1. Standard memberpyxelated
    Dawg of the Lord
    The South
    Joined
    23 Aug '08
    Moves
    5442
    29 Jul '11 20:443 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Where did I ever say I was an atheist? The truth is, I could care less whether there is a god or not. If there is no god, I'm home free, same as everyone else on the planet. If there is a god, it clearly doesn't give a rats asss about humans or our plight or there would not be so many religious wars and duped individuals like yourself and Dasa whom all of you think you have some kind of leg up on the universe. You are all deluded. It's really pathetic. You all obsess over religion and study and study and study and at the end of it all there is nothing just like cutting into an onion.

    You're pretty confident about how a God would run the world, if he were around. Where do you get your inside information? You sound like you were around to give God some good advice, and you're really torqued because He didn't listen.

    But with religious books, they are ALL written by men. No god guided anyone's hand in this, otherwise there would be one religion where you go to Australia and the aborigines there talk about a 7 day creation or you go to Madagascar and they talk about a 7 day creation or you go to the depths of the Ukraine and they also talk about a 7 day creation, this is under the assumption that the Christianity so-called faith is correct. It is a scam, designed and built from day one to control people, subjugate women and build a religious empire. Worked too.

    There are things from the Bible that are mentioned in the history of practically every culture--the flood, for instance. And we aren't required to believe that the creation took seven literal days, although that's a possibility... especially given theories like Gerald(?) Schroeder's, who uses relativity to reconcile the apparent billions of years with the literal seven days. I have no idea what is true in this area, though I do have opinions, which if expressed here would be worth the paper they're printed on 🙂

    Then all the other religions act as though THEY are the only ones. Hinduism, Taoism, Rastafarians, whatever. Nobody on Earth has a clue as to what is really out

    ... snip ...

    So much wasted energy and intellectual power. It needs to be put to immediate problems like the screwed up economies of the entire planet, the massive over consumption of mankind already using up half the earth's resources. To you religious types, all that is fluff, doesn't mean a thing since of course we all have a better place in our next life.


    So what are you going to change by shouting about it? People, especially smart people, don't respond well to shouting (though it sometimes makes the shouter feel better 🙂 )

    We already have a whole herd of tigers by the tail. It seems to me that true religious principles, if actually followed, would not have resulted in the mess we have today. "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried." We are not required to have babies till the cows come home, but simply not having sex if we choose not to have babies is by far the simplest and safest answer to that problem. Of course, it's not necessarily the easiest, humanly speaking, but that's why we need somebody outside ourselves to help us do that (including the targets of our passions, who might much more effectively resist us, i.e., help us Do The Right Thing, if they had strong philosophical and religious reasons to do so, instead of being brainwashed into compliance by the "let it all hang out--if it feels good, do it" culture that is the logical culmination of the (a)thestic fundamentalist culture we in the non-Catholic West have had over the past 500-odd years).

    What do you want? You want to save the planet, but at the same time be able to do whatever pleases you (you don't want to be told how to live your life, and instead to use whatever techie gee-whiz gizmos you can come up with to "solve" problems like overpopulation). But as should be becoming obvious even to you, that doesn't work. Overcomplicated technological solutions have so many unintended consequences (in the nuclear industry, the financial "industry," the "health industry," agriculture, you name it, it's screwed up bad wherever the geeks and the engineers have been allowed to run free) that they threaten to take our "civilization," such as it is, down the toilet in the next five-to-a-hundred years, and most if not all of us with it.

    What a load of crap, the biggest scam of the last 3000 years ALL of you. Hindu's, Jews, Muslims, Christians, you make me sick with your eternal bickering while the whole planet dies right around us.

    Well, no doubt scamsters have pulled their stunts in every religion you can name. Some of the worst ones, though, were those who thought they could see through it all; they really didn't believe in the religions they were using as cover. (Scamsters are not only crooks, they are hypocrites too.) But the most dangerous scamsters of all are the ones who have been taken in by their own scams and don't even know it.

    ---------------

    Got a reading list for you. You're perfectly welcome to blow me off, but before doing so, consider the fact that many highly intelligent people--much smarter than me--have considered the evidence and concluded that the Christian faith (and more particularly the Catholic faith) is the ultimate truth (well, at least as close as we get here).

    The Science before Science, by Dr. Anthony Rizzi (published 2004)
    The Quantum Enigma, by Dr. Wolfgang Smith (published 1989(?))

    Both the above guys are physicists who have made significant contributions to both theory and practice in the 20th and 21st centuries. (Not to metion Fr. Georges Lemaitre, who came up with the Big Bang theory... and in previous centuries, Pasteur, Volta, Ampere, Coulomb, Copernicus, Galileo (yes, Galileo), etc etc etc... I'm scratching the surface here. Not to mention non-Catholics such as Dr. Walt Brown.)

    Fr. Stanley Jaki's writings on science are good.

    The Last Superstition, by Dr. Edward Feser
    Aquinas, by Dr. Edward Feser

    The works of E.F. Schumacher, particularly Small is Beautiful and A Guide for the Perplexed.

    Rizzi and Feser are, I believe, theistic evolutionists, while Brown and Schumacher and others don't buy evolution, but as I said elsewhere, that's mainly a scientific (and somewhat philosophical) debate, and it's nowhere near being settled as far as I can tell, orthodox scientific protests to the contrary notwithstanding.

    By the way, whatever you may think of me and my opinions personally, I really enjoy trading rants with you, and I applaud your selfless concern for the rest of the human race (however inconsistent with your professed (non-)beliefs it seems 🙂 ).
  2. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    29 Jul '11 23:321 edit
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    Listen Dasa

    I like what you said about the false science and totally agree with everything you said in that section.

    However I don't agree with what you are saying with regards to Christianity being false. You didn't physically mention religions but of coarse I am educated enough (not like the scientists with certificates though) to read between the t any other religion being false - I agree, but so with yours being false too.

    Nicksten
    You cannot use the Bible to defend the Bible...........it a conflict of interest.

    The Bible will always have verses that will try and prop it up, because when something is not true you then have to have verses to support that falsity and the Bible compilers knew this and therefore fabricated many verses to support it.

    The Bible teaches falsity and I could mention many false teachings from it.

    I keep mentioning meat eating because why discuss all the other falsities of the Bible if persons cannot understand that killing is wrong.

    What's the point of me bringing up all the other falsities when no one is honest enough to admit that killing is something religious persons do not do.

    The Vedas are eternal and the Bible is not eternal but has been recently created by materialistic unqualified persons.

    Moses was not talking to God as the Bible depicts because the conversations between the Lord and Moses are completely mundane and ridiculous and anyone can see that they are fabricated by unscrupulous men.

    The Bible is one book and the Vedas are thousands of books and if any doctrine were to explain religion then one book is surely insufficient.

    How can an eternal infinite God be explained in one book.....it cannot be done.

    The reason why Christians kill and eat the rotting flesh of animals is because their Bible has no knowledge of the eternal soul and therefore think that animals have no souls ........but this is false because every living thing has a soul or otherwise it would not be alive.

    Christianity is devoid of true knowledge because it has been fabricated by mundane unauthorized academic persons who have no spiritual realization.

    The soul cannot be destroyed because it is spiritual energy and is indestructible and therefore eternal just like God.

    To defend animal slaughter is to be a dishonest person and any religion that also defends it is false.............you know this.

    It is sadly ironic that the Christian doctrine is actually the anti Christ............because it doesn't support true religion but destroys it by misguiding the entire human race.

    And it does this when the little children at Sunday school are taught that God likes you to slaughter animals.............this is disgraceful and it is child abuse.
  3. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    29 Jul '11 23:51
    Originally posted by Dasa
    To defend animal slaughter is to be a dishonest person and any religion that also defends it is false.............you know this.
    You are misusing the word "dishonest", Dasa. What you mean is that your beliefs are different from people who do not share your opposition to eating meat. The word "dishonest" has a certain meaning and you are using it incorrectly here.
  4. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    30 Jul '11 01:12
    Originally posted by FMF
    You are misusing the word "dishonest", Dasa. What you mean is that your beliefs are different from people who do not share your opposition to eating meat. The word "dishonest" has a certain meaning and you are using it incorrectly here.
    You have told me this many times but you are wrong in your assumption.

    Did it ever occur to you that persons who believe in falsity and refuse to acknowledge what is actually true are dishonest for their refusal to give up the falsity and believe differently.

    Their dishonesty is the refusal to give up the false belief.

    They are not dishonest for believing something, but when that something is shown to them to be false ...........they then become dishonest by refusing to let it go.

    I cannot be more clear about that.

    Now you know.
  5. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    30 Jul '11 01:21
    Originally posted by Dasa
    Did it ever occur to you that persons who believe in falsity and refuse to acknowledge what is actually true are dishonest for their refusal to give up the falsity and believe differently.
    Your fervour and sincerity does not alter the conventional meaning of words. You are not using the word "dishonest" correctly.
  6. Joined
    14 May '03
    Moves
    89724
    30 Jul '11 01:241 edit
    Originally posted by Dasa
    You have told me this many times but you are wrong in your assumption.

    Did it ever occur to you that persons who believe in falsity and refuse to acknowledge what is actually true are dishonest for their refusal to give up the falsity and believe differently.

    Their dishonesty is the refusal to give up the false belief.

    They are not dishonest for belie ...[text shortened]... ecome dishonest by refusing to let it go.

    I cannot be more clear about that.

    Now you know.
    You are an almighty hypocrite.

    There is no difference between a Christian / Muslim / Jew using their holy text as a basis to prove their points and you using vedic text.

    Your assumption that your text is perfect is as hollow and shallow as theirs.
  7. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    30 Jul '11 01:341 edit
    Originally posted by Dasa
    How can we tell if religion and science is true or false?
    Well you have to apply the acid test which is quick and accurate, and you will not have to get stuck in any long pointless arguments or debates which is what we all want……right?

    As I have just said it will be quick and accurate, so don’t be dismayed of the simplicity of the test….ok.

    False scien ...[text shortened]...
    But for the honest person the few facts I have mentioned is enough (the acid test is complete)
    Where did you get the idea 'science' says all there is in existence is matter? Right now, leading edge physics is pursuing the ideas of other dimensions, and stuff that is not like our matter right here in our own universe and maybe some of the dark matter stuff right here in the solar system where we are trying to detect the stuff, so far without success.

    You have a peculiar bias towards science. You spout what you want to support your pre-conceived ideas. Your version of religion is no more true or false than any other including christianity. There is no such thing on earth as a true religion, they are ALL false including yours. You think because thousands of volumes have been written, your religion is true because thousands of volumes have been written.

    You know nothing about what a real god would be like because NOBODY on earth has the slightest clue as to what a real god would be like, any more than a colony of intelligent ants could say anything about what humans are like inside.

    All you are doing is proselytizing, something I intensely dislike about religions.
    Organized religions have one goal: make more people come under the power of that religion. Your religion is just like the rest. Out to control people.

    Take a look at this link, about us all being holograms:

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128221.300-existence-am-i-a-hologram.html

    Does that follow your bias about science thinking only matter exists?
  8. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    30 Jul '11 07:37
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Where did you get the idea 'science' says all there is in existence is matter? Right now, leading edge physics is pursuing the ideas of other dimensions, and stuff that is not like our matter right here in our own universe and maybe some of the dark matter stuff right here in the solar system where we are trying to detect the stuff, so far without success. ...[text shortened]... -am-i-a-hologram.html

    Does that follow your bias about science thinking only matter exists?
    Science fails the acid test.

    They say that everything came from nothing.

    They are dishonest.

    Nothing more to say.
  9. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    30 Jul '11 07:40
    Originally posted by nook7
    You are an almighty hypocrite.

    There is no difference between a Christian / Muslim / Jew using their holy text as a basis to prove their points and you using vedic text.

    Your assumption that your text is perfect is as hollow and shallow as theirs.
    The doctrines of the Christians Muslims and Jews have been fabricated in recent times.

    The Vedas are eternal.

    Therefore the Vedas are the only authorized authority.

    You reject the Vedas because it does not allow you to kill.

    This shows you insincerity and shallowness.
  10. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    30 Jul '11 07:43
    Originally posted by FMF
    Your fervour and sincerity does not alter the conventional meaning of words. You are not using the word "dishonest" correctly.
    Your stubbornness in intentionally refusing to understand what I am saying is irritating and dishonest.
  11. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    116912
    30 Jul '11 07:44
    Originally posted by Dasa
    You cannot use the Bible to defend the Bible...........it a conflict of interest.
    And yet you constantly use the Vedic teachings to defend the Vedic teachings. What a bizarre person you are.
  12. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    30 Jul '11 08:13
    Originally posted by Dasa
    Your stubbornness in intentionally refusing to understand what I am saying is irritating and dishonest.
    I do understand what you are saying, Dasa. I simply disagree. Therefore you are misusing the word "dishonest".
  13. Standard memberSoothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    Planet Rain
    Joined
    04 Mar '04
    Moves
    2701
    30 Jul '11 08:22
    Originally posted by Dasa
    Science fails the acid test.
    I think we should turn this into a drinking game. Every time Dasa says "acid test" we all take a shot of whiskey; then in a couple of days this'll be the happiest forum in the world.
  14. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    30 Jul '11 20:03
    Originally posted by Dasa
    You cannot use the Bible to defend the Bible...........it a conflict of interest.

    The Bible will always have verses that will try and prop it up, because when something is not true you then have to have verses to support that falsity and the Bible compilers knew this and therefore fabricated many verses to support it.

    The Bible teaches falsity and I could ...[text shortened]... that God likes you to slaughter animals.............this is disgraceful and it is child abuse.
    You have not read the Holy Bible carefully, if you have read it at all.
    It is the spirit that causes a body to become a living soul, according
    to the Holy Bible. You do not have a soul, you are a soul. The Holy
    Bible also teaches that cows, horses, dogs, etc. are living souls just
    as we are living souls. It is the spirit that is eternal, for the Holy Bible
    teahces that "the soul that sins shall die." The commandment from
    God about not killing had to do with "murder", it had nothing to do
    with catching and killing fish for food.
  15. Joined
    14 May '03
    Moves
    89724
    31 Jul '11 06:19
    Originally posted by Dasa
    The doctrines of the Christians Muslims and Jews have been fabricated in recent times.

    The Vedas are eternal.

    Therefore the Vedas are the only authorized authority.

    You reject the Vedas because it does not allow you to kill.

    This shows you insincerity and shallowness.
    You are wrong.

    by wrong l mean incorrect in every way that it is possible to be incorrect.

    You act in a manner that defies all forms of logic and reason.

    You assert fluff as fact and continually denigrate all who disagree with your insane ranting.

    l would feel sorry for you if it wasnt for your insufferable ability to act like a complete tool.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree