Print Page | Close Window

Another religion poll

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=86296
Printed Date: November 24 2024 at 19:13
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Another religion poll
Posted By: Failcore
Subject: Another religion poll
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:35
These wouldn't fit in the poll choices, so I just used corresponding letters:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

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



Replies:
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:37
I personally am like an A.8, so I rounded to a B.

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


Posted By: colorofmoney91
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:41
I choose D. If you ask me to defend myself, I can't, and that is one of the reasons for my answer.

-------------
http://hanashukketsu.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - Hanashukketsu


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:42
I believe in a lower power.

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


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:45
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

I believe in a lower power.
Ah, are you one of those, "If God exists, he's a dick" ppl?


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


Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:49
B is the closest to what I believe I guess, but I wouldn't exactly describe it as a "higher power" in any capacity.

It makes sense in my head but I can't really explain my beliefs.

Also, I'm not entirely sure anything can be revealed through religious institutions.


Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:51
B.2

-------------
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:51


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:57


-------------
What?


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 12:58
^nice one.LOL

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:06
I believe in the Great Cosmic Goat (but the hypothesis of the Great Cosmic Whale is interesting).


Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:08
C

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


Posted By: PyramidMeetsTheEye
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:10
i beleave in f**king logic 

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today





Madalyn Murray O'Hair


you still live in our minds 



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


Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:13
i voted C

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


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:20
Originally posted by PyramidMeetsTheEye PyramidMeetsTheEye wrote:

i beleave in f**king logic 

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today



Logic is subjective


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


Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:23
Logic isn't necessarily subjective, but saying logic disproves all theism shows pretty flawed thinking capabilities.  I'm sure happy for you that you understand the universe more than anybody else ever has.


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:28
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Logic isn't necessarily subjective, but saying logic disproves all theism shows pretty flawed thinking capabilities.  I'm sure happy for you that you understand the universe more than anybody else ever has.
What I mean by logic is subjective, is that it is open to interpretation. There maybe a pure, unsubjective logic that runs the universe, but as you said, without being a full and complete Turing machine with access to all knowledge, its impossible to be completely adherent to it.


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


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:48
I believe that the nature and will of some but not all of the higher powers can be discovered through religious (and scientific) texts, so A, I guess.

(Higher than what?)

Higher Power is a term coined in the 1930s in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous" rel="nofollow - Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and is used in other http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve-step_program" rel="nofollow - twelve-step programs . It is also sometimes referred to as a power greater than ourselves and is frequently abbreviated to HP.


Posted By: OT Räihälä
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 13:59
Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

E) You have no religious senses at all.


-------------
http://soundcloud.com/osmotapioraihala/sets" rel="nofollow - Composer - Click to listen to my works!


Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:03
Firm atheist right here.

-------------
http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:03
Originally posted by OT Räihälä OT Räihälä wrote:

Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

E) You have no religious senses at all.


Well, D and E can be the same, but with a different formulation.


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:09
Actually, I'd say that E is closer to C. If you don't ever think about it, then you have no opinion one way or the other.

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


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:15
I am my own higher power.

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:18
Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by OT Räihälä OT Räihälä wrote:

Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

E) You have no religious senses at all.


Well, D and E can be the same, but with a different formulation.
Well, no, not really, there is no belief necessary in Osmo's version of E, it is completely areligious rather than irreligious.
 
 
My version of E just requires an angelic teddy bear ...


-------------
What?


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:32
I'm highly offended you don't have "Q" as a choice.
Don't respect my beliefs eh!?

Angry


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:34
^ the Q Continuum is a fiction Brian. Just because it's got its own Wikipedia page doesn't make it real.

-------------
What?


Posted By: Junges
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:35
E - I KNOW there is no higher power.

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


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:43
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I'm highly offended you don't have "Q" as a choice.
Don't respect my beliefs eh!?

Angry
Hahaha.


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


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:43
Originally posted by Junges Junges wrote:

E - I KNOW there is no higher power.
Semantics.

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


Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 14:46
And the vote goes to.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
Anything is possible, but i would still think it unlikely. 


-------------
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 15:30
Originally posted by PyramidMeetsTheEye PyramidMeetsTheEye wrote:

i beleave in f**king logic 




But evidently not spell checkers.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 16:02
A5. If you want to label the Bible as "religious text", be my guest. "Religious institutions", including the church I visit almost every Sunday, is a bit of another point now and then.
 
Voted for option A.
 


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


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 16:05
I am actually pleased to see we are getting a decent spread here. It's cool that proggers are diverse bunch.

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


Posted By: smartpatrol
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 16:35
Originally posted by Junges Junges wrote:

E - I KNOW there is no higher power.
That would be V, actually


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 17 2012 at 16:40
Originally posted by PyramidMeetsTheEye PyramidMeetsTheEye wrote:

i beleave in f**king logic 


Yes I can see you screwing logic up. 




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


Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 03:43
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by OT Räihälä OT Räihälä wrote:

Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

E) You have no religious senses at all.


Well, D and E can be the same, but with a different formulation.
Well, no, not really, there is no belief necessary in Osmo's version of E, it is completely areligious rather than irreligious.
 
 
My version of E just requires an angelic teddy bear ...


Ah, it's true: thinking deeper about it, the D answer involves a knowledge of religious concepts that the E answer evacuates and... Wait a minute, what's this crap about "angelic teddy bears"???


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 03:47
Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by OT Räihälä OT Räihälä wrote:

Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

E) You have no religious senses at all.


Well, D and E can be the same, but with a different formulation.
Well, no, not really, there is no belief necessary in Osmo's version of E, it is completely areligious rather than irreligious.
 
 
My version of E just requires an angelic teddy bear ...


Ah, it's true: thinking deeper about it, the D answer involves a knowledge of religious concepts that the E answer evacuates and... Wait a minute, what's this crap about "angelic teddy bears"???
Would you believe me if I told you I don't remember Thomas Aquinas mentioning them at all?


Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 03:50
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by OT Räihälä OT Räihälä wrote:

Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
B) You believe in a higher power, but aren't sure of its nature or you think it cannot be fully revealed through religious texts or institutions.
C) You think it's possible there is a higher power, but you aren't sure.
D) You firmly believe there is no higher power.

E) You have no religious senses at all.


Well, D and E can be the same, but with a different formulation.
Well, no, not really, there is no belief necessary in Osmo's version of E, it is completely areligious rather than irreligious.
 
 
My version of E just requires an angelic teddy bear ...


Ah, it's true: thinking deeper about it, the D answer involves a knowledge of religious concepts that the E answer evacuates and... Wait a minute, what's this crap about "angelic teddy bears"???
Would you believe me if I told you I don't remember Thomas Aquinas mentioning them at all?


I could totally.


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 06:50
Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I'm highly offended you don't have "Q" as a choice.
Don't respect my beliefs eh!?

Angry
Hahaha.


Now you mock my beliefs?

I'll send a religious army to kill you for this.


Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 08:37
God exists. He speaks to me all the time.

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


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 08:42
Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Logic isn't necessarily subjective, but saying logic disproves all theism shows pretty flawed thinking capabilities.  I'm sure happy for you that you understand the universe more than anybody else ever has.
What I mean by logic is subjective, is that it is open to interpretation. There maybe a pure, unsubjective logic that runs the universe, but as you said, without being a full and complete Turing machine with access to all knowledge, its impossible to be completely adherent to it.


That's not true and that wouldn't make logic subjective.

What makes it subjective is that we must chose axioms and rules of inference. The most obvious example would be the law of the excluded middle. Intuitively, it appears to make sense at first, but the certainty of it really seems to melt down especially with developments of the 20th century.

Anyway, I'm between C and D. I act on the hypothesis of there being no God, but I admit the non-zero probability that it exists.


