Hi, Vishnu called when you were out. Says you read the wrong book and now you're going to reincarnate as a toad.

Sorry, man, but it's never too late to pry open your Third Eye!

merry christmas fucker!!
or mithras,vishnu,krishna,horus...whatevs floats yer boat.

and a happy new year!

Short version: Cosmology, particle physics, theoretical physics, etc... are elucidating fantastically complex aspects of our universe's beginning that we don't and probably won't ever fully understand. Some interpretations may indicate that there is some eternal process giving rise to the complexity we can observe. Therefore it's the Jewish war-diety from 3000 years ago that did it, definitely not Allah or Vishnu - that would just be crazy.

MY EARS! I'm going to hell because of you, she devil! GAH! I practiced celibacy and was home schooled to avoid any auditory temptations but now I'm ruined. Raped. Ear RAPED. Fucked in the ears.

And now I have no choice but to become the beast I always feared. FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK ME JESUS

Souls! Feed me souls! BLlaefoiugrbsrgbsgrubs -- and now I transform into my final form to destroy the sanctity of life and shatter the world. Laying siege to all holy lands! Nothing is sacred, all life is to be extinguished, and suffering will be endless. ENDLESS!!!!!

Millions, billions, trillions, untold time passes; dimensions crossed, the very meaning of ALL unraveled and laid forth, meaningless. Meaningless! All conflict, all freedoms, all philosophy is now folly; unnecessary as a multiuniversal nihilism cascades across the boundaries of consciousness. The godheads destroyed, their corpses rotting the core beyond ALL.

Blackness.

Void.

Nirvana crumbles and the enlightened turned against the balance. Yahweh screams in horror, corrupted and turned into a tentacle demon to rape its devoted followers. Ra's phallus goes limp. Baal is ground into an all beef hamburger patty. Shiva, Vishnu, Devi, Surya and Ganesha warp into a single form, becoming the Eye of Saron. The reptilians of earth devolve into alligators, and the greys become monkeys.

There is no shelter because there is only horror. For all eternity, in all realities.

Sorry, that's just my interpretation of the reporter's reaction.

He uses Zeus (and other older myths) because it is the least offensive mythology to show sympathy towards. If he used Islam then he'd just be labelled a terrorist sympathiser. This is not his first rodeo.>> ^PoweredBySoy:

Wow he handled that amazingly well. Instead of so much Zeus and mythology though, I would have loved to see him stay in the present and ask those same questions about Allah or Vishnu...

Wow he handled that amazingly well. Instead of so much Zeus and mythology though, I would have loved to see him stay in the present and ask those same questions about Allah or Vishnu...

>> ^shinyblurry:


The funny part about saying that "The Devil"™ runs things down here is funny. The reason it's funny is that even when I was a fairly religious person I could never quite figure out why "The Devil"™ was so evil.
He disobeyed "God"™, but that was about it. Apparently, now, he runs a place called Hel or Helle(or if you prefer the misspelled version: hille, hillja, hell, etc...). He's also able to tempt us (or if you wish, we let him tempt us, giving him even less power) to do things; who knows what though. He's also supposed to be a fallen angel that many think to be red and ugly with horns. It should also be noted that Hell (Hel) has lakes of fire (which sounds cool; almost like Hawaii), but seems to lack all the horrific stuff you hear of elsewhere.
I'm just wondering, why Lucifer (The Bringer of Light) is so "Evil"™? Also, last time I checked "Free Will"™ was sitting around; so if "The Devil"™ runs Earth, why do we need that? His role greatly differs throughout the Christian realm of knowledge as well as those that are linked (like Judaism, Islam, etc...). The idea of a bad guy against the ultimate good guy sent here or another place are in many religions world wide. Some of those religions pre-date Christianity by more than a thousand years and Judaism by hundreds (if not more). Sometimes these "figureheads" have been concentrated into one form as they were once in the form of many figureheads, besides "God" and "the Devil".
There is a litany of things attributed to: Satan, ha-sataan(Judaism has no "real" direct version), Baal Davar, the Devil, Lucifer, Lord of Flies, Dragon (or serpent; is "believed" to be the serpent in the Garden of Eden), Beelzubub (if you like the demon storyline; not a Mormon thing), Iblis, Shaitan, Jinn, Ying-Yang (pick one), Vishnu (atleast one aspect), Set, Apep,Sammael, Belial, ad nauseum...
Anyway, he disagreed with God "about something"; the "about something" depends on the flavor you belong to.
To cut it short: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism... They all suffer from the same problem: cognitive dissonance. Not a one holds up to a double-blind scientific experiment, let alone a simple thought experiment. If we have a "God" they most certainly are not prescient or omnipotent. The fact that I can post this kills one half of the logic, the other logic "free will" seems to be negated by every law and fact of science ever put together. You have choice, but it most certainly is not absolute.


If you were formally religious I am surprised you don't understand why the Devil is evil. I'll elaborate on this..
In the beginning, when man still dwelled in the Garden of Eden, he existed in a perfect state of grace with God. There was no such thing as sin, or death. Adam and Eve, the first humans, walked and talked with God face to face. God, to test their hearts, only gave them one command..not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He promised them that if they did so they would surely die.
Now the devil enters the picture. God had made him the most beautiful of all the angels, and gave him great power and dominion. The devil was soon corrupted by his own vanity however, because he started to think "I will be like the Most High" and desired to have his throne beside Gods. His sin was/is pride. Because of this, he was cast down to Earth.
Now God gave Earth to Adam. He was its ruler. Satan knew this, and knew that if he could corrupt him, he would gain power over the whole world because he would gain power over Adam. So the devil came to them and said that God was lying about the apple. That, not only would they not die, but they would become like God by eating it. After eating, Adam and Eve lost their innocence and the state of grace they enjoyed with God by sinning, and brought death into the world. From that moment on they were mortal beings with mortal needs.
Satan has been the ruler of this world since then. His power, however, was broken at Calvary when Christ died on the cross. Christ, the new Adam, lived a sinless life. Being born of a virgin, he did not inherit the sin of Adam. By living a sinless life, he redeemed mankind and gave all people on Earth a way to know God, His Father, through Him. When He died He went down to hell, battered down the gates, and took the power of death from the devil. When He was resurrected, He liberated mankind from the power of death, and was the first fruits of the world to come.
Now, Satan is still the ruler but on the run. He knows his time is short and growing ever shorter. His last shot is when the antichrist comes to power. Now, free will is fairly simple. You have the choice to obey or disobey Gods commands. God doesn't make you love Him. All those who delight in wickedness, however, will be punished on judgment day. Hell was not created for humans, but anyone who throws their lot in with the devil will earn the devils reward. His sin was pride, and so too are the ones who reject God similarly prideful, for they believe his lies and reject the truth.
That about sums it up. I would ascribe some cognitive dissonance to your post also, for your conclusions have seemingly been pulled from a hat. How does posting what you did negate anything about Gods omniscience, and how do the arbitrary rules of science say anything about free will? You may want to read about determinism vs free will for some background before you answer.


Indeed, that does just about sum it up.

Kceaton doesn't need to try to negate your Christian god's omniscience (assuming the proposition that he exists in the first place is true, which you haven't even attempted to demonstrate). You did that just swimmingly all on your own, assuming again, that you're not a liar or playing Devil's Advocate and earnestly believe what you just typed.

Thanks for saving anyone with any inclination to refute your imaginary friend a whole lot of time by doing it for us. Also, cognitive dissonance doesn't mean what you think it means. I would say that you were a fantastic example of it in action but that means you would need to actually recognize (in some form) the incongruity of your own silly, self-contradictory beliefs and/or be bothered by it.

The funny part about saying that "The Devil"™ runs things down here is funny. The reason it's funny is that even when I was a fairly religious person I could never quite figure out why "The Devil"™ was so evil.
He disobeyed "God"™, but that was about it. Apparently, now, he runs a place called Hel or Helle(or if you prefer the misspelled version: hille, hillja, hell, etc...). He's also able to tempt us (or if you wish, we let him tempt us, giving him even less power) to do things; who knows what though. He's also supposed to be a fallen angel that many think to be red and ugly with horns. It should also be noted that Hell (Hel) has lakes of fire (which sounds cool; almost like Hawaii), but seems to lack all the horrific stuff you hear of elsewhere.
I'm just wondering, why Lucifer (The Bringer of Light) is so "Evil"™? Also, last time I checked "Free Will"™ was sitting around; so if "The Devil"™ runs Earth, why do we need that? His role greatly differs throughout the Christian realm of knowledge as well as those that are linked (like Judaism, Islam, etc...). The idea of a bad guy against the ultimate good guy sent here or another place are in many religions world wide. Some of those religions pre-date Christianity by more than a thousand years and Judaism by hundreds (if not more). Sometimes these "figureheads" have been concentrated into one form as they were once in the form of many figureheads, besides "God" and "the Devil".
There is a litany of things attributed to: Satan, ha-sataan(Judaism has no "real" direct version), Baal Davar, the Devil, Lucifer, Lord of Flies, Dragon (or serpent; is "believed" to be the serpent in the Garden of Eden), Beelzubub (if you like the demon storyline; not a Mormon thing), Iblis, Shaitan, Jinn, Ying-Yang (pick one), Vishnu (atleast one aspect), Set, Apep,Sammael, Belial, ad nauseum...
Anyway, he disagreed with God "about something"; the "about something" depends on the flavor you belong to.
To cut it short: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism... They all suffer from the same problem: cognitive dissonance. Not a one holds up to a double-blind scientific experiment, let alone a simple thought experiment. If we have a "God" they most certainly are not prescient or omnipotent. The fact that I can post this kills one half of the logic, the other logic "free will" seems to be negated by every law and fact of science ever put together. You have choice, but it most certainly is not absolute.



If you were formally religious I am surprised you don't understand why the Devil is evil. I'll elaborate on this..

In the beginning, when man still dwelled in the Garden of Eden, he existed in a perfect state of grace with God. There was no such thing as sin, or death. Adam and Eve, the first humans, walked and talked with God face to face. God, to test their hearts, only gave them one command..not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He promised them that if they did so they would surely die.

Now the devil enters the picture. God had made him the most beautiful of all the angels, and gave him great power and dominion. The devil was soon corrupted by his own vanity however, because he started to think "I will be like the Most High" and desired to have his throne beside Gods. His sin was/is pride. Because of this, he was cast down to Earth.

Now God gave Earth to Adam. He was its ruler. Satan knew this, and knew that if he could corrupt him, he would gain power over the whole world because he would gain power over Adam. So the devil came to them and said that God was lying about the apple. That, not only would they not die, but they would become like God by eating it. After eating, Adam and Eve lost their innocence and the state of grace they enjoyed with God by sinning, and brought death into the world. From that moment on they were mortal beings with mortal needs.

Satan has been the ruler of this world since then. His power, however, was broken at Calvary when Christ died on the cross. Christ, the new Adam, lived a sinless life. Being born of a virgin, he did not inherit the sin of Adam. By living a sinless life, he redeemed mankind and gave all people on Earth a way to know God, His Father, through Him. When He died He went down to hell, battered down the gates, and took the power of death from the devil. When He was resurrected, He liberated mankind from the power of death, and was the first fruits of the world to come.

Now, Satan is still the ruler but on the run. He knows his time is short and growing ever shorter. His last shot is when the antichrist comes to power. Now, free will is fairly simple. You have the choice to obey or disobey Gods commands. God doesn't make you love Him. All those who delight in wickedness, however, will be punished on judgment day. Hell was not created for humans, but anyone who throws their lot in with the devil will earn the devils reward. His sin was pride, and so too are the ones who reject God similarly prideful, for they believe his lies and reject the truth.

That about sums it up. I would ascribe some cognitive dissonance to your post also, for your conclusions have seemingly been pulled from a hat. How does posting what you did negate anything about Gods omniscience, and how do the arbitrary rules of science say anything about free will? You may want to read about determinism vs free will for some background before you answer.

>> ^shinyblurry:

From a Christian perspective, the message itself is ridiculous because there is no way for human beings to create an ideal society. It doesn't matter if it is a democracy or a dictatorship. The ruler of this world is the Devil. Until Jesus returns, mankind will be subject to his rule, culminating when the Antichrist comes to power. This man does not understand the message and I doubt he is a real Christian.
As for all the wonderful people calling for Christians to disappear, etc, I'll make you a deal. If you don't use this guy as an example for Christians, I won't use you as an example for Atheists.


The funny part about saying that "The Devil"™ runs things down here is funny. The reason it's funny is that even when I was a fairly religious person I could never quite figure out why "The Devil"™ was so evil.

He disobeyed "God"™, but that was about it. Apparently, now, he runs a place called Hel or Helle(or if you prefer the misspelled version: hille, hillja, hell, etc...). He's also able to *tempt* us (or if you wish, *we* let him tempt us, giving him even less power) to do things; who knows what though. He's also supposed to be a fallen angel that many think to be red and ugly with horns. It should also be noted that Hell (Hel) has lakes of fire (which sounds cool; almost like Hawaii), but seems to lack all the horrific stuff you hear of elsewhere.

I'm just wondering, why Lucifer (The Bringer of Light) is so "Evil"™? Also, last time I checked "Free Will"™ was sitting around; so if "The Devil"™ runs Earth, why do we need that? His role greatly differs throughout the Christian realm of knowledge as well as those that are linked (like Judaism, Islam, etc...). The idea of a bad guy against the ultimate good guy sent here or another place are in many religions world wide. Some of those religions pre-date Christianity by more than a thousand years and Judaism by hundreds (if not more). Sometimes these "figureheads" have been concentrated into one form as they were once in the form of many figureheads, besides "God" and "the Devil".

There is a litany of things attributed to: Satan, ha-sataan(Judaism has no "real" direct version), Baal Davar, the Devil, Lucifer, Lord of Flies, Dragon (or serpent; is "believed" to be the serpent in the Garden of Eden), Beelzubub (if you like the demon storyline; not a Mormon thing), Iblis, Shaitan, Jinn, Ying-Yang (pick one), Vishnu (atleast one aspect), Set, Apep,Sammael, Belial, ad nauseum...

Anyway, he disagreed with God "about something"; the "about something" depends on the flavor you belong to.

To cut it short: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism... They all suffer from the same problem: cognitive dissonance. Not a one holds up to a double-blind scientific experiment, let alone a simple thought experiment. If we have a "God" they most certainly are not prescient or omnipotent. The fact that I can post this kills one half of the logic, the other logic "free will" seems to be negated by every law and fact of science ever put together. You have choice, but it most certainly is not absolute.

>^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
-He's for the Mosque - but he's against the right of the people of California to make their own laws.

So it's an attack on freedom for a Federal Judge to rule that a state amendment violates individual freedoms under the federal constitution? Are you arguing that denying homosexuals the right to marry other homosexuals somehow increases freedom?


-He's for the Mosque - but he's against the Bill of Rights when it applies to freedom of religious expression for Christians in schools or other places.

Only in public institutions as far as I know. Kids are "free" to pray, it just can't be initiated or led by the public school employees. Would you want your kids' teachers to set aside time for everyone to pray to Vishnu?


-He's for freedom when it comes to Mosques - but he's against it when it comes to the free market, people buying insurance...

The individual mandate was proposed and supported by conservatives, at least until Obama decided to do it too. Now it's suddenly anti-freedom when a Democrat does it.


Obama did the right thing with the mosque pseudo-issue, but conservatives can't actually commend him for it. No, instead they change the subject to other decisions they don't like. I'm sure allowing homosexuals to serve in the military will somehow be an attack on liberty as well (assuming he gets around to it).

I could list lots of decisions Obama has made that I don't agree with, but he got it right on this one and I hope to see more of it.

It often disappoints me that atheism expends so much energy on being anti-Christian. You rarely see videos or blog posts denouncing Vishnu, Poseidon, or Odin - all equally non-existent.

I also prefer a good dose of comedy with my atheism. When being reminded that once my beautiful life is over there's nothing, a hearty laugh helps. George Carlin said it better.

Should've made it iDiety, with your choice of Jesus, Buddha, Vishnu, Moses, or Allah. Instant Deep Profound Political statement instead of unimaginative troll.

@ponceleon

First off, I'm wondering why you happen to think that I believe in a god or gods. No where in this thread have I stated that I'm religious. I simply think forcing opinions on other people is a bad idea--whether it's forcing others to believe in your religion or forcing others to give up their religion, as say China does. So maybe you might want to lay off the ad hominem attacks. Let's have a reasonable open dialogue, shall we?

Second, you entirely missed the point of my post. I'm not asking you to believe. You are free to look at the world around you and decide for yourself. My point was that the world around us can be interpreted in multiple ways. Take a roller coaster for instance. One person rides a roller coaster and is terrified. The person next to him is having a great time and loves it. Are roller coasters terrifying or fun? Science cannot help us answer this question. Both people experienced exactly the same event but interpret it in entirely separate ways. The best we can say is that some people find roller coasters scary and some people find them fun. What does this have to do with religion? So far, you have interpreted your experiences in this world to conclude there is no god or gods. That's fine! I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with you demanding everyone else interpret their own experiences exactly as you do. You want scientific proof of god. Again, I have no problem with that (although I find your insistence on scientific proof kind of funny, since I don't require scientific proof to know that I am having fun on a roller coaster). That's your choice. But I don't think you have the right to take away the choice from everyone else in the process. Trying to do so would be as absurd as trying to force everyone in the world to like roller coasters.

Let's talk about Dawkins for a second. I think Dawkins does a disservice to atheists everywhere by lumping all religious people into one group. We call that "stereotyping." The stereotype that Dawkins uses is based on a conservative fundamentalist Islamic/Christian religious fanatic (the unthinking believer that I was talking about in previous posts). Since he is using a stereotype, he may as well be railing against [insert the ethnicity of your choice] and screaming about all the problems they cause. Now, certainly he has an eager audience--as do KKK leaders at most of their rallies. But he's doing nothing to make the world a more civil or peaceful place. In fact, he's simply polarizing it even more.

Why not Vishnu? I have no problem with people who worship Vishnu. Or Thor. Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Or the Tooth Fairy. The problem comes only when people try to impose their religion on others--and that is not something I am advocating. As I said above, I have a problem whenever anyone forces their opinion on others (as does Dawkins--it's something we agree on). So obviously I am against things like the forced inclusion of Creationism in textbooks. Or blasphemy laws. Or the discrimination against a particular group based on their religion (or lack thereof).

Sorry this post is getting so long. I'll wrap it up with this: I'm curious what your stance is on the existence of dark matter. Most astronomers believe in dark matter in spite of the fact there is no physical way to measureit. It's basically invisible. And yet current models of the structure of the universe require the existence of dark matter to work properly. You demand proof in order to believe in a god or gods. Well, there is no proof of dark matter--only speculation. And yet the scientific community generally has faith that it exists. How do you reconcile that?

Although I don't have any evidence of the existence of God or gods, science has ironically given us plenty of evidence for the benefits and evolutionary advantages of faith. Have a read.

The Evolutionary Advantages of Faith

So, your insistence on doing away with religion is actually quite amusing, as you would be fighting evolution apparently.

Allow me to answer.

When you are saying that the universe is controlled by a zombie vampire that demands cannibalize of all his worshipers on Sunday, YOU are under the burden of providing proof of such a silly explanation of how the universe works, not me.

Just as Dawkins says, why not Vishnu, why not Xenu, why not the Magic juju at the bottom of the ocean, why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster? See the problem with you "faithful" people is that you want to put the burden of proving that something by definition magical and unprovable on me the rational person.

Sorry, if you are going to believe that the tooth fairy is real, YOU have to show me the tooth fairy DNA. I don't have to WASTE my time searching for evidence in YOUR particular delusion when the world is FULL of other, funnier ones I'd rather search for if I was forced to.

As for re-inventing the wheel, I'm not saying we need to do that. If you re-read my post you'll see that I have no problem with secularizing the good teaching and removing them from all the mumbo jumbo. Be nice to each other, check. Don't kill people, check. Worship the magic doodaddie or you go to the magical pit of fire for all eternity... sorry, no check for you.

Anything else?

>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^ponceleon:
Sure it is fair to dismiss ALL religion. Just because you are a little crazy in that you believe in magical forces controlling the universe doesn't make it ANY more legitimate.
[edit]
I do good things because it is better for all of us to be good to each other, not because some magical being threatens me if I don't do what he says. Who is a better person, the one who does good deeds because he wants to do good deeds, or the one who does them because he's afraid of the consequences if he doesn't?

I'm only going to address these two parts of your post, so sorry for the edit.
First part. Do you have any legitimate proof that magical forces aren't controlling the universe? I highly doubt it... you would have published said proof and won the Nobel prize by now.
What science has given us are facts about the world we live in, but that collection of facts can be interpreted in multiple ways. Where some people see only random chaos others see intelligent organization. Clearly, your interpretation of the facts is that there cannot possibly be any divine being or beings or any "mystical" forces. And that's fine! But surely you must realize that this is your interpretation? That other interpretations are possible? Were you to demand everyone to believe your interpretation (as Dawkins does) you would be no better than the Fundamentalists that both you and he despise.
Second part. What exactly is "doing good things?" That is precisely the question most religions strive to answer. You feel you can come up with the answers for yourself. I respect that! But others feel: why re-invent the wheel? People have been exploring this question (and many others like, "What is the meaning of life?") through religion and philosophy for centuries. They choose to look to other places for answers and they should be free to do so. In fact, I think we all should do a bit of introspection on questions like this more often and instead of blindly trying to force others to see our opinion, engage others in open and honest dialogue. Most hostility towards religion comes precisely because there are those who refuse to engage in honest dialogue, thereby giving themselves and religion in general a bad name.
In closing, I just want to say that nobody thinks unquestioning belief is a good thing. Faith is not the same thing as unquestioning belief. Faith is trust, and trust comes from experience. You yourself, ponceleon, have faith--faith in yourself and your own moral code that I'm assuming stems from your own personal experiencese. That is exactly the same way it is for the bulk of religious people (with the exception of the radicals and fundamentalists I mentioned earlier). Most religious people believe not because of some threat or because they no longer question things, but because their experiences in life have given them confidence that their interpretation of things is correct.

vishnu is my nickname for my 1 yr old