|
|
metadata
Do you hope (not think) another religion is right or part of it is right?
I hope that reincarnation is right, along with my beliefs of my religion.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Hoping something else is right does not really make sense. You always hope things turn out best for yourself, so this point is rather moot.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
no i do not. although reincarnation would be nice. i just know that atheism is the only way, and i hope that one day science proves that there is no god and every religious person is crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[darkninja210](/forums/9/topics/48563?page=1#posts-1071728):***
>
> no i do not. although reincarnation would be nice. i just know that atheism is the only way, and i hope that one day science proves that there is no god and every religious person is crazy.
Lmfao. Good luck. Even if science could prove how each and every thing in the universe works, beyond any doubt, there’s still nothing that says God didn’t put it there in the first place. ;)
> *Originally posted by **[zamininc](/forums/9/topics/48563?page=1#posts-1070166):***
>
> Do you hope (not think) another religion is right or part of it is right?
>
> I hope that reincarnation is right, along with my beliefs of my religion.
What religion is it you follow that doesn’t believe in reincarnation, but would be compatible with reincarnation, should it be true? o.o
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Well, I hope there is a heaven… But, unfortunately, there is not. **Sorry for the bad news**.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> no i do not. although reincarnation would be nice. i just know that atheism is the only way, and i hope that one day science proves that there is no god and every religious person is crazy.
True atheists do not care about Christianity or God. True atheists inherently have nothing against religion or religious people.
You are no atheist!1one
> Well, I hope there is a heaven… But, unfortunately, there is not. Sorry for the bad news.
Hey, let’s all make baseless statements without proof.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
The only proof for heaven is an ancient bestseller, so…
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Absence of proof is not the same as proof to the contrary.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Russel’s teapot:
“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”
anyway, this would do better in another thread.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[johnrulz](/forums/9/topics/48563?page=1#posts-1071744):***
>
> Well, I hope there is a heaven… But, unfortunately, there is not. **Sorry for the bad news**.
If you can’t stay on topic then get the fuck out.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
darkninja: no. that’s not how science works.
if religion were falsifiable, it would be an improvement.
darkruler: you’re right that there’s no inherent reason to be agianst religion or religious people. assuming a perfect world, we could just ignore that aspect of them if we didn’t like it.
there are still reasons to be against religion, though.
like, in the states, religious fundamentalists are actively interfering with scientific progress, and discriminating against atheists, gays, and women. they are batshit insane.
on top of that, a large portion of the normally not so bad religious people actually defend them. if it were up to popular vote, creationism would be taught in schools as science. also prop 8 and similar laws, anti-abortion support, iraq war, churches not paying taxes, etc.
i’m canadian, so not as many of these problems are as bad here, but these are severe enough issues that the border doesn’t stop them from being terrible.
@op: being reincarnated as a bear might be cool.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[johnrulz](/forums/9/topics/48563?page=1#posts-1071898):***
>
> Russel’s teapot:
> “If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”
> anyway, this would do better in another thread.
Lmfao. Read what you just said, please.
> it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it
No one said anything was wrong with anyone for doubting the existence of Heaven. The problem is that you state that Heaven doesn’t exist as if it’s a proven fact without any basis of proof to back up that statement at all.
I agree that the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. If you asserted that there were a teapot out there, it would fall on you to provide proof if you wanted to be taken seriously. In this case, you’re the one who has made the claim — Heaven doesn’t exist. That’s great. Proof, please.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> Proof, please.
Well… I can show that “burning in hell” isn’t possible. Do I get points for that?
Anyway, on topic, reincarnation would be pretty nice, IMO. Other than that, no, not really.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> Well… I can show that “burning in hell” isn’t possible. Do I get points for that?
Three.
Also, what is it that everyone finds so appealing about the idea of reincarnation? Personally, I’d rather just die and either be done with it or do my thang in the afterlife. Constantly cycling through random species on earth for all of eternity doesn’t sound so fun.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> Also, what is it that everyone finds so appealing about the idea of reincarnation?
For me, it’s the fact that an “afterlife” would be boring as all hell, and reincarnation would avoid that.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[Frogmanex](/forums/9/topics/48563?page=1#posts-1071974):***
> > it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it
>
> No one said anything was wrong with anyone for doubting the existence of Heaven. .
It was at one point,you would be called a heretic and burned at the stake.
> Proof, please.
The problem with that is, there is no way to prove something doesn’t exist. That is what I was trying to say with Russel’s teapot. The logical thing to do is assume it does not exist, because there is no proof for it.
We should continue this in another thread though.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
i don’t think reincarnation would be all that great.
if any form of reincarnation is somewhat consistent with reality, though, it involves a memory wipe, apart from maybe a few things. so i think that gives it points over an eternal afterlife.
also the sun eventually burns out and the cycle stops, presumably. or you get reincarnated in another part of the universe.
mainly, i just think being a bear would be cool. not necessarily fun, because bears have to survive in the wild, and humans aren’t very nice to them, and all that stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
If any religion i would hope that buddhism is right, as they believe in reincarnation which as an idea is sort of childish, but less so than the idea that if you are **good** you go to a good place and if you are **bad** you go to a bad place. Reincarnation could work if the universe were infinite (both time and space), because you could be reincarnated as _another_ being on _another_ planet in _another_ place.
However i find that all ideas about the afterlife are wrong, and that if the Abrahamic idea of heaven were right, it would be extremely boring after 30,000 years.
Everything is born so everything must die
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> Constantly cycling through random species on earth for all of eternity doesn’t sound so fun.
Sitting around heaven for all eternity is more fun?
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Lol. I’d rather be able meet all the old folk like Lincoln and whoever else, lounge around, play billiards all day, have an endless supply of fresh fruit… whatever the hell’s supposed to happen in Heaven… than be turned into a tulip or something… Especially if it meant my memory being erased.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
If your memory was erased then how could you be bored? You technically never experienced anything before it.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
True. But I still wouldn’t want that to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[Frogmanex](/forums/9/topics/48563?page=1#posts-1072482):***
>
> True. But I still wouldn’t want that to happen.
You wouldn’t not want it to happen after you are born again with no memory. (Until you get to thinking about the idea of Reincarnation, depending on what religion you are in your next life, or if your personality is different)
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Eh, it is what it is. I shall still live on in your hearts ‘n’ stuff.
|
 "zamininc"){kind=small}
 "Darkruler2005"){kind=avatar}
 "darkninja210"){kind=avatar}
 "Frogmanex"){kind=small}
 "JohnRulz"){kind=small}
 "Iggyshark"){kind=avatar}
 "notallama"){kind=small}
 "FuzzyBacon"){kind=small}
 "OverSoul"){kind=small}
 "SaintAjora"){kind=avatar}
 "Solidus"){kind=small}