Scientology

[Anjin-san]

In my search for proof that god exists, I looked up Scientology. Basically, they're all nutbars after your money!

The basics are pyschotherapy invented by their creator, and the more advanced stuff reads like

'Xenu came to this region of the galaxy millions of years ago with all the overpopulation of other worlds, put them on earth and destroyed them with hydrogen bombs. Human minds nowadays are infected with these souls and must excorsise them.'

I'd do a little search, sounds like a cultish secret society to me...

[Hank]

In my search for proof that god exists, I looked up Scientology. Basically, they're all nutbars after your money!

The basics are pyschotherapy invented by their creator, and the more advanced stuff reads like

'Xenu came to this region of the galaxy millions of years ago with all the overpopulation of other worlds, put them on earth and destroyed them with hydrogen bombs. Human minds nowadays are infected with these souls and must excorsise them.'

I'd do a little search, sounds like a cultish secret society to me...Yeah, he blew them up in the caldera of a Hawaiian volcano or something like that. With nukes. Bizzare. So, all of our problems result from an infestation of angry souls that only the scientologists can exorcize. There's also something about humans evolving directly from clams or some stuff. That's what you get when a crazy sci-fi writer makes a religion - crazy sci-fi. If it weren't for the money and power, this idea would have been DOA (true for so many religions/cults). But, hey, it certainly helped Mr. Cruise balance his psyche.

Oh, no, wait - what's the opposite of balance?

Hank.

[Anjin-san]

Its really scary... anyone who leaves the church of scientology are classified as 'fair game'... any scientologist can injur, sue, harass or destroy 'fair game' without discipline.

Also, they have special 'celebrity centres' for recruiting high-profile people for furthering the cause.

[Lloromannic]

Scientology sure is "far-fetched" but it is understandable when you take into account it was created by a (mediocre) sci-fi writer in order to get tax exemptions. But really if you think they are weird then look up SOLLOG. (http://www.sollog.com/)
there is also a Wikipedia article about it. Trouble is that since anyone can edit Wikipedia it sometimes changes into a SOLLOG fanatic article.

[Anjin-san]

Its not so much the far-fetchedness of their beliefs thats wierd. Its the fact that they're the worlds most successful cult that gets me. They really do fit all the definitions of one...

[Andou]

Its not so much the far-fetchedness of their beliefs thats wierd. Its the fact that they're the worlds most successful cult that gets me. They really do fit all the definitions of one...

Yeah...but if you look at other things (this isn't an intended blow to religion or any other mass following) but there are lots of cults around that can screw with people without any type of harsh consequence. I being a member of the Highlander cult myself, I can tell you if you mess up here...chop chop chop goes the katana through the neck :wink:

[Yiu Fai]

We too have the Church of Scientology here in Australia.

They had a stall at my Uncle's Chinese NYE fair, promoting massage therapy and getting kids to swear not to take drugs and issuing "Drug-Free Ambassador" Certificates.

From the outside, nothing seems to be too weird about this "Church" but after reading some of their theories...

[Berugijin]

Its not so much the far-fetchedness of their beliefs thats wierd. Its the fact that they're the worlds most successful cult that gets me. They really do fit all the definitions of one...

And this year's MTV award for Most Successful Cult goes to:

Christianity with 2.1 billion loonie followers.

[JSchmidt]

And this year's MTV award for Most Successful Cult goes to:

Christianity with 2.1 billion loonie followers.

Dude, you got serious issues. Seek help.

Jakob

[Berugijin]

Dude, you got serious issues. Seek help.

Jakob

I sought help and now I am paying Scientology 500 dollars a month to exorcise my "body thetans".

[The great I AM]

I sought help and now I am paying Scientology 500 dollars a month to exorcise my "body thetans".

No really, get a grip. You are running the risk of becoming KW's next Issac Ru with the way you are going on at people at the moment. Its a bit much.

[Infinity]

Its really scary... anyone who leaves the church of scientology are classified as 'fair game'... any scientologist can injur, sue, harass or destroy 'fair game' without discipline.

Also, they have special 'celebrity centres' for recruiting high-profile people for furthering the cause.

until recently i was a fan of tom cruise.
now i understand why he is so rude, self righteous and a basic loonie.

funny thing is i doubt god is interested in religion - whatever it is.

[Sepiraph]

And this year's MTV award for Most Successful Cult goes to:

Christianity with 2.1 billion loonie followers.

No really, get a grip. You are running the risk of becoming KW's next Issac Ru with the way you are going on at people at the moment. Its a bit much.

You know, to an agnostic/atheist like myself, most religions are pretty much the same thing, be it Scientology or any other major religions. Many religious people say don't insult a religion just because you don't believe it, which is nice and all. However, if some of the said people get themselves in power and if history has taught me anything, it is that I'll be burned at the stake for being an infidel, which the mob most likely cheering on.

Just my 2c.

[drizzt]

You know, to an agnostic/atheist

how are you both? Pick man PICK. you either dont know, or you dont beleive in a God..........


why has the flames section turned into the religion debate forum? EVERY SINGLE THREAD turns into a religious argument(and yall are so talented at goading me into even bothering to start).........

[Berugijin]

No really, get a grip. You are running the risk of becoming KW's next Issac Ru with the way you are going on at people at the moment. Its a bit much.

I have trouble taking you (http://www.kendo.uclu.org/images/albums/endofyear2005/slides/Picture_013.jpg) seriously.

