 BC - Born Dec 25 of a virgin, star in the east, adored by three kings, teacher at 12, baptized/ministry at 30, 12 disciples, preformed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water, known as "Lamb of God" or "The Light", betrayed, crucified, dead for 3 days, resurrected.

Or even Attis of 1200 BC - Born Dec 25 of a virgin, crucified, dead for 3 days, resurrected.

Maybe Krishna of 900 BC Born of a virgin, star in the east, preformed miracles, resurrected.

How about Dionysus of 500 BC Born Dec 25 of a virgin, teacher, preformed miracles (such as turn water into wine), known as King of Kings, God's only sun, Alpha and Omega, resurrected.

Mithra of 1200 BC - Born Dec 25 of a virgin, 12 disciples, preformed miracles, dead for 3 days, resurrected, known as The Truth, The Light, warship Mithra on Sunday.

I could name more daddy, but I wanna go to bed now. Crazy people make me mad. SNORE."
Click to expand...
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

They weren't too bright even though in the translation of the bible there was complex usage and utilization of grammar far more than anyone i know can do?

I'm sure there was EVEN more utilization without SOME words being lost in translation.

Also: Zezombia...Shroud of turin...

Of course people had to be stupid about technology back then, but not about General areas. (The egyptions weren't stupid about technology back then)
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Snickers said:
The people weren't too smart at that time.
Click to expand...
People were much more smarter than, than they are now. We use calculators, they used their heads, we use machines, they use their hands, we barely need to even think now, but yeah, of coarse our technology is much more developed now than it was back then.
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

FeaR said:
Snickers said:
The people weren't too smart at that time.
Click to expand...
People were much more smarter than, than they are now. We use calculators, they used their heads, we use machines, they use their hands, we barely need to even think now, but yeah, of coarse our technology is much more developed now than it was back then.
Click to expand...

If you gave someone back then a 'Rubiks Cube' and told them what to do, I doubt it if they would be able to fix it. Ofcourse there were smart people, but I think the people now are way smarter, because we all get an education (atleast we do in the western world).
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

As I said, it's a price of clothing. I don't understand what your trying to say or how it relates to me.
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

I think of myself as a spiritual, but not religious person. aka i respect some facts of life from buddhism, rastafarians(it's actually more a philosophy than a religion) and some other religions, but i don't really follow any rules of them.
 
What's your religious stance?

What stance does TMS hold on religion?

I respect it, but I don't believe in something myself, though I wouldn't say I'm an atheist either.
 
Re: What's your religious stance?

I really like Agnosticism, because it doesn't take either side.
 
Re: What's your religious stance?

I think a god is plausible, but not going to worship something that won't show itself, if it were to appear, then I would.
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Merged, it's interesting opening this discussion anyway.

Panki said:
I really like Agnosticism, because it doesn't take either side.
Click to expand...

So what does that mean?
Believe in absolutely nothing?
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Mave said:
Merged, it's interesting opening this discussion anyway.

Panki said:
I really like Agnosticism, because it doesn't take either side.
Click to expand...

So what does that mean?
Believe in absolutely nothing?
Click to expand...
[quote author=Wikipedia]
Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable. Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves there is a God, whereas an atheist disbelieves there is a God.[/quote]

Got any questions? :D
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Panki said:
Mave said:
Merged, it's interesting opening this discussion anyway.

Panki said:
I really like Agnosticism, because it doesn't take either side.
Click to expand...

So what does that mean?
Believe in absolutely nothing?
Click to expand...
[quote author=Wikipedia]
Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable. Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves there is a God, whereas an atheist disbelieves there is a God.
Click to expand...

Got any questions? :D
[/quote]

I guess I'm an agnostic as well then :D
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Mave said:
Panki said:
Mave said:
Merged, it's interesting opening this discussion anyway.

Panki said:
I really like Agnosticism, because it doesn't take either side.
Click to expand...

So what does that mean?
Believe in absolutely nothing?
Click to expand...
[quote author=Wikipedia]
Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable. Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves there is a God, whereas an atheist disbelieves there is a God.
Click to expand...

Got any questions? :D
Click to expand...

I guess I'm an agnostic as well then :D
[/quote]
You should watch the latest South Park episode, they sorta take the piss on Agnostic people.
 
Re: Debate: Religion(s)

Agnostic here. It's simply the most logical approach.

I like the way Stephen put it;
Something like "It's not that I don't believe in a god, There's simply no way to know for sure for now. And until he proves his existence to me, I will live my life the way I want, instead of blindly following a deity that may or may not exist."

Also, some people say agnostics/athiests are assholes and aren't accepting of others (LOL how ironic is that, coming from for example a Christian!?). Personally I don't give a fuck what religion people are, I say they can believe whatever they want. HOWEVER: When their beliefs start fucking with other people, whether that be killing, harming, or even just attempting to force their views on others, then it becomes a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom