The Son of God:
" If by curiousity - doubt - despair you mean curiousity - doubt - acceptance, then I'll agree with you. The entire idea that atheism somehow equates to despair is nonsensical and without basis. I'm an atheist, I'm just as happy give or take as I was when I was a christian. Where I end up when I die, i.e. in the ground and nowhere else, does not play on my mood or affect my daily routine in the slightest. Is living in reality really the "worst" outcome for society? That's a rather sad belief to have. Let's be clear though that Marxism has absolutely nothing to do with Atheism. Atheism is the nonbelief in a God or Gods, full stop. Atheism has existed since at least the founding, if not prior to religion itself. Marxism is something entirely different altogether. In terms of atheism being the enemy of a functioning society, I would like to introduce you Norway, Sweden, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Australia, Japan, China, Canada and Spain just to name a few nations where at least half the population identifies as secular. I don't think I really need to say more on that. |
|
"Although it isn't inherently true that atheism and Marxism must be linked, as a matter of circumstance it is historically true that they are linked. Marxists seek to achieve equality of outcome (as opposed to equality of opportunity). To achieve this end philosophically, Marxists are often keen on propagandizing societies with the doctrines of value nihilism — that is, that all outcomes are equally devoid of meaning — in order to minimize resistance to Marxism within those societies. Value nihilism leads to moral nihilism, the belief that choices are meaningless; one then tends to be quite generous with that one believes to be worthless. A culture of nihilism is a culture of cuckoldry, ripe for conquest. Moral relativism is a euphemism for moral nihilism. Or perhaps more accurately, the former is the logical completion of the latter; the latter says there is no right or wrong, while the former says there is no right or wrong in labeling things right or wrong. Historically, theistic religions, for all their mystic irrationality, tend to reject nihilism and instead assert a specific set of values and morality. The reason for this is evolutionary: societies based on ideological rejection of morality die, as there is no longer a mission within the culture that it's people feel is meaningful to achieve. Any doctrine based on moral nihilism couldn't survive without an abundance of value, spawned from a competing ideology, to leech off of, so you won't find any that lasted long more than about 400 years ago. That said, it is possible to create a nihilistic theism, such as Thelema. But such theisms are relatively new and lack the, um, cultural entrenchment of the faiths of Abraham. I think Pwnzors87 is slightly off. It is not the belief in God, but the belief in Good that serves as antagonist to Marxism; it is not that Atheism and Marxism are best friends, but that Marxism and irreligiousness are best friends. Essentially, he's guilty of the common error of assuming religion and their are the same thing. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on May 25, 2017, 11:17:59 AM
|
|
" What ;D ? Atheism is irreligiousness, they do not believe or recognice anything they cannot experience,...jet. But very nice post, it´s always good to be backed up by somebody that is actually smarter than once self. @BodyHammer ""Accaptence"" is a God,Evolution,Coincidence given Gift, to protect you from insanity. A Person which is close to his Exodus, will always experience, Disbelieve,Wrath,Anger,Despair,Accaptence. Usually or better gladly not, rinse and repeat. The Atheist get´s tricked by his earthly boundries. I worte Atheism and Marxism are best friends, not the same. The intention of it is completly diffrent. And were exactly are the banner´s in Sweden,Japen which state, ""This Society is not one bit religious or spiritual"". I´m well aware that a nerd in his best ages, might care lidl for such topic´s. My whole point is, that usaually the big mouth´s run a Society, and if they were to say: Tomorrow all of you will be completly screwed, than the Population would say: Then let´s make Today realy amaizing (Hedonism). Note: My english is not good enough to make eloquent sentences. Last edited by Pwnzors87#5366 on May 25, 2017, 12:25:34 PM
|
|