[ahmed61086]

Dear Berugijin,

I have been reading these forum for about 6 months now, and it seems you are one of the only people who constantly and habitually flames and disrespects those who follow any type of religion. Now, we have all gotten your point, you dont believe in what some people believe in, but this gives you no right to blatantly disrespect our beliefs. I would not disrepect you for not believing in my religion, why do you feel you must repeatly get ur beleifs across in such a fashion, which would most definitly anger some people who practice a certain religion other than your own? Here is just one example,

And this year's MTV award for Most Successful Cult goes to:

Christianity with 2.1 billion loonie followers.

now i am sorry you feel this way, i am not a christian, but i can understand how a christian reading this would feel. Please, could you keep such comments to yourself. If you would like to speak about your beliefs, that is ok, but to disrespect beleifs of other people is unneeded. I could understand if you were doing it as a joke, but this type of comment i have seen from you many times and, to me, it seems that you are not REALY joking, but actualy conciously disrespecting other people and there religions. So i am going to end my post with a small passage from the Quran,the muslim holy book, which is believed to be gods holy words.

In the name of God, most Gracious, most Merciful.

Say: Oh you who reject faith!
I worship not that which you worship,
Nor will you worship that which i worship.
And i will not worship that which you have been wont to worship,
Nor will you worship that which i worship.
To you be on your way, and to me mine.

So i ask you Berugijin, could you be more thoughtful and respectful in your future posts? Could you go on your path and let us go on ours in peace? It would be most appreciated. Thank you for your time.

Ahmed.

[Berugijin]

Dear Berugijin,

I have been reading these forum for about 6 months now, and it seems you are one of the only people who constantly and habitually flames and disrespects those who follow any type of religion. Now, we have all gotten your point, you dont believe in what some people believe in, but this gives you no right to blatantly disrespect our beliefs. I would not disrepect you for not believing in my religion, why do you feel you must repeatly get ur beleifs across in such a fashion, which would most definitly anger some people who practice a certain religion other than your own? Here is just one example,

I realize I come across as 'rude', but my style is sort of 'in-your-face' and direct. I do not disrespect you at all, if you got this impresson than I apologize.

I'm just very bitter and disgruntled with the world. The best and most recent example is the bombs that just went off in London that were most likely caused by religious extremists (although this is not a fact). I personally believe that everyone will be better off if there wasn't such a thing as "blind faith".



And this year's MTV award for Most Successful Cult goes to:

Christianity with 2.1 billion loonie followers.

I should've dropped the 'loonie' part. I admit it's an uncalled for generalization. But I still believe that "a big cult is a religion and a small religion is a cult".


now i am sorry you feel this way, i am not a christian, but i can understand how a christian reading this would feel. Please, could you keep such comments to yourself. If you would like to speak about your beliefs, that is ok, but to disrespect beleifs of other people is unneeded. I could understand if you were doing it as a joke, but this type of comment i have seen from you many times and, to me, it seems that you are not REALY joking, but actualy conciously disrespecting other people and there religions. So i am going to end my post with a small passage from the Quran,the muslim holy book, which is believed to be gods holy words.

In the name of God, most Gracious, most Merciful.

Say: Oh you who reject faith!
I worship not that which you worship,
Nor will you worship that which i worship.
And i will not worship that which you have been wont to worship,
Nor will you worship that which i worship.
To you be on your way, and to me mine.

So i ask you Berugijin, could you be more thoughtful and respectful in your future posts? Could you go on your path and let us go on ours in peace? It would be most appreciated. Thank you for your time.

Ahmed.

But our paths cross when we discuss about religion in the Flames section. I'm not the type to walk away from a discussion. If you feel insulted and disrespected, I'm sincerely sorry.

Interesting passage from the Quran. It conflicts with the idea that Western people have that every Muslim is forced by his religion to go on a holy war and kill or convert all non-believers... But you do realize that it's usually the other way around? Atheists don't search out religious men to tell them they're wrong, atheists are being sought out by religious men.

Thank you for your time.

[JSchmidt]

Atheists don't search out religious men to tell them they're wrong, atheists are being sought out by religious men.


Dude, that's exactly what you have been doing here.

Jakob

[Berugijin]

Dude, that's exactly what you have been doing here.

Jakob

Whoa there kiddo, I believe we're still in the Flames section of KW. I'm not knocking on your door telling you that you should be atheist.

Way to go for missing my point completely.

[JSchmidt]

Whoa there kiddo, I believe we're still in the Flames section of KW. I'm not knocking on your door telling you that you should be atheist.

Way to go for missing my point completely.

Bullshit, you are jumping on everybody that shows that they're just a little bit religious. As I said...you should seek help.

Jakob

[Berugijin]

Bullshit, you are jumping on everybody that shows that they're just a little bit religious. As I said...you should seek help.

Jakob

See children, this is what we call an "unfounded accusation". Yes little Timmy, it's also a "generalization".

It's all too easy to stop the discussion and simply state the opposing side should "seek help". When you participate in a discussion in a section called "Flames" you shouldn't cry later after someone confronted your views and opinions.

[JSchmidt]

You are in denial as well, I see.

Jakob

P.S. I've been an atheist for longer than you have been alive...

[The great I AM]

I have trouble taking you (http://www.kendo.uclu.org/images/albums/endofyear2005/slides/Picture_013.jpg) seriously.

Excuse me? You don't know me. That is a picture of me enjoying myself with a few friends after a lot of drinks. Thats called having a good time. And to be honest, I fail to see what relation that has to a religous discussion, if this can be called that. Wrong context my friend. If you had posted something where I just completley failed to listen to a point of view, became amazing generalistic and in some cases just rude, then fine. But thats a picture from a party.

You say that you have a very in your face style, but simply come across as rude, generalising and unthinking, which I would hope you are not.

If you like to debate then fine, but there are much more friendly ways of doing it than getting up everybody's nose with overstated and aggressive opinions.

[Anjin-san]

Berugi-jin, you're an asshole.

I'll agree you haven't tried to shove atheism down peoples throats. Instead, you've done worse by attacking other peoples beliefs instead by whining about shit that everyone already knows sucks. Religion or no, people would have conqered, slaughtered, ethnically cleansed, and whatever. From you, its all noise, no signal.