-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 09:39
Originally posted by AtomicCrimsonRush AtomicCrimsonRush wrote:

God exists. He speaks to me all the time.


That's not true, we only have contact via the Just For Fun section!


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 09:39
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Originally posted by Deathrabbit Deathrabbit wrote:

Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Logic isn't necessarily subjective, but saying logic disproves all theism shows pretty flawed thinking capabilities.  I'm sure happy for you that you understand the universe more than anybody else ever has.
What I mean by logic is subjective, is that it is open to interpretation. There maybe a pure, unsubjective logic that runs the universe, but as you said, without being a full and complete Turing machine with access to all knowledge, its impossible to be completely adherent to it.


That's not true and that wouldn't make logic subjective.

What makes it subjective is that we must chose axioms and rules of inference. The most obvious example would be the law of the excluded middle. Intuitively, it appears to make sense at first, but the certainty of it really seems to melt down especially with developments of the 20th century.

Anyway, I'm between C and D. I act on the hypothesis of there being no God, but I admit the non-zero probability that it exists.
I think you misunderstood me, because that's actually what I meant.


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


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 10:28
I suppose that I did, but my comment still stands about the Turing Machine. 

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: April 18 2012 at 20:30
Used to be quite anti-religious.  Warming to it again as the journey moves along.  I've had some personal experiences in the last year which have helped me see things a bit clearer.  But I've never claimed to "know" what the truth is and I never will.  I'll believe what brings me peace and not sweat the details.   Smile




Posted By: manofmystery
Date Posted: April 19 2012 at 08:05
I believe in Bill Murray


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


Time always wins.


Posted By: RoyFairbank
Date Posted: April 28 2012 at 02:12
I am only firm for two things, Atheism.... and...... oh nevermind.


Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: April 28 2012 at 02:22
I believe there is nothing worth calling God. Nothing anywhere near resembling an all-powerful being pulling strings and all that. There may be some weird, deeper level to the universe, and maybe that can or cannot be understood by humans. The real issue is is there anything out there worth worshiping, sacrificing to, appeasing, pretending like you give a sh*t about church for, or anything even sort of worth believing through faith based on shaky evidence? And that answer is no.

-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: April 28 2012 at 04:09
Actually, the success of D here shouldn't be so surprising in hindsight. Prog fans tend to be on the intellectual side and intellectuals tend to be less religious.
 
(Note: This is not the silly "religious people are stupid" argument and shouldn't be responded to as such. Intellectual is not the same thing as intelligent.)


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 11:23
Also, it's the internet. The only holy name on here is Richard Dawkins, lol. Jesus hasn't figured out how to use computers yet, but he's a 2000 year old Jew, so I wouldn't expect that to be forhtcoming, lol


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


Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 12:41
Wait, Jesus DOES know how to use a computer: he has a blog! Filled with cute kitten!

Well, at least, that's what Hikaru Nakamura says in his mangas...


Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 13:11
Used to be D, have slowly moved into B territory, where I am today, and where I think I'll stay. Okay.

-------------
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 13:20
All religion post-1979 lacks the production values to make it worthy of listening to.  Pre-1980 religion is where it is at.
 
 
 
And C for me.


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


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 16:09
Failcore: Yeah, the internet *hates* religion. Which is probably why religion is doomed, I don't think they can get around that.


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 17:19
The internet is antisemitic. 

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


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 17:22
The people who use the internet are antisemantic

-------------
What?


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 18:01
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

The people who use the internet are antisemantic


Oh, they are!  They make me so angry I literally stab myself in the face!


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 18:53
That's racist.


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 18:53
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

The people who use the internet are antisemantic


Oh, they are!  They make me so angry I literally stab myself in the face!
I can't find the link now but the same http://www.cracked.com" rel="nofollow - source you used yesterday in an article about politicians recently had one where it was said that you can definitely, totally, literally use 'literally' in the way you just used it and be correct in your use of the language. Wink

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


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 18:55
Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

That's racist.
You have been manipulated by the media. 

