NationStates Jolt Archive

Just a poll, hoping not to stir debate.

Just gauging what God is to people...

So theres no point in posting then?

There'll be debate anyway so it is pointless to say that you do not want a debate because it'll happen anyway.

A three letter word that provokes insanity in the unstable.

There'll be debate anyway so it is pointless to say that you do not want a debate because it'll happen anyway.

Hey Corneliu... long time no see.

Hey Corneliu... long time no see.

Been Busy :D

...big.

...nonexistent.

hung like Jesus.

Neesika wins.

...not

I think you'll find most of NSG is either Agnostic or Atheist. There are a few Christians about, some Buddhists, Muslims, hell probably a Sikh or two.

I don't know.

I think you'll find most of NSG is either Agnostic or Atheist. There are a few Christians about, some Buddhists, Muslims, hell probably a Sikh or two.

That is interesting considering the moral and seemingly religious debate that occurs here.

That is interesting considering the moral and seemingly religious debate that occurs here.

It's cute that religious folks automatically think they have the morals market cornered.

... not Jewish.

And made out of noodles

It's cute that religious folks automatically think they have the morals market cornered.

Morals are relative, like that cousin no one talks to. It's still a relative.

God is larger than the human imagination can comprehend. Like reality, God will constantly surprise.

I am a christian but the whole business is confusing to me.

...dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

Just wanted to put it in there before someone else posted it in an attempt to look good. I've never read Nietzsche.

God is larger than the human imagination can comprehend. Like reality, God will constantly surprise.but only certain people. you know, dumb folks are easier to surprise.

... A simplistic anagram.

God is larger than the human imagination can comprehend. Like reality, God will constantly surprise.How do you know then?

one of us. He also smokes cannabis.

If the last option were simply "an abstract idea," I would vote for it. Meaning is a personal thing. No one else can say what has or hasn't meaning but an individual.

The perfect mother, father, grandfather and grandmother rolled into one.

Don't ask me how I came to that conclusion.

God is a bicycle with no wheels. It just kind of floats there. And you can't get anywhere no matter how fast you peddle God. And He comes equipped with a basket and streamers. And if you put old baseball cards in God, He makes motorcycle noises. There is no kickstand, though (since this is a floating bicycle, it doesn't need to be propped up).

God is a bicycle with no wheels. It just kind of floats there. And you can't get anywhere no matter how fast you peddle God. And He comes equipped with a basket and streamers. And if you put old baseball cards in God, He makes motorcycle noises. There is no kickstand, though (since this is a floating bicycle, it doesn't need to be propped up).

Is he always being stolen by the neighborhood bully, and returned six days later with shit smeared all over the seat? I hear that happens to some diety-bikes. A shame really.

....the creator, the only one worthy of worship or praise.

Just a poll, hoping not to stir debate.

Just gauging what God is to people...

A seven-letter rude word that starts with B.

....something the apathetic, afraid, or unwilling turn to when they no longer have a solution to their earthly problems or the will to see it through.

Submitting this post.

Where is the "Thinks it is arrogant to believe that their belief is superior to anyone elses when there is no proof to either side. Agnostic and aetheist included."?

God is incomprehensible...

Those who know this do not concern themselves with the particulars.

Those who do not know this fool themselves every day of their lives.

Those who do not believe in God, need not...God is above needing petty things like praise, worship, humility, or even acknowledgement.

Those needs are human needs...and God is anything but.

God is incomprehensible...

Those who know this do not concern themselves with the particulars.

Those who do not know this fool themselves every day of their lives.

Those who do not believe in God, need not...God is above needing petty things like praise, worship, humility, or even acknowledgement.

Those needs are human needs...and God is anything but.

*applause*

:fluffle: I adore you.

a fictional character.

An abstract idea that has no meaning.

So when does everyone think the usual Bible debate will start up?

Submitting this post.

you? god? don't make laugh.

I'm a Diest all the way mo fo.

I'm a Diest all the way mo fo.

So you believe in Death.....

Wow....bad, BAD joke :( :sniper:

...dead.

I'm probably not the first to say this...

God is incomprehensible...

Those who know this do not concern themselves with the particulars.

Those who do not know this fool themselves every day of their lives.

Those who do not believe in God, need not...God is above needing petty things like praise, worship, humility, or even acknowledgement.

Those needs are human needs...and God is anything but.How come you know?

God is a fish, looking for a bicycle.

Why did I know the last one would be most popular? Well it does not matter, I am not the religious type, however am Christian. I believe what most Atheists do. The Big Bang... etc. however with a creator, "God" if you will.

I think you should have added another option..

Do not know.

Some of us .. just don't know. We don't know if God exists or if He doesn't.

I think God is the human necessity to know there is a higher force in control of us.

Gods are abstract ideas that have an awful lot of meaning.

God is the infinite.

We are the finite manifestation of the infinite.

... is dog spelt backwards.

If the last option were simply "an abstract idea," I would vote for it. Meaning is a personal thing. No one else can say what has or hasn't meaning but an individual.

Well put.

I don't know whether or not God(s) exist, I don't know what he wants out of humanity, and I don't pretend to know these things. Quite frankly, I just don't care. I figure that, provided he does exist, the best I can do is live life according to my own moral standards, and hope that that's good enough for him.

rhetoric nonsense.

At least try to back up your cheap shots.

Trinity!
Yea, most people here are atheist, not a surprise since this is the internet.

God is the infinite.

We are the finite manifestation of the infinite.rhetoric nonsense.

rhetoric nonsense.

Do not take a stab at someone else's belief, especially when they didn't stab at yours.

Do not take a stab at someone else's belief, especially when they didn't stab at yours.

Get used to it and welcome to NSG.

You should have included the option "dead" if only for humourous purposes.

Where is the "Thinks it is arrogant to believe that their belief is superior to anyone elses when there is no proof to either side. Agnostic and aetheist included."?
Funny that you should include agnostics in having a side in this debate.

As an agnostic, I contend that if there is a god, it's pretty unlikely that any human society has successfully defined it and that it's impossible to know one way or another whether or not this god exists.

...dead. Long live God!

So you believe in Death.....

Wow....bad, BAD joke :( :sniper:

heh...yeah....kinda..

Well then I'll simply call you Ignorant, and leave it at that.

And I'll call you Jim.

Get used to it and welcome to NSG.

Well then I'll simply call you Ignorant, and leave it at that.

I am a Christian, so I believe that an eternal Trinity created, sustains, and predestines the world according to his will.

And I'll call you Jim.

Sweet.

...made of fail.

...not real.

How many people said that before me?

I think God Himself put it best.

"I am."

Thus, God is. It's simple, people.

I cannot pick any poll option, unfortunately.

'God' is a symbol of the unknowable.

... a dj, yes he is. and i am surprised to be the first to make this reference.

...made of fail.

I knew it! ...it's a meme.

God works at 7/11.

Why did I know the last one would be most popular? Well it does not matter, I am not the religious type, however am Christian. I believe what most Atheists do. The Big Bang... etc. however with a creator, "God" if you will.

Believing in God doesn't make you Christian.

Believing in God doesn't make you Christian.

QFT.

It makes you (mono)theist.

God is everything. The cause and consequence of everything that is, ever was, and ever will be.

My personal one was actually "a multitude of divine forms and faces but ultimately one". I believe that all the divine figures are faces and expressions of one Divine force, though I believe this is a conscious (knowing) force/being behind all.

At least try to back up your cheap shots.chap shots? that's a cheap shot: "God is the infinite. We are the finite manifestation of the infinite." esoteric drooling.

God is everything. The cause and consequence of everything that is, ever was, and ever will be.Got any evidence for that claim? Or who told you that?

There'll be debate anyway so it is pointless to say that you do not want a debate because it'll happen anyway.
Corneliu:fluffle:

God is All knowing.

I am a Christian, so I believe that an eternal Trinity created, sustains, and predestines the world according to his will.Why are you a Christian? Because you were raised to believe so and stayed that way out of convenience or because you thought it through?

Just a poll, hoping not to stir debate.

Just gauging what God is to people...

Non-existant.

chap shots? that's a cheap shot: "God is the infinite. We are the finite manifestation of the infinite." esoteric drooling.

The converse is that we are finite and god is the infinite manifestation of us. *drools esoterically*

How come you know?

I'm not quite sure I understand the question...

If you're asking how I know the statements I made are true, it's simple...I don't know they are true, I simply believe them to be true.

It may be that there is no god, or god might be an insufferable prick...but I prefer my version. :)

Neesika wins.

Seconded.

... made of spaghetti.

... unimportant.

I'm not quite sure I understand the question...

If you're asking how I know the statements I made are true, it's simple...I don't know they are true, I simply believe them to be true.

It may be that there is no god, or god might be an insufferable prick...but I prefer my version. :)You did not say that you believe god is so and so. You said, God was incomprehensible and so forth, as a statement of fact.
And what you believe is irrelevant anyways, since that happens only in your mind, and not in the real world where god is supposedly existing. Your version lacks any confirmation out of the real world, so why do you keep to it?

My God is a constant companion, an uncritical ear, and an ultimate cause to me.

That I only ever notice Him, speak to Him, or blame Him for anything when the hammer in my right hand hits the thumb of my left hand, says more about me than it does about Him.

:D

again nit pickers that we are, cameroi sees no entirely accurate option in this poll, though two that are equally close to our possition. to us, god is something big, freindly and nontangable, that while, on a basis of tangable evidence may or may not exist, we have a strong feeling that something of the sort exists.

we also have an equaly strong feeling that most of what is believed about, is again, while perhaps possible, not supported by any tangable evidence.

there's no reason one or more such awairnessess couldn't exist, though we openly questing the reqirement for them, if they do, which the more ardent of theologens propose, of such an awairness being a/"the" ALL creator, or even infallable.

such questions being, for all intents and purposes, appearently unanswerable in an objectively compelling manor, it is our preference to concern ourselves with such matters, as such dieties, should they choose to exist, have left in our own hands.

specificly it being up to nobody but ourselves, to avoid messing everything up, for each other.

our invissible freinds are good friends to have and to love. and however all powerful they might be, such responisbilities as mentioned, remain primarily, if not entirely, our own.

so sure, there could very well be something, big, friendly, and nontangable, but the nature and origen of their existence isn't neccessarily the ultimate question of our own.

there could also be, little, friendly, unknown and harmless nontangable beings who would be good friends to have too.

most of what most people think they know about it is simply one, or a very small range of possibilities, out of a very nearly infinite real range of them.

=^^=
.../\...

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/downloads/crazy800.jpg

*snip content*

=^^=
.../\...

You again! I thought I'd turned signatures off :p

*snip image*

And you! Nice artwork, apart from the text in it!
Yours?

And you! Nice artwork, apart from the text in it!
Yours?

Oh my no. Comes from www.principiadiscordia.com

Slighty flawed poll, IMO - you can believe God doesn't exist without believing that the idea of God is meaningless. One is simple atheism, the other is error theory. There wasn't an option for agnosticism either, but I'm sure the many agnostics on this forum have already complained about that.
Many of the people who've voted for the 'meaningless abstraction' option probably don't actually believe this to be the case, anyway - I don't believe in string theory, but I don't think the very idea is ridiculous.

You did not say that you believe god is so and so. You said, God was incomprehensible and so forth, as a statement of fact.

Yep...If we assume there is a God, then I think that's pretty indisputable, unless you can point me in the direction of the person who fully comprehends God.

Your version lacks any confirmation out of the real world, so why do you keep to it?

I'll assume "of" was supposed to be "in"...

I don't really "keep" to anything, if your speaking in a doctrinal sense. Organized religion is, in my opinion, a great evil in the world.

I don't require confirmation in the real world, as my faith is personal. I don't generally share my thoughts regarding my faith with anyone. I don't feel anyone should believe as I do, nor do I feel my own beliefs are any more or less valid than anyone elses.

I had a personal experience that caused me to get off of the agnostic fence and I now believe in a higher power. I don't pretend to know what it is, or what it wants, and I really don't care, as I'll find out the details soon enough. :p

God is whatever the individual believer wants it to be.

God is whatever the individual believer wants it to be.

God is whatever the individual believer has been taught to believe in by his/her parents...
*ducks*

God is whatever the individual believer has been taught to believe in by his/her parents...
*ducks*
True, to a certain extent, though I find that most believers have personalized their image of God in at least some subtle ways.

Though it's nitpicking, I see no entirely accurate option in this poll, though two are close to my position. To me, god is something big, friendly and nontangable. I have a strong intuition that God exists, but no evidence.
Note I have repositioned you from "we" to "I." It makes it clearer.

Iwe also have an equally strong feeling that most of what is believed about, is again, while perhaps possible, not supported by any tangible evidence.

There is no reason one or more such awarenesses couldn't exist, even if there is no requirement for their existence. Why, by existing need one be the Creator? Why need one be infallible?
there's no reason one or more such awarenesses couldn't exist, though We openly question the reqirement for them, if they do,] which the more ardent of theologians propose, of such an awareness being "the" ALL creator, or even infallable.

If there be God, God has left us these questions to answer for ourselves.such questions being, for all intents and purposes, appearently unanswerable in an objectively compelling manor, it is our preference to concern ourselves with such matters, as such dieties, should they choose to exist, have left in our own hands.
I tried to make it clearer. I probably messed it up a bit.

specificly it being up to nobody but ourselves, to avoid messing everything up, for each other.
Hmm.

our invisible freinds are good friends to have and to love. and however all powerful they might be, such responisbilities as mentioned, remain primarily, if not entirely, our own.
Sort of. Invisible friends should serve us. They exist at our pleasure, in our time and in our minds. When they start bossing us around, it's time to pull the plug on their mental tenancy.

so sure, there could very well be something, big, friendly, and nontangible, but the nature and origin of their existence isn't neccessarily the ultimate question of our own.
That's good. It's very good. I wish I'd written it.

there could also be little, friendly, unknown and harmless nontangible beings who would be good friends to have too.

most of what most people think they know about it is simply one, or a very small range of possibilities, out of a very nearly infinite real range of them.
Yeah, that's OK too. Referring to yourself in the plural kind of makes sense now too.
=^^=
.../\...
Stop that! It's a signature, circa 1985. Put your signature in your profile, so those who don't want to see it don't have to.

<Snip>On a completely unrelated note; how does one "sing kumbaya out of Bottle"? The curiousity's killing me...

On a completely unrelated note; how does one "sing kumbaya out of Bottle"? The curiousity's killing me...

Look at the the hyphens. :rolleyes:

Got any evidence for that claim? Or who told you that?

I see you can't read.

NO DEBATE IN THIS THREAD!!!! It is on the first page. What are you? Illiterate?

Corneliu:fluffle:

God is All knowing.

Hear Hear!!

Why are you a Christian? Because you were raised to believe so and stayed that way out of convenience or because you thought it through?

Why are you being a jerk in a thread about what we all believe God is? Were you raised to be a jerk?

Corny is back and he is kicking ass.

Slighty flawed poll, IMO - you can believe God doesn't exist without believing that the idea of God is meaningless. One is simple atheism, the other is error theory. There wasn't an option for agnosticism either, but I'm sure the many agnostics on this forum have already complained about that.
Many of the people who've voted for the 'meaningless abstraction' option probably don't actually believe this to be the case, anyway - I don't believe in string theory, but I don't think the very idea is ridiculous.

Yeah, I voted that option, and I'm an agnostic.
I don't believe in God because I have not been convinced. On the other hand, there are enough unknowns close to my own experience, that I certainly won't rule out the existence of a creator as being ridiculous.

Frankly, if there'd been a "pancakes are God" option, I would have voted that.

God is rather large i think

Look at the the hyphens. :rolleyes:What'd be the fun in that? - Nevermind, don't answer. My sense of humour's too young to die.I see you can't read.

NO DEBATE IN THIS THREAD!!!! It is on the first page. What are you? Illiterate?There'll be debate anyway so it is pointless to say that you do not want a debate because it'll happen anyway.I see the expected caught you by surprise :pWhy are you being a jerk in a thread about what we all believe God is? Were you raised to be a jerk?I thought you were above petty insults - or did you have a change of heart since yestoday?

Whatever, while it's implied he thinks very little of you, the question was perfctly innocent.

Corny is back and he is kicking ass.

What, by yelling at people?

What, by yelling at people?

Exactly.

Exactly.

Meh, that only impresses other loud idiots.

Volume is the resort of those without arguments.

What'd be the fun in that? - Nevermind, don't answer. My sense of humour's too young to die.I see the expected caught you by surprise :pI thought you were above petty insults - or did you have a change of heart since yestoday?

No I wasn't caught off guard Similization. Just trying to make sure people know how to read and follow rules of the thread that was laid out in the originial post.

Whatever, while it's implied he thinks very little of you, the question was perfctly innocent.

I do not care what others think of me here because this is a chat board and know one knows me personally so it really makes little difference.

This poll is terrible for lack of an option that says "ME!!!! MEEE, I SAY!!!"
I, after all, am a sollipsist, and have been since 7 minutes ago when I started imagining all this was happening.

...

I do not care what others think of me here because this is a chat board and know one knows me personally so it really makes little difference.

Yep. Corneliu is back and kicking ass.

I'd have to stand up to do that, but I bow to Corneliu's ass-kicking skills. :p

No I wasn't caught off guard Similization. Just trying to make sure people know how to read and follow rules of the thread that was laid out in the originial post.

Amusing. So you make the suggestion that debate will happen regardless. Then when debate does happen, you start screaming like a little girl with her pig tails caught in a knot. And then when you're called out on it you throw a red herring out.

So you're the famous Corneliu.

I do not care what others think of me here because this is a chat board and know one knows me personally so it really makes little difference.

So why the screaming then?

Why are you being a jerk in a thread about what we all believe God is? Were you raised to be a jerk?If you all cannot explain why you believe what you believe, you all are the jerks.

Thread dynamics/chaos may make me appear a cheerleader of anti-Corny sentiments. It is not so.

Corneliu is old school (by my junior standards). He has opinions, he backs them up as well he can, and he's a gentleman in defeat. Mostly.

And until he replies to a post that had your heart in, and totally destroys it and all it's lines of retreat, you don't realize just how good he is.

A little respect could save you a lot of pain. All I'm saying.

I don't require confirmation in the real world, as my faith is personal. I don't generally share my thoughts regarding my faith with anyone. I don't feel anyone should believe as I do, nor do I feel my own beliefs are any more or less valid than anyone elses.

So if you met somebody who thought that God was a kangaroo and created the earth 150 years ago, you would think that is just as valid as your God?