Furthermore, your conduct stands as among the worst on this forum. The excuse that being obnoxious, fececious, and course is 'just your style' is even weaker than the bullshit arguments you attempt to put accross.

Firstly, no one asked for you anti-christian views in a thread about scientology. Furthermore, you've insulted and belittled two of my sempai here, and that makes it personal. I officially don't like you.

[Berugijin]

Berugi-jin, you're an asshole.

Thanks.

I'll agree you haven't tried to shove atheism down peoples throats. Instead, you've done worse by attacking other peoples beliefs instead by whining about shit that everyone already knows sucks. Religion or no, people would have conqered, slaughtered, ethnically cleansed, and whatever. From you, its all noise, no signal.

Ofcourse I am attacking other people's beliefs. We were having an argument in the flames section of a discussion board! If you don't want to be attacked by rational arguments, then don't participate in a discussion on religion. You don't see me whining that my points have been attacked (instead I tried to disprove those attacks). In fact you don't even see me whining about all the slandering.

Furthermore, your conduct stands as among the worst on this forum. The excuse that being obnoxious, fececious, and course is 'just your style' is even weaker than the bullshit arguments you attempt to put accross.

It's easy to say they're "bullshit arguments", why don't you try to disprove them like an adult instead of saying "you're an asshole and you're wrong" without giving further explanation and/or rational arguments.

Firstly, no one asked for you anti-christian views in a thread about scientology. Furthermore, you've insulted and belittled two of my sempai here, and that makes it personal. I officially don't like you.

The thread about scientology was about cults, right? I didn't mean to insult or belittle anyone, all of this is very non-personal to me, just a discussion. I offer my most humble apologies to everyone who feels insulted, it was not my intention.

Despite you calling me an asshole and saying you don't like me, I have nothing against you. In fact I've enjoyed reading your opinion on religion. I'm very sorry that you "officially" don't like me.

KW is obviously not the proper place to discuss religion and sensitive topics so perhaps I will just withdraw from all of this to avoid people feeling attacked and insulted.

[Berugijin]

Excuse me? You don't know me. That is a picture of me enjoying myself with a few friends after a lot of drinks. Thats called having a good time. And to be honest, I fail to see what relation that has to a religous discussion, if this can be called that. Wrong context my friend. If you had posted something where I just completley failed to listen to a point of view, became amazing generalistic and in some cases just rude, then fine. But thats a picture from a party.

That wasn't meant to be a personal attack, more like just to lighten things up a bit. I've done more embarassing things than sticking sticks up my nose to be honest. I could've just as easily replied with a couple of insults to answer your insults. Instead I chose to link to a funny picture. Is that so wrong?

You say that you have a very in your face style, but simply come across as rude, generalising and unthinking, which I would hope you are not.

Rude, yes, sometimes. But it's a fact that I've been insulted for simply stating that I don't like religion. I've done nothing but apologize to people who felt insulted and those who simple insulted me I have ignored. Generalising, yes, but I've stated multiple times that I only have problems with extremists and fundamentalists. To be rude, I could care less about the average christian. Unthinking? That is an insult. I simply explain my point of view.

If you like to debate then fine, but there are much more friendly ways of doing it than getting up everybody's nose with overstated and aggressive opinions.

That's a matter of style in my opinion. Socrates was considered rude too be he questioned people's beliefs and made them see their own contradictions.

Again, I did not mean to insult you or belittle you, if I did than I am truly sorry.

[The great I AM]

Just because we are in the flames section doesn't give you lisence to summararily annoy people, surely basic politeness from the point is more likely to engeder interest in your opinion.


As for the unthinking thing, you yourself admitted that you hadn't necessarily been thinking when you posted your little "MTV award" jibe. Insulted you may feel, but you admitted it yourself, are you going to flame yourself next?

As I said before, its a bit much.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Just because we are in the flames section doesn't give you lisence to summararily annoy people, surely basic politeness from the point is more likely to engeder interest in your opinion.
Isn't that the point of a flames section, to dispense with the politeness? Otherwise such topics would just be discussed politely in the lounge. Admittedly I haven't seen a really good entertaining flame here, just a lot of noise, but still...

[The great I AM]

Yeah I do realise what you're saying, but so many people use this section to simply insult people or post offensive rubbish under the excuse "I'm in flames so its ok". There should still be a basic modicum of respect, especially as essentially, we don't know each other, flames section or not.

[Paikea]

KW is obviously not the proper place to discuss religion and sensitive topics so perhaps I will just withdraw from all of this to avoid people feeling attacked and insulted.There's a thought.

[Paikea]

Yeah I do realise what you're saying, but so many people use this section to simply insult people or post offensive rubbish under the excuse "I'm in flames so its ok". There should still be a basic modicum of respect, especially as essentially, we don't know each other, flames section or not.Thing is...we know who YOU are, you know who I am, but the worst and most offensive people here hide behind anonymity. I can't respect cowards...

[Neil Gendzwill]

There should still be a basic modicum of respect, especially as essentially, we don't know each other, flames section or not.
Been around the internet long? A flame, by definition, involves displaying utter disdain and lack of respect for the opponent. If done properly, it's entertaining, clever, witty but most importantly it must be insulting. It's getting to be a lost art due to the dumbification of the net.

[The great I AM]

Been around the internet long? A flame, by definition, involves displaying utter disdain and lack of respect for the opponent. If done properly, it's entertaining, clever, witty but most importantly it must be insulting. It's getting to be a lost art due to the dumbification of the net.

Well thats all well and good, but there seem to a lot (ie all recent ones) that seem to be missing the entertaining clever and witty bits. Just insulting. Flame or not, thats a bit shit. I agree that its great when flames are funny, but when they are not, many many many people get offended. Lost art indeed.

[Paikea]

Wasn't it Churchill who said "if you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite?"

[Anjin-san]

OK then lets do this. First lets cover this thread.

And this year's MTV award for Most Successful Cult goes to:

Christianity with 2.1 billion loonie followers.


You are insinuating here that if there were an MTV award for the most successful cult, then christianity would win it. Furthermore, you're saying that the people that follow christianity are all 'loonies'. A shortened form of the term lunatic.

I take it, broken down, what you're saying at first is:

(premises)
-Christianity is a cult
-Christianity is has the largest following on earth

(conclusion)
-Therefore christiantiy is the most successful cult.

dictionary.com definition of a cult:

"A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader."

I propose that by disproving the identity christianity is instance of a cult, the first premise of your argument is disproved and your argument along with it.

Please consult the dictionary.com definition. Cult, 'a religious sect'. The term Christianity is all encompassing for any christian denominations and therfore it does not hold that 'Christianity' is a 'sect'. Cult, 'generally considered to be extremist or false'. By your own statement Christianity has 2.1 billion followers, so its not generally considered to be extremist or false. Cult 'with its followers often living in an unvonventional manner'. I fail to see how the lifestyle of 2.1 billion people can be generalised in any way, let alone 'unconventional'. Cult 'under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader' in the past perhaps, but now there are no christian leaders on earth that wield real executive power, outside of secret societies.

By the previous argument, I have shown that that Christianity is not an instance of cult. Two things you might come back with

i) Christianity shows the properties of a cult, but on a larger scale.

I don't care that this may be the case. It has nothing to do with what YOU said. You said christianity IS a cult.

ii)dictionary.com does not have an accurate definition of a cult

dictionar.com represents a fair, independant source of an accurate definition of the term. I'd imagine that any other fair, independant definition will be a variation on the theme, and I have no reason to question dictionary.com's integrity. That it may not be YOUR definition is besides the point. You could start speaking swahili and claim you were right and there'd be nothing I could say, as human communication requires that there is a universal agreement on the meaning of lexical elements like 'cult'.

Secondly, you make the assertion that all that follow christiantiy are 'loonies'.

I'm going to have to make a few assumptions here, in that you aren't using some kind of technical or belgian slang word here, and that you mean the corruption of the term 'lunatic' when you say 'loonie'.

Dictionary.com helps us out again, lunatic:


Suffering from lunacy; insane
Of or for the insane.
Wildly or giddily foolish: a lunatic decision.
Characterized by lunacy or eccentricity.
So you're asserting that 2.1 billion people are insane? Giddily foolish? Eccentric? These terms all define people who are out of the ordinary, different from everyone else, outcast to society. My argument here is that by definition, a third of the population of us, even if they were completely different from the other two thirds, constitute a significant proportion such that they can no longer be classed as 'eccentric, out of the ordinary, insane, or giddily foolish'.

For further reading, I suggest you google the acronym STFU. Now take a long walk off a short cliff.

[ahmed61086]

Ahhhh, i love religious debates, i just hate having to type them out. Well, lets begin.

I love it when socrates is quoted. Many people use socrates to help there argument(as i am about to do)whether or not they are from one side or another. Here is the problem with socrates. Nobody realy knew what he truly believed in because he was to busy questioning everything. And whether or not Sacrates believed in one god, many gods, or no gods is still undetermined. One more thing, socrates wasnt considered to be rude. Socrates just asked a question after every sentece a man spoke that most people hated him.

And now to the main point. Cult!?!?! Why are all atheists so fast to call religions a cult? As my friend anjin san has allready proved, it is illogical to called Christianity, Islam, or Judaism, a cult. Why is it illogical? Because they do not fit the definition of course. Can you call a cat a dog? Of course u can, but it wont be true. Well, let me go in one a direction, because i have just been all over the place.

When speaking of religion, one must be utterly respectfull. Why would someone want to join the religion of someone who is a dickhead? Remember when you are "preaching" your religion, you are the spokes person for your religion at that time. Unless of course you are preaching for a "cult"(i.e. a false religion, with followers who live in an unconventional manner) than maybe you would want to be disrepectful, becuase that would be unconventional. So if Berugijin is the spokes person for the athiest community, and he likes to be unconventional with his preaching tactics, then technically wouldnt he be part of the cult? Lol, tell me if my logic is off. Any way, Neil, i hope you consider this a true "flame" because i tried to be a little bit clever while writing this, even though i tried not to be be too insulting.

[Sepiraph]

Please consult the dictionary.com definition. Cult, 'a religious sect'. The term Christianity is all encompassing for any christian denominations and therfore it does not hold that 'Christianity' is a 'sect'. Cult, 'generally considered to be extremist or false'. By your own statement Christianity has 2.1 billion followers, so its not generally considered to be extremist or false.

You have just made a few logical fallacies, in particularly the 'Appeal to Belief' and the 'Appeal to Popularity', of which the basic premises are that since many/most people believe/approve of X, then X is true.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-belief.html

Any religion, by its very definition, fits in the general definition of a cult.

cult ( P ) Pronunciation Key (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html)
n.

A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
The followers of such a religion or sect.


A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.



Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
The object of such devotion.

An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.



So you're asserting that 2.1 billion people are insane? Giddily foolish? Eccentric? These terms all define people who are out of the ordinary, different from everyone else, outcast to society. My argument here is that by definition, a third of the population of us, even if they were completely different from the other two thirds, constitute a significant proportion such that they can no longer be classed as 'eccentric, out of the ordinary, insane, or giddily foolish'.

It really won't surprise me that if the WHOLE world is insane, let alone 2.1 billion people.

Finally, when you are in a debate, one has to challenge the others' opinion and belief, that is the very point of debating. Unfortunately, some people cannot understand this and take it as a personal attack when really it is the actual art of debating.

[Sepiraph]

how are you both? Pick man PICK. you either dont know, or you dont beleive in a God..........

One can believe that there is no God, but if you cannot prove that God does not exist, you simply don't know.

Thus in my case, I fit both descriptions.

[Neil Gendzwill]

One can believe that there is no God, but if you cannot prove that God does not exist, you simply don't know.

Thus in my case, I fit both descriptions.
No, you don't. As the existance or non-existance of God is unprovable, both being atheist and theist require faith. If you don't have faith and are waiting for proof one way or the other, you are by definition agnostic.

[Commander]

I hate these arguments :(

(sorry just had to post that)

[Sepiraph]

No, you don't. As the existance or non-existance of God is unprovable, both being atheist and theist require faith. If you don't have faith and are waiting for proof one way or the other, you are by definition agnostic.

First of all, strictly speaking, no one has a proof on the unprovability of God. Secondly, I can choose to believe in something, but unless I have a proof of its truth, I cannot claim that what I believe in is, in fact, true. Belief does not automatically equal truth, which unfortunately most people do not or cannot understand.

Also the claim that you require faith to be an atheist is illogical, as one is basically committing the fallacy of the 'Burden of Proof'.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html

[Neil Gendzwill]

Secondly, I can choose to believe in something, but unless I have a proof of its truth, I cannot claim that what I believe in is, in fact, true. Belief does not automatically equal truth, which unfortunately most people do not or cannot understand.

Your definitions are wacky. Believing in the existance of God makes you a theist (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=theist&x=16&y=19), it's got nothing to do with the truth of whether God exists or not. Believing in the non-existence of God makes you an atheist (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=atheist&x=16&y=20), again nothing to do with the truth of existance. These are the definitions of theist and atheist - they are both belief systems. If you believe in neither and aren't willing to rule out either possibility, you are agnostic (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=agnostic&x=12&y=19).

[Paikea]

No fallicy, simple definition of terms. In questions of language, I prefer Webster.


Main Entry: be·lieve [/url]
Pronunciation: b&-'lEv
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): be·lieved; be·liev·ing
Etymology: Middle English beleven, from Old English belEfan, from be- + lyfan, lEfan to allow, believe; akin to Old High German gilouben to believe, Old English lEof dear -- more at [url="http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=love"]LOVE (http://javascript<img%20src=&quot;images/smilies/tongue.gif&quot;%20border=&quot;0&quot;%20alt=&quot;&quot;%20title=&quot;stick%2 0out%20tongue&quot;%20smilieid=&quot;6&quot;%20class=&quot;inlineimg&quot;% 20/>opWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?believ04.wav=believe'))
intransitive senses
1 a : to have a firm religious faith b : to accept as true, genuine, or real <ideals we believe in> <believes in ghosts>



...one who believes may reasonably considered to have faith.

Main Entry: athe·ist
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist
Function: noun
: one who believes that there is no deity
- athe·is·tic "A-thE-'is-tik/ or athe·is·ti·cal /"A-thE-'is-ti-k&l/ adjective
- athe·is·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb
...an atheist is, by this definition one who believes (has faith) that there is no diety, as opposed to:


Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic

Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-

Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=know)
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

...which aparrently requires no faith, nor convoluted logical arguments to support.




(damned Software Engineers always type faster than I can...)

[Hank]

First of all, strictly speaking, no one has a proof on the unprovability of God. Secondly, I can choose to believe in something, but unless I have a proof of its truth, I cannot claim that what I believe in is, in fact, true. Belief does not automatically equal truth, which unfortunately most people do not or cannot understand.

Also the claim that you require faith to be an atheist is illogical, as one is basically committing the fallacy of the 'Burden of Proof'.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.htmlI agree.

In general, I'll point out again that one doesn't set out to prove something doesn't exist. This can only be done for tightly bound cases. One can, however, refute the arguments of those claiming to prove that something does exist. If there is no evidence for something's existence, then, for all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist. That's really all there is to it.

Belief in god(s) is about faith - it's not based in logic. So, tell me I have no faith, but don't tell me my atheism is belief-based. It's just not.

Hank.

[Sepiraph]

Your definitions are wacky. Believing in the existance of God makes you a theist (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=theist&x=16&y=19), it's got nothing to do with the truth of whether God exists or not. Believing in the non-existence of God makes you an atheist (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=atheist&x=16&y=20), again nothing to do with the truth of existance. These are the definitions of theist and atheist - they are both belief systems. If you believe in neither and aren't willing to rule out either possibility, you are agnostic (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=agnostic&x=12&y=19).

Exactly which of my definitions (even though they aren't 'my' definition) are wacky, if you can kindly point them out, maybe I can actually answer your question. Even if something is 'wacky' (whatever that is supposed to mean), doesn't not mean it's not true, or vice-versa.

The definitions of a theist and an atheist are well-known to me, and as you claimed that both requires a belief. However, belief is one thing and truth is another.

Here's the crux of the argument:

To a theist, the distinction is not obvious as a theist believes that God exist, therefore God must exist.

However, to an atheist that wants to be logically consistent, this is not the case--an atheist chooses to believe that God does not exist, but this is not mean that God does not exist since the issue is not proven. He/she must acknowlege that fact.

Belief is subjective while truth is objective.

[Neil Gendzwill]

However, to an atheist that wants to be logically consistent, this is not the case--an atheist chooses to believe that God does not exist, but this is not mean that God does not exist since the issue is not proven. He/she must acknowlege that fact.
An "atheist" that acknowledges that God may exist is not an atheist but an agnostic. This is where your definitions are wacky. You can't be both. Either you acknowledge that the question is open, or you don't. Whether or not God exists is irrelevant to the terminology.

ETA Hank's reasoning is that of the atheist - he doesn't need to prove that god exists, the burden of proof is on the theists. According to his logic, the issue is proven. The agnostic thinks it's not proven.

[Sepiraph]

An "atheist" that acknowledges that God may exist is not an atheist but an agnostic. This is where your definitions are wacky. You can't be both. Either you acknowledge that the question is open, or you don't. Whether or not God exists is irrelevant to the terminology.

Belief and truth is different, maybe I didn't clarify. Being an atheist means you don't believe in a God, but it doesn't mean that there isn't a God. An agnostic acknowledges this fact. Taking an atheistic viewpoint is based on belief, whereas taking an agnostic viewpoint is based on logic.

ETA Hank's reasoning is that of the atheist - he doesn't need to prove that god exists, the burden of proof is on the theists. According to his logic, the issue is proven. The agnostic thinks it's not proven.

Did you not read this link http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html that I provided? The burden of proof clearly lies in the theist's side. As otherwise, I can claim anything exist and claim that the burden of proof lies in the other side to prove that it does not exist. For example, I can use the famous example of claiming that the Easter Bunny exists and demand that you show me a proof of its non-existance.

Secondly, no where does Hank claim that the 'issue' (although I'm not entirely clear what issue you are referring to) is proven. He is merely pointing out the logical fallacy.

[Neil Gendzwill]

You got in trouble making this statement:

You know, to an agnostic/atheist like myself

And I have interpreted all your statements so far as a defence of that. If you agree that you can't be both, and I agree that just because someone believes in something doesn't necessarily make it true, we can quite this debate.

[JSchmidt]

However, to an atheist that wants to be logically consistent, this is not the case--an atheist chooses to believe that God does not exist, but this is not mean that God does not exist since the issue is not proven. He/she must acknowlege that fact.

That is the definition of an agnostic.

I don't understand why you are so insistant on being both?

Jakob

[Berugijin]

For further reading, I suggest you google the acronym STFU. Now take a long walk off a short cliff.

Your pseudo-intellectual approach is laughable, it looks to me as if someone is a little too proud of taking "formal logics 101". My statement about 2.1 billion loonies was in jest. I appreciate the effort you made but it was a waste. The real debate wasn't in this thread. Only my stupid and false comment (that needed no disproving because it was such an obvious troll) is here.

I appreciate your continuous insults, it makes me look much less of an asshole for making that comment. I'm really disgusted that you make this whole thing personal because you feel the need to "come to the aid" (to avoid the words 'sucking up to') your sempai because you feel I belittled and/or insulted them. I already offered my apologies to them, to you and to everyone I insulted (without intent to do so).

I hope we can both let this issue die now.

[ahmed61086]

Of course there is proof of gods existence, have u never read anselm of canterburry? Comon guys, just read his proof and one will know, god does exist.
Me, i just look at the proofs in the Quran, but for those who are still skeptic, go read some Prosologian.

[Sepiraph]

You got in trouble making this statement:



And I have interpreted all your statements so far as a defence of that. If you agree that you can't be both, and I agree that just because someone believes in something doesn't necessarily make it true, we can quite this debate.

Heh, but I love trouble! Especially those that can get me into an interesting debate. =D

The definition of an agnostic (www.dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com)) is as follows:
ag·nos·tic n.
1. a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.

b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.


2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

Obviously if you take the 1.b. definition, it's impossible to be both atheistic and agnostic. However, if you take the 1.a. definition, then you can be both atheistic and agnostic. Notice that 1.a. definition comes first, and should be taken as the more commonly used definition of agnostic.


Beside, I enjoy debate for the sake of debating, this is what the ancient Greek scholars did! :)

Of course there is proof of gods existence, have u never read anselm of canterburry? Comon guys, just read his proof and one will know, god does exist.

I read that proof in my philosophy class a long time ago, but I wasn't impressed by it. I recall I dissect the proof with the professor in the class, it was so fun!

[Berugijin]

Of course there is proof of gods existence, have u never read anselm of canterburry? Comon guys, just read his proof and one will know, god does exist.
Me, i just look at the proofs in the Quran, but for those who are still skeptic, go read some Prosologian.

Anselm of Canterbury was once the archbishop. Can you spell 'agenda'? As for the Quran or any other holy book, that must be the most biased source ever! Prosologian was written by Anselm.

Any of the sources you mention are written by biased people who have an agenda. I'll believe in god when I see its peer-reviewed proof in Nature.

[ahmed61086]

I know the prosologian was written by anselm, i stated that in my last post(if not in the same sentence), obviosly i didnt mean to say the Quran was written by Anselm, that would be blasphemy on my part. We as muslims believe the Quran was written by god, not by a human being. Whether or not you believe this, is most definitly, your own opinion.

[Berugijin]

I know the prosologian was written by anselm, i stated that in my last post(if not in the same sentence), obviosly i didnt mean to say the Quran was written by Anselm, that would be blasphemy on my part. We as muslims believe the Quran was written by god, not by a human being. Whether or not you believe this, is most definitly, your own opinion.

I just said it was written by Anselm to indicate that the book is not to be trusted. Nowhere did I state that the Quran was written by Anselm.

If the Quran is indeed written by god then it's even less to be trusted. If I dropped a book on your doorstep that I wrote and that basically said that you have to worship me or be labelled infidel, would you believe any of it?

[ahmed61086]

See this is the difference, if you wrote a religious book, i would know the difference between your writing, and gods. The reason why your religion would amount to nothing, and the reasons why Islam is the largest religion in the world, is most definitly the proof.
In the Quran, there is a passage that states,

And if you are in doubt about what we have revealed (the Quran) to our worshiper ( muhammed), then produce a chapter like it, and call your witnesses besides God if you are truthful. And if you do not do it, then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones. It has been prepared for disbelievers. And give good news (O Muhammed) to those who believe and do good deeds, that for them are gardens (Paradise) in which rivers flow.... (Quran, 2:23-25).

Ever since the Quran ws revealed, fourteen centuries ago, no one has been able to produce a single chpater like the chapters of the Quran in their beauty, eloquence, splendor, wise legislation, true information, true prophecy, and ohter perfect attributes. Also, note that the smallest chapter in the Quran (chapter 108) is only ten words, yet no one has ever been able to meet this challenge, then or today. Some of the disbelieving arabs who were enemies with Mohammed tired to meet this challenge to prove that Muhammed was not a true prophet, but they failed to do so.


Berugijin, i would appreciate if you took my post as a friendly post, because it would be most ill advised to respond with avarice or jest.

[ahmed61086]

Before anyone starts Saying, "how is islam the largest religion in the world?" Well, if you consider the fact that Islam is one religion and not split up into hundreds of differnct sects (except for shi'ites and sunnies, which is only a political difference, and not a religous one), one would clearly see, factually, that it is the largest religion in the world. One cannot say christianity is the largest religion, because Christianity is split into many different sects, example, Roman catholic, protestant, christian, jahova witness, ect, ect, ect.....

That was just to put any questions to rest.

[louisvandalen]

And if you do not do it, then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones.

Oh dear, does he burn Kote to?

[Hisham]

I saw that coming hehe, seriously though the first part of the verse is the interesting part as far as what Ahmed said.

[louisvandalen]

I saw that coming hehe, seriously though the first part of the verse is the interesting part as far as what Ahmed said.

So could you translate the chapter in the Quran (chapter 108) which is only ten words(if possible). I'm curious.

[Stealth]

And if you are in doubt about what we have revealed (the Quran) to our worshiper ( muhammed), then produce a chapter like it, and call your witnesses besides God if you are truthful. And if you do not do it, then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones.* It has been prepared for disbelievers. And give good news (O Muhammed) to those who believe and do good deeds, that for them are gardens (Paradise) **in which rivers flow.... (Quran, 2:23-25).

Yes, you are right this little example of love and faith must be devine.

* Believe it or I will toast your butt.
** Believe it and paradise awaits you. (To bad it's after you get toasted).

What a heap of crap.... My God wouldn't have to threaten me nor would he attempt to seduce me offering the ultimate place to live(or to be dead). Fear and seduction are such typical human trades.

Blind people.

[ahmed61086]

ahhahahhaaha, your funny, love this love that. God does love his creations, but why would he love those who worship another god, or not worship him at all. Think about it, what does a parent do to their child when their child misbehaves, well, a good parent would punish the child. A bad parent would say, "i love you, please dont do it again, but if u do it again, nothing ill will happen to you". Where is the logic in that. You are so weak and scared of punishment that you would rather have a belief that paradise is promised to you no matter what. I am a muslim, and even though i believe in god does not mean i do not fear his punishment, because no man is exempt from it. This is what keeps me from doing bad deeds and only doing the good ones. This is why i pray, why i give chraity, why i am good to my friends and neibors, even why i am good to my enemies.

And go does not seduce, he promises. Heres an example from this life, since you are so close minded to see further than now.

When you are studying for a test, what do you expect to happen when you study hard? You expect to get a good grade. When you dont study for the test, what do you expect to get? You most likely know that you will get a bad grade. Do you expect your teacher to say, "dont worry, i love you, no matter what happens on this test, you will all get A's, i will not seduce you by telling you if u study hard you will get an A, you all deserves A's, yayyyy, life is so sweet".

This life is a test. If you study hard (do good deeds, stay away from the bad) you will get an A, which will entitle you to paradise. But if you dont study, and you do bad deeds, and dont believe in god, you will fail. Failure is not something which is takin lightly in this life or the hereafter.

So lets stop being frightend and close minded and understand that life not all fairy tales and songs. Your god does love you, but he wont if you dont do what he tells you to do.

I do not want to sound like i know what god knows, but i am just speaking of what i understand about my religion and of other such as Christianity.

Calling another mans religion "a heep of crap" just shows the type of person you are. I believe you are the one that is blind my friend, because you cannot see what is right in front of you everyday. Peace.

[Kaoru]

ahhahahhaaha, your funny, love this love that. God does love his creations, but why would he love those who worship another god, or not worship him at all. Think about it, what does a parent do to their child when their child misbehaves, well, a good parent would punish the child. A bad parent would say, "i love you, please dont do it again, but if u do it again, nothing ill will happen to you". Where is the logic in that. You are so weak and scared of punishment that you would rather have a belief that paradise is promised to you no matter what. I am a muslim, and even though i believe in god does not mean i do not fear his punishment, because no man is exempt from it. This is what keeps me from doing bad deeds and only doing the good ones. This is why i pray, why i give chraity, why i am good to my friends and neibors, even why i am good to my enemies.

And go does not seduce, he promises. Heres an example from this life, since you are so close minded to see further than now.

When you are studying for a test, what do you expect to happen when you study hard? You expect to get a good grade. When you dont study for the test, what do you expect to get? You most likely know that you will get a bad grade. Do you expect your teacher to say, "dont worry, i love you, no matter what happens on this test, you will all get A's, i will not seduce you by telling you if u study hard you will get an A, you all deserves A's, yayyyy, life is so sweet".

This life is a test. If you study hard (do good deeds, stay away from the bad) you will get an A, which will entitle you to paradise. But if you dont study, and you do bad deeds, and dont believe in god, you will fail. Failure is not something which is takin lightly in this life or the hereafter.

So lets stop being frightend and close minded and understand that life not all fairy tales and songs. Your god does love you, but he wont if you dont do what he tells you to do.

I do not want to sound like i know what god knows, but i am just speaking of what i understand about my religion and of other such as Christianity.

Calling another mans religion "a heep of crap" just shows the type of person you are. I believe you are the one that is blind my friend, because you cannot see what is right in front of you everyday. Peace.

I must say, this is an excellent post. You made good sense. I don't much like religious discussions, because I don't know why it is always "My God is better." or, My God isn't mean" or what have you. What is this, "My God, your God" stuff? God is God to me. I can't figure out why people have to claim one God is better than another, or, that one religion's God is different than another's.

It would be so nice if all could just get along and not say if one is not Muslim/Christian then they are bad or infidels, etc. The Muslims that are being terrorists think Christians or anyone else not Muslim, are bad. Some Christian fundamentalists(Or others, because I think some that aren't Fundamentalists are like that too.) think Muslims are bad. I hate that! I wish everyone could just like each other. What's so wrong about Muslims and Christians being friends?

Anyway, I really liked what you had to say. Sorry I strayed a bit from what you said, but I had to say it, because lately, I've been annoyed by this.

Kaoru

[drizzt]

I must say, this is an excellent post. You made good sense. I don't much like religious discussions, because I don't know why it is always "My God is better." or, My God isn't mean" or what have you. What is this, "My God, your God" stuff? God is God to me. I can't figure out why people have to claim one God is better than another, or, that one religion's God is different than another's.

It would be so nice if all could just get along and not say if one is not Muslim/Christian then they are bad or infidels, etc. The Muslims that are being terrorists think Christians or anyone else not Muslim, are bad. Some Christian fundamentalists(Or others, because I think some that aren't Fundamentalists are like that too.) think Muslims are bad. I hate that! I wish everyone could just like each other. What's so wrong about Muslims and Christians being friends?

Anyway, I really liked what you had to say. Sorry I strayed a bit from what you said, but I had to say it, because lately, I've been annoyed by this.

Kaoru

actualu what the christian God is the same God as the muslims, we just feel differently about worship(and the idea of christ as the messiah). both are the judaic God, Jehovah.

[ahmed61086]

Yes drizzt, you are correct.

[louisvandalen]

ahhahahhaaha, your funny, love this love that. God does love his creations, but why would he love those who worship another god, or not worship him at all.

Think about it, what does a parent do to their child when their child misbehaves, well, a good parent would punish the child. A bad parent would say, "i love you, please dont do it again, but if u do it again, nothing ill will happen to you"

First paragraph: because we are silly humans that don't have a clue (thanks Mingshi).

Second paragraph: This is still very far apart from setting a kid on fire.

[ahmed61086]

You are supposed to take that metaphor as what it is......a metaphor.

And we might be silly, but not that silly. We have the ability to be pious, we have people that have set that precedent. If we did not have that ability, then i believe our punishment would not be so severe.

[Berugijin]

A god sounds like a vain egomaniac that suffers from megalomania. I don't think a being is that perfect when he demands to be worshipped. What an ego!

[louisvandalen]

You are supposed to take that metaphor as what it is......a metaphor.

And we might be silly, but not that silly. We have the ability to be pious, we have people that have set that precedent. If we did not have that ability, then i believe our punishment would not be so severe.

So is it a metaphore I can expect in the end or is it severe punishment in case of failure?

And man, looking at the other thread I posted about Another Religion: I'm still lost. For someone who looked at all religions instead of being given one it's a really hard choice and most definatly not as easy as you make it seem. I am unable to truly recognise the writtings of God. Then again I can't read arabian or hebrew nor any of the other funky writings that claim to hold the truth. If the words are so devine it must be practically impossible to translate them rightfully.

I wish it was otherwise.

[ahmed61086]

louis, i am greived to hear of your troubles with this issue.

Let me elaborate on some things. I never said it was easy to choose a religion. I can understand how someone can feel when trying to find a religion to believe in, or just trying to believe in god. A lot of my friends were in the same predicament and i helped them, by helping them understand my religion and others like it. I am not trying to be arragant and cocky when i say these friends of mine converted to Islam. I repeat, choosing a religion is not easy, it is actually one of the hardest things to do for some people. I am blessed to be born with a religion and to study it and find that i believe in it, not because i was born to it, but because it makes sense.

God speaks of those in search of religion and of those who find Islam. Those people who find Islam are wiped clean of their previous sins, and are highly loved by God, because it is a very straining part of a mans/or womans life when he/or she feels he needs to find what they believe to be the truth.

Since i understand how you feel, i am here to help you, or anyone like you, that would like to learn about islam for whatever reason. Peace.

p.s. Berugijin, i hope you find peace in whatever you believe in. It seams my opinions are not appealing to you, and that is fine. To each is his own.

[louisvandalen]

Since i understand how you feel, i am here to help you, or anyone like you, that would like to learn about islam for whatever reason. Peace.

Maybe you could start a koran thread: looking at recent events it looks like the non-believers aren't the only ones that need to learn something about the Islam.

But honestly, in another thread you mentioned that God/Allah will love the ones that truly believe and the ones that do good. The later I do (once in a while). I'm on the safe side.

[ahmed61086]

"Maybe you could start a koran thread: looking at recent events it looks like the non-believers aren't the only ones that need to learn something about the Islam."


Ummmmmm, well, nobody's perfect, especially when it comes to grouups of people, there is usually a bad lot in every crowd. You Saying that, "non-believers aren't the only ones that need to learn something about the Islam.", is true in some ways, because even those people who memorise the Quran sometimes interpret it incorrectly (as i feel you misinterpreted my post), because we are only human. As for terrorists, they are extremeists and are not considered the people to look up to, especially by the muslim world. Islam is about peace, no matter what anyone has to say about it. Just because a couple of extremeist like to blow up shit, doens't mean that is a part of the Islamic religion.

One can see that in any part of history, their have been extremist groups that have done horrible things, and its not only reliogious groups, a lot of non religous groups have done some horrible things, look at the nazis. Well, I think we have been switching from topic to topic, so i quess its time for me to stop posting on this thread. If you have anything to say, just PM me.

[Mr. Donigan]

All I know is Tom Cruise is acting like a strange bird.