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


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 18:55
Oh come on, it's not as if Epignosis ever follows people around criticising them for not using words correctly. "Do unto others" and all that, he lives by such credo.


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 19:00
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

That's racist.
You have been manipulated by the media. 
 
You have been manipulated by your momma.
 
 
 
Actually who hasn't been? Not by your mom, by their own mom. Well maybe by your mom, I guess some people on here might know her, I don't know what she gets up to.
 
Wait, don't take it like that, I was just saying I don't know what she does, I'm not trying to offend. I mean, she could be dead this is unsalvagable.
 
At the comedy festival last night during Axis Of Awesome, the band said they were going to do an offensive song about religion but just to check, was anybody really religious there and if you love God/religion, MAKE SOME NOISE!
 
To my surprise, there was a total, dead, silence. After several seconds, literally two people (I could see them from my table) started clapping. The keyboardist said sneeringly "Well there's always a couple" and then they carried on.
 
But it made me think how much progress NZ is making regarding religion. Sure it was only a comedy audience (comedy fans tend to be less serious about things like religion for obvious reasons) of about 500 or maybe more. (It was a room in the town hall and it was full.) But the band could've done the same thing almost anywhere in America and gotten a huge roar.


Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 19:02
My head hurts a lot. I voted for E. I liked that one the best. Where's F? I love the idea of God, even if I don't believe in it. I want my mom to believe in God. She's calmer and happier when she does. 


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 19:57
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

The people who use the internet are antisemantic


Oh, they are!  They make me so angry I literally stab myself in the face!
I can't find the link now but the same http://www.cracked.com" rel="nofollow - source you used yesterday in an article about politicians recently had one where it was said that you can definitely, totally, literally use 'literally' in the way you just used it and be correct in your use of the language. Wink


Yes, I read that Cracked article.  http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-commonly-corrected-grammar-errors-that-arent-mistakes/" rel="nofollow - I'll post it so people can read it. 

It's mostly bullsh*t, sorry.  This author seems to think that just because people do something wrongly for a long period of time automatically makes the mistake right.  Historically, that's true sometimes.

Just because people misuse words for a long time doesn't make it proper- it only makes it proper in their linguistic milieu.  The author of that article took one form of English and said, "This is correct in all versions of English" and he is ridiculously wrong.  Grammar and usage is (supposed) to make communication as clear as possible; misusing words very often works against the communicator and the intended message.

The writer then made the Linguistics 101 black and white distinction between descriptivism and prescriptivism, which is stupid.  Both are right, but neither one absolutely.  Language is Silly Putty.  We can mold it as we like it, but we cannot turn it into a living bird or a stack of $100s.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 20:48

You can't put an s on the end of a number like that.

 
Honestly, some people.


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 20:51
Originally posted by Failcore Failcore wrote:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that it's nature.




Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 01 2012 at 22:10
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

The people who use the internet are antisemantic


Oh, they are!  They make me so angry I literally stab myself in the face!
I can't find the link now but the same http://www.cracked.com" rel="nofollow - source you used yesterday in an article about politicians recently had one where it was said that you can definitely, totally, literally use 'literally' in the way you just used it and be correct in your use of the language. Wink


Yes, I read that Cracked article.  http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-commonly-corrected-grammar-errors-that-arent-mistakes/" rel="nofollow - I'll post it so people can read it. 

It's mostly bullsh*t, sorry.  This author seems to think that just because people do something wrongly for a long period of time automatically makes the mistake right.  Historically, that's true sometimes.

Just because people misuse words for a long time doesn't make it proper- it only makes it proper in their linguistic milieu.  The author of that article took one form of English and said, "This is correct in all versions of English" and he is ridiculously wrong.  Grammar and usage is (supposed) to make communication as clear as possible; misusing words very often works against the communicator and the intended message.

