Coming to Christ has done much good for myself and family.

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: przero
So, sport, your saying because you people have no respect or manners we would be wrong for posting that topic here?

That's one way to look at it, "sport".

Or you could say the general ATOT public is completely sick of debating with "I Know I'm Right Because The Bible Said So" AOL no0bcheese, and thus your interests would be better served at a religion oriented forum, which the "Off-Topic" section of a computer forum is not.

- M4H

 

[tooltime]

not sure

 

[przero]

Have you thought about just not reading the threads marked clearly that they are religious?

Let me ask you a question. Suppose you and I are debating the outcome of the LSU vs. OU game in the Sugar Bowl in a thread titled LSU owns OU in the Sugar Bowl. NoW say MAME, for instance, post the following:

"Football is stupid. It is juat a bunch of men running up and down a field and accomplishing nothing. The world would be better off spending all that money on medical research. Football is a wate of time. No more football threads on ATOT!"

Wouldn't you agree that that doesn't belong in our thread? He should have moved along. It's called respect. And it is in short supply on ATOT!

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: przero
Have you thought about just not reading the threads marked clearly that they are religious?

Let me ask you a question. Suppose you and I are debating the outcome of the LSU vs. OU game in the Sugar Bowl in a thread titled LSU owns OU in the Sugar Bowl. NoW say MAME, for instance, post the following:

"Football is stupid. It is juat a bunch of men running up and down a field and accomplishing nothing. The world would be better off spending all that money on medical research. Football is a wate of time. No more football threads on ATOT!"

Wouldn't you agree that that doesn't belong in our thread? He should have moved along. It's called respect. And it is in short supply on ATOT!

Firstly, that wouldn't ever happen, because I don't give a rat's ass about the Sugar Bowl unless it's run out and I need a cup of coffee.

Secondly, a debate over the outcome of a particular (pivotal?) football game is a world apart from theology. One has a definitive answer, can be backed from both sides by both a statistical and analytical basis, and will resolve itself given time. The other is sorely lacking in all of the above categories.

And lastly, football and other sports-related threads are well-received in this forum. The concept seems to slip your grasp every single time, but I will try again - religious debacle is generally frowned upon here. Even those who are devout believers are quite fed up with the attention that the fundamentalists draw, as it serves only to create a negative impression of the group as a whole. Since you like analogies, let's try this one:

- You join ClubSI forums, a place notorious for its dislike of the Riceboy - although it is never formally stated
- You then proceed to start threads on "Altezzas make your car look mAd tYt3 y0" "Pep Boys is the best place to hang out" and the nail in the coffin "APC MAKES THE BEST PARTS GREDDY IS SH!T"
- And then you bitch and moan when you get your ass handed to you

Get it?

- M4H

 

[Semper Fi]

:sun:

Amen Brother!

May God continue to bless you and your family.

 

[Semper Fi]

^
|
|
|
Directed at the original poster.

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: przero
Have you thought about just not reading the threads marked clearly that they are religious?

Let me ask you a question. Suppose you and I are debating the outcome of the LSU vs. OU game in the Sugar Bowl in a thread titled LSU owns OU in the Sugar Bowl. NoW say MAME, for instance, post the following:

"Football is stupid. It is juat a bunch of men running up and down a field and accomplishing nothing. The world would be better off spending all that money on medical research. Football is a wate of time. No more football threads on ATOT!"

Wouldn't you agree that that doesn't belong in our thread? He should have moved along. It's called respect. And it is in short supply on ATOT!

Firstly, that wouldn't ever happen, because I don't give a rat's ass about the Sugar Bowl unless it's run out and I need a cup of coffee.

Secondly, a debate over the outcome of a particular (pivotal?) football game is a world apart from theology. One has a definitive answer, can be backed from both sides by both a statistical and analytical basis, and will resolve itself given time. The other is sorely lacking in all of the above categories.

And lastly, football and other sports-related threads are well-received in this forum. The concept seems to slip your grasp every single time, but I will try again - religious debacle is generally frowned upon here. Even those who are devout believers are quite fed up with the attention that the fundamentalists draw, as it serves only to create a negative impression of the group as a whole. Since you like analogies, let's try this one:

- You join ClubSI forums, a place notorious for its dislike of the Riceboy - although it is never formally stated
- You then proceed to start threads on "Altezzas make your car look mAd tYt3 y0" "Pep Boys is the best place to hang out" and the nail in the coffin "APC MAKES THE BEST PARTS GREDDY IS SH!T"
- And then you bitch and moan when you get your ass handed to you

Get it?

- M4H

The topic being discussed was not the focus of przero's example; the interjection and disruption of the discussion of it by someone who had nothing productive to say was.

It's quite true that religious topics are generally not well received in ATOT. From what I have observed the cause is quite often two or more persons with differening beliefs that a) won't agree to disagree, and b) won't back down from a heated argument. Though it has taken me some time, I have learned to duck my head and see my way out of a thread should it turn sour. In fact I've learned to mostly not get involved save some rare instances.

I agree that I am not pleased with the sweeping generalizations that are applied to those who share the same faith as I. Though I think that much effort from the fundamental theists and fundamental atheists could end many of the flame-fests that shine negatively upon the image of those who profess Christ to be their savior. I highly doubt this will happen, but I have been wrong before and certainly will be wrong again.

Lastly, though you're example is quite humorous, I don't believe it applies to this thread. LordMagnusKain has shown considerable restraint regarding some of the remarks that have been directed at him. He made a comment saying that he doesn't agree with Native American religion considering the use of peyote cactus as a means for religious gain. DanTMWTP decided to flip his sh!t because of that comment. przero proceeded to ask him to calm down and let him know that he was being offensive. After being told that religion has no place in a computer technology oriented forums (on that same token, neither should threads about cars, girls, pictures of yourself, music, or movies), he offers some suggestions for handling religious topics should the person reading it not look kindly upon religious topics. Somehow implying that people should exercise self-restraint is now a reprimandable offense.

/me ducks and sees his way out of this thread

ups

 

[AIWGuru]

TO the original poster:
I haven't read any of this garbage but I just had to stop by to say that your name is blasphemous and you'll be burning in hell hethen!

 

[przero]

MercenaryForHire - You missed my point entirely! Besides do you have some special membership that allows you to determine what is fit to post? Is this MercenaryForHireTech Forums? If it is then you are correct we should move on, but until then learn some manners. Don't post just to aggravate someone.

Thisis kind of biblical but it works just as well for non-believers too:

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: przero
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

Actually, Confucius said that a few hundred years before Christ.

ZV

 

[przero]

Actually it is a paraphrase of a scripture in Leviticus written about 800 years before Confucius.

 

[nick1985]

i like chocolate. anyone else?

 

[JBAR]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: przero
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

Actually, Confucius said that a few hundred years before Christ.

ZV

Confucius actually said "What you do not want done to you, do not do to others." So did Rabbi Hillel. This is a negative commandment. All you have to do to keep it is to leave other people alone. Jesus said, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." This is a positive commandment, one which can never be fulfilled. To keep it one constantly has to do good to everyone that they come in contact with. There is a difference between the two. Jesus knew this.

 

[JBAR]

Originally posted by: fumbduck
i killed jesus

True. So did I. We all did.

 

[oslama]

Buddha Saves.

 

[Palek]

It was a pleasure to read a thread about faith/lack of faith that stayed civil for this long. Must be a new record for ATOT.

<--- Still trying to understand what exactly caused DanTMWTMP to fly off the handle in such spectacular fashion.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
How many people have had better lives because there is no god?

How many people have had better lives because of the salvation of God?

The existence of God and Salvation doesn?t prove logically correct or incorrect; but it does prove good and Positive:

I challenge the assumption that it proves good and positive. ... Nietzsche ... It is quite clear to me that a belief in Him makes this life harder for us

Just because you have not experienced freedom does not mean that freedom does not exist; Tell me how good a slaves life of free-base addiction is in comparison to freedom in Christ;

Someone with a relationship with God through salvation isn't going to be a thief, isn't going to start a holy war, and isn't going to be slave to the drags of every day life that so many others turn to drugs and alcohol to 'fix'.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

Originally posted by: Palek
It was a pleasure to read a thread about faith/lack of faith that stayed civil for this long. Must be a new record for ATOT.

<--- Still trying to understand what exactly caused DanTMWTMP to fly off the handle in such spectacular fashion.

he thought i was insulting the native American's shamanic beliefs. Which, of course, was not the case.. if he had read the link, i was simply showing that troll guy that the native Americans and myself both worship the same God "great spirit", i just disagree with how they go about it.

*not that the practice of there faith should be out-lawed*

 

[JBAR]

Magnus, I want your poems! Please post a link to your poetry.

 

[Athanasius]

4) Church. What a big steaming pile of poo.

Why on Earth would God want us to worship him? WHY? It's not like he's some communist. Kiss my feet or go to Hell?

Bwhahaha!!!

Right.

:disgust:

Maybe "worship" is just another name for "declare your center." Maybe that which is the Center (if He exists) would actually want rational beings to center on that which is the Center. Maybe He would want it so badly because centering on the Center actually is a good thing for those who do it.

If you don't think God is the center, that is your choice. But, if God exists, He almost certainly is the center and foundation of everything else. Hence His desire that we would actually build our lives on that which is foundational is easily understood without drawing the conclusion that He is egomaniacal.

It seems to me (in the rare moments when I actually am less egocentric myself) that the more I insist on maintaining my own centrality, the more I presuppose that motive in others.



LordMagnus, I am happy for you.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: JBAR

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: przero
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

Actually, Confucius said that a few hundred years before Christ.

ZV

Confucius actually said "What you do not want done to you, do not do to others." So did Rabbi Hillel. This is a negative commandment. All you have to do to keep it is to leave other people alone. Jesus said, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." This is a positive commandment, one which can never be fulfilled. To keep it one constantly has to do good to everyone that they come in contact with. There is a difference between the two. Jesus knew this.

Logically, the commandments are identical, though there are many who would argue this. Arguing positive versus negative is simply sophistry.

Personally, it's a moot point since I would prefer to have everyone leave me alone anyway. To keep it constantly I would simply have to become a hermit. Perfectly fulfillable.

I would have everyone simply not do bad to me. I don't want a bunch of bloody sycophants being nice to me all the time. I'd be able to take that for about a day before I started killing people.

ZV

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Someone with a relationship with God through salvation isn't going to be a thief, isn't going to start a holy war, and isn't going to be slave to the drags of every day life that so many others turn to drugs and alcohol to 'fix'.

An avowed atheist with at least two functioning brain cells isn't going to do any of that either because it's a bloody stupid idea to do those things, even secularly. You make some very arrogant assumptions about what people would do on their own and you are quite clearly implying that you agree with the ancient fallacy that there is no morality outside of a relationahip with God.

There are millions upon millions of people who do not steal, do not start wars, and are not "slaves to the drags [sic] of everyday life" for no reason other than that THEY do not want to be. Any person with a halfways reasonable level of intelligence is capable of realizing the so-called "Christian morality" without having to know God. The morality you describe is self-evident and perfectly logical when one considers rational self-interest with the appropriate long-term view. I don't go out and rob banks because I don't want to have my own bank robbed. I don't kill people because I don't want to get killed. I don't lie because I don't want to be lied to, etc, etc. A person does not need God to explain morality to them. I will agree completely that a person needs God to have salvation, but salvation does not make this current life better, and if a person believes simply because they want salvation then their motives are ultimately selfish.

To sum up: A life without God is NOT BY ANY STRETCH automatically a life of slavery to "free-base addiction". Such instances are the exception and not the rule. "Cristian morals" are, in fact, self-evident principles that can be arrived at independantly of a faith in God.

I do want to be clear on one last thing though, I believe in Jesus Christ. I believe that He died for my sin and for everyone else's sin. I believe that He was, is, and forever will be the son of God. What I do not believe in is the unthinking and overly simplistic approach that so many Christians today seem to take towards their faith.

ZV

EDIT: Typos.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: przero
Actually it is a paraphrase of a scripture in Leviticus written about 800 years before Confucius.

EDIT: Oops, mis-read the post. Sorry.

I'm curious though, have a chapter and verse? I'd like to read it. (Not a challenge, I believe you, I'd just like to save time and not have to fumble through the whole book to find it.

ZV

 

[OpTiX]

im a atheist

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Athanasius

4) Church. What a big steaming pile of poo.

Why on Earth would God want us to worship him? WHY? It's not like he's some communist. Kiss my feet or go to Hell?

Bwhahaha!!!

Right.

:disgust:

Maybe "worship" is just another name for "declare your center." Maybe that which is the Center (if He exists) would actually want rational beings to center on that which is the Center. Maybe He would want it so badly because centering on the Center actually is a good thing for those who do it.

If you don't think God is the center, that is your choice. But, if God exists, He almost certainly is the center and foundation of everything else. Hence His desire that we would actually build our lives on that which is foundational is easily understood without drawing the conclusion that He is egomaniacal.

It seems to me (in the rare moments when I actually am less egocentric myself) that the more I insist on maintaining my own centrality, the more I presuppose that motive in others.



LordMagnus, I am happy for you.

Maybe.

I think the biggest red light in my mind is that there are so many religions. They can't all be right, because they are often contradictory, at least if taken literally. So in my mind, they are all wrong by mutual exclusion.

Again, I don't want to rephrase everything I've already posted. Nobody has really addressed the points in my other posts.

Magnus, so you believe God has everything to do with your good fortune? It has nothing to do with your own doings?

What are you going to think when things take a turn for the worst(they will; such is the nature of life)? Are you going to say "I must have been bad. I am sorry". Are you going to get angry at God? What?

If you think anybody but you is in control of your destiny and fate, you are deluded. If you aren't in control, who is? God? You aren't his puppet.

My Dad subscribes to this theory, and I see how well it hasn't worked for him. He refuses to make decisions for himself, instead he "puts it in God's hands" and.. waits. and waits, and waits, and waits.

It's enough to drive a 3rd party observer insane.