I had a personal experience that caused me to get off of the agnostic fence and I now believe in a higher power. I don't pretend to know what it is, or what it wants, and I really don't care, as I'll find out the details soon enough. :p

Care to expand on this experience? You don't have to by all means; it is personal, but it would be interesting to know.

Thread dynamics/chaos may make me appear a cheerleader of anti-Corny sentiments. It is not so.

Corneliu is old school (by my junior standards). He has opinions, he backs them up as well he can, and he's a gentleman in defeat. Mostly.

And until he replies to a post that had your heart in, and totally destroys it and all it's lines of retreat, you don't realize just how good he is.

A little respect could save you a lot of pain. All I'm saying.

I'll have to see it to believe it, considering he made a post asking what we think God is and didn't expect any arguing or debate.

This poll is terrible for lack of an option that says "ME!!!! MEEE, I SAY!!!"
I, after all, am a sollipsist, and have been since 7 minutes ago when I started imagining all this was happening.

We look forward to your development as a social being.
Your posts from before your existential epiphany were a bit ... well, creepy.

The work of the planning committee is hereby disregarded. The real H N Fidddlebottoms VIII is among our company!

All hail the real H N Fiddlebottoms VIII !
You know writing your name out in full makes me feel sort of silly, right?

I'll have to see it to believe it, considering he made a post asking what we think God is and didn't expect any arguing or debate.

He's probably drunk.
I mean that in the nicest possible way. Don't mess with a drunk.

EDIT: It's only fair to mention that I am drunk. Been drunk since noon, and it's tomorrow already.

If you all cannot explain why you believe what you believe, you all are the jerks.

I am neither for nor against any belief put forward here, but I wanted to step in.

We have two concepts brewing here. One being belief (which is what the thread was based on), the other being knowledge (which I believe Beleriand here is the ringleader of, as this particular person keeps posting).

I want to compare the ideas in a few ways. Knowledge is like algebra. It's concrete, easy to get and easy to follow. Belief is like college level Calculus 4. It's abstract, hard to follow if you haven't taken 1 through 3 yet, and some people just don't get it. (I know I don't.)

And as for proof in their belief, I want to switch over to athletics. Let's say you're a big football fan. You have one team that is your favorite and you always want to win. Why do you want them to win? Why do you say they'll win? You have proof to back that up? No, you just have faith that they will. They could be the worst team in the league, but they're your team, and you're proud of that.

So I guess what I'm saying here is: If someone believes in a religion, be it a popular one or one they just discovered of their own machinations, no one else -has- to get it. They do, and that's all that matters.

Wait a minute...isn't Corneliu Allegheny Country 2???

If not, then my apologies. I'd heard it said on other threads and assumed it to be true.

So if you met somebody who thought that God was a kangaroo and created the earth 150 years ago, you would think that is just as valid as your God?

Let me put it this way...he might be right. God is incomprehensible, so it is entirely possible that the most wacked out idea you can think of is, in fact, the correct one.

That said...and I'll say it one more time, God is incomprehensible. Claiming that a God is a kangaroo implies that one can comprehend God, just as one can comprehend a kangaroo.

I do not believe this is possible.

I'll respect their beliefs, so long as they respect mine, for they are both grounded in faith in something that is inherently unknowable.

No denomination has a monopoly on faith, and it would be rather hypocritical of me to state that my faith is somehow more valid than any other when I don't have evidence that any faith (including my own) has any basis in truth that we can percieve.

Care to expand on this experience? You don't have to by all means; it is personal, but it would be interesting to know.

It is indeed personal, and I'm afraid I won't expand upon it.

Thank you for asking though. :)

I do not care what others think of me here because this is a chat board and know one knows me personally so it really makes little difference.It's a discussion forum, not a furnace. You don't have to respond to anything, just as you don't have to call people names for asking perfectly legitimate questions. Then again, I'm no saint & personally I'm quite fond of your... Style, for lack of a better word.I had a personal experience that caused me to get off of the agnostic fence and I now believe in a higher power. I don't pretend to know what it is, or what it wants, and I really don't care, as I'll find out the details soon enough.Whatever fence you climbed off, it had nothing to do with being agnosticism. At least not if the rest of the quoted bit's true. Agnostics hold that ultimate confirmation's unobtainable (this side of the grave & at this point in time at least). Unlike you, I'm an atheist - but like just like you, I'm agnostic about it. Honest people usually are.

EDIT: Proggresica that Kangaroo thing.. Did you get that idea from a book or am I hallucinating again?

And as for proof in their belief, I want to switch over to athletics. Let's say you're a big football fan. You have one team that is your favorite and you always want to win. Why do you want them to win? Why do you say they'll win? You have proof to back that up? No, you just have faith that they will. They could be the worst team in the league, but they're your team, and you're proud of that.

So I guess what I'm saying here is: If someone believes in a religion, be it a popular one or one they just discovered of their own machinations, no one else -has- to get it. They do, and that's all that matters.

Well said.

Just a poll, hoping not to stir debate.

Just gauging what God is to people...

Jim Norton and friends explain what god is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l56b60FT1iw

Let me put it this way...he might be right. God is incomprehensible, so it is entirely possible that the most wacked out idea you can think of is, in fact, the correct one.

That said...and I'll say it one more time, God is incomprehensible. Claiming that a God is a kangaroo implies that one can comprehend God, just as one can comprehend a kangaroo.

I do not believe this is possible.

I'll respect their beliefs, so long as they respect mine, for they are both grounded in faith in something that is inherently unknowable.

No denomination has a monopoly on faith, and it would be rather hypocritical of me to state that my faith is somehow more valid than any other when I don't have evidence that any faith (including my own) has any basis in truth that we can percieve.

Very well said.

It is indeed personal, and I'm afraid I won't expand upon it.

Thank you for asking though. :)

Fair enough, but is there any way you could describe why you think God exists? I know it might be difficult, but why do you feel he does exist, in whatever form he might be, over him not existing?

EDIT: Proggresica that Kangaroo thing.. Did you get that idea from a book or am I hallucinating again?

Neither, I just picked it at random as an absurb idea of God.

God is...










































Wait for it...


































The Hoff!

http://www.lovethehoff.com/images/dancer-poles.gif

Neither, I just picked it at random as an absurb idea of God.Great. Not only will I be wondering about this all day, Cluich apparently decided it'd be good fun to kill my eyesight. The only thing left to complete the day is getting a nut stuck in the zipper.

Great. Not only will I be wondering about this all day, Cluich apparently decided it'd be good fun to kill my eyesight. The only thing left to complete the day is getting a nut stuck in the zipper.

I hope for your sake that that doesn't happen.

Great. Not only will I be wondering about this all day, Cluich apparently decided it'd be good fun to kill my eyesight.

I do what I can. ;)

I do what I can. ;)

Didn't you get banned from posting that other hoff gif?

What did you do, go out and find one just as ghastly the moment the ruling was posted?

Didn't you get banned from posting that other hoff gif?

I wasn't banned. The image itself was.

What did you do, go out and find one just as ghastly the moment the ruling was posted?

Nah, I've known where to find 'em for quite some time.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to make my lunch...



























http://www.lovethehoff.com/images/Stroganhoff.jpg

I wasn't banned. The image itself was.

Not 'for', 'from'.

If you all cannot explain why you believe what you believe, you all are the jerks.

I believe it because I want to. Because I feel that it is right. I have studyed it and from my studies I believe the events occured as predicted. It is what we call faith.

A three letter word that provokes insanity in the unstable.

Are you referring to God or NSG?

Are you referring to God or NSG?

Probably a little bit of both.

Why are you being a jerk in a thread about what we all believe God is? Were you raised to be a jerk?

Wow. Wasn't there a time when you actually pretended to have a point? Now you post insults and try to tell people they aren't allowed to debate.... on a debate forum. How sad.

Wow. Wasn't there a time when you actually pretended to have a point? Now you post insults and try to tell people they aren't allowed to debate.... on a debate forum. How sad.

Whoa...relax. Have some Hoffey apples.

http://www.lovethehoff.com/images/Hoffey%20Apples.jpg

In one sense, we're all God -- after all, we all create our own worlds, our own realities, and even (if we're "insane" enough) others.

In another sense, God is likely incomprehensible to us, and his various manifestations on Earth might all be simply different facets of something far greater, the way photons appear both as waves and as particles when they are in fact something greater and encompassing both.

I prefer to go with Multivac's answer to just about all tough questions like that: There is insufficient data available to answer the question.

Whoa...relax. Have some Hoffey apples.

http://www.lovethehoff.com/images/Hoffey%20Apples.jpg

I am relaxed. It is sad. People disagreeing doesn't upset me. Insults don't upset me. It's just disappointing that even the semblance of debate isn't attempted anymore on some subjects.

Are you referring to God or NSG?

*thunder booms, a faint distance off*

Corny is back and he is kicking ass.

More like being an ass.

*thunder booms, a faint distance off*

Big Man's got shitty aim then.

God is...

Extremely unlikely, to say the least.

I believe it because I want to.... It is what we call faith.

Maybe it's just me. I see those two sentiments as being mutually exclusive.

At least you finally admit your 'faith' is more about wish fulfillment than reality.

If as has been suggested somewhere earlier in this thread God is a fish looking for a bicycle is it more important to know why god is looking for the bicycle, where the bicycle is or would god be looking for a bicycle if s/he was a kangaroo?

Me personally I thin k it more likely that I and the world I appear to operate in are constructs of some future computer simulation.

Wow. Wasn't there a time when you actually pretended to have a point? Now you post insults and try to tell people they aren't allowed to debate.... on a debate forum. How sad.

Read the 1st post. The thread starter did not want this to be a debate.

Read the 1st post. The thread starter did not want this to be a debate.1. since when is that binding?
2. if he didn't, he wouldn't have posted such a topic, likely to stir debate. After all, it is a serious topic. Folks kill and die for god(s).

I believe it because I want to. Because I feel that it is right. That is no cause, that is just personal preference and arbitrariness.

I have studied it and from my studies I believe the events occurred as predicted.It is what we call faith.What have you studied? Using which sources? And what occurred as predicted?

Read the 1st post. The thread starter did not want this to be a debate.

It's a debate forum and it's a cop out on your part. This isn't the RP forums. The thread starter doesn't own the thread. We're permitted to debate on a debate forum. Now, you don't have to include yourself in said debate, but if you choose not to, you could... oh, you know, refrain from posting for the sole reason of slinging insults. Well, unless, you prefer not to be credible.

Or, you could, try something new and support and defend your position. Novelty isn't just a name for particular types of stores.

*thunder booms, a faint distance off*

It was faint for YOU...it was deafening here. God must live in Baltimore.

God is .. one hell of a sleepy bastard.

It was faint for YOU...it was deafening here. God must live in Baltimore.

No, I used to. Now I live in Massachusetts. :p

God is...
... An abstract idea that has every conceivable meaning at once, even those that are contradictory and inconsistent.

I am surprised by the poll numbers. So there must be a lot of agnostic/atheist conservative Republicans on NS, since it seems like they end up debating often, or are they just a small vocal minority of Christian conservative Republicans? (US-wise).

I am surprised by the poll numbers. So there must be a lot of agnostic/atheist conservative Republicans on NS, since it seems like they end up debating often, or are they just a small vocal minority of Christian conservative Republicans? (US-wise).Why are you surprised? The poll numbers only indicate that folks finally start to realize that God (and it must be supposed that the biblical god is meant) is indeed only an abstract idea that has no meaning that was fabricated by a bunch of Jew-ish fanatics in the Persian era right before the crap got written down in the Ptolemaic era.

(and it must be supposed that the biblical god is meant)

Why? Dangerous assumption. I believe in god, but certainly not the one worshipped by abrahamists.

Personally, I don't think god has a gender, but because "it" sounds a little demeaning, I worship her as a female entity. I don't think she'll mind if I'm wrong.

I am surprised by the poll numbers. So there must be a lot of agnostic/atheist conservative Republicans on NS, since it seems like they end up debating often, or are they just a small vocal minority of Christian conservative Republicans? (US-wise).

I'm still reeling from the fact that there were 8 people who picked the "multiple gods" angle. I thought I'd be pretty much the only one.

The poll numbers only indicate that folks finally start to realize that God (and it must be supposed that the biblical god is meant) is indeed only an abstract idea that has no meaning that was fabricated by a bunch of Jew-ish fanatics in the Persian era right before the crap got written down in the Ptolemaic era.

That's just one of many Gods in this world, Beleriand. Seems you have a thing against Christianity.

But because you asked this of everyone else, I feel I must ask you the same.

Do you have proof that God is just an abstract idea that has no meaning? Not just the Christian God, mind you, but every God. You sound more like you're here to prove your point rather than express it.

That's just one of many Gods in this world.But the way the OP is phrased and the fact that in the western world only the biblical god is referred to as just "God" without specifically naming the deity, justifies my interpretation of the question. And the biblical god is definitely an abstract idea that has no meaning because this very specific idea of god did not even exist in the ages long before Jews wrote the bible.

True, but the term God is a general term regarding any deity in any culture in any part of the world. Though the original creator seems to be leaning toward the Christian faith in -his- idea of what God is perceived to be by others, God can be a multitude of things that aren't covered on that poll.

And as for your facts, so what if they wrote a doctrine immediately on discovering him? I might be able to agree that the Bible itself is a load of junk, but you and I cannot prove, regardless of earthly facts, that this particular God does not exist.

But the way the OP is phrased and the fact that in the western world only the biblical god is referred to as just "God" without specifically naming the deity, justifies my interpretation of the question. And the biblical god is definitely an abstract idea that has no meaning because this very specific idea of god did not even exist in the ages long before Jews wrote the bible.


And gravity doesn't exist either, because the current particular notion of it didn't until Newton wrote about it. Give it a rest already. :rolleyes:

The difference being that gravity is an observable phenomenon, while God(s) is/are not.

Doesn't make his argument any less fallcious.

And gravity doesn't exist either, because the current particular notion of it didn't until Newton wrote about it. Give it a rest already. :rolleyes:

The difference being that gravity is an observable phenomenon, while God(s) is/are not.

Exactly. Gravity is observable, God is not.

As such, God cannot be proven or disproven, regardless of case.

Not to get too philosophical here, but religion is very much like the wind. Wind cannot be seen, but can be felt by some. When those who feel the wind tell the others who did not feel it about it, they call the one who felt it crazy.

Exactly. Gravity is observable, God is not.

As such, God cannot be proven or disproven, regardless of case.

Not to get too philosophical here, but God (generic term, not Christian faith) is very much like the wind. Wind cannot be seen, but can be felt by some. When those who feel the wind tell the others who did not feel it about it, they call the one who felt it crazy.

That's not the point. Disregarding an idea or notion simply because it didn't exist until X point in time is absurd.

My belief is that God comes in multiple guises and is truly a massive omnipotent force manipulating the known universe as "it" see's fit.

I am not christian or subscribe to any other religious pigeon hole. My belief is uniquely my own.
I have two objections
Organized religion- my experience with diverse factions of christian churches
is that the congregation gathers to worship god and instead ends up worshipping the reverend,pastor,priest etc. taking every word said as divine inspiration to be followed obediently without question. etc

True Believers- What part of "Don't cram religion down my throat" don't you get????Accept the fact that I don't believe as you do and move on.
Little you say will change my mind. I often wonder if Jesus and or the apostles and other iconic people of other religions went around harassing people as much as their minions do nowdays???

*listens to crickets chirping and frogs croaking*

*listens to crickets chirping and frogs croaking*

It's partly your sig, as it's eye-blistering. And it's partly the fact that no one either needs to argue with you (because they either agree with you or feel it's your opinion to believe this way) or feels like arguing with you (as this topic has been discussed before).

I chose Trinity, yet I believe that God the "Father" is to be considered genderless. Placing gender is giving Him human qualities where it cannot be placed. In Christ, however, is where any form of humanity may come in.

The Poll is Almost Equal to Believers and those who dont

If you count up the total number of votes of those who believe in some Divinity (The first poll choices) compared to the last, you get 71 right now.

God is the owner of a harem of popes?

True Believers- What part of "Don't cram religion down my throat" don't you get????Accept the fact that I don't believe as you do and move on.
Little you say will change my mind. I often wonder if Jesus and or the apostles and other iconic people of other religions went around harassing people as much as their minions do nowdays???

Amen to that!

Not that I really follow any religion myself. :D

But the way the OP is phrased and the fact that in the western world only the biblical god is referred to as just "God" without specifically naming the deity, justifies my interpretation of the question. And the biblical god is definitely an abstract idea that has no meaning because this very specific idea of god did not even exist in the ages long before Jews wrote the bible.

If you look at the poll, it's pretty clear that only two refer to the biblical god. You're really being pretty belligerant. I'm actually a bit anti-abrahamist myself, but much to my surprise I actually kinda agree with Corny on this one, there's no need to be a jerk.

Margaret Thatcher.:)

If you look at the poll, it's pretty clear that only two refer to the biblical god. You're really being pretty belligerant. I'm actually a bit anti-abrahamist myself, but much to my surprise I actually kinda agree with Corny on this one, there's no need to be a jerk.

*dies of a heart attack*

Even worse than Satan if He really did tell George W. Bush He wanted him to be President.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/downloads/crazy800.jpg
FAIL!
---------------
"God is in the rabbits eyes."

FAIL!
---------------
"God is in the rabbits eyes."

http://www.dbc.uci.edu/~faculty/wagner/wrbb2.jpg

Exactly. Gravity is observable, God is not.

As such, God cannot be proven or disproven, regardless of case.

Not to get too philosophical here, but religion is very much like the wind. Wind cannot be seen, but can be felt by some. When those who feel the wind tell the others who did not feel it about it, they call the one who felt it crazy.If god is not observable, how can humans possibly say anything meaningful about god, let alone know anything? And even narrow it down to the well known teachings about god, such as the bible expresses? Isn't that complete nonsense then?

If god is not observable, how can humans possibly say anything meaningful about god, let alone know anything? And even narrow it down to the well known teachings about god, such as the bible expresses? Isn't that complete nonsense then?

Again, you're just being obtuse. Obviously, he means emperically. Not being able to be scientifically studied is not the same as being unable to be experienced. You know there's a saying that one can't be angry at God without first admitting God exists. You seem to be unusually angry at a non-existent being. Is this a case of one who protests too much?

You know there's a saying that one can't be angry at God without first admitting God exists. You seem to be unusually angry at a non-existent being. Is this a case of one who protests too much?

Really? I could be particular angry at Lady Luck, when cards don't go my way. Or TV characters, when they do stupid things.

God is...

...an imaginary dictator in the sky made up so that power-hungry religious leaders of past and present could make the weak believe in absurdities such as pregnant virgins and make them commit atrocities for the government in the name of God, though God is an imaginary dictator in the skyso that power-hungry religious leaders of past and present could make the weak believe in absurdities such as pregnant virgins and make them commit atrocities for the government in the name of God though God is an imaginary dictator in the sky...

The characters exist. They just characters.

God is a character in the Bible, isn't He?

Really? I could be particular angry at Lady Luck, when cards don't go my way. Or TV characters, when they do stupid things.

The characters exist. They just characters. As far as Lady Luck, if you're actually angry at Lady Luck well....

God is a character in the Bible, isn't He?

No. God is presented as real. Characters on television aren't. While Alexander the Great may be more of a legend than a real person, but the fact is that he's presented as a person, so if you're angry you're angry and what you believe exists.

... a meaningless, zombie idea/concept/meme - it's dead but manages to keep propagating it'self.

" A distant figure that cares not for the world. "

Absolutely.

No. God is presented as real. Characters on television aren't. While Alexander the Great may be more of a legend than a real person, but the fact is that he's presented as a person, so if you're angry you're angry and what you believe exists.Eh... What?

I was pretty angry with the sock gnome yestoday. Are you suggesting my anger made the sock gnome real?! :eek:

...is living in the bottle, his name is Jack and the label's black.

Joona

Eh... What?

I was pretty angry with the sock gnome yestoday. Are you suggesting my anger made the sock gnome real?! :eek:

Nope. I'm suggesting that if you can really get angry at the sock gnome you must believe it's real. We're not talking aobut existence but belief.

Nope. I'm suggesting that if you can really get angry at the sock gnome you must believe it's real. We're not talking aobut existence but belief.Oh... So it wasn't just deliberate displacement of my anger then?

And here I thought I yelled at the sock gnome becauce I can't afford to rip the washer to peices every time a sock goes missing..

Two questions though; how do you know such things? And if you really do, then why don't I?

Sometimes when dealing with certain kinds of people, it's easier & more well recieved to attack their excuse for being cunts than it is to just attack them for being cunts. In fact, the latter way of dealing with people will often land you in prison.

Oh... So it wasn't just deliberate displacement of my anger then?

And here I thought I yelled at the sock gnome becauce I can't afford to rip the washer to peices every time a sock goes missing..

Two questions though; how do you know such things? And if you really do, then why don't I?

Sometimes when dealing with certain kinds of people, it's easier & more well recieved to attack their excuse for being cunts than it is to just attack them for being cunts. In fact, the latter way of dealing with people will often land you in prison.

I took you as rational. Rational people don't get angry at things they believe don't exist. Attacking things is not the same as being angry. If you're angry at God, you're either nuts or you believe he exists. Which would you prefer I assume of you?

I took you as rational.That was your first mistake ;) Rational people don't get angry at things they believe don't exist.I do, though "murderous rage" better describes my relationship with the sock gnome than anger. Attacking things is not the same as being angry.But it can be. How do you tell the difference? If you're angry at God, you're either nuts or you believe he exists. Which would you prefer I assume of you?Well, if you believe in God you're nuts anyway, so I don't see what the fuss is about.
Joking aside, I think it's rather arrogant of you to presume people can't get angry at concepts with an obvious significance to others. I mean, I get really fucking angry at the sock gnome from time to time, and I don't for a second believe it's a real entity. I deliberately anthropomorphize my laundry problems for the sole purpose of having something to yell at.

In a situation where lots of people already anthropomorphize something, act like it's real, and manage to act like complete twats based on the something, it's both very easy & tempting to follow suit, because it's not just a harmless outlet for your frustrations, it also serves as an attack on the excuse a bunch of people give for behaving like twats.

For example: "I'm gonna molest my dog 'cos my invisible friend told me to."
"Well then your invisible friend's a bastard."

Moreover, the twats in question have themselves decided what their God wants from them, consciously or otherwise, so your anger also serves to attack the legitimacy of their behaviour.

Finally, I suspect I may have given you the impression I hate religious people, deities & whatnot. I don't. Obviously there's some I can't stand, but that's true for humanity in general. As far as I'm concerned, religion's not my problem unless peple involve me in it. Sure, I think religious people must be a bit crazy, but in my experience, we're all a bit crazy in our own special way and I'm sure the world would be dreadfully boring if we weren't.

It was faint for YOU...it was deafening here. God must live in Baltimore.

Not New Jersey?
:D
Seriously though, a person tends to tune it out after a while, like so many other voices ....

Big Man's got shitty aim then.

Must've been surrounded by iron. Turns out, god's not quite so effective in such cases. So if anything nasty happens to the main cities, what with all their steel and iron and all, can't blame god for it.

Judges 1:19
And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

Must've been surrounded by iron. Turns out, god's not quite so effective in such cases. So if anything nasty happens to the main cities, what with all their steel and iron and all, can't blame god for it.

Tell that to Sodom and Gomorra.

Must've been surrounded by iron. Turns out, god's not quite so effective in such cases. So if anything nasty happens to the main cities, what with all their steel and iron and all, can't blame god for it.
Chariots of iron? What, tanks? :confused:

The Bible would be much more awesome if one side had tanks.

Tell that to Sodom and Gomorra.

Well, Gomorra's the better listener of the two, since the namesake of the other is quite popular, with priests and layperson alike ... of course, invocations of holiness in nearly every act ... and thus, it's hard to get a word in edge-wise.
:)

For some reason, that calls to mind having sex with the Gamorrean guards in Star Wars...
Bad Vetalia! Bad images! :mad:

The force of my disgust cause space-time to bend.

Well, Gomorra's the better listener of the two, since the namesake of the other is quite popular, with priests and layperson alike ... of course, invocations of holiness in nearly every act ... and thus, it's hard to get a word in edge-wise.
:)

I had to reread that, but when I got it, I fell out of my chair laughing.

I wonder why they don't call it Gommorry

I wonder why they don't call it Gommorry

For some reason, that calls to mind having sex with the Gamorrean guards in Star Wars...

Just a poll, hoping not to stir debate.

Just gauging what God is to people...

God is an important part of humanity and helps up learn how the world should be run.

I had to reread that, but when I got it, I fell out of my chair laughing.

I wonder why they don't call it Gommorry

:)
Then my work here is pretty much done. *bows*

Maybe Gommorhea?

For some reason, that calls to mind having sex with the Gamorrean guards in Star Wars...

I wonder how much those topics get brought up at the conventions ...

Bad Vetalia! Bad images! :mad:

The force of my disgust cause space-time to bend.
THAT would earn "Winner of thread"

That was your first mistake ;) I do, though "murderous rage" better describes my relationship with the sock gnome than anger. But it can be. How do you tell the difference? Well, if you believe in God you're nuts anyway, so I don't see what the fuss is about.
Joking aside, I think it's rather arrogant of you to presume people can't get angry at concepts with an obvious significance to others. I mean, I get really fucking angry at the sock gnome from time to time, and I don't for a second believe it's a real entity. I deliberately anthropomorphize my laundry problems for the sole purpose of having something to yell at.

In a situation where lots of people already anthropomorphize something, act like it's real, and manage to act like complete twats based on the something, it's both very easy & tempting to follow suit, because it's not just a harmless outlet for your frustrations, it also serves as an attack on the excuse a bunch of people give for behaving like twats.

For example: "I'm gonna molest my dog 'cos my invisible friend told me to."
"Well then your invisible friend's a bastard."

Moreover, the twats in question have themselves decided what their God wants from them, consciously or otherwise, so your anger also serves to attack the legitimacy of their behaviour.

Finally, I suspect I may have given you the impression I hate religious people, deities & whatnot. I don't. Obviously there's some I can't stand, but that's true for humanity in general. As far as I'm concerned, religion's not my problem unless peple involve me in it. Sure, I think religious people must be a bit crazy, but in my experience, we're all a bit crazy in our own special way and I'm sure the world would be dreadfully boring if we weren't.

Are you claiming that anthropomorphizing your laundry problems is rational behavior? Like I said, when in a discussion I assume rationality until shown otherwise. Would you prefer I do otherwise?

For some reason, that calls to mind having sex with the Gamorrean guards in Star Wars...

*hits Vetalia for the nightmares that are sure to come*

God is an important part of humanity and helps up learn how the world should be run.
We need a ROFLMFAO emot....

... a three-headed swamp beast with hallitosis.

God is an important part of humanity and helps up learn how the world should be run.Well, his way to run it is to drown those he does not convince.

Are you claiming that anthropomorphizing your laundry problems is rational behavior?No, I'm claiming it can be & in my case, is. I've already explained why. If you disagree, perhaps you'd explain why?Like I said, when in a discussion I assume rationality until shown otherwise. Would you prefer I do otherwise?I have no preference, and I don't see why it should matter if I had one. If you meant to ask if I think there's grounds for assuming NSGers are rational, the answer is no.

a great bit wonderful invisible teaddy bear. but not a real substitute for it being up to ourselves to avoid screwing everything up for each other.

=^^=
.../\...

No, I'm claiming it can be & in my case, is. I've already explained why. If you disagree, perhaps you'd explain why?I have no preference, and I don't see why it should matter if I had one. If you meant to ask if I think there's grounds for assuming NSGers are rational, the answer is no.

You've not explained that it's rational. In fact, you've explained exactly why it's irrational. Your claim is that while you know that this thing doesn't exist, you resist your rational urge to treat it as such and to deal with your issues as they are, instead choosing to blame a non-existent being, a being you claim to believe does not exist, for your troubles. I'm sorry, but I fail to see anything rational in that behavior.

As far as your prejudices towards groups of any type, I don't share them. I treat individuals as individuals. I give individuals the benefit of the doubt until they show me otherwise. Treating people a certain way because of the group they happen to be a part of is not my style, be that group black people, Christians or NSGers.

You've not explained that it's rational. In fact, you've explained exactly why it's irrational. Your claim is that while you know that this thing doesn't exist, you resist your rational urge to treat it as such and to deal with your issues as they are, instead choosing to blame a non-existent being, a being you claim to believe does not exist, for your troubles. I'm sorry, but I fail to see anything rational in that behavior. Then perhaps you should explain what rational behaviour is to you.
In this particular case, I can either vent on the object of my frustration, with negative consequences for my (oh the shock!) Muslim girlfriend and myself, or I can redirect my wrath to avoid negative consequences for the both of us.
Given the situation, redirecting my shit would be sound judgement. Failing to do so would be unsound judgement. Or rational & irrational, respectively.As far as your prejudices towards groups of any type, I don't share them. I treat individuals as individuals. I give individuals the benefit of the doubt until they show me otherwise. Treating people a certain way because of the group they happen to be a part of is not my style, be that group black people, Christians or NSGers.You read what you want, eh? I said nothing about being prejudiced towards any particular group of people. Superstition is per definition an expression of unsound judgement, or not sane, if you prefer. Stating it isn't an expression of how I percieve, treat or think of religious people. Calling a rock a rock likewise doesn't reflect what I think of rocks.
Further, I explicitly stated I don't personally believe anyone's wholly sane, so you have no basis for believing I'm prejudiced towards any particular group of human beings. If anything, you've only managed to demonstrate that you indeed do not give individuals the benefit of the doubt before you start judging them.

But don't despair. Through sheer coincidence, you've managed to judge correctly. I am indeed prejudiced as fuck towards one particular group of people. Fascists. I fucking hate them. It's still no more than a lucky guess on your party however. The simple fact that I dislike a certain procentage of humanity does not indicate any prejudice on my part, just the recognition that we can't all be friends - perhaps because we aren't terribly rational critters, but that's just speculation.

As for my quip on NSGers, look no further than the two of us. I've already admitted I can't control my temper & you're merrily passing out judgements left & right on the basis of nothing what so ever. It's not reasonable to assume we lot are reasonable, not given the trackrecord of the lot of us. Not that I don't. Being the self-contradicting cynic that I am, I tend to assume being rational is in people's own best interest, and that people act primarily out of self interest. Don't bother telling me that bit of logic is flawed. I know already. Consider it my personal superstition if you wish.

Then perhaps you should explain what rational behaviour is to you.

Hmmmm... I would say rational behavior is placing the blame for actions on the source of the problem, not imaginary objects.

In this particular case, I can either vent on the object of my frustration, with negative consequences for my (oh the shock!) Muslim girlfriend and myself, or I can redirect my wrath to avoid negative consequences for the both of us.

Or... you could control yourself and have a reaction that's appropriate to the situation. Rational behavior would be accepting that things are as they are and not make up things to direct your anger at.


Given the situation, redirecting my shit would