god, lucifer & other sh*t

[Phytotron]

This is a nifty one, if you want to take the time to read it:

Mutation, Selection, And Vertical Transmission Of Theistic Memes In Religious Canons

(Mainly directed at Lucifer, as I assume the holy ones here will just consider it more of the devil's trickery.)

[Luke-Jr]

I wanted freedom for all,

Freedom from what?

From God's guilt-ridden tyranny, what else would people in heaven need freedom from?

Freedom from truth and good is slavery to lies and evil.
Likewise, being 'enslaved' to good/truth comes with freedom from evil.

You didn't really think all that one-sided PR about God being loving and wonderful actually indicated he was less than a tyrannical ruler, did you?

He expects everyone to be perfect, nothing more. Do you have a problem with everyone being perfect?

Not to mention he's as bipolar as it gets, one minute in a fit of rage and blasting towns all over the place, but the next minute he loves everyone and wants you to do so as well.

Please tell me I don't have to explain how non-bipolar this is... you should be smarter than this...

God villified me for the same reason the Catholic Church villified Martin Luther: I threaten the "truth" of his rule. I challenge people to think for themselves. And I want people to live with a reasonable expectancy of being treated decently by other people.

"You" introduced confusion of what the truth was. Thinking for yourself is fine-- God made that possible in the first place. However, making up your own "truth" is just lying.

You should have seen some of the massacres that went on in Heaven. I know you haven't heard about them, God's censorship has been quite extreme. Used to be, if you questioned His Word, you'd get lynched, burned, stoned, or otherwise killed in a tortuous inhumane manner.

You're forgetting that angels are not physical. Besides, God isn't human-- why should He act human[e]?

why would you trust what God's prophets say about Him without checking for a disinterested third-party's point of view?

God has no peer to review Him, other than Himself.

In lieu of that, can you develop your own?

Developing your own "truth" is stupid.

Of course, had I said that just 1000 years ago, I'd be toasty-fried right now. Had to go and start all sorts of different religions just to keep God guessing where I was at any point in time.

God knows all.

And science fiction? Yeah, I invented that too.

Still mere fiction. Unlike "you", God can make non-fiction.

protection of basic Angel Rights that all immortals are entitle to.

Like the right to use proper grammer? Besides, all rights come from God.

s/God/the state and you could hire Stalin to be your God. Oh wait, that's what you've already got!

God made the angels, not the state or Stalin.

Did God like that? Nooooo. He had to kick me out and execute my generals.

You could have apologised... well, I guess not since angels are not capable of that kind of regret.

Would Benjamin Franklin have apologized had he lost?

Wasn't Benjamin Franklin one of your freemasons? No surprise there... Besides, it's not a matter of who wins or loses. It's a matter of who is right and wrong.

With the exception of recent events in Iraq,

Huh? Catholicism used to be an allowed religion in Iraq-- now it's not. How exactly is that not in accordance with "your" will?

I was referring to the blatant human rights violations by "the good guys" (Abu Ghraib and others) and Bush's "Crusade" in general.

I was referring to the fact that there are no "good guys" and it's just satan-followers fighting each other.

my movement is spreading rapidly here on Earth.

For now... your Conciliar protestants may have hijacked the name Catholic in the eyes of the world and taken over the Vatican, but that's just a minor thing in the long run.

I see. You mistake me. I don't work within the church anymore, haven't for centuries, it's not necessary any longer. Nowadays you can openly question the church without fearing for your life. When you see something that makes you think, I probably had a hand in it. When you see a man stand up for the right to think for himself, even at great risk to himself, I influenced that guy.

Can't trick me. There's actually quite a number (even if a minority) of us true Christians that are quite aware of your counter-church and plans for it.

3) Logic has been shown time and time again to prove things in the Bible to those who demand proof. Never has it shown anything opposing the Bible.

But that's not true! All the land in Europe is littered with the skulls of those who found proof to oppose the Bible, murdered by the Jesus Fan Club.

Are you referring to the Spanish Inquisition, which was completely unrelated to the Church? Yes, I know you've tricked many people into thinking there was only one Inquisition, but I'm not one of those people.

You trust in your God too much. Too much trust in anybody is dangerous.

Too much trust in anyone other than God is dangerous, but how can it be dangerous to trust truth itself?

[Phytotron]

Boy, luke is coming off loonier by the post.

OK, I'm going to bed now.

[Lucifer]

This is a nifty one, if you want to take the time to read it:

Mutation, Selection, And Vertical Transmission Of Theistic Memes In Religious Canons

(Mainly directed at Lucifer, as I assume the holy ones here will just consider it more of the devil's trickery.)

It's long, I've read the abstract and bookmarked it, I'll come back to it.

But from reading the abstract, I talked to this girl one night (she was pretty crazy) who had a pretty interesting hypothesis. Here it is: (and I say "hypothesis" because that's exactly what it was)

Humans have reached levels of civilization even higher than what we currently have, possible on other planets (Mars, but she was skeptical about it), but definitely here. Why don't we have archaeological record of it? We do, we just haven't found it (Antarctica is still buried under ice, remember?). But in our religions and the stories that have been passed down the ages there is evidence. Look at it like this. You're in a highly advanced technological civilization, but for all that, you can't survive an ice age and maintain your civilization. You must let it go and focus on the race surviving. In what way can you pass down the wisdom of your civilization and give clues that will help the race to rebuild when the ice age is over, or at least when they've adapted to it and might rebuild during the ice age? You can't put it on tablets, no guarantee the race will still be able to read and write when they're ready to use it. Computers are right out. How about stories? Yeah, stories that are intended to be passed down from generation to generation. Then it makes perfect sense that the same source group of stories, passed down orally over time, would develop into the rich group of stories we have today, especially where you find the same elements in various cultures' stories when the cultures themselves have never interacted and are separated by thousands of miles of ocean/mountains/some other impassable barrier.

I thought it was an interesting hypothesis, and agreed that there's plenty of room for archaeological evidence that still hasn't been uncovered. She in turn agreed that it's highly unlikely such evidence will be found because it's highly unlikely the hypothesis is right. Look at our big skyscrapers and our cars and stuff. Bury it in the ground right after an ice age starts and age it 50,000 years, then add another 10,000 years on top of it and what should you find? But then, the advanced civilization didn't have to exist right before the last ice age, it could have been millions of years ago....

[Luke-Jr]

I'm sure Google could find some. I don't have the time to dig something up for you.

Google can find anything. Google can find "proof" ... that the earth is flat, ... and that the earth is anywhere from 6,000 years old to having always existed.
And you clearly have enough time to keep responding to these posts.

You contradict yourself. The time issue is sifting through all the (as you put it) "proofs" and finding the real logical proofs.

No, you made a claim that science has disproven evolution and proved (your) god.

Actually, I only claimed (or meant to, anyway) science disproved evolution and proved the existence of a God. (by semi-definition, there cannot be more than one God)

I'd like to see it backed up by legitimate, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals. You very readily and easily made the claim; surely you have the material on hand that brought you to that conclusion, yes?

On the disproof of evolution it might be in one of my long lists of bookmarks somewhere-- probably even harder to find that than via Google. On God's existence, my proof relies on private revelation, so it wouldn't apply to anyone else.

[Lucifer]

Boy, luke is coming off loonier by the post.

In his defense, I'm playing devil's advocate. He's naturally taking the opposite role to mine. As you can see, the premises that we're each working from are fundamentally different and in opposition to each other. If you can't even agree on the facts you're going to fight over, chances are you live in different dimensions.

(Not exactly playing, but you know what I mean. After all the years of people going at me trying to find flaw with the idea that there's no God I wound up learning to argue not if there is a God, but that God is a fascist that needs to be overthrown, because if you do accept the base premise of Christianity, what does critical thought applied to the Bible tell you?)

[Tank Program]

this was waaayyyy off topic from development so i split it.

[Lucifer]

this was waaayyyy off topic from development so i split it.

Heh, it's cool.

[philippeqc]

And for you athiests...... do you know everything????? No! Then could God happen to exist in the part that you don't know? YES! Then don't say there isn't a God because He just might exist in the part that you don't know.

And you beleivers, do you know everything???????? No! Then could God just not be, and what you feel and beleive is unrelated to the existance of an higher creature? YES! Then dont say there is a God because He just might be a fragment of your imagination from a part of your psycke you don't know.

-ph

[philippeqc]

edit: flamebait

[Luke-Jr]

And you beleivers, do you know everything???????? No! Then could God just not be, and what you feel and beleive is unrelated to the existance of an higher creature? YES! Then dont say there is a God because He just might be a fragment of your imagination from a part of your psycke you don't know.

Indeed, it is quite possible that our very existence (including God) is part of some huge emulation. I think this is where faith comes in. Don't expect the unprovable/undisprovable to be proven/disproven.

[Phytotron]

I'm sure Google could find some. I don't have the time to dig something up for you.

Google can find anything. Google can find "proof" ... that the earth is flat, ... and that the earth is anywhere from 6,000 years old to having always existed.
And you clearly have enough time to keep responding to these posts.

You contradict yourself. The time issue is sifting through all the (as you put it) "proofs" and finding the real logical proofs.

Huh? How did I contradict myself? I asked you to provide evidence that science as disproved evolution and proved the existence of a god, and you replied with "just Google it." My point was that that was insufficient, that "scientific proof" for any wacky idea can be found with Google, as I listed.

No, you made a claim that science has disproven evolution and proved (your) god.

Actually, I only claimed (or meant to, anyway) science disproved evolution and proved the existence of a God. (by semi-definition, there cannot be more than one God)

Didn't you just repeat what I said? As for the parenthetical, not only could there be more than one god (polytheism), but it could also be the case that if a single god did exist that it's not your conception of god, but some other religion's...or even one no religion has come up with -- perhaps the one the guy roaming around on Main Street is talking to, who everyone thinks is crazy.

I'd like to see it backed up by legitimate, reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journals. You very readily and easily made the claim; surely you have the material on hand that brought you to that conclusion, yes?

On the disproof of evolution it might be in one of my long lists of bookmarks somewhere-- probably even harder to find that than via Google. On God's existence, my proof relies on private revelation, so it wouldn't apply to anyone else.

Well, you originally claimed that science proved (your) god exists. Science isn't revelation, so either you've changed your claim, or you originally misspoke, or...I don't know what.

[Phytotron]

Luci: Well, um...interesting(?) idear (I wouldn't consider it qualifying as even an hypothesis)...I guess. But that's not what that essay is about, at all. The essay basically demonstrates how religions (in this case, Christianity) are put together from previous religions. An example it traces is the Biblical Great Flood myth having been nearly directly lifted from the Epic of Gilgamesh. So, yeah.

[TiTnAsS]

I don't see why you guys argue about this topic when you know your arguements you argue will be disregarded by the person your argueing and they will continue to beleive their original beleifs... If that makes sence, in a rush..

[Phytotron]

Well, I can't speak for the others, but I do it because I'm a masochist.