" I understand and appreciate your predicament. For me, the Bible reveals the Nature of God, and is the way Jesus has chosen to allow his Gospel to proliferate -- in conjunction with the work of the Holy Spirit, without whom the Bible would be meaningless. I often exhort my friends who do not yet believe to read the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) for themselves, with an open heart and an engaged mind -- leaving behind worldly biases where possible and trying to behold (/understand) what is written to see whether or not they believe. I believe every woman, every man, has the right to engage with the gospel of Jesus... which is in keeping with his command to spread his gospel to the four corners of the earth. Even on an internet forum, there are people who might hear his Word and be interested, leading them to investigate further for themselves -- to see whether or not they believe. If you approach the gospel of Jesus with a predetermined attitude, "I do NOT believe," then there will probably be little value in reading it for you. But if you approach with an open, investigative curiosity -- "What is written? What is really being said? Do I understand it properly? Do I believe it?" -- I think the chances are much better of you finding the treasure you seek. It is written, "Man does not live on bread alone." We need a higher sort of nourishment: nourishment of our hearts, which feeds the soul and pleases the spirit, and stimulation (and renewal) of our minds. I don't believe I could convince anyone to change their beliefs... But perhaps I can be of use to you, if you are curious. By directing you or anyone else to Jesus' gospel, which is provided for us in written form, I am offering you the most genuine hope I can. While I am capable of representing the gospel, I trust far much more in the Word of God, the Word of the Lamb, which is completely trustworthy and true as presented in Scripture. Whether or not you give authority to the Bible, I think, shouldn't come from a predetermined naysaying... but, rather, a genuine consideration. Don't let biases and forces you don't fully understand influence your approach. Engage and consider fully, leaving behind anything that might hinder you from doing so. That's my advice. - 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0- 0 * - <
<739610877-3104-376.101077-1106.75103739110792103.108-5'92.9410776.> - 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0- 0 * - < | |
" While I don't take much issue with any of that, I don't feel that anyone can establish a solid enough base of specifically Marxist and specifically atheist societies to validate that. Much as the common mislabeling of countries like Russia and North Korea as atheist nations, which couldn't be further from the truth. We also have to decide what we are considering an atheist nation, one that outwardly considers itself to be atheistic (see again Russia and North Korea) or a nation that by terms of population is predominantly atheist or secular, as in my list previously. Moral relativism however I must disagree with you on. I do not see the leading of moral relativism to moral nihilism or vice verse. I would suggest that basically every single person, secular or not, is an unwitting relativist. Every religious person picks and chooses for themselves which book, which laws, which tenets make the most sense to them, in terms of their own personal view as to the nature of God. This can be messy and is pretty much a discussion in and of itself. Take american slavery, as just an easy relatable example. Religion was one of the major driving forces in american history used to prop up the arguments and laws in support of slavery, citing old testament law. Joseph Smith and his misguided Mormonism was no doubt the biggest driving force, but Mormoms were far from alone in this belief. Today, pretty much all of these same denominations have given up the idea of slavery in favor of the more socially acceptable teachings of Jesus. It is not that the bible changed. It is not that the text changed. Society changed, and religious values followed suit. If it was objectively true in the 1800's the slavery was not only acceptable, but mandated by God, how can it be objectively true now that slavery is no longer okay? The quick answer is it was never objectively true to begin with, nor is it now. |
|
" I deal with non english speakers all the time, I don't mind at all. Could you please clarify what you mean by the first paragraph in regards to atheists being tricked by their earthly boundaries? You won't find an atheist flag being flown in most of those countries we are discussing, but you also will not find a religious flag either. So if we are choosing to determine how religion versus atheism affects how "functioning" a society is, that leaves us only with statistics and population identification, which is what my list is based upon. Last edited by BodyHammer01#3364 on May 25, 2017, 3:30:02 PM
|
|
|
Should I really believe we all come from incest family who created different skin colors kids in less than 1000 years? Should I really believe women common ancestors is a rib?
Evolution theory from the bible: human rib>woman WTF Poe Pvp experience
https://youtu.be/Z6eg3aB_V1g?t=302 |
|
" I'll tell you this, I would honestly follow the word of the bible if God told me it was true. Until then I can only accept its truthfulness as far as I am willing to accept and have faith in the people giving that message and it feels wrong to me to worship the word of man before God, false idols and all that. Last edited by GeorgAnatoly#4189 on May 25, 2017, 7:04:46 PM
|
|
" You are very faar off, understanding a ""diety"". God is not a literal person but ""Life"" itself. He is part of me,you, evrybody,evrything ""He is the holy Spirit"". The holy Trinity translate to Mind,Body,Soul-Thought-Material-Feeling. The father is the thinker, the son is his meaning, the Spirit is the nice Juice in your head when you have sex ;D. The Soul,Juice is even amoung nonebelievers, regard as ""Mythic"", because it´s incomprehensible. So if a Christian says, he heard god and spreads ""Harmony"", he is therefore right. Lucifer is a Angel, a servent, synthetic like a Computer, God´s fraktion of his very own "doubt´s" ""He was the sinner in the very Beginning"", that answer´s pretty much why god can apear evil to some, because our very own Creation started our Sins. That´s why you will hear some freak´s shouting, ""Lucifer is God"", which is not true, he cast away his own ""doubts"". By worshipping Doubt,Death,Destruction you fill ""Lucifer"" ,gods very own doubts, value in life,existence ""Why should i exist"". And this very ""Lifeforce"" seek´s harmony, that´s why we are nothing more than a Mirror to him/it and that makes us so important to him/it, although we seem so fragile and unimportant. If we suffer, he suffers, if we enjoy he enjoy´s, because we are his copy. He does not Impact his/its ""Mirror"" directly, obvious isnt it, we have a free will. He won´t make the earth better for us, that would dilude the very only Point of your Creation. He won´t Approach you, he is already here. The Kingdom of God, Paradise, is a place full of ""Harmony"", were we rejoin as equal. Again, he is not a literal person, he won´t approach you and you won´t be rewardet be earthly plessure´s, the reward is ""Life"". By demanding better condition´s for yourself, you question his ""gift of life"" and the potential for ""Harmony" in the first place. The ""ethernal struggle"" will continue on, be it in heaven or hell. In his abscence, even the angel´s will start to doubt his power. Means, If you don´t feel God,Live,Harmony it´s your very own fault. |
|
" OK, here's the situation: 1. God gives his Word through Man, whom he deems appropriate to relay his Word. 2. God gives us his Word, who was with God in the beginning and was God, directly: the Word became flesh -- that is, the Son of Man, Christ Jesus. 3. God appoints men to relay the gospel of Jesus, so that we might all receive his Word. God routinely uses Man for his Will. Among other things, we are his agents. We have a long history of seeing men reject God.... Your idea is this: "If I believe 'the people God appointed,' then I'd be worshiping them." Your idea is that, if God did not truly appoint these men, then you would be worshiping Man instead of God. Implicit is your conclusion: "Therefore you should reject all men who claim God appointed them to spread his Gospel." This isn't a sound conclusion. In order for it to be a valid one, you would have to reject the premise that God uses Man to accomplish his Will. And if you are not willing to listen to anyone, how can you be sure your rejection of this premise is a sound rejection? Now if you acknowledge it is possible that God uses Man as his agents, among others, then it is logical to ask the following question: "Why have I closed myself off to hearing the gospel of Jesus Christ as given to us by four faithful witnesses? What have these men done that I reject them? Isn't it worth at least reading what they wrote?" *** After Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension, the Disciples were persecuted unto death. None of them recanted from their testimony. Take a moment to think about how stunning that is. If their testimony had been some mere conspiracy, surely at least one of them would have broken, facing death. But none did. You can contrast this to Joseph Smith's Mormonism. He claimed to have received tablets from an angel from God, and he had multiple witnesses. When confronted by a US Judge -- in fear of incarceration (not even death) -- all the witnesses recanted, admitting their testimony had been false. Food for thought. - 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0- 0 * - <
<739610877-3104-376.101077-1106.75103739110792103.108-5'92.9410776.> - 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0 -- 0 * - < _ > - * 0- 0 * - < |
