• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Does the world need more Atheist?

ChronaMew

Demonic Warrior
I do not understand how a God who sent His Son to be tortured, humiliated, defamed by hypocrites and evildoers, and die on a crucifix just as a sacrifice for the evils of a people whom He could have just as easily let die in sin (and consequently burn in Hell) is evil, but you are entitled to your opinions. I have not flamed anyone on this forum, I daresay I do not think I have ever flamed anyone.

I'd just like to step in and answer to this point -

Do you seriously believe sending his son to be TORTURED and KILLED, knowing *full well* what would happen to him was anything but cruel?

Especially considering that you believe God is *omnipotent*, meaning he could have just waved his arms and said "Fine, you're forgiven"?

He's still the one who lets them burn in hell for no good reason, I see that as no different than being a jealous little prick. You're free to prove me wrong, this is just what I understood after reading through the Bible a few times - "Fine, you can have free will, but if you use it go to against me, you BURN!"

That's the equivalent of saying that a thief holding a gun up to someone's head saying "Give me all your money or die" giving the person free will. I mean they don't HAVE to give the thief all their money, maybe he's wrong all along. Maybe he ISN'T such a sadistic ******* that would kill you for disobeying what he says. Maybe the gun isn't loaded. But odds are if he doesn't give him the money, he'll be shot and the money will be taken regardless. It's not "free will", really.

That's really what I thought about when I was reading the Bible. Maybe God wouldn't torture us just for not believing in Jesus, maybe Hell doesn't really exist, but if it does than he is a major ******* simply for letting us suffer in it. All-loving? All-forgiving? More like picky and selective, caring only about those that worship him. Like a dictator, really.
 

PartyPokemon

L or Kira?
I think Purgatory is for these kinds of situations, where someone doesn't 'deserve' to go into heaven (immediately), but also doesn't deserve to go to hell. In Purgatory, one works of their sins, and gets into heaven as a reward.
Oh. I guess that works. But what I was saying is: if you REALLY deserve hell and were a total devil-worshipper and did loads of horrible things, would you be able to get to heaven by just accepting Jesus at the last second? Sounds kinda cheap to me.
But then, for such a person there could be a harsher version of purgatory... it depends... I dunno.
 
I think Purgatory is for these kinds of situations, where someone doesn't 'deserve' to go into heaven (immediately), but also doesn't deserve to go to hell. In Purgatory, one works of their sins, and gets into heaven as a reward.
How utterly fantastic and true that would be if Purgatory existed. But, in a Christian sense (which I assume is the sense you are speaking of) it does not. There is Heaven, and Hell. Life's just a trip that ends in one of two places. All it takes is repentance and acceptance of Christ. If you find it unfair that even people that have been bad their whole lives can go to Heaven by becoming a Christian, then find some other religion.

ChronaMew, no sin can be forgiven without sacrifice. This was true in Old Testament times when goats and lambs were sacrificed for the sins of a family. The Messiah's coming was predicted hundreds of years before the fact. His hand's and feet being pierced was predicted 200 years before the Romans invented crucifixion. If you think that God is too strict about who He lets into Heaven, then that is your opinion. You should be thankful that He gives us, rotten, no-good sinners a way there at all. God will not allow sin into His home, so He gave us a way to be and feel forgiven. That is the epitome of love.
 

PartyPokemon

L or Kira?
PokeJustice said:
How utterly fantastic and true that would be if Purgatory existed. But, in a Christian sense (which I assume is the sense you are speaking of) it does not.
Catholics (and Dante) believe that there is a Purgatory. You saying we (and Dante) are not Christian? Well then excuse me, but we are the oldest branch of Christianity. So there!
 
Last edited:

Blue_Ditto_256

Fail on a Stick
The reason why there are no explicitly atheist charities is because people aren't inclined to donate money to those who say they are atheists.
Atheists base their beliefs on reason and fact, and think for themselves rather than accept what people tell them to believe without question. I have never heard a single conclusive proof of a god, so I don't believe in one.
 
Catholics (and Dante) believe that there is a Purgatory. You saying we (and Dante) are not Christian? Well then excuse me, but we are the oldest branch of Christianity. So there!
It is nowhere to be found in the Bible. I don't care how old your religion is, or who said that there was a Purgatory. http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/swank/2005/03/there-is-no-purgatory.html is an interesting page. Purgatory is found only in the Apocrypha, which is discussed here: http://watch.pair.com/apocrypha.html If apocrypha is not divinely inspired, which evidence shows that it is not, then there is no Purgatory. Regardless of what Dante says.
 

Dr. Ste

Pokemon Breeder
Blue Ditto 256 said:
I have never heard a single conclusive proof of a god

I have never heard a scientific definition of God, so I don't know exactly what to try to scientifically prove or disprove.

To the previous posts:
To Orthodoxy, there is no such thing as a Purgatory (or Limbo, just our belief). To us, Heaven and Hell is the same place, in the presence of God. Those who love God and follow his teachings will enjoy living by Him, while those who do not won't have a very good time, of course.

Acceptance of Jesus means something deeper than recognizing Him. You have do admit your sins to be sins, feel sad for them, and want to make up for them.

Jesus was not just "God's son", He was the "Father's" son, for Jesus is God too. God became human, felt humanity, died, and defeated death through Resurrection. In the same way, a human can now become one with God. Beside Jesus's teachings, the main events of Jesus's life (Birth, Crucifixion and Resurrection) symbolize the breaking of the barrier between God and Human.

That's what we Orthodox believe at least.

EDIT: Technically, Catholicism and Orthodoxy were formed at the same time, when the Great Schizm took place. The eschatologic differences were formed later on.
 
Last edited:

ChronaMew

Demonic Warrior
ChronaMew, no sin can be forgiven without sacrifice. This was true in Old Testament times when goats and lambs were sacrificed for the sins of a family. The Messiah's coming was predicted hundreds of years before the fact. His hand's and feet being pierced was predicted 200 years before the Romans invented crucifixion. If you think that God is too strict about who He lets into Heaven, then that is your opinion. You should be thankful that He gives us, rotten, no-good sinners a way there at all. God will not allow sin into His home, so He gave us a way to be and feel forgiven. That is the epitome of love.

No sin can be forgiven without sacrifice? Glad to know that you put such great limitations on the power of your god, that he can't even forgive someone without having something killed. Guess he's not that powerful after all
 
That is the way things work. That is what is said in the Torah, that is true during Christ's time: no sin forgiven without sacrifice. God is omnipotent, but God has laws, and they must be followed. It is not that He is unable to forgive, but He must have sacrifice.
 

PartyPokemon

L or Kira?
It is nowhere to be found in the Bible. I don't care how old your religion is, or who said that there was a Purgatory. http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/swank/2005/03/there-is-no-purgatory.html is an interesting page. Purgatory is found only in the Apocrypha, which is discussed here: http://watch.pair.com/apocrypha.html If apocrypha is not divinely inspired, which evidence shows that it is not, then there is no Purgatory. Regardless of what Dante says.
EVIDENCE? YOU? Look, buddy. There is no such thing as evidence in religious debates. There is only what we think of as possible clues pointing toward something. The apocrypha could have been divinely inspired for all you know. And the creator of FSMism could also have received a heavenly vision telling him that God is in the form of a flying plate of spaghetti. In the end, there is no evidence. Just opinion and belief. This applies to everything divine (or anything that "disproves" something divine existing).
Plus. Just because it's not explicitely written in the Bible, doesn't mean it's not sacred. Look, for example, at the miracles of Jesus. It is stated that many of them have not been written down in the Bible (because there are too many to write). Does this mean now that these miracles are not sacred? Because they are not written in the Bible? Similarly, the apocrypha was not included in the final edit of the Bible. But does this mean that it's not a good, sacred piece of religious literature? Tell. Oh, and those links were biased. Protestantly biased. See, I have nothing against Protestants, I really don't. They're cool. But if you want to tell me something, give me a Christian site. Not Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant or Swiss Reformist or anything else. Just a good, unbiased CHRISTIAN site. So there.
And besides, Dante is cool. No matter what your opinion of him might be.
 
Last edited:

ChronaMew

Demonic Warrior
That is the way things work. That is what is said in the Torah, that is true during Christ's time: no sin forgiven without sacrifice. God is omnipotent, but God has laws, and they must be followed. It is not that He is unable to forgive, but He must have sacrifice.

...which just proves that he is a major *******?

Last I checked, if your kids disobey you and you throw them into the furnace, you're sent to jail. Just because you created/gave birth to something, doesn't give you the right to take a giant dump all over it. If he was omnipotent, he'd get rid of hell. If he doesn't, that just means that he's not "good" whatsoever.

Why not show us the benefits of living in heaven instead of hell then? As I recall, Satan's death toll in the Bible was around five or six people, WITH God's permission. God killed billions for no good reason, he seems to me like a child that cries if he can't get what he wants. I'd rather chill with good ol' Satan than live with that type of being.
 

PartyPokemon

L or Kira?
Why not show us the benefits of living in heaven instead of hell then?
I disagree with everything you said except for that. That, I agree with. I think that IF a Christian gets the idea of attempting to convert atheists, the Christian shouldn't talk about how the atheist will go to hell. The Christian should talk about heaven and not try to scare them with hell (it won't work).
Now, this is IF you decide to try your hand at converting to someone. Of course, you shouldn't. It's unpleasant to other people and you wouldn't want THEM to preach their bull to you (so don't preach yours to them, do unto others as you'd have them do unto you). But IF you do you might as well do it right.
 

Rensch

Well-Known Member
I personally think the world doesn't necessarily need more atheists. To be more precise I think the world needs more secularists. However, religions are usually intolerant to a lesser or higher extend to people who live or think different, and many strong secularists are atheists. Politics and religion should not mix to much.
 

Jhonny

Officially The Worst
I disagree with everything you said except for that. That, I agree with. I think that IF a Christian gets the idea of attempting to convert atheists, the Christian shouldn't talk about how the atheist will go to hell. The Christian should talk about heaven and not try to scare them with hell (it won't work).
Now, this is IF you decide to try your hand at converting to someone. Of course, you shouldn't. It's unpleasant to other people and you wouldn't want THEM to preach their bull to you (so don't preach yours to them, do unto others as you'd have them do unto you). But IF you do you might as well do it right.

This to me seems in the first instance to be a bad way to go about things, and in the second instance immoral. Telling someone the benefits or the negatives of a set of beliefs would give a non believer no reason to adopt those beliefs. Secondly, why should you not try to convert an atheist? If you have the belief that certain ways of life will lead to a punishment after death, then surely the brotherly thing would be to prove to this person that they should avoid that life. To me, Bible bashing would be a gift, if certain atheist lifestyles (if not all) lead to damnation.
 

PERSONA

colour spectrum
The question doesn't make any sense to me: the world needs more atheists... for what?

Are you asking: would the world be a better place with more atheists? If so, then what is your definition of "better?"
 

randomspot555

Well-Known Member
The question doesn't make any sense to me: the world needs more atheists... for what?

Well if you had read the first post, you'd see that the first post paints that monotheistic Christian religions as the builders of everything good while atheists run failed countries.

But of course that's overtly simplifying it, and it makes several misleading statements if not flat out untrue, such as the US is founded on a belief in God.

Are you asking: would the world be a better place with more atheists? If so, then what is your definition of "better?"

It'd certainly be better if people were able to set aside their faith when dealing with matters that affect everyone, such as those of government. I certainly don't like how government manages certain areas and they do it in the name of some religion's belief or another.
 

PERSONA

colour spectrum
Well if you had read the first post, you'd see that the first post paints that monotheistic Christian religions as the builders of everything good while atheists run failed countries.

But of course that's overtly simplifying it, and it makes several misleading statements if not flat out untrue, such as the US is founded on a belief in God.



It'd certainly be better if people were able to set aside their faith when dealing with matters that affect everyone, such as those of government. I certainly don't like how government manages certain areas and they do it in the name of some religion's belief or another.

Better is in the eye of the beholder. What does it amount to really?

I would support a secular government, but not one that bans the practice of religion. As I see no problem with religion if it is being used to make people feel good and meaningful, I have a problem with religion when it starts getting militant. Politically, any type of religion turns into an irrational bias when dealing with politics. All irrational bias should be set aside, like you said, when dealing with these type of matters.

Hmm, but aren't political opinions biases as well?
 
Last edited:

randomspot555

Well-Known Member
I would support a secular government, but not one that bans the practice of religion.

There's no correlation of a secular government banning the practice of one's personal religion. What secular means is it governs in the interest of all people and society, not by any one religions teachings.

Hmm, but aren't political opinions biases as well?

That doesn't make a point. In the world of politics, politics should be debated. Laws should be made based on political and legal thought, not doctrine of religion. The point of a secular government isn't to eliminate bias, it is to eliminate bias that is irrelevant to the discussion. That's why, in the US, property owned by a recognized religion isn't subject to property tax, so that financially rich religious insitutions don't have any more say in government than smaller ones, since they all contribute 0.
 

Poliwag2

ship it holla
There's no correlation of a secular government banning the practice of one's personal religion.

I doubt he intended to infer such a thing. The parts before and after the comma are two separate, but related, thoughts.

The point of a secular government isn't to eliminate bias, it is to eliminate bias that is irrelevant to the discussion.

What an absurd notion... bias implies subjectivity and private interests, so what constitutes "relevant" bias?
 
Last edited:

PartyPokemon

L or Kira?
This to me seems in the first instance to be a bad way to go about things, and in the second instance immoral. Telling someone the benefits or the negatives of a set of beliefs would give a non believer no reason to adopt those beliefs. Secondly, why should you not try to convert an atheist? If you have the belief that certain ways of life will lead to a punishment after death, then surely the brotherly thing would be to prove to this person that they should avoid that life. To me, Bible bashing would be a gift, if certain atheist lifestyles (if not all) lead to damnation.
So it's a lose-lose situation in your eyes, eh? Well, the reason I don't Bible bash people is because I wouldn't want them to try to convert me to their belief system. Every belief system wants more followers (now there are even atheists going door to door and giving out pamphlets). But most people are already happy with their own religion (or lack thereof). I'm happy with my own so I don't bother people with it.
Jesus says to do unto others as I would have them do unto me. So I follow what he says. What can I do?
I have a problem with religion when it starts getting militant.
Well, everything is good until it starts getting militant. Religion, atheism, political... stuff, everything!
 
Top