The writer then made the Linguistics 101 black and white distinction between descriptivism and prescriptivism, which is stupid.  Both are right, but neither one absolutely.  Language is Silly Putty.  We can mold it as we like it, but we cannot turn it into a living bird or a stack of $100s.
I understand. Though remember English is my second language so you can be a little more forgiving of my silly waysTongue

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


Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: May 03 2012 at 13:36
Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

That's racist.
You have been manipulated by the media. 
 
You have been manipulated by your momma.
 
 
 
Actually who hasn't been? Not by your mom, by their own mom. Well maybe by your mom, I guess some people on here might know her, I don't know what she gets up to.
 
Wait, don't take it like that, I was just saying I don't know what she does, I'm not trying to offend. I mean, she could be dead this is unsalvagable.
 
At the comedy festival last night during Axis Of Awesome, the band said they were going to do an offensive song about religion but just to check, was anybody really religious there and if you love God/religion, MAKE SOME NOISE!
 
To my surprise, there was a total, dead, silence. After several seconds, literally two people (I could see them from my table) started clapping. The keyboardist said sneeringly "Well there's always a couple" and then they carried on.
 
But it made me think how much progress NZ is making regarding religion. Sure it was only a comedy audience (comedy fans tend to be less serious about things like religion for obvious reasons) of about 500 or maybe more. (It was a room in the town hall and it was full.) But the band could've done the same thing almost anywhere in America and gotten a huge roar.
I doubt there would have been a roar in America, unless it was specifically a religious event. People are cowards and in general will not say what they believe if they think it will be met with hostility. Online, however.....LOL


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


Posted By: frippism
Date Posted: May 15 2012 at 10:34
Originally posted by AtomicCrimsonRush AtomicCrimsonRush wrote:

God exists. He speaks to me all the time.

Oh come on, me whispering things to you in your sleep does not make me a God.

I personally, voted C, though it's somewhere between C and D. According to MY rationality and logic, I don't see how the existence of higher deity makes sense. With that, I don't trust mine or anyone's rationality as a correct rationality. Moreover, I just don't care. I really really really really don't care. It's a useless question to ask, in the end.


-------------
There be dragons


Posted By: Bosh66
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:08
Originally posted by Failcore Failcore wrote:

These wouldn't fit in the poll choices, so I just used corresponding letters:

A) You believe in a higher power and believe that its nature and will can be discovered through religious texts or institutions.
 
This, although agnostics seem to be in the ascendency and atheists the biggest single group. No surprises there then Smile


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:15
Originally posted by frippism frippism wrote:

Originally posted by AtomicCrimsonRush AtomicCrimsonRush wrote:

God exists. He speaks to me all the time.

Oh come on, me whispering things to you in your sleep does not make me a God.




LOL
You sure baby?

That is interesting though, I assume ACR means that as something symbolic, or god speaks to him all the time through prayer, or things he sees/feels.

Because if you mean literal talking to prophet type stuff, I'd say ACR you need to get your head checked, or we're in the presence of the savior of our time!



I still am completely unsure, I always am hovering in some gray area between agnostic and deist...the problem usually being semantics.
This is why I like to go with extreme agnostic. I ain't just unsure, I am 100% absolutely sure I am unsureWink



Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:21
I vote for E.

If you have to ask the reason why, then the answer is already lost. 


Posted By: frippism
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:22
I put it beside the keys how could you have already lost it?

-------------
There be dragons


Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:25
I don't like paraphrasing others (but I'll make an exception for Kafka); beliefs are like guillotines, just as heavy, just as light. 

It works both ways.


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:42
I never had a good way with words on the topic, here's some cheery lads who do a far superior job




Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:45
Brian empty your message inbox, it's full you sociable b*****d.


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:48
At least you were the one who finally filled it up < 3



But suuuuummer is a coming and, arise. Ariiise.
But suuuuummer is a coming and, arise. Ariiise!


Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 02:50
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

At least you were the one who finally filled it up < 3

I <3 u 2 bby grl


Posted By: progresssaurus
Date Posted: May 24 2012 at 03:44
D



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk