So, are the anonymous visitors of /jp/ religious? Any Christfags/Jewcakes/Islamofascists? Given that this subforum is Japanese, are any of you hardcore enough to believe in Shintoism? Pic related, as I believe in a slight modification of it.

File: 56 KB, 604x377, belldandy in yggdrasil.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

4tran Thu Mar 27 02:16:52 2008 No.320948 [Reply] [Original]

So, are the anonymous visitors of /jp/ religious?

Any Christfags/Jewcakes/Islamofascists?

Given that this subforum is Japanese, are any of you hardcore enough to believe in Shintoism?

Pic related, as I believe in a slight modification of it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:17:02 2008 No.320954 Atheist faggot here.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:17:02 2008 No.320955 I believe in miko

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:18:22 2008 No.320957 I believe in Touhouism.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:18:49 2008 No.320959 >>320948 I'm not trolling you or anything...Im actually highly curious How do you believe in Ah! Megami-sama???

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:18:53 2008 No.320961 I'm Christian, but considering where I am, it's quite obvious I don't embody the usual stereotype crafted by the assholes of society.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:18:56 2008 No.320962 Isn't Shintoism just a catch-all term for Japan's many indigenous religions, instead of a proper unified religion in itself?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:20:49 2008 No.320981 Atheist, FSMist, or Jedi depending on who's asking or what form I'm filling out.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:21:20 2008 No.320985
File: 126 KB, 464x650, 1206584480091.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Catholicism? Its got old stinking fart fuck men that rape little boys

Shinto? Miko. Shit yea, hot virgin female miko.

Those shinto bastards know whats up. Who wants to listen to preaching all day? Not me. I'll donate to a fucking hot miko any time.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:22:15 2008 No.320993 I believe in SCIENCE!

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:22:35 2008 No.320996 >>320985 I don't think the average Japanese miko is actually a virgin, enjoy your donations to her condom supply fund for her boyfriend.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:23:16 2008 No.321001 Atheist, considering Buddhism and Shinto.

>>	Yowane Haku !EFPBBu/XAg Thu Mar 27 02:23:16 2008 No.321003 File: 163 KB, 640x480, 1206584596836.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I'm an atheist...

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:23:25 2008 No.321004 >>320985 o u

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:24:37 2008 No.321011 Catholic but I don't go to church much or anything. So sick of all the IRL newfags who like to parade around with "LOL RELIJUN IS GAY, I AM ATHEUST DERPDERPDERP".

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:24:41 2008 No.321013 File: 121 KB, 719x1024, 1206584681136.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>320996 Miko dont need condoms They have control over borders

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:25:04 2008 No.321021 Ain't got none. Don't care about yours.

>>	anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:26:13 2008 No.321024 File: 39 KB, 403x600, 1206584773336.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321011 seconded

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:26:18 2008 No.321025 Atheist, I disdain religion but I'm not going to go out of my way to bitch about it.

>>	Gainaxfag !9ZG178OTIU Thu Mar 27 02:26:54 2008 No.321033 No religion. Not even Atheism so there.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:27:49 2008 No.321040 Agnostic leaning towards Atheist - is my usual answer

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:28:02 2008 No.321054

I've tried out a shitload of religions
Spent a lot of time in the pagan part of it. The whole thing with nature seemed to make sense.

Then I got together with some other pagans, and actually saw it in action and realized how stupid it was.

Now I'm simply Agnostic. Probably something like Myst is what's actually happening, though.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:28:37 2008 No.321049 >>321011 >>321024 >"I'm a bad Catholic who doesn't actually practice my religion, but atheists are veddy veddy bad. Grrr atheists! BRB jacking off to loli porn." Fixed

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:28:59 2008 No.321053 >>321033 best answer

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:30:12 2008 No.321070 >>321054 Yeah, pagan religions try to sound all mysterious and different, and then you go to their meetings and instead of silly pointy pope hats and robes, they're all wearing silly pointy witch hats and robes. Same shit, fatter people.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:30:27 2008 No.321065 >>321049 It's not that I don't practice it, I'm just not into church. Maybe when I get older.

4tran Thu Mar 27 02:30:49 2008 No.321068

>>320959
The world is lacking in religious evidence; we can't really say one religion is more or less accurate than another. Thus, why not choose one that is not full of malevolent god(s) who are out to kill us? The AMG universe seems to fit my preferences. Can you come up with a better religion?

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:31:53 2008 No.321077

agnostic - we dont have an opinion because its useless to argue. no scientific facts, power of belief my ass. you guys fight over whose god is better and i'll be over here laughing at every last one of you

atheism is the belief in no gods. agnostic is not believing in anything. wish people would get that right.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:33:00 2008 No.321088 File: 40 KB, 514x514, 1206585180588.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] The only answer.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:33:35 2008 No.321093 >>321077 actually agnosticism is the very specific belief that one cannot know god.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:33:35 2008 No.321094 >>321070 >>Pagans are touhous.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:34:05 2008 No.321101 >>320962 No. >>320948 Shinto isn't so much a belief system as it is a set of traditions and rituals. For regular Japanese at least.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:34:23 2008 No.321095 >>321093 it actually presupposes the existence of a God, just not one you can understand through human faculties.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:35:05 2008 No.321102 >>321065 Have you tried other churches? Personally, I've heard of some hypocritical ones that do anything but follow the word of God. Of course if Catholicism really isn't working for you, there's always Protestantism.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:35:08 2008 No.321104 Laveyan Satanist

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:35:10 2008 No.321105

>>321070
>>321068

I don't remember AMG that much...It's been a long time since I've seen it. But when I dabbled in paganism, I always thought the deities where something like Belldandy...benevolent, and mostly leave you alone unless you ask for help

If I ever continue with it, that's probably what I'll think too, but for the most part I'll continue being agnostic

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:35:26 2008 No.321109 >>321068 AMG's universe is really just Asatruism (the modern worship of Odin and other Norse gods). And that makes it the best religion because Odin and Thor are the most awesome gods ever.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:36:25 2008 No.321117 Strong atheist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:36:51 2008 No.321123 >>321102 There's a nice Catholic church here in town. I just don't know if I'm mature enough to appreciate it. I mean shit, I hang around here all day, after all.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:37:22 2008 No.321128 >>321109 i dont remember any of the Norse Gods being mentioned in AMG!? where'd this come from? again, it's been too long, so my memory is probably off

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:37:26 2008 No.321129 Chaote.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:37:50 2008 No.321134 >>321117 How much can you bench?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:38:37 2008 No.321137 >>320948 Atheist who wishes he could believe in Touhouism ;_; There are a bunch of fundamentalists who are fun to have discussions with though. If you're at U of W, I highly recommend the "Jesus on tap" event happening tomorrow. It's good fun.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:39:12 2008 No.321141 >>321123 Oh come now, you're plenty mature enough. I hear they're going to be making the pope who sat by and ignored the Holocaust in WW2 into a Saint. You should at least go and take part in that celebration.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:40:09 2008 No.321147

huh, didn't realize their was more than one version of agnosticism... from a philosophical standpoint it means purely to suspend judgment (i.e. can't prove one way or the other - with logic, science, etc. - so instead of arguing a moot point, the person chooses to withhold their decision)

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:40:36 2008 No.321151 >>321134 I can bench Yuyuko.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:40:45 2008 No.321152 >>321141 The guy was a kid at the time, what the fuck was he supposed to do? Many of your own kind (atheists) actively participiated in the highest echelons of the Nazi party (Bormann, Goebbels etc..)

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:41:24 2008 No.321157 >>321147 Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive. It's very possible to be an agnostic atheist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:41:48 2008 No.321159 >>321134 'Strong atheist' is used to seperate true atheists from weak wishy washy atheists who are practically agnostic pussies. Weak/typical atheists say 'God may exist but I don't believe he does'. Strong atheists KNOW that God doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:42:04 2008 No.321169 >>321162 University of Waterloo

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:42:09 2008 No.321160

>>321147
The popular definition of atheist these days is someone who is 99.99999999~% sure no religion is correct (since we can come up with infinite numbers of equally plausible fairy tales with an equal chance of being true and there's no reason to believe any of them).

Actual "I -KNOW- there is no supreme being!" atheists are few and far between, and the few that do exist are usually 15 years old and shopping at Hot Topic.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:42:22 2008 No.321162 >>321137 Universtiy of Wisconsin?

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:42:22 2008 No.321163

>>321128
Remember when K1 was possessed by the Lord of Terror? God was gonna kill him by launching Gungnir at him. Also, the goddess's computer system is Yggdrasil. And Belldandy, Urd, and Skuld's names are corruptions of the Norns (the equivalent of the Greek Fates) - Verdani, Urda, and Skuld. In fact, Urd refers to herself as a Norn, and like their mythological counterparts, they represent the present, past, and future, respectively.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:42:31 2008 No.321164 >>321152 >>321141 Now, now children. That was then, this is now. It's not like any of us will start mass-genocide because of our philosophical viewpoints.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:42:58 2008 No.321168 Orthodox Christian here.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:43:52 2008 No.321174

>>321159
Coming from one of these supposed 'weak' atheists (weak as in I'm 99.999999999999~ sure all religions are fake), why would you say something stupid like "I -KNOW- there's no supreme being or beings!"? That makes you just as stupid as the religious.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:43:54 2008 No.321175
File: 34 KB, 600x600, 1206585834854.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Raised Southern Baptist, but I never believed in it. I was one of those kids that never believed in Santa or the Easter Bunny, so God and Jesus and all that just seemed like the same thing. I got saved and all that to fit in, but it was just something to do. I call myself and atheist, but I got tired of all the arguing and stuff that tends to go with that, so I don't mention my religious beliefs to people.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:44:44 2008 No.321178 Anyone who is not an Atheist needs to be removed from the gene pool.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:44:55 2008 No.321179 >>321163 holy shit, this is awesome What do you know about Asatru? I'm definitly going to have to rewatch the series

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:45:00 2008 No.321188 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFGrQMD6Uqc

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:45:09 2008 No.321183 >>321157 While that was not what I was taught I won't say you're wrong as the different disciplines/schools of thought would probably approach that gray area in their own way

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:46:08 2008 No.321190

>>321163 continued
Going back to the Lord of Terror arc, the titular villain also caused the awakening of Fenrir and Jorgamund. And in another arc, a would-be exorcist accidentally summons Garm, the dread watchdog of Hel (the icy destination of those who do not die nobly in battle, ruled by Loki's daughter who is also named Hel).

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:46:27 2008 No.321194 >>321174 No it does not. I know that there is no God or tiny space teapots or rainbow dragons. Being 'not 100% sure' about these, makes you half-witted.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:47:32 2008 No.321202

>>321123
As do I, but I've felt the same way before.
There used to be times where I considered conscience and then action, and it used to near tear me apart. These days, even though I'm here more than ever, I also feel more spiritually inclined as I try to study the Bible more. It's really hard to say, but I don't feel a lamenting guilt coming here. Perhaps more of a quasi-yeah-I-know sort of guilt. Yes, as I mature, I'll appreciate finer morals and God much more than I can imagine so long as I'm diligent in studies. I mean, it's not like everyone here is an actual pedophile IRL.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:47:49 2008 No.321208 File: 26 KB, 153x150, 1206586069514.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] a true Haruhist its the only logical thing

4tran Thu Mar 27 02:48:10 2008 No.321210

>>321109
Odin and Thor have yet to appear in the story. Fenrir does appear, but was defeated. Furthermore, the original Nordic religions make no mention of string theory. Even if string theory is wrong, it's a trivial task to revise the religion to incorporate whatever new theory of quantum gravity takes its place.

>>321128
Belldandy, Skuld, and Urd are the norns/time goddesses. They roughly correspond to the Greek Fates (Clotho, Lachesis, and Atropos).

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:48:49 2008 No.321217

>>321174
I figure that my brain isn't large enough to be able to believe every single claim that can be made without evidence (potentially infinite, for all that matters), so I can say with 100% certainty that none of them are correct, because acknowledging one would mean acknowledging all of them, which is physically impossible and stupid.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:49:19 2008 No.321221

A better question might be "How many who consider themselves religious on /jp/ actually follow their religious beliefs?"

Your favorite Touhou girl offers you a night of incredible sex, but she doesn't want to get married, and you just got out of a church sermon on how bad fornication is. Are any of you HONESTLY Christian enough to turn them down? Stop pretending to be something you aren't.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:49:26 2008 No.321223 Atheist

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:49:59 2008 No.321226

>>321179
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asatru

Also, although The Almighty is never referred to by name in AMG, the fact that he is in possession of Gungnir and Sleipnir (which you may recall Urd once stole) and is the father of the goddesses should make it blatantly obvious that he is Odin.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:51:17 2008 No.321233 >>321226 i'm curious how you know so much about asatru...have you ever followed it?

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:51:19 2008 No.321234

Assuming equal likelihood in all gods existing and counting "no god" as a god, there's a 1/∞ chance that any given god exists, a 1/∞ chance there is no god, and ∞-1/∞ chance that an unspecified god exists. By this logic, it's foolish to worship any god, because it has a zero (or arguably near-zero) chance of actually existing, and it's safe to assert that there is no god, because even though it's most likely untrue, it makes no difference if the god that exists isn't the one you'd worship anyway. So I say God doesn't exist. Does that make me atheist or agnostic?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:52:01 2008 No.321243 File: 69 KB, 500x676, 1206586321657.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:52:38 2008 No.321245 >>321234 It makes you an idiot. There isn't an infinite number of gods.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:52:51 2008 No.321248 >>321226 Gungnir and Sleipnir Hey, I know those words! Gungnir is his spear (lol Final Fantasy) and Sleipnir's his horse. Also, isn't Urd based on a Norse goddess named Erdh or something?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:53:16 2008 No.321252 >>321234 This is pretty much how I view things: >>321217 But you have to remember that our minds are finite, which means it can store finite amounts of data. Because of this quantization, it is possible to claim 100% disbelief (with rounding)

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:53:19 2008 No.321253

>>321234
Logical fallacy, "no god" doesn't count as an equally weighted possibility, because it's simply the absence of a postulation.

Sort of like how if you find an abandoned shed, there COULD be a mountain of gold in there, a phoenix, a unicorn, Elvis, etc., but most likely it's just an empty fucking shed.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:54:16 2008 No.321260 >>321245 There are an infinite number of claims that can be made without proof, and an infinite number of those can be classified as "gods".

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:54:51 2008 No.321266 >>321245 Sure there is. There's a finite number of gods that have been worshipped, but new ones are made up (discovered?) all the time.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:55:13 2008 No.321269 >>321260 Again, no there aren't. Human knowledge (and therefore claims), albeit vast, is finite.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:55:16 2008 No.321271

>>321245
Actually, there are.

Squirrel with the head of a minotaur who wears Raymoo's outfit, name is Fjkewnfkwe13310sExxxxxyBGrrrrrrl and is the goddess of the 172nd quadrant of the 192021st galaxy cluster.

There we go, another god. I could make an infinite number of these.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:55:43 2008 No.321278

My mother raised me to be a Christian. No special sort of Christian, just the go-to-church-every-Sunday kind--you know what I mean, right?

The thing is, they didn't actually teach the small children anything. They'd spend time talking about how God was good, and you should trust Him, et cetera, then they'd tell us to stand up and we'd sing songs. "Who built the ark? Noah, Noah! Who built the ark? Brother Noah built the ark!"

God, I hated it.

It was so boring. We just stood and sang and sang and sang and sang. Maybe I could have withstood it if it had been just that. But, also--my legs were always very weak. After only five minutes, they'd start to hurt, and...

Eventually, I just didn't stand up. I got in trouble a few times, but once they saw I wasn't going to "shape up" anytime soon, they stopped troubling me.

But still, it was all just so boring.

My mom had this large, thick, green Bible. It had maps, profiles on the important figures, and notes. God, there were a lot of notes. Half of each page was normal Bible verse, and the other half was itty-bitty notes concerning the verses.

I read.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:56:20 2008 No.321281

>>321221
If such impossibilities were the case, I'd still have to turn her down, even if persuasion for her hand in marriage fails hard. I can always try again anyway. I'll sacrifice my own primitive and selfish pleasure for God, though I'd be in a bit of a quandary in the first place, considering how China is a youkai.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:56:20 2008 No.321283 >>321269 Well, okay. But for all that matters for a single human being, it might as well be infinite. It's certainly out of the range of any one human's mental capacity.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:56:54 2008 No.321288 your actual question is kind of off-topic op anyways I don't think even the Japanese believe in shintoism (or buddhism), but at the same time it permeates their culture

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:57:06 2008 No.321290 If one believes in Norse gods but sides with Loki and his anti-Valhalla army, are they still called Odinists?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:57:15 2008 No.321291 >>321253 No no, think about it this way. If you roll an infinite number of ten-sided dice, there's an infinite number of possible combinations, each corresponding to a different hypothetical god. The roll of all zeroes means no god.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 02:57:36 2008 No.321295 >I only skipped maybe Leviticus, You missed some of the lulziest parts of the Bible

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:00:53 2008 No.321322

>>321253
No no, think about it this way.

If you roll an infinite number of ten-sided dice, there's an infinite number of possible combinations, each corresponding to a different hypothetical god. The roll of all zeroes means no god.

If God can have any characteristics at all, "doesn't exist" has to be one of them.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:01:15 2008 No.321328

>>321233
Nope, I'm an atheist. But I read books. And I have an interest in mythology (and although I'm an Amerifag, my grandmother is from Norway and the family line can be traced back to the viking era, so I take a particular interest in Norse mythology). But if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to swear allegiance to a deity, you can bet I'd pick Odin.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:01:54 2008 No.321333

>>321278
God is nothing more than the people of the time wanted him to be. They became slaves and kept their God, as well as incorporated the Gods of their enslavers. Moses actually did not set the slaves free, he was a dick who kicked them out because the fucking Jews were spreading disease and poverty around Egypt. Nobody wants fucking Jewish Niggers fucking up your economy. He sent them out n the fucking desert so they would starve to death.

But, they ended up forming a civilzation or some shit, and who wants to read in their history books "we got kicked the fuck out of Egypt for being Jewish Niggers" so instead they said Moses lead them to the "Promised Land" or whatever the fuck.

From then on, anytime they conquered people, they forced people to believe in their God, because he was more vengeful and shit.

And the place where "Moses" brought down the 10 commandments? It wasn't actually Moses, it was someone else, but in their books, they said Moses brought everyone along. So "Moses" settled by a mountain (volcano). Where do you think the pillar of fucking fire came from? A fucking volcano, that's where.
So "Moses" takes them all to the base of a Volcano, and he starts getting pissed of all their shit, so he comes up with the rules to try and calm all the fucking Jews down. And he said that the "God" from the "Mountain" told him the rules, so they have to follow it. Fucking idiot Jew Niggers believed him, and that's how the entire religion got started.

Fucking Jew Niggers who got expelled out of Egypt for being dirty motherfuckers ended up creating what we have for Christianity today. Fucking weird, isn't it?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:02:16 2008 No.321337 File: 100 KB, 600x598, 1206586936155.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:02:37 2008 No.321340 >>321295 Leviticus is fun stuff, rigid society in a rigid epoch. "Stone dem fags" Personally, I enjoy Job, just because is applies so much to rebuking today's self-centered society.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:02:43 2008 No.321341 >>321328 My grandfather's from Norway and I can trace my lineage back to Leif Ericson.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:03:04 2008 No.321347
File: 69 KB, 580x500, 1206586984842.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Wow, am I the only Jew on this board? Though I don't get why this thread belongs in /jp/.

In an attempt to make it fit, what does eel taste like? I keep kosher and won't eat meat out unless it's certified kosher, so I eat a lot of fish; when I go out for Japanese, though, I always notice eel is on the menu and I can't help but wonder what it's like, despite it not being permitted.

in b4 oven, etc

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 03:04:02 2008 No.321356
File: 73 KB, 900x600, 1206587042635.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There is no "religion" in modern Japan. Shinto and Buddhism are just part of the culture. A family may pray to a small shrine in their house, but if you ask them if they are actually "believe" in a kami, they will say no. Its not like western religion; its social and custom based rather than worship. Even the concept of a holy war is very odd to them.

People RARELY ever visit shrines or temples, except for corresponding holidays or special events. And yet damn near ever car in a production lot will be blessed by a priest. People don't believe in it, but are compelled to follow it. Say a family member gets in an accident. If you ask why, one of the answers will be "oh, didn't pray to our ancestors or the local kami recently" and will do so. The entire interaction with kami is interesting, since it is a "maintaining good terms" rather than worship.

If you are interested about this subject, check out "Practically Religious." Its a good book.

>>	Haruhi Suzumiya !6WLOYpwYgg Thu Mar 27 03:04:23 2008 No.321359 >>321347 Eel's pretty good. It basically tastes like any fish, but it's kinda rubbery.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:04:54 2008 No.321368 File: 111 KB, 400x300, 1206587094176.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321333 HA HA OH WOW

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:05:20 2008 No.321372 >>321359 like other fish? rubbery? find and eat some good eel pls

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:06:01 2008 No.321390 >>321347 Eel is the tastiest of all fishes. Its a bit flaky though.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:06:25 2008 No.321383 >>321347 Why don't you just buy some and find out? OH WAIT, YOU CAN'T, ENJOY YOUR JEWHOOD. Eel tastes really good if properly seasoned. It can't really be compared to anything else I can think of, it's a pretty unique taste.

>>	Haruhi Suzumiya !6WLOYpwYgg Thu Mar 27 03:07:13 2008 No.321394 >>321372 You know different species of eel are gonna have different flavor and consistency, right? Anyway, eel's boring. I really prefer salmon and octopus.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:07:29 2008 No.321401

I'm a devout follower of Oyashirosama. I get aggitated and violent if I'm away from home, I shun and wish death on people that say things I disagree with, and will go insane if I can't look at Rika frequently.
Every summer, I meet with other worshippers to stare at little girls in costumes and wander around between various booths.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:07:40 2008 No.321404 >>321368 http://www.pantheon.org/articles/y/yahweh.html pantheon.org read about the history of religion, fucker

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:07:42 2008 No.321408 File: 40 KB, 288x216, 1206587262540.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321383 >ENJOY YOUR JEWHOOD THX I WILL

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:09:29 2008 No.321425 >>321408 Fuck, those things are good. I'm not even a Son of Abraham and I eat them.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:09:52 2008 No.321435 >>321425 very truth best fucking weiner you will ever put in your mouth

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:11:29 2008 No.321456 File: 48 KB, 640x480, 1206587489470.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321404 Complete bullshit. Go learn some real theology if you want to know how monotheism developed.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:12:22 2008 No.321468

>>321337
Law to the proud. Grace to the humble. Old Testament is all about giving the right and wrong of life while shooting down any pretentious idiot who tries to be holier than thou. Once one has swallowed one's pride the New Testament is about grace and mercy to those who believe. In short, a patient with a fatal disease who thinks he is quite healthy won't take the cure until he realizes he is sick (or in some cases accepts the fact he is sick).

>>321347
Why isn't eel kosher? Is it because of the serpent-esque shape? Anyway, the roast eel roll has a sweet taste to it and is lighter than most other fish.

>>	Haruhi Suzumiya !6WLOYpwYgg Thu Mar 27 03:13:41 2008 No.321485 >>321456 Yeah really. One of the most obnoxious myths in western religion is that Jews invented monotheism. They so didn't.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:14:00 2008 No.321501 >>321468 For seafood to be kosher, it must have both fins and scales of a particular sort. Shellfish, cephalopods, and whatever class eels belong to aren't kosher, amongst others I'm probably forgetting.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:14:26 2008 No.321493 >>321456 ok so I embellished and made the story sound a little better and more exciting than the real shit pantheon.org is still a really good site though

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:14:39 2008 No.321496

Catholic/Orthodox: We are the True Christianity and anyone else who believes differently and calls themselves Christian, is a heretic.

Orthodox Jew: We are the True Judaism and anyone else who believes differently and calls themselves Jewish, is an abomination.

Nichiren Buddhist: We are the True Buddhism and anyone else who believes differently and calls themselves Buddhist, is an impostor.

Greek/Norse Pagan: We are the True Paganism and anyone else who believes differently and calls themselves Pagan, is a new ager.

Laveyan Satanist: We are the True Satanism and anyone else who believes differently and calls themselves Satanist, is a devil worshipper.

Strong Atheist: We are the True Atheism and anyone else who believes differently and calls themselves Atheist, is a theist pet.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:14:40 2008 No.321497 Fuck off.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:14:52 2008 No.321500 File: 32 KB, 704x396, 1206587692099.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321368 Keikaku victory?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:16:30 2008 No.321520 >>321333 Bible Fanfic by Peter Chimaera?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:17:30 2008 No.321529 >>321501 It says in Leviticus, doesn't it? Something shall be an abomination unto whatever.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:18:18 2008 No.321541 >>321501 Ah, I see now, so fins and other anatomy are the cause. Refreshed a bit of my hazy memory of reading the books of law.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:18:38 2008 No.321547 File: 9 KB, 186x251, 1206587918339.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Everything else is lies.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:19:14 2008 No.321550 >>321496 Elitism is ever-present.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:20:23 2008 No.321560 >>321496 All too true. Guess there's nothing left for me than to romp around with my fellow heretic friends and family.

>>	Haruhi Suzumiya !6WLOYpwYgg Thu Mar 27 03:22:14 2008 No.321582 File: 116 KB, 500x500, 1206588134072.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:24:01 2008 No.321598
File: 291 KB, 720x540, 1206588241545.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Christfag here (with a certain dislike of Catholicism).

>>321328
>And I have an interest in mythology (and although I'm an Amerifag, my grandmother is from Norway and the family line can be traced back to the viking era, so I take a particular interest in Norse mythology).

Genealogies can be fun. I've got records tracing back to Odin for my family.

Yes, I do mean the Norse god. One is free to believe that "historical" is not the same as "factual."

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:25:03 2008 No.321609 >>321560 I'll stay with my pseudo-atheist self and chat with my abomination friend.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:26:57 2008 No.321635 >>321598 And my mom comes from Loki. We are bound to kill each other?

>>	4tran Thu Mar 27 03:29:00 2008 No.321676 >>321269 Our knowledge may be finite, but that doesn't prevent us from constructing an infinite set of religions. The real numbers form an uncountably infinite set, and it hardly requires an infinite amount of data to process this idea.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:29:19 2008 No.321667 File: 30 KB, 300x455, 1206588559860.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Heretics and Traitors, the lot of you. This thread must be purged and reinstated with the Imperial Cult! All hail the Immortal God-Emperor of Mankind!

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:30:17 2008 No.321684 too much serious in this thread

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:30:58 2008 No.321693 >>321598 Exactly how is that done? I'm curious as to weather or not I have a Chinese god of war or something in my blood.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:31:43 2008 No.321701 >>321667 Yahweh? Is that you?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:34:41 2008 No.321729 File: 45 KB, 300x400, 1206588881845.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321667 Treading on thin ice, aren't we?

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:35:01 2008 No.321731
File: 164 KB, 1280x960, 1206588901078.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>321693
How do you trace your lineage back to a god?

Research. Lots of research. I've got books thiiiiis thick of the births, deaths, and marriages of my direct ancestors.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:35:03 2008 No.321739 >>321693 Your ancestor might end up being a giant god-eating wolf, or the serpentine Adversary of the almighty white-breaded Creator.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:44:47 2008 No.321806 >>321739 I'm already an ex-nobleman, so maybe god-eating paid the ancient bills even more. However, being Satan would be quite inconvenient considering how I've devoted myself to my greatest enemy and his son, so I'll lean toward the wolf.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:54:58 2008 No.321917

I believe in science, therefore I am atheist. Any religiousfag that says religion has a place in science is delusional.

Science seeks to find the truth to everything. No outdated lies and bullshit are held onto forever regardless of contradicting evidence, unlike RELIGION

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:56:57 2008 No.321930 >>321917 Science like religion kills in it's name. I'll remain agnostic.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:58:14 2008 No.321941 File: 74 KB, 450x636, 1206590294653.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321917 It's hard to tell if you're being serious.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:59:23 2008 No.321951 File: 787 KB, 2736x4122, 1206590363676.jpg [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] This god is a middle school girl.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 03:59:37 2008 No.321954 >>321941 if you can't tell, then you are already lost to the brainwashed idiots

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:00:10 2008 No.321960
File: 98 KB, 515x570, 1206590410661.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>321485
If you want early monotheism, look no farther than Zoroastrianism. Judaism (and so Christianity and Islam) was more-or-less based on it. It is the founder of the middle eastern religions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:00:31 2008 No.321969 File: 391 KB, 1000x1135, 1206590431871.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>321954 You just proved your own point.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:01:05 2008 No.321978 if technology continues to improve and scientific knowledge about everything continues to accumulate, people 100 years ago are going to look back that this time when people still believe in religion and facepalm. HARD.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:03:13 2008 No.321987 if technology continues to improve and scientific knowledge about everything continues to accumulate, people 100 years from now are going to look back that this time when people still believe in religion and facepalm. HARD.

4tran Thu Mar 27 04:03:45 2008 No.321992

>>321917
Science is an abstract, self correcting mathematical model of the universe. It is correct by construct.

Religion is a static, supernatural claim about existance (generally wrong or unprovable).

It doesn't make sense to "believe" science. It's accurate because experiment says so. If it disagrees with experiment, we change it.

Your last 2 statements are true.

>>321930
When was the last time somebody was killed because they didn't pray to Maxwell's equations enough times?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:03:49 2008 No.321995 File: 98 KB, 459x1371, 1206590629024.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] hay guys

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:04:52 2008 No.321999 >>321987 No, they will look back a people like you and facepalm, HARD.

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:05:48 2008 No.322006

>>321917
Science and religion both answer the "questions of the universe" and are pretty similar in that aspect. HOWEVER science is provable and can be changed when new discoveries are made. Religion does not allow for questioning since it destroys faith.

Science will never destroy religion though. The early 1900s carried a popular belief that science will be the world's new belief and religion will be cast away. But this will never happen, since religion is an inherent human need, and it takes a lot more energy to teach science.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:07:05 2008 No.322015 File: 907 KB, 1200x2466, 1206590825363.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:08:20 2008 No.322025

>>322006
>But this will never happen, since religion is an inherent human need, and it takes a lot more energy to teach science.

so basically religion is for people that are too dumb to understand how things work, and need something simple without any evidence to support it so that their shallow mind can grasp onto something.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:09:26 2008 No.322035 File: 491 KB, 1295x1835, 1206590966687.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:09:34 2008 No.322037 >>321999 so you're saying that science will disappear, and we will go back to everyone believing in religion? yay for backward progress!!

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:10:23 2008 No.322045 >>322025 Science is for people too dumb to understand people I guess.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:10:48 2008 No.322047 File: 148 KB, 500x600, 1206591048884.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:11:27 2008 No.322055

>>321930
Please back up this statement. I cannot think of a single war that was carried in the name of science. There are countless religious ones though. However I would like to point out that many of these wars only carried the banner of religion and were actually caused by politics. The Crusades is a good example of this. And using religion as the "reason" is a great way to keep soldiers/peasants motivated.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:12:01 2008 No.322061
File: 119 KB, 500x500, 1206591121689.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>321954
The ability to differentiate idiot from troll has little to do with brainwashing.

>>321960
Reading the Zoroaster article, I'm unimpressed with their ability to count time.

>>321992
Science is the sum of human knowledge. Knowledge may be wrong. While it attempts to perform reconciliation, this is no different nor more successful than religious apologetics--which is to say that it sometimes is and sometimes isn't.

Have people ever died for what others believed to be true--without questions of religious faith entering the picture? Yes. In the tens of millions.

>>	4tran Thu Mar 27 04:12:09 2008 No.322062 >>322025 Yeah, basically. Some of the smarter ones (priests, etc) use the available power structure to their advantage.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:12:49 2008 No.322066

>>322006
Personally, I never really regarded science as something that destroys religion so much as something that can prove which one is the truth. Religions and atheism are like mystery doors and one of them holds the truth, and I believe that science lets us see which one holds said truth.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:13:56 2008 No.322074 File: 87 KB, 800x600, 1206591236731.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:16:07 2008 No.322082

>>322061
What do you even mean?
Yes theories can be wrong. However, they are only replaced with more theories that are better at explaining what the previous theory failed to do. This happens indefinitely, but science allows us to get closer and closer to the truth, even if we never will reach it.

This is vastly different from religion, which puts up a bunch of "facts" and never changes it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:16:53 2008 No.322089 File: 355 KB, 352x198, 1206591413058.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:17:33 2008 No.322094
File: 72 KB, 414x507, 1206591453568.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322061
Just to throw another bomb out there, theology is technically part of science.

Just as much as sociology, statistics, or anything else you can learn in a university but can't really prove.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:18:00 2008 No.322106 LOL at people being on a computer and bashing science

>>	Friendly Neighborhood TheAsian Guy !.VQkasIanY Thu Mar 27 04:18:18 2008 No.322100 File: 6 KB, 300x300, 1206591498579.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I am a lay disciple of Buddha.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:19:14 2008 No.322108 File: 202 KB, 1600x1200, 1206591554930.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:21:24 2008 No.322130

>>322025
I'm saying science is difficult to understand for many people, while religion is easier. But also religion claims to have all the answers and to be honest is "warmer." It gives simple answers, justifies your actions, and promises immortally.

Science is the truth, but it is colder. There is no "absolute" because there is alway room for new discoveries. And it really brings the realization that our lives are small and insignificant in comparison to the universe.

But that doesn't mean there isn't a middle ground. My immortality will be my genetic bloodline in my children. My nirvana will be becoming one with the universe as I decompose, allowing my nutrients to nourish new life and continue the cycle of energy. My very atoms were once part of the mighty stars themselves. And so while I am still alive I will try to better this world and fight the entropy around me.

And this gives me happiness and a purpose. That is why I call myself a "spiritual atheist."

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:22:00 2008 No.322148 >>322082 What if the facts were true to begin with? Just because one plus one has always equaled two, doesn't mean the logic is flawed.

>>	4tran Thu Mar 27 04:22:16 2008 No.322141 >>322066 Science will never prove or disprove God(s), especially if he's omnipotent.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:22:31 2008 No.322143 >>322106 My computer works by faith, not science. The bible tolds me so so it must be true.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:23:37 2008 No.322156
File: 116 KB, 496x702, 1206591817075.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322082
>However, they are only replaced with more theories that are better at explaining what the previous theory failed to do.

So idealistic. They are intended to be better--this does not mean that they are. Ptolemy explained observed planetary motion while not being even slightly closer to the truth than unadorned geocentric theory.

>This is vastly different from religion, which puts up a bunch of "facts" and never changes it.

You are apparently unfamiliar both with the history of Christianity and even, I suspect, with the very concept of the apologist.

Go, learn. I have nothing more to say to you.

>>	4tran Thu Mar 27 04:24:29 2008 No.322166 >>322130 inspirational!

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:24:29 2008 No.322168 Jinns make my computer work because it is the will of Allah. If Allah didn't will it, it would not be so.

>>	Friendly Neighborhood TheAsian Guy !.VQkasIanY Thu Mar 27 04:25:05 2008 No.322175 >>322130 My mind is blown just reading this.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:25:15 2008 No.322176

>>322066
>Personally, I never really regarded science as something that destroys religion so much as something that can prove which one is the truth.

No, science can never destroy religion or disprove religion because religious people have placed everything they believe into the realm of "faith", which is just a fancy word to believe in something while disregarding everything observable. They say you can't ever discover god by science, because there is no "evidence of god".

If you think about it, that is complete idiocy though. If god had or has his hand in the world, and effects it in observable ways, why can't we see this "god" based on evidence? It's because there is no god.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:28:24 2008 No.322214 >>322130 Indeed. Atheism is far more spiritual than religious people give it credit for.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:29:09 2008 No.322223
File: 143 KB, 450x333, 1206592149322.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322156
You are so wrong it hurts.

Christian apologetics is all about backtracking whenever science's boot is about to connect with Christianity's ass and quickly changing their position to try to make sure the ultimate conclusion (God exists and he wants you to do XYZ) stays intact. It's not science, it's not even a valid, rational way of thinking.

>>	Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:30:21 2008 No.322236 File: 5 KB, 278x278, 1206592221910.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>322166 >>322175 People like my philosophical beliefs. This makes me smile. :) And now I will post the Time Lord symbol just because it looks cool.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:30:59 2008 No.322239 Fundamentalist (Model) Agnostic here. Not that it matters in the slightest.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:34:00 2008 No.322267

"The basic assumption of science is scientific determinism. The laws of science determine the evolution of the universe given its state at one time. These laws may or may not have been decreed by God, but He cannot intervene to break the laws, or they would not be laws. That leaves God with the freedom to choose the initial state of the Universe, but even here, it seems, there may be laws. So God would have no freedom at all." -Stephen Hawking

Is there any religion that believes the same?

>>	sage sage Thu Mar 27 04:35:01 2008 No.322269 File: 6 KB, 377x233, 1206592501022.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Sage for old /n/ shit in /jp/

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:36:33 2008 No.322282
File: 94 KB, 500x430, 1206592593062.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322223
Apologists explain contradictions in theory through modified theory.

Scientists explain contradictions in theory through modified theory.

These are the same. Claiming otherwise, as you attempt to do, is nothing but sophistry. And I hope you're not >>322082. I shouldn't need to explain why.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:36:51 2008 No.322287 sage

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:39:04 2008 No.322311

>>322267
Yes, Deism is awesome.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

So is pantheism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism
http://www.pantheism.net/

I enjoy how some of the most brilliant scientific minds fell into these areas. It does the "religions" justice.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:39:25 2008 No.322314

>>322236
this doesn't have much to do with what you said, but did you know that EVERYTHING past iron on the periodic table of elements was synthesized in a supernova? That means gold, lead, mercury, the iron in our blood, etc... was all formed at the nanosecond a star exploded

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:40:51 2008 No.322330
File: 51 KB, 350x450, 1206592851478.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322267
I find it curious that he makes the assumption that God is not part of the universe's state, which is about the same as saying that God does not exist (or else he's saying that there exists something outside the universe that cannot interact with it, which is interesting but not useful).

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:41:20 2008 No.322341

>>322282
The obvious difference that you keep ignoring is that the religious have already accepted their 'truth' without any evidence, and no matter where the 'evidence' blows, religion will never change its views, only warp the evidence to attempt to still support the same conclusion.

The only 'evidence' supporting any religion comes in the form of God-of-the-gaps logical fallacies. Christian apologetics are not in the 'game' for the pursuit of truth, as scientists are. They're in it to make sure they're ready to twist the evidence or modify their own teachings to avoid being crushed by overwhelming evidence against them. Scientists are willing to discard the most basic of their beliefs if evidence crops up against them, the religious are not, and their initial beliefs were not based on evidence in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:42:12 2008 No.322349 >>322314 In a supernova you say? Everything past iron? I thought it was everything past hydrogen, granted I have public education working against me.

>>	Friendly Neighborhood TheAsian Guy !.VQkasIanY Thu Mar 27 04:45:18 2008 No.322386 File: 37 KB, 450x484, 1206593118685.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>322236 You made me look up Doctor Who Dr.Doujin. Is it worth watching?

>>	Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:45:46 2008 No.322391 >>322314 Gives a sort of "one-ness" feeling with the world, doesn't it? We all came from the same brilliant source, are made of the same things, and will combine to create something after we are gone.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:48:44 2008 No.322420
File: 34 KB, 200x200, 1206593324574.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322341
You think that only theists accept their beliefs on faith? That a scientist whose theories were sufficiently challenged would say, "Oh, I guess I was wrong all along, after all."?

Naive. That is not how the world works, because this is not how humans operate. Like others before you, you've bought into the hype that it's all "science vs. religion," with completely closed minds on one side and completely open minds on the other. This view is so overly simplistic that it's absurd.

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:50:26 2008 No.322442

>>322386
Yes. The new seasons on Sci-fi are win-tastic. Starting with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_%28Doctor_Who%29

Who'd have thought that improved special effects could revamp cheesy 1960 science fiction? *cough* (Battlestar Galactica) *cough*

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:53:21 2008 No.322475

>>322176
It all depends on viewpoint. The biased assumptions of the human being create views.
For example, consider radioactive decay. One must make assumptions as to the original content amount of a substance and its product, weather or not any contamination was involved, and many other things. For one who believes in an older earth, lack of contamination and the like would be present, but for the one who believes in a younger earth the opposite would be true. In this instance, one requires additional evidence to get the truth. All in all though, any belief requires some kind of leap of faith to believe. As to why God doesn't outright appear before us is less scientific than say in protection of human will. To overwhelm the populace with His presence would give us no choice in the matter of belief. In other words, like a parent holding a loaded gun before his child, requesting obedience even if said parent would never dare pull the trigger.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:53:53 2008 No.322480

did anyone know that the part of the brain used to blindly believe in things (faith), is the early, undeveloped part of the brain, before the cerebral cortex evolved to set us apart from all other animals?

If you believe in faith, you are no different from the way an animal thinks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SHc67Hep48

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 04:54:55 2008 No.322495

>>322349
I think he was referring to how the Big Bang allowed for many the simpler elements to be combined through fusion. In the end its all protons, neutrons, and electrons anyways. It's really how many you have in an atom and how the electron fields/orbitals are placed which creates the actual elements.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:56:25 2008 No.322511 File: 387 KB, 500x625, 1206593785509.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>322480 Unless everything you believe stems directly and logically from cogito ergo sum, then you have faith.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:58:04 2008 No.322528

>>322420
Thankfully, it is not a single scientist that gets to decide whether or not a theory is to be accepted in the scientific community. Of course, there will be debates and arguments whenever a new competing theory sprouts up. However, overtime, as more and more evidence mounts up in favor of one, the supporters of the other theory will back down and accept the new one. Unlike religion, without evidence, a theory's only choice is to be abandoned. Just because a single , or group of scientists feel attached to one theory, doesn't mean they will get their wish.

How does a theist support his beliefs without faith? Their only recourse is to what >>322341 described. "We can't explain it, so god did it"

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 04:58:59 2008 No.322536

>>322420
There are countless examples of scientists throwing out long-held beliefs, even ones they were primary proponents of, when new evidence cropped up proving them wrong. I know a British scientist who spent over 15 years pursuing a line of research that turned out to be completely pointless, and when he was proven wrong by a young visiting American scientist, he was sad, but he thanked the American for enlightening him and moved on. Of course it's basic human nature not to want to admit that you've been wrong, and of course some scientists will be stubborn. Another complication can occur when money is invested in something that ends up being proven wrong, but even then, eventually the truth breaks through. For you to claim that scientists are as adamant in their 'beliefs' (and for that matter, to compare scientific belief, for which the evidence can be shown to anyone at any time if they want to devote the time to understand, say, the circulatory system, and religious belief) is an absolutely pathetic strawman that I'm sure you masturbated furiously to while knocking down.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:00:34 2008 No.322548 >>322480 Display of faith in no God, hence the adamant nature of response. Of course, it is also obvious that anyone could use my post to determine what I put faith in.

4tran Thu Mar 27 05:00:59 2008 No.322552

>>322475
Isn't it better to at least tell the child that you're holding a loaded gun at him, instead of waiting for him to make a false move before pulling the trigger?

>>322420
Einstein never accepted quantum theory, and he ended up failing to create a theory of everything. To his credit, he helped quantum theory a lot, but he didn't include it in his attempt at a final theory.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:03:38 2008 No.322566

>>322511
This pretty much seals your bullshit. You're attempting to justify your own ridiculous religious beliefs by a heinous, horribly outdated misuse of Descartes to show that because only one thing can be 100% proven, everything else is equally illogical and therefore whatever bizarre, evidence-barren religion you follow is just as 'true' a belief as anything else. Enjoy your intellectual masturbation, because that's all it is. You know nothing of real philosophy, and I hope you'll have the integrity to stop pretending you do.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:06:52 2008 No.322590 GOD IS DEAD. THE ONLY GOD IN THE CURRENT WORLD IS HOW MANY STOCKS YOU HAVE IN THE STOCK MARKET, MONEY AND PROPERTIES. ENJOY HAVING POOR PEOPLE OBSESSED WITH RELIGION SO THE POPE GETS RICHER.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:08:44 2008 No.322603

I don't except sciences views on politics or philosophy because I see to much "It's a settled scientific fact" pushed to move political or social agendas. There is no such thing as a settled scientific fact, if you claim there is you do not know science.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:09:57 2008 No.322615

>>322420
Christian apologists bullshit:

Cosmological argument: Someone had to start everything, therefore God did it. If God was the first mover, who moved God?

Teological argument: everthing is too complex, therefore god did it.

Ontological argument: God exists because of his very definition

Moral argument: really?

etc. etc.

none of these arguments require any evidence, and is just based purely on circular logic.

>>	Friendly Neighborhood TheAsian Guy !IzyqvCHinA Thu Mar 27 05:10:33 2008 No.322618 100/10 Someone please archive this thread.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:13:23 2008 No.322640

>>322552
Well, that's what Jesus is for. That and I think my metaphor did not come across cleanly or at least the latter part. God would not merely let his own children die in his hands unless he can help it and they are willing. Of course there were also those cases of instantaneous death way back then, as to reason why usually involved some Bible story. I believe God never wanted mankind to be his set of dolls where he can simply say obey or strangle it out of them by flaunting his power so arrogantly.

Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 05:14:17 2008 No.322648
File: 238 KB, 465x640, 1206594857611.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I need to finish studying and get some sleep, so I will part with this.

In the end nether side will prove/disprove the other. Fights over beliefs will continue forever, because self-doubt of belief and faith means that potentially everything we believe is wrong. Thus we need to learn to respect other's beliefs as long as they do not cause harm. No wars, no proselytizing, no preaching. Though there will still be conflicts (ie: belief against vaccination can cause harm to others since it could create disease) at least the petty bickering will decrease.

And I'd like to drop the following quotes.

"'I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
- Galileo Galilei

“Freedom of speech and freedom of action are meaningless without freedom to think. And there is no freedom of thought without doubt.”
~ Bergen Evans

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything."
~ Friedrich Nietzsche

>>	4tran Thu Mar 27 05:14:29 2008 No.322649 >>322618 I wasn't even attempting a flamewar. I was trying to survey this place; I expected a lot of "touhouisms", but got surprisingly little.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:15:06 2008 No.322654
File: 36.00 MB, 1600x1200, 1206594906552.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322536
There are plenty of examples, as you say, of scientists giving up on beliefs, as there are of scientists refusing to give up. The same is no less true of people whose field of study is fundamentally different from physics and chemistry.

In claiming:

>the religious have already accepted their 'truth' without any evidence, and no matter where the 'evidence' blows, religion will never change its views, only warp the evidence to attempt to still support the same conclusion

...there is a strawman, but it's not mine.

>>322566
>everything else is equally illogical

Everything else is equally unproven.

And you are claiming, then, that only theists take anything on faith? Because that was the POINT. Not Descartes. I'm trying to make people THINK.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:16:22 2008 No.322666 >>322420 except sometimes the scientists admit that they are wrong, or their incorrect theories are overthrown by their successors

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:17:44 2008 No.322675 File: 101 KB, 430x601, 1206595064412.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Also, Yukari is fuckin' hot. Yes, yes she is.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:17:51 2008 No.322676 File: 49 KB, 460x457, 1206595071581.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>322648 > Also, Yukari is fuckin' hot. And I believe that is something all of us can agree on.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:19:31 2008 No.322689 >>322130 Nothing yet has captured the spirituality of Atheism better than Carl Sagan's Cosmos. If you haven't watched it yet, I highly suggest you do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShJwq3aPLMk&feature=related

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:20:28 2008 No.322695

>>322654
Your daughter has a horrible infection. Scientists say she can be cured with a shot of antibiotics, and if you ask them, they can show you thousands of case studies and mountains of research showing why the shot will work.

But you know, fuck that, let's just take her to a faith healer in Africa, since both things are equally unprovable.

>Not even trying, then? Well, don't strain yourself.

Not the person you're replying to, but please. You didn't refute either of their perfectly valid points, and returned to this 'everything is equally absurd' nonsense.

Just go to sleep, and stop corrupting Yukari with your failure.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:20:54 2008 No.322699 >>322676 I disagree.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:25:21 2008 No.322727
File: 284 KB, 600x670, 1173817782548.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322695
You're apparently operating on precisely the same... what should I call it? It's far beyond misunderstanding. Like seeing a mountain and calling it an ocean.

>You didn't refute either of their perfectly valid points

What points? Let's go step-by-step.

>This pretty much seals your bullshit.
Not a point.

>You're attempting to justify your own ridiculous religious beliefs
Actually, no. The post quoted makes no mention of any religious beliefs. It states that faith is commonplace regardless of beliefs.

>by a heinous, horribly outdated misuse of Descartes
Descartes went back and changed the intended meaning of his statement?

>to show that because only one thing can be 100% proven, everything else is equally illogical
I DID address this.

>and therefore whatever bizarre, evidence-barren religion you follow is just as 'true' a belief as anything else.
Again, no. See above.

>Enjoy your intellectual masturbation, because that's all it is. You know nothing of real philosophy, and I hope you'll have the integrity to stop pretending you do.
Not a point.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:28:34 2008 No.322749 religion is the one true failure created by the human species

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:28:56 2008 No.322751

>>322727
Just so I understand you here, are you claiming that there is no difference between 'faith' in something with a ~99% probability of being true (such as the shot in my example) and something with a 0.0~1% chance of being true (African faith healer prays the AIDS away)?

I just want to clarify here.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:34:39 2008 No.322778 I, too, aspire to have my cremated remains rickshawed through town in a portable shrine.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:37:37 2008 No.322787 Carl Sagan on the birth of science http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fRV5gfZAbw

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:37:54 2008 No.322790
File: 136 KB, 444x719, 1206596274837.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322751
That depends.

Are you accepting the 99% certainty because you have examined all possible courses of action and determined it to have the most advantageous cost-benefit ratio, accepting the chance of failure and factoring it into your analysis? Or because you trust the doctors? Ignore, for the moment, that you need to trust them anyway that there's a 99% chance.

In this situation, it's very reasonable to say that it's not faith. However, bear in mind that an example in no way discredits a generality. Since you were already confused on this, let me restate:

Faith is commonplace regardless of theistic/atheistic beliefs.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:38:05 2008 No.322793

>>322654
You are ignoring the fact that the scientific process is a democratic one. Not one person gets to decide whether any theory is valid. This is in stark contrast to religion, where there is usually a single commanding authority on the subject.

Please stop trying to equate religion and science. I am not explicitly saying that one is better than the other. They are separate methods of explaining how the world works.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:38:08 2008 No.322794 File: 58 KB, 500x375, 1206596288372.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] It suddenly all makes sense now... RAN RAN RUU~! RAN RAN RUU~! RAN RAN RUU~! RAN RAN RUU~!

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:42:28 2008 No.322812 >>322790 Please watch this. All your ideas are refuted quite successfully in it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe7yf9GJUfU

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:44:26 2008 No.322816
File: 94 KB, 411x240, 1206596666469.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Religion is okay.

Arguing/Comparing religions is the dumbest thing ever.

Faith is best, whether you have faith in eroge or rape or the divine or loli, as long as it's there.

People need to look at religions the same way they do their college classes: take the ones you need/want, don't worry about the courses other people are taking. On that note, people also need to treat religions in the same way. (and hate Islam of course, because it's a religion of violence and hate)

Point is, you don't necessarily go around debating how Biology is more useful than English. People sometimes need one more than the other, but they are always necessary.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:44:51 2008 No.322817

>>322790
>Are you accepting the 99% certainty because you have examined all possible courses of action and determined it to have the most advantageous cost-benefit ratio, accepting the chance of failure and factoring it into your analysis? Or because you trust the doctors? Ignore, for the moment, that you need to trust them anyway that there's a 99% chance.

Well, for this example, I think it's reasonable for a person to arrive at a number around 99%, because they know people who have been cured by antibiotics, and because if they have the desire to, the way antibiotics work are possible to learn yourself. In addition, putting antibiotics on the same level of faith healing would require believing that not only doctors but also the creators of case studies to test medicinal effectiveness and statisticians measuring success rates are all in a giant conspiracy to lie to you about the effectiveness of antibiotics.

I certainly won't deny that it is still faith, but I want to know why it seems to me that you are arguing that all faith is equally probable to be the truth. If that's NOT what you're arguing, then I need further clarification.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:45:33 2008 No.322818 there is no difference between reasonable faith and blind faith

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:46:20 2008 No.322821
File: 131 KB, 500x500, 1206596780550.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322793
Apparently you don't pay attention to Science News--or any other method of tracking the work of a large number of scientists over a period of time. It's not democratic. It's not consistent, either--amusingly, findings from one month to the next contradict eachother without anyone seeming to really care. Were it democratic, they'd have to... what, vote on whose experiment was more flawed? I don't know how that'd work, but it remains that the pursuit of science isn't a "majority rules" thing, though it's true that more influential scientists can squish people they don't like, to varying extents.

As for the religious--are you even slightly aware of how many denominations there are of prodestant Christianity alone? No, there's no one person who speaks for them. The Roman Catholic Church is the exception, not the rule. And even there, apologists don't have to get their work signed by the pope.

Please stop trying to put atheists up on a pedestal. That's all I've been saying.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:46:21 2008 No.322820

>>322790
Yes, I agree that it is generally impossibly to say that something will/had happen with 100% certainty.

However, are you saying that my "belief" that the sun will rise tomorrow, based on the empirical evidence that I have seen it rise every day for my entire life, is the same as the belief that Jesus came back from the dead? Because I can't prove either of which with 100% certainty?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:46:57 2008 No.322822 Religion is for pussy's who like to make up bullshit because they are giant cunts and can't deal with their problems. Those faggots need to die.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:47:31 2008 No.322823 I'm Mormon. One of the few on 4chan and the primary reason I only post on the worksafe boards. No I don't have multiple wives, like all anon I don't even have 1

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:49:29 2008 No.322831 Religion is for pussies who like to make up bullshit because they are gigantic cunts that can't deal with their problems. Those faggots need to die.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:51:02 2008 No.322835 religion should not be respected in a reasonable society

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:52:32 2008 No.322836
File: 157 KB, 1181x1200, 1206597152061.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>322812
I'm not bored enough to argue something you won't even type out yourself. And if we WERE doing things that way, which we're NOT, I'd just have said, "LOL READ THESE BOOKS" about ten posts ago.

Besides, the last time I was bored enough to accept an editorial as a counterargument, it turned out to have nothing to do with the discussion.

>>322820
>>322817
>I certainly won't deny that it is still faith, but I want to know why it seems to me that you are arguing that all faith is equally probable to be the truth. If that's NOT what you're arguing, then I need further clarification.

It's not. There are large degrees of faith and small degrees, after all. I thought that was obvious, though apparently not. Hell, it's even Biblical--mustard seeds and all that.

But do bear this in mind, before reducing my previous assertion to triviality--it is highly doubtful that all of your beliefs are so well-supported by the evidence as "the sun will rise tomorrow." Again, specifics, generalities...

And I'm out. Goodnight, /jp/.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 05:58:08 2008 No.322850

>>322836
Well, goodnight. At the end, though, it still does seem to me that your entire argument has been "You can't prove it 100%, therefore any unproved belief is just as valid as any other unproved belief", when that simply just isn't the case, as I demonstrated in my shot example, and by extension, atheism in the place of the antibiotics. The difference between faith in things thoroughly tested in the scientific method and "Jesus turned water to wine, died for your sins, rose from the dead, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc." is literally the difference in size between your Biblical mustard seed and a Boeing 747, and I just don't see how that kind of reasoning can be at all considered "equal".

Oh well. At the end of the day, I don't care what anybody else believes, as long as they stick to pure secularism when it comes to the creating and enforcing the law.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:00:24 2008 No.322859

>>322821
You're the one that seems to have an misconception of how the scientific process works. There are these things called scientific journals, where scientists publish their work. Yes, there are many different theories published on many different subjects by scientists around the world. Of course, some of them will have to contradict each other, as they are usually giving different views on how a single natural event. All of them are peer reviewed by fellow scientists. This peer review, is what I guess you would call "voting". The more sturdy and testable a theory is, the more it is accepted by the scientific community. There will always be conflicts, but overtime, there will be a single theory left. However, it always has the possibility to be replaced by another one in the future.

And while it is true that a single important figure can hold back progress, Einstein's refusal of Quantum Mechanics as the most famous example, you can see that it is only temporary.

Lastly, it is funny how you seem to think I am talking about atheism at all. Where have I every
talked about there being no god? I am simply stating how science works as a process. You seem to be the one thinking, science = atheism.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:03:50 2008 No.322866 Daoist, fuck yeah.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:05:28 2008 No.322872

I'm putting an end to this faggotry debate once and for all. I've seen real MIRACLES. Not your bullshit I got in a car crash and somehow didn't die shit, real to God miracles. I've also met others who've shared with me miracles they've seen.

The only response people can give to this is I'm either lying or stupid. Either I don't know what a miracle is (lol, someone who's never seen a miracle telling me what I have and haven't seen) or I'm lying. Take your pick but you'll have to ignore hundreds and thousands of others like me in order to claim there is no God.

Like it or not there is a God, believing or not believing in him does not change the fact that he exists.

Good luck

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:08:11 2008 No.322887 >>322872 http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/ I'll bet you haven't seen anyone regenerate a limb.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:12:26 2008 No.322903 >>322887 Because as we all know telling God, "Hey, heal these amputees or I won't believe in you" is a great way to ask him if he's there and get a response eh?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:16:51 2008 No.322928 >>322872 >I've seen real MIRACLES. Not your bullshit I got in a car crash and somehow didn't die shit, real to God miracles. So... you believe these "MIRACLES" are a work of "God", and not reasonable normal science because of what, exactly?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:18:20 2008 No.322940 >>322887 Checked out some of that website, it's written by somebody who doesn't know what miracles are. By the way, you're a dumbass

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:28:50 2008 No.322985 I believe in miracles because I have seen Scientists and Engineers works, trust me you have to believe in miracles.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:28:50 2008 No.322986 One guy who survived the Killing Fields said that he was surrounded by Khmer Rouge soldiers. And according to him, god pulled a 'ZA WARUDO' and he was able to GTFO.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:32:54 2008 No.322997

>>322985
>I believe in miracles because I have seen Scientists and Engineers works, trust me you have to believe in miracles.

By saying that you have "seen scientists and engineers works" doesn't say anything about understanding them. Because you believe in miracles, I am assuming you do not.

Please watch this series to understand the basic fundamental idea of science. You won't regret it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KR8SigWQuY&feature=related

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:33:21 2008 No.322998 >>322940 Explain what a miracle is, then.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:33:55 2008 No.323000

>>322928
absolutely, hence the term miracle. Any time God intervenes in our lives it's a miracle. Anything from praying to find a penny to raising someone from the dead.

The fact of the matter is you don't want to believe in miracles or God so you'll come up with whatever you can to disprove them, anything from lol coincidence, to hallucinations, to insanity. It doesn't matter to you what it is, you CAN'T believe in miracles so no matter what I say I've seen and done, you'll dismiss it. Because otherwise you'd be wrong and we can't have that now can we?

I'll say it again, I KNOW what miracles are, I KNOW I've seen them, I'm either lying or stupid, take your pick.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:35:34 2008 No.323008 Nihilist i suck nietzche's dead cock.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:39:05 2008 No.323030 >>323008 I don't believe you...

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:40:21 2008 No.323037 >>323008 fyi, nietzche despised nihilists

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:41:15 2008 No.323040

>>323000
>Any time God intervenes in our lives it's a miracle.

"The basic assumption of science is scientific determinism. The laws of science determine the evolution of the universe given its state at one time. These laws may or may not have been decreed by God, but He cannot intervene to break the laws, or they would not be laws. That leaves God with the freedom to choose the initial state of the Universe, but even here, it seems, there may be laws. So God would have no freedom at all." -Stephen Hawking

>The fact of the matter is you don't want to believe in miracles or God so you'll come up with whatever you can to disprove them

I don't try to come up with anything to "disprove" god, nor does anyone else, because science, or anything at all cannot disprove something based on faith. This is a very basic misconception of science. Science is based on probabilities.

Please watch the series I told you to watch, even if you still want to believe in god. It is a tragedy of humanity if you do not understand basic science.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:42:26 2008 No.323046 I'm no religiousfag, in fact I hate them. But I do enjoy using religious phrases, its various occasions, and such. While I was in Japan, I prayed like the locals at famous shrines I visited.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:43:23 2008 No.323050 >>322872 Certainly blows anything I have that's close to a miracle out of the water. For me it's how God prevented me from committing suicide.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:46:51 2008 No.323063 File: 176 KB, 1074x665, 1206600411785.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] One bajillion posts, and no disciples of discord?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:46:52 2008 No.323062 Can God make a burrito so hot even he can't eat it?

Pom !S534LQ.DBU Thu Mar 27 06:49:25 2008 No.323071

Christian here. But, I bet that Bible is more metaphor than truth. I think that mankind has evolved from apes, but I think God created world. Jesus HAS lived, that has been confirmed by science. But, it is not known that did he cure ppl or something like that. I think that he did.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:50:47 2008 No.323075 >>323071 >But, it is not known that did he cure ppl or something like that. I think that he did. Why?

>>	Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 06:53:31 2008 No.323085 >>322872 I came back to let you know that you are full of shit. Anything good = miracle. Anything bad = god testing us. And "miracles" have no rating system, so anything can be called one. Therefor: "4chan is a miracle"

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:53:56 2008 No.323088

>>323071
Then all of the explicitly stated laws of the bible are irrelevant? You're disgusting. At least real Christians have conviction in their beliefs, you half-assed conformist. The only thing I hate more than religious fanatics are religious moderates.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:54:04 2008 No.323089

>>323071
>Jesus HAS lived, that has been confirmed by science

the only thing science has said on that was that there were around 9 or more people going around Israel at that time that fit the description of what he was "supposedly doing" in the bible.

The Jesus you know and believe of in the bible has NOT been confirmed by science.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:55:40 2008 No.323094 >>323089 note, "supposedly doing" means that there are written stores of people seeing these "miracles". It doesn't mean they actually happened at all, or even in the way they are described in the bible.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:56:58 2008 No.323099

>>323040
Who says God needs to break his own laws to create miracles? God knows physics better than you or I do or anyone on the Earth does. It's not hard to understand that he can intervene however he likes without needing to break his own rules as Hawking suggests.

How about some miracles then?

I'll give you some from Google but you need to remember, I've seen some myself.

http://mormanity.blogspot.com/2004/06/note-on-miracles.html

I found this one particularly insightful, a good read

http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com/2008/03/dissection-of-miracle.html

You won't believe them of course, you can't believe them because you decided a long time ago there is no God and nothing can change that for you ... even real miracles.

So I'll leave it here and when you and I stand before God to be judged, don't tell him I didn't warn you.

Peace

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:57:58 2008 No.323103 >>323088 Well said, Anonymous.

>>	Dr. Doujin !6zq1qwwMaI Thu Mar 27 06:57:58 2008 No.323107 BEHOLD! >>323071 This is the very reason why I still have faith in America. Liberal Christians. Religious-Conservative/Fundamentalist/Evangelicals are the cancer which is killing the world.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 06:57:58 2008 No.323108 >>323063 I'm reading Principia Discordia right now.

THE MYTH OF THE APPLE OF DISCORD Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:00:52 2008 No.323122
File: 12 KB, 128x128, Apple_of_Discord.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

It seems that Zeus was preparing a wedding banquet for Peleus and Thetis and did not want to invite Eris because of Her reputation as a trouble maker.

This made Eris angry, and so She fashioned an apple of pure gold and inscribed upon it KALLISTI ("To The Prettiest One") and on the day of the fete She rolled it into the banquet hall and then left to be alone and joyously partake of a hot dog.

Now, three of the invited goddesses, Athena, Hera, and Aphrodite, each immediately claimed it to belong to herself because of the inscription. And they started fighting, and they started throwing punch all over the place and everything.

Finally Zeus calmed things down and declared that an arbitrator must be selected, which was a reasonable suggestion, and all agreed. He sent them to a shepherd of Troy, whose name was Paris because his mother had had a lot of gaul and had married a Frenchman; but each of the sneaky goddesses tried to outwit the others by going early and offering a bribe to Paris.

Athena offered him Heroic War Victories, Hera offered him Great Wealth, and Aphrodite offered him the Most Beautiful Woman on Earth. Being a healthy young Trojan lad, Paris promptly accepted Aphrodite's bribe and she got the apple and he got screwed.

As she had promised, she maneuvered earthly happenings so that Paris could have Helen (the Helen) then living with her husband Menelaus, King of Sparta. Anyway, everyone knows that the Trojan War followed when Sparta demanded their Queen back and that the Trojan War is said to be The First War among men.

And so we suffer because of the Original Snub. And so a Discordian is to partake of No Hot Dog Buns.

Do you believe that?

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:00:58 2008 No.323120

People normally ask "where did God come from or what made Him?" Likewise, if there is no God, then what established the laws of physics? What created the singularity of the big bang theory and what force made it explode? What established the concept of nothing? What set time in motion? What separates logic from the illogical? The order of the universe couldn't have been merely been so for all eternity if everything had a beginning, and that's if said force or being never created time, hence being bound by it. Limiting oneself to question only God, lack of God, gods, etc. is just too lopsided if one isn't going to question every angle.

A SERMON ON ETHICS AND LOVE Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:02:58 2008 No.323130

One day Mal-2 asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to approach the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice. Shortly afterwards the radio came on by itself, and an ethereal female Voice said

YES?

"O! Eris! Blessed Mother of Man! Queen of Chaos! Daughter of Discord! Concubine of Confusion! O! Exquisite Lady, I beseech You to
lift a heavy burden from my heart!"

WHAT BOTHERS YOU, MAL? YOU DON'T SOUND WELL.

"I am filled with fear and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are hurting one another, the planet is rampant with injustices, whole societies plunder groups of their own people, mothers imprison sons, children perish while brothers war. O, woe."

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THAT, IF IT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO?

"But nobody Wants it! Everybody hates it."
OH. WELL, THEN STOP.

At which moment She turned herself into an aspirin commercial and left The Polyfather stranded alone with his species.

SINISTER DEXTER HAS A BROKEN SPIROMETER.

GREYFACE Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:03:33 2008 No.323140
File: 6 KB, 359x353, chart.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

In the year 1166 B.C., a malcontented hunchbrain by the name of Greyface, got it into his head that the universe was as humorless as he, and he began to teach that play was sinful because it contradicted the ways of Serious Order. "Look at all the order around you," he said. And from that, he deluded honest men to believe that reality was a straightjacket affair and not the happy romance as men had known it.

It is not presently understood why men were so gullible at that particular time, for absolutely no one thought to observe all the disorder around them and conclude just the opposite. But anyway, Greyface and his followers took the game of playing at life more seriously than they took life itself and were known even to destroy other living beings whose ways of life differed from their own.

The unfortunate result of this is that mankind has since been suffering from a psychological and spiritual imbalance. Imbalance causes frustration, and frustration causes fear. And fear makes for a bad trip. Man has been on a bad trip for a long time now.

It is called THE CURSE OF GREYFACE.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:03:58 2008 No.323133 >>323120 Amusingly, people who are chipping away at the concept of God with science use this exact same reasoning, in reverse. Why can't a singularity exist forever if a proposed God can do the same?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:06:24 2008 No.323158 File: 449 KB, 1161x1828, coffeeBOSS.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] You don't use your mind to think about your religion.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:06:58 2008 No.323159

>>323133
because we can say by science that a very simple thing, the singularity, has a probability of over 99.9999999999% of existing at the beginning of the universe, while an extremely complex thing, "god", does not.

The universe, and everything, has the most highest probability of starting as simple, than complex. The universe has gone from simple to complex, not from unbelievably complex, to simple to complex.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:07:58 2008 No.323161

I am an Apathetic Agnostic:

1) The existence of a supreme being is unknown and unknowable.

2) If a supreme being does exist then it is apathetic to our existence.

3) I am apathetic to the existence or non-existence of a supreme being.

Or to put it into shorter words "it's impossible to know so I don't care either way".

A PRIMER FOR ERISIAN EVANGELISTS Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:09:40 2008 No.323176
File: 115 KB, 800x600, crazy800.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

The SOCRATIC APPROACH is most successful when confronting the ignorant. The "socratic approach" is what you call starting an argument by asking questions. You approach the innocent and simply ask "Did you know that God's name is ERIS, and that He is a girl?" If he should answer "Yes." then he probably is a fellow Erisian and so you can forget it. If he says "No." then quickly proceed to:

THE BLIND ASSERTION and say "Well, He Is a girl, and His name is ERIS!" Shrewedly observe if the subject is convinced. If he is, swear him into the Legion of Dynamic Discord before he changes his mind. If he does not appear convinced, then proceed to:

THE FAITH BIT: "But you must have Faith! All is lost without Faith! I sure feel sorry for you if you don't have Faith." And then add:

THE ARGUMENT BY FEAR and in an ominous voice ask "Do you know what happens to those who deny Goddess?" If he hesitates, don't tell him that he will surely be reincarnated as a precious Mao Button and distributed to the poor in the Region of Thud (which would be a mean thing to say), just shake your head sadly and, while wiping a tear from your eye, go to:

THE FIRST CLAUSE PLOY wherein you point to all of the discord and confusion in the world and exclaim "Well who the hell do you think did all of this, wise guy?" If he says, "Nobody, just impersonal forces." then quickly respond with:

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:10:58 2008 No.323180

>>323176

THE ARGUMENT BY SEMANTICAL GYMNASTICS and say that he is absolutely right, and that those impersonal forces are female and that Her name is ERIS. If he, wonder of wonders, still remains obstinate, then finally resort to:

THE FIGURATIVE SYMBOLISM DODGE and confide that sophisticated people like himself recognize that Eris is a Figurative Symbol for an Ineffable Metaphysical Reality and that The Erisian Movement is really more like a poem than like a science and that he is liable to be turned into a Precious Mao Button and Distributed to The Poor in The Region of Thud if he does not get hip. Then put him on your mailing list.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:10:58 2008 No.323181 >>323159 In other words, occam's razor. A simple thing is more likely to be correct than a complex thing.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:22:00 2008 No.323219

>>323133
To exist forever but require an origin would be to be bound by time. If we state that God created time, that would mean he transcends it due to it being a creation of his. To transcend time lets anything simply be present and defy having a moment of formation for time and cause and effect had not been created yet. Ergo the burden of starting time and existence "before" time could not be fulfilled by a simple piece of soulless matter. Pardon my entangled mess, as the night is taking its toll on me.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:44:02 2008 No.323303

>>323219
someone can propose anything they want about anything, but that doesn't mean that what they propose won't be irrational and a bunch of baseless bullshit. Religion and faith likes to do this.

Science says that the world we live in is bound by the 4 dimensions of spacetime, but the entire universe is bound by 11 dimensions. Watch this video on "flatland" to understand what I'm trying to get at.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:49:02 2008 No.323317

>>323303
replace "world we live in" with "world we can naturally perceive". We definitely live in a 11 dimensional world.

we can perceive the 11 dimensions through mathematics, physics, and cosmology. But our normal human senses can only perceive four of them.

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:50:02 2008 No.323320

>>323099
Nothing in any of those blogs is a 'miracle'. At best, they're coincidences (which, by the way, happen to all of us) or the person in question taking the first good thing that happens to them (and good things do, by the way, happen to all of us) to be a 'miracle'.

I found it particularly hilarious that you linked to a Mormon blog. Are you aware that until the late 50s, the Mormon prophet and twelve apostles taught that the only way for a black man to make it into heaven was as a slave? That's just one example in a literal shower of the bitterly racist ideologies the Mormon church held until after the civil rights movement. Funny how the will of God only changed after numerous lawsuits and a change in the ever mutable public opinion.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 07:51:02 2008 No.323326 >>323317 don't forget chemistry

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 27 08:25:05 2008 No.323466 >>323326 >physics They said chemistry right there.

GARdian Thu Mar 27 08:41:05 2008 No.323518

Motherfucking Religious debate on /jp/.

God, or whatever you want to call him, is supposedly an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent creative force.

Science is the process by which we attempt to understand the world around us and how it works.

Would not Science be the study of God?

Now shut the fuck up.

>>	4tran Thu Mar 27 09:20:09 2008 No.323676 >>323518 Why didn't you speak up earlier?

Anonymous Thu Mar 27 11:48:36 2008 No.324270
File: 52.00 MB, 320x246, bugstrut.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Jew here again. My god, did this thread descend into faggotry.

Religion should never be mixed with science. Why anyone would debate otherwise is beyond me.

I think the major problem is that too many people are looking towards religion to explain the "how," as in how the world came into being and such forth. Judaism deliberately moved away from this by having as vague of a creation story as possible, amongst other things; I assume Christianity, in its core, is the same, despite how evangelists interpret it. The bible will never tell you how the world came into being; we have science for that.

Religion is a resource to teach how to treat your fellow man. That isn't to say you NEED to have religion to be moral. It's just its intended purpose. That it's so frequently used otherwise is one of the great modern tragedies. Jesus would weep.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 22 23:46:31 2013 No.324270,1 >>322590 tips fedora while smirking jewishly

Reply to thread

Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Action

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/jp/ - Otaku Culture