God exists?

[Farnhamia]

How can it be a good thread? not only has the subject been repeated 7 trillion times but all it turns into is a 'Yes he does' with the typical 'Ooooh, no he doesnt' with both parties giving evidence which both sides ignore. My personal belief being a Agnostic is 'I dont know, it doesnt really matter and if there is a god we dont have the mind to comprehend what a being of such almighty power wants with us'

I have nothing against anybody who does belong to a religion aslong as they dont use their religion as a excuse to Hate or intolerate other people because most of the main stream religions preach tolerance of people regardless of religion.

I have nothing against Atheist, aslong as they dont think they are smarter or better then everyone else for simply being a Atheist. Most of them barely understand Evolution yet cling to it like a Christian to a bible which is lectured to them every sunday at church and then barely read outside of that.

I see myself as Agnostic because if there is something after death or not, it doesnt really matter. What does matter is we try and make our time on Earth better which in the end is what all our lives should be about anyway.

It's a requirement that we have this thread at least once every two months, at a minimum. Whenever forum software is installed on a server and started for the first time four threads are automatically created, one each on whether God exists, gay marriage, a ninjas-versus-pirates-type with the two sides chosen randomly by the system, and evolution. If there is not an active thread on those topics for more than five business days, the forum system crashes. *nod*

[Phenixica]

Most of them barely understand Evolution yet cling to it like a Christian to a bible which is lectured to them every sunday at church and then barely read outside of that.

Most? No. Some? Yes.

Most? Yes. Some? No (Sorry just correcting a mistake your didnt notice)

It's like any belief on this subject, we have the experts who know everything about their chosen subject Priest, Rabbi or Scientist and then you have the many flocks of sheep who listen and defend every word their beloved prophets say.

Only advantage Evolution has is because it's a Scientific theroy it evolves (Ha, get it!) it stays fresh and modern while Religion stagnates to the respective time period it was founded.

We will be creatures completely made out of pure energy, which has colonized the furthest reaches of the universe and have the greatest technological achievements realistically capable in the said universe and we still wouldnt have no bloody clue where we came from or where we are going. Heck go ahead 3 centuries and the Scientific theroy on how we came about could be something like big pink blobs from the lollipop kingdom rained down farts and sunshine and created life on this planet.

Not saying I myself dont believe in evolution (WHAT A TWIST) since it has much more evidence then most religions have about their Creation stories but I also know that just because Evolution could be true doesnt mean it cancels out any kind of 'higher being'. I love how in a way Atheist have formed in a way their own religion, with a few people at the top who understand it and the great mass at the bottom how believe whatever the ones above say.

But like every person in the lower caste of any religion, they all think they understand it completely.

[Rutini]

Yes gods exist. Humans. I am much more powerfull than Zeuz Odin and all the others. With more technology humans will achieve immortality and became more powerfull than actual gods. Man creates gods based on their knowledge. As we gain more knowledge, better gods appear.

[Farnhamia]

Yes gods exist. Humans. I am much more powerfull than Zeuz Odin and all the others. With more technology humans will achieve immortality and became more powerfull than actual gods. Man creates gods based on their knowledge. As we gain more knowledge, better gods appear.

More powerful that Zeus and Odin? Can you change yourself into a swan, a bull, a shower of gold coins, can you hurl thunderbolts (literally)? Can you hang on a tree for nine days and nights, pierced by your own spear, and have you thereby gained the wisdom of nine worlds?

[Rutini]

I can make people believe i can

[Phenixica]

I still think the Big Pink Blobs of the holy land of the Lollipop Kingdom deserve worship, you know it makes sense!

[Farnhamia]

I can make people believe i can

Indeed?

And it's polite to quote the post you're replying to.

[Farnhamia]

I still think the Big Pink Blobs of the holy land of the Lollipop Kingdom deserve worship, you know it makes sense!

Heretic! Everyone knows it's the Even Bigger Puce Piles of the Exalted Kingdom of Candy Canes who deserve worship!

[Phenixica]

I can make people believe i can

Indeed?

And it's polite to quote the post you're replying to.

He is just a rude god, so if anything he is quite like the Classical Pagan Gods

[Rutini]

Indeed?

Yes indeed

And it's polite to quote the post you're replying to.

Polite, but in this two cases, unnessesary.

[Farnhamia]

I can make people believe i can

Indeed?

And it's polite to quote the post you're replying to.

He is just a rude god, so if anything he is quite like the Classical Pagan Gods

Perhaps, perhaps. Or like the satyrs, they were pretty rude. I remember one time Dionysos fell asleep under a tree and ... uhm, better not tell that one.

[Rutini]

Thanks for admiting i'm a god.
Thats all i wanted.

[Hairless Kitten II]

I believe you are incorrect. The concept of Original Sin dictates that you are born sinful. Already a sinner. Not that you are destined to sin.

How is it possible that a fresh born baby is already sinner? I'm not innocent, you aren't probably too, but babies of al creatures are.

[Rutini]

Buffett and Colbert wrote:

I believe you are incorrect. The concept of Original Sin dictates that you are born sinful. Already a sinner. Not that you are destined to sin.

How is it possible that a fresh born baby is already sinner? I'm not innocent, you aren't probably too, but babies of al creatures are.

This is pointless, not even christians believe that crap.

[Mathematica Numerica]

Yes gods exist. Humans. I am much more powerfull than Zeuz Odin and all the others. With more technology humans will achieve immortality and became more powerfull than actual gods. Man creates gods based on their knowledge. As we gain more knowledge, better gods appear.

[/scoff]. Not true. Immortality cannot be achieved in such a way, that they are indestructable. Not even the fabric of the universe is.

[Enadail]

I believe you are incorrect. The concept of Original Sin dictates that you are born sinful. Already a sinner. Not that you are destined to sin.

How is it possible that a fresh born baby is already sinner? I'm not innocent, you aren't probably too, but babies of al creatures are.

Logic and religion don't usually match.

This is pointless, not even christians believe that crap.

Err... yah, a lot of them do believe in original sin.

[Rutini]

[/scoff]. Not true. Immortality cannot be achieved in such a way, that they are indestructable. Not even the fabric of the universe is.

You just cant think of that as ancient greeks couldnt think of this forum.

[Farnhamia]

I believe you are incorrect. The concept of Original Sin dictates that you are born sinful. Already a sinner. Not that you are destined to sin.

How is it possible that a fresh born baby is already sinner? I'm not innocent, you aren't probably too, but babies of al creatures are.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia on Original Sin:

This is a difficult point and many systems have been invented to explain it: it will suffice to give the theological explanation now commonly received. Original sin is the privation of sanctifying grace in consequence of the sin of Adam. This solution, which is that of St. Thomas, goes back to St. Anselm and even to the traditions of the early Church, as we see by the declaration of the Second Council of Orange (A.D. 529): one man has transmitted to the whole human race not only the death of the body, which is the punishment of sin, but even sin itself, which is the death of the soul [Denz., n. 175 (145)]. As death is the privation of the principle of life, the death of the soul is the privation of sanctifying grace which according to all theologians is the principle of supernatural life. Therefore, if original sin is "the death of the soul", it is the privation of sanctifying grace.

The Council of Trent, although it did not make this solution obligatory by a definition, regarded it with favour and authorized its use (cf. Pallavicini, "Istoria del Concilio di Trento", vii-ix). Original sin is described not only as the death of the soul (Sess. V, can. ii), but as a "privation of justice that each child contracts at its conception" (Sess. VI, cap. iii). But the Council calls "justice" what we call sanctifying grace (Sess. VI), and as each child should have had personally his own justice so now after the fall he suffers his own privation of justice.

We may add an argument based on the principle of St. Augustine already cited, "the deliberate sin of the first man is the cause of original sin". This principle is developed by St. Anselm: "the sin of Adam was one thing but the sin of children at their birth is quite another, the former was the cause, the latter is the effect" (De conceptu virginali, xxvi). In a child original sin is distinct from the fault of Adam, it is one of its effects.

Catholic doctrine does hold that without baptism, a child who dies does not automatically gathered to Jesus:

The absolute necessity of this sacrament is often insisted on by the Fathers of the Church, especially when they speak of infant baptism. Thus St. Irenæus (Against Heresies 2.22): "Christ came to save all who are reborn through Him to God — infants, children, and youths" (infantes et parvulos et pueros). St. Augustine (On the Soul, Book III) says "If you wish to be a Catholic, do not believe, nor say, nor teach, that infants who die before baptism can obtain the remission of original sin." A still stronger passage from the same doctor (Epistle 28) reads:"Whoever says that even infants are vivified in Christ when they depart this life without the participation of His Sacrament (Baptism), both opposes the Apostolic preaching and condemns the whole Church which hastens to baptize infants, because it unhesitatingly believes that otherwise they can not possibly be vivified in Christ," St. Ambrose (II De Abraham., c. xi) speaking of the necessity of baptism, says:" No one is excepted, not the infant, not the one hindered by any necessity."

Sorry for all the copy-pasta but sometimes it's necessary.

[Ifreann]

Buffett and Colbert wrote:

I believe you are incorrect. The concept of Original Sin dictates that you are born sinful. Already a sinner. Not that you are destined to sin.

How is it possible that a fresh born baby is already sinner? I'm not innocent, you aren't probably too, but babies of al creatures are.

This is pointless, not even christians believe that crap.

Actually they do. Maybe not all of them, but the idea of original sin does still exist.

[Rutini]

Actually they do. Maybe not all of them, but the idea of original sin does still exist.

The idea will disappear like the Adam and Eve, and the creation myths.
I already know that you know 2 people who believe that myths, but im speaking in general.

[Maurepas]

Actually they do. Maybe not all of them, but the idea of original sin does still exist.

The idea will disappear like the Adam and Eve, and the creation myths.
I already know that you know 2 people who believe that myths, but im speaking in general.

The Southern Baptists might want to be told about such a measure, because, I know a few of them, and they still seem to be clinging to the myth,

[Rutini]

Dont start talking to me about the southern baptists beacause i agreed to the terms of the forum

[Mathematica Numerica]

[/scoff]. Not true. Immortality cannot be achieved in such a way, that they are indestructable. Not even the fabric of the universe is.

You just cant think of that as ancient greeks couldnt think of this forum.

Not unless they cause a paradox.

[Enadail]

Dont start talking to me about the southern baptists beacause i agreed to the terms of the forum

That sentence... makes no sense. Ms. South Carolina, is that you?

[Maurepas]

Dont start talking to me about the southern baptists beacause i agreed to the terms of the forum

Um...what? What do the terms have to do with it?

Or do you dislike them so much that you might breach it? Cant say as I blame you if that be the case...