Do you believe in some kind of God?

[Greebles]

Again, burden of proof.

The claim is more or less unfalsifiable (even just at present) so there is little point, in my opinion, over arguing about it. It works both ways: you cannot force a religious opinion upon someone because you make a claim that cannot be proven false (in general: with specifics, inconsistencies can be found). Equally, I could tell you that all religions claim to be true and are therefore not plausible. But that doesn't prove atheism.

My opinion: I doubt there is a God in the form we imagine because we have a habit of projecting human form on the concept. It may be that we don't need a God and that all laws of the universe arise from collective pareidolia.

But in the end, it doesn't really matter since we're all going to die in [horrendous catastrophe].

[Kalmor]

Where's CaptainCool when you need him? He was usually all over these threads. :V

[Mapa]

Nah. I'm not at all uncomfortable with the idea of there not being a god, I wasn't raised religiously (even though my family is religious), and I haven't seen any convincing evidence, so I don't really have any reason to believe. 

I totally respect you if you do believe though. That's more than I could say a few years ago when I spent way too much time watching "The Atheist Experience" and the likes.

*shudders*

[Rukh Whitefang]

Christian here, and I don't mean the culture Christianity that is popular in the U.S. I believe because of what I have personally seen and experienced.

[MuttButt]

I was discussing this earlier with somebody actually! A fella on omegle asked me if I wanted to accept jesus into my soul, and I told him no, there's no room left for Jesus with all the drugs and dicks in there already 

[Butters]

6 hours ago, Kalmor said:

Where's CaptainCool when you need him? He was usually all over these threads. :V

Noooo. Don't say that. You'll summon him. 

[Cingal]

I was always told to believe in myself.

 

So, yes, I guess I do.

[FlynnCoyote]

The opposite ends of this issue seem to be based on emotional need vs intellectual need.

Those with emotional need value being happy. They'll hold onto beliefs that keep them that way in spite of facts that contradict them.
Those with intellectual need value understanding. They will search out the truth no matter how unpleasant it may be. No matter how unhappy it may make them.

I think in both cases, there is something to be gained from loosening up and keeping an open mind. And I say that having witnessed both sides of the extreme and stood for one of them as well. It used to seem so important to know where I was on the issue. Or more accurately, to be right. Then someone I knew died, someone who I knew for certain believed the polar opposite to me. I remember being there beside her in the hospital a few days before she was gone. The funeral was surreal and challenged every shred of skepticism I held. At one stage I found myself WANTING there to be a God and Heaven, simply so she could have this vindication, this eternal paradise that her friends and other relatives were so certain she had found.

But as the days wore on and the grief became easier to handle, that feeling faded. I realized then it was not a matter of choice anymore. I couldn't simply cast aside everything I had come to understand because believing something else made me feel better. As painful as it is in times like this, I am not capable of simply believing. I am not capable of Faith. I am not capable of letting my emotions take precedence over logic. I have an intellectual need to pursue the truth of this even at the expense of my own happiness, and everything I have learned paints a simple picture. This is our only life, this is all we'll ever have.

I refuse to entertain the notions of a comforting delusion. Give me evidence, give me reason and I'm all ears. But I will not surrender my rationality for the sake of warm fuzzy feelings in my heart.

 

[Guest]

I feel like our world is too vast to rule out that there isnt a higher force at play. Like, I won't straight say, "No, there isn't x" but I won't say, "Yes, there is x". 

I have chosen to remain just ? when it comes to that kind of question. 

[GarthTheWereWolf]

[Jtrekkie]

19 hours ago, FlynnCoyote said:

The opposite ends of this issue seem to be based on emotional need vs intellectual need.

Those with emotional need value being happy. They'll hold onto beliefs that keep them that way in spite of facts that contradict them.
Those with intellectual need value understanding. They will search out the truth no matter how unpleasant it may be. No matter how unhappy it may make them.

I don't think that comparison is entirely accurate, or at least somewhat simplified. It does sound like another comparison between science and philosophy that has also caused some unneeded grief. Anyway, anyone is capable of faith, but then faith does not preclude skepticism. A better description that what we normally get is to put confidence in, or to rely upon.

 

18 hours ago, GarthTheWereWolf said:

-snip-

That remind me of Plato's Dream.

I like to think that Voltaire would have made a great webcomic.

[FlynnCoyote]

2 hours ago, Jtrekkie said:

I don't think that comparison is entirely accurate, or at least somewhat simplified. It does sound like another comparison between science and philosophy that has also caused some unneeded grief. Anyway, anyone is capable of faith, but then faith does not preclude skepticism. A better description that what we normally get is to put confidence in, or to rely upon.

It is a simplified view, and one I think can only be applied to the hardcore theists and atheists. The polar opposites of the issue that will launch into a theistic debate at the drop of a hat. Most people won't fall strictly into either category but will lean towards one or the other. Keep in mind this is purely observation on my part, based on watching others and partaking in numerous theistic discussions with theists myself. Without fail, I always eventually end up getting a response equivalent to "I don't care what Science discovers, I will always believe in God."

To me, the sheer irrationality of such an outlook can only really be attributed to some kind of conditioned or emotional need.

[Rabbit Head]

...

[FlynnCoyote]

It is amusing that the Satanic laws and statements present greater morals than the Judaeo-christian ten commandments.

[Rabbit Head]

10 minutes ago, FlynnCoyote said:

It is amusing that the Satanic laws and statements present greater morals than the Judaeo-christian ten commandments.

The wording of said laws can be a little pretentious and funky (mating signal?), but I agree.

I mean does the bible have commandments that say not to rape or hurt little kids? No. In fact, it's arguable that they bible condones such behavior in some parts.

I'm pretty sure the quran outright DOES, but I'm no expert on the subject. 

In other words, Hail Satan.

[FlynnCoyote]

The first four commandments are all basically stroke God's ego in some way.

4 hours ago, Rabbit Head said:

The wording of said laws can be a little pretentious and funky (mating signal?), but I agree.

According to Satanic principles, human is just another animal, so animal terminology is appropriate in the context they want to convey. The Seventh Satanic Statement:

Quote

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development," has become the most vicious animal of all!

The rest are here for those interested:

Nine Satanic Statements
1. Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
2. Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
5. Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!
7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development," has become the most vicious animal of all!
8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
9. Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!

And what does Satanism consider "sin?"

Nine Satanic Sins
1. Stupidity
2. Pretentiousness
3. Solipsism
4. Self-deceit
5. Herd Conformity
6. Lack of Perspective
7. Forgetfulness of Past Orthodoxies
8. Counterproductive Pride
9. Lack of Aesthetics

Some of these are a little silly, but you couldn't call yourself a religion if you didn't have at least some bullshit involved. And it STILL makes more sense than Christianity.

[Gamedog]

No, and I'm tired of my roommate getting all bent and questioning that

no

yiu don't have to believe that a higher being made the earth.

hes one of those people who doesn't believe in God but he does believe in creation.

idfk

[GarthTheWereWolf]

11 hours ago, Jtrekkie said:

That remind me of Plato's Dream.

I like to think that Voltaire would have made a great webcomic.

The eternal geometer remains displeased with us. :c

and I fully agree. Voltaire's works would make for wonderful comic fodder.

[MalletFace]

I feel it is an important point to clarify that appending agnosticism to my atheism is because my culture punishes anything that approaches or goes beyond 'It doesn't really make sense with what we know' or 'I really don't care' when it comes to gods. Drawing the line at that point seems arbitrary when one considers that agnosticism to all ideas is not only ridiculous; it is harmful to one's health. I'm not sure that many of those that hold an open mind to something like creation in six days - metaphorical or not - would do anything but dismiss a person that suggests gravity is one of many incorrect solutions for problems we encounter in life, and all other alternatives must be considered to have equal merit.

It is, though, where the line is drawn around these parts.

[FenrirDarkWolf]

2 hours ago, GarthTheWereWolf said:

The eternal geometer remains displeased with us. :c

and I fully agree. Voltaire's works would make for wonderful comic fodder.

with your superior art skills, maybe you should make it into a webcomic

[Jtrekkie]

11 hours ago, Rabbit Head said:

I mean does the bible have commandments that say not to rape or hurt little kids? No. In fact, it's arguable that they bible condones such behavior in some parts

Not to derail too much, but

"It is better to tie a millstone around your neck and cast yourself into the sea than to place a stumbling block in front of a child." Also, Christianity has two commandments, which is just enough for a close deontological system. In other words you can derive the ethics from that, with everything else being corollaries. If you want to know about that, you'll have to go to the source as there are almost no good commentaries.

[Vallium]

On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Butters said:

Noooo. Don't say that. You'll summon him. 

@Käpt'n

Like this?

[Falaffel]

7 minutes ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

@Käpt'n

Like this?

You're a bad person

[Jtrekkie]

Is that his name here?

 

[Vallium]

13 hours ago, Rabbit Head said:

The wording of said laws can be a little pretentious and funky (mating signal?), but I agree.

I mean does the bible have commandments that say not to rape or hurt little kids? No. In fact, it's arguable that they bible condones such behavior in some parts.

I'm pretty sure the quran outright DOES, but I'm no expert on the subject. 

In other words, Hail Satan.

I find it iffy to acknowledge the guy who is literally known for hell and evil, imo

On top of that...some of those rules are still vaguely sketchy, not perfect anyways.

4 "cruelly and without mercy" for someone who "annoys" you, a bit of an escalation there...

6 is kind of weird, what does it mean? Does it justify murder/assisted suicide? Or maybe your neighbor just has too much junk on his curb and its free game

7 ...this sounds shady...that last part sounds like some kind of horror movie voodoo curse

11 ...an escalation again.

 

All of it sounds a bit dark to me, on the edge of curses and retribution. 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Jtrekkie said:

Is that his name here?

 

I always assumed CaptainCool was the lemur guy, so funny that there's two lemur guys

[FlynnCoyote]

10 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

I find it iffy to acknowledge the guy who is literally known for hell and evil, imo

You mean according to the God who supposedly drowned almost every living thing on Earth at one point? And sent a gang of angels to murder all firstborn sons of Egypt at another?

Tell me, how many accounts are there in the bible of Satan actually being evil compared to the numerous instances of God being far worse? But yea sure, Satan is the bad guy. :v

10 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

4 "cruelly and without mercy" for someone who "annoys" you, a bit of an escalation there...

It gets the point across. :3

10 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

6 is kind of weird, what does it mean? Does it justify murder/assisted suicide? Or maybe your neighbor just has too much junk on his curb and its free game

It means don't steal, don't take another person's property unless they make it clear they don't want it.

10 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

7 ...this sounds shady...that last part sounds like some kind of horror movie voodoo curse

This is a reference to Satanic rituals found later in the book, which upon closer examinations are little more than psychological exercises designed to either give you focus or purge your mind of desire. They are dressed up as demonic sounding "magic" rituals, though the book essentially admits that it isn't real magic and this is for the most part just to fuck around with Christians and play on their fear.

When you break it down, it's basically saying don't pretend this stuff doesn't work if it has worked for you, or else you will destroy what progress you have put in place in your own mind.  .

10 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

11 ...an escalation again.

The operative word here is destroy, and as is the case with all vague religious texts, completely up to interpretation. Based on the tone of the book, it could be any kind of metaphor and for the most part the author would trust the individual to make sense of this rather than blindly follow this rule to the letter.

[Endless/Nameless]

lmao

[Käpt'n]

There is no evidence so I don't believe in them. 

[Socketosis]

What the heck God?

Apparently all of Job's sane, logical questions were answered by God being so powerful that humans can't even comprehend it. Even though all of this only happened because God wanted to show off to Satan.

 

On 8/16/2016 at 0:59 AM, Cingal said:

I was always told to believe in myself.

 

So, yes, I guess I do.

I didn't know God was that sexy.

[MalletFace]

6 hours ago, FlynnCoyote said:

The operative word here is destroy, and as is the case with all vague religious texts, completely up to interpretation. Based on the tone of the book, it could be any kind of metaphor and for the most part the author would trust the individual to make sense of this rather than blindly follow this rule to the letter.

"When a person, by his reprehensible behavior, practically cries out to be destroyed, it is truly your moral obligation to indulge them their wish... They are weak, insecure, and on extremely shaky ground when you throw your curse, and they make ideal human sacrifices."

"When we sacrifice a person in a Satanic ritual, we do not slaughter him on the altar in a physical manner. We simply direct our hate forces towards the deserving recipient. You must never direct a curse toward a person unless you are prepared for the ultimate consequences."

"By sending these hate forces forth, we ensure suffering on the part of the person who has dealt us an injustice... You cannot perform a working of this type and specify that you want the person to suffer only a broken arm or mild illness. You must realize that death may be the final outcome of a magical working of this nature."

4 hours ago, Socketosis said:

What the heck God?

Apparently all of Job's sane, logical questions were answered by God being so powerful that humans can't even comprehend it. Even though all of this only happened because God wanted to show off to Satan.

The Job story made me really sad as a little kid. It really bothers me now that the persons working at the church I was going to were really glad that they had caused a child to nearly come to tears as long as it was to instill a fear of God.

[Joel]

ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 

[Dr. Doggo]

On 17/08/2016 at 9:02 AM, Rabbit Head said:

The wording of said laws can be a little pretentious and funky (mating signal?), but I agree.

[...]

In other words, Hail Satan.

Pretty sure these Satanist LARPers are a product of a 1960s subculture, and these "commandments" are penned by some guy called LaVey.

Yet I see them treat it as it it's ancient obscure canon even though they're clearly within laws and social expectations of most of the civilised word at the time of their inception, and it was just another way for edgelords to stick it to the man with the philosophical and ephiphanic depth of Neil DeGrasse Tyson's fans' amazement that the universe is indeed a very, very big place and that the garden of eden is just a story, which devout christians brought into question a thousand years ago that it is a mere parable (even though creationists are still a thing).

In old canon, "Satanism" refers more to the likes of ancient religions, such as the Canaanites and figures of their pantheon such as Moloch, the chief of Satan's angels who had a penchant for recieving child sacrifices, and some nutcases still worship him to this day.

As for what Christians condone and condemn, the Old/New testament divide is critically important here.

In other words, I hate hippies, thanks for reading my blog~

[FlynnCoyote]

5 hours ago, MalletFace said:

"When a person, by his reprehensible behavior, practically cries out to be destroyed, it is truly your moral obligation to indulge them their wish... They are weak, insecure, and on extremely shaky ground when you throw your curse, and they make ideal human sacrifices."

"When we sacrifice a person in a Satanic ritual, we do not slaughter him on the altar in a physical manner. We simply direct our hate forces towards the deserving recipient. You must never direct a curse toward a person unless you are prepared for the ultimate consequences."

"By sending these hate forces forth, we ensure suffering on the part of the person who has dealt us an injustice... You cannot perform a working of this type and specify that you want the person to suffer only a broken arm or mild illness. You must realize that death may be the final outcome of a magical working of this nature."

In other words, be reeeally sure you want that guy dead, and if you're still committed enough to go through with the ritual then there's probably something wrong with you.

3 hours ago, Sir Gibby said:

Yet I see them treat it as it it's ancient obscure canon even though they're clearly within laws and social expectations of most of the civilised word at the time of their inception, and it was just another way for edgelords to stick it to the man with the philosophical and ephiphanic depth of Neil DeGrasse Tyson's fans' amazement that the universe is indeed a very, very big place and that the garden of eden is just a story, which devout christians brought into question a thousand years ago that it is a mere parable (even though creationists are still a thing).

This is all pretty much true.

However, there are still more mature satanic organizations around, and their principle interest seems to be similar to that of most atheist organizations. They try to uphold the legal separation of church and state, stepping in when christian groups attempt to put some kind of religious influence in public venues. They have an angle that atheist organizations can't make use of, namely insisting that their literature be distributed alongside bibles whenever an evangelical group tries to brainwash a school. By ensuring that pluralism is respected whenever the line between church and state is breached, the satanists have discouraged church groups from trying to get influence into schools and other public venues.

It is a shame their image is ruined by pretentious teenage fuckwits.

[Dr. Doggo]

13 minutes ago, FlynnCoyote said:

However, there are still more mature satanic organizations around, and their principle interest seems to be similar to that of most atheist organizations. They try to uphold the legal separation of church and state, stepping in when christian groups attempt to put some kind of religious influence in public venues. They have an angle that atheist organizations can't make use of, namely insisting that their literature be distributed alongside bibles whenever an evangelical group tries to brainwash a school. By ensuring that pluralism is respected whenever the line between church and state is breached, the satanists have discouraged church groups from trying to get influence into schools and other public venues.

It is a shame their image is ruined by pretentious teenage fuckwits.

That kind of strikes me as vanilla secularism headed by people who only want to criticise Christianty because they know that if ever challenged with it, doing the same to Sikhism, Hinduism, Judaism, or Islamism would look really bad within their social/media circle. Such behaviour is very common.

Personally, I think of myself as more of a secularist although I believe that faiths and subcultures should be preserved within the subject nation.

[FlynnCoyote]

3 hours ago, Sir Gibby said:

That kind of strikes me as vanilla secularism headed by people who only want to criticise Christianty because they know that if ever challenged with it, doing the same to Sikhism, Hinduism, Judaism, or Islamism would look really bad within their social/media circle. Such behaviour is very common.

Personally, I think of myself as more of a secularist although I believe that faiths and subcultures should be preserved within the subject nation.

Honestly dude, that's the idea. Satanists are basically atheists with a middle finger to Christianity. 

[Proper noun]

5 minutes ago, FlynnCoyote said:

Honestly dude, that's the idea. Satanists are basically atheists with a middle finger to Christianity. 

So vocal atheists?

[PastryOfApathy]

12 minutes ago, Proper noun said:

So vocal atheists?

No, they're simply edgy atheists.

[MalletFace]

7 hours ago, Sir Gibby said:

Pretty sure these Satanist LARPers are a product of a 1960s subculture, and these "commandments" are penned by some guy called LaVey.

Yet I see them treat it as it it's ancient obscure canon even though they're clearly within laws and social expectations of most of the civilised word at the time of their inception, and it was just another way for edgelords to stick it to the man with the philosophical and ephiphanic depth of Neil DeGrasse Tyson's fans' amazement that the universe is indeed a very, very big place and that the garden of eden is just a story, which devout christians brought into question a thousand years ago that it is a mere parable (even though creationists are still a thing).

It wasn't even of that time. It was one of the last major acts of extreme neo-classical liberalism from the 1800s as the movement was turning into right-libertarianism. In his bible, Levey even honored and quoted people like Ragnar Redbeard - a writer that wrote the Bible of Social Darwinism and was laughed out of a century known for belief in Social Darwinism.

[Socketosis]

3 hours ago, Proper noun said:

So vocal atheists?

That's a bit redundant.

[Conker]

12 hours ago, Joel said:

ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 

 

<3

If there is a God out there, I see no reason to believe that it isn't something like this. The more I think about the nature of celestial beings and, "he works in mysterious ways" the more I come back to Azathoth and not Yaweh.

In a fucked up sort of way, the Biblical god seems too convenient. Well, if you ignore the Old Testament.

[Bloodshot_Eyes]

As the sum total of everything; physical, mental, and spiritual. Everything within and without space/time. An integral part of everything that was, is, and will be. Consciousness that transcends duality and limitation while simultaneously embracing the experience as every temporal field of consciousness with or without a physical body. 

It's also "love" for some reason. :V

[Bloodshot_Eyes]

On 8/17/2016 at 1:02 AM, Rabbit Head said:

Eh, I like TST's (the Satanic Temple) 7 tenets better personally. 

1. One should strive to act with compassion and empathy towards all creatures in accordance with reason.
2. The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.
3. One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.
4. The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo your own.
5. Beliefs should conform to our best scientific understanding of the world. We should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit our beliefs.
6. People are fallible. If we make a mistake, we should do our best to rectify it and resolve any harm that may have been caused.
7. Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word

 

[Revates]

I wish I did because I'd rather burn in hell for all eternity than die and it to be just nothing, I am more scared of there being nothing when I die... But I just don't. I don't believe that there is any god or afterlife and that frightens the hell out of me.

[Vallium]

On Thursday, August 18, 2016 at 3:46 AM, FlynnCoyote said:

You mean according to the God who supposedly drowned almost every living thing on Earth at one point? And sent a gang of angels to murder all firstborn sons of Egypt at another?

Tell me, how many accounts are there in the bible of Satan actually being evil compared to the numerous instances of God being far worse? But yea sure, Satan is the bad guy. :v

It gets the point across. :3

It means don't steal, don't take another person's property unless they make it clear they don't want it.

This is a reference to Satanic rituals found later in the book, which upon closer examinations are little more than psychological exercises designed to either give you focus or purge your mind of desire. They are dressed up as demonic sounding "magic" rituals, though the book essentially admits that it isn't real magic and this is for the most part just to fuck around with Christians and play on their fear.

When you break it down, it's basically saying don't pretend this stuff doesn't work if it has worked for you, or else you will destroy what progress you have put in place in your own mind.  .

The operative word here is destroy, and as is the case with all vague religious texts, completely up to interpretation. Based on the tone of the book, it could be any kind of metaphor and for the most part the author would trust the individual to make sense of this rather than blindly follow this rule to the letter.

I wasnt going to respond because I didnt want to get into some theistic argument, and in fact is the thing I wanted to avoid with the arrival of this thread, since these things always turn up an negative, judgmental vibe of people disrespecting others for their personal beliefs. TBH I could care less if someone was a devil worshipper, it'd make me uncomfortable but its not my life. I hate it more when people shove their values onto other people and look down their nose at them as awful, terrible people(i.e Christianity, i.e Atheists.)...I believe in respect more

 

That said, those kind of missed context. Wiping out most of humaity misses the context that some civilizations at the time were literally savage and evil, we're talking Ninevah, Sodom and Gomorra. No, not the gay sex, we're talking rape and stabbing peoples skulls on stakes and leaving them in front of your town for all to see. Stuff that's legit evil. It was an awful thing to do, but humanity was fucked up. It wasnt evil for the sake of evil...Regarding 'the angel of death', it was a retribution for the evil that happened in the land, i.e Pharoah being prideful in abusing the Hebrew people in horrid conditions of slavery, it was a jolt to wake him up because he'd already put those people through a lot of pain as is, and only relented when he lost his own son.

 

Not going as far to say shit is perfect in how a lot of Christians interpret text as well, but I dont think satanic text is inherently better just because of a gripe against religion, that was really just why I'd called it out.

 

TL;DR Lets just all C03X15T, man

[Vallium]

Also, Relevant:

 

[Taikugemu]

YHWH is just a tiny figment of The Great Will that commands all the universes, so we should pay him no mind.

[FlynnCoyote]

9 hours ago, WolfNightV4X1 said:

Apologetics

I don't care. If we're to believe some god is all powerful, we can expect better solutions from it than the petty bullshit that allegedly happened. And the total supplication we're expected to give in exchange for being "saved" from its temper.

[WolfyAmbassador]

I'll just reply with this:

I like to apply this song to SJWs as well, or any other indoctrinated group of shitheads for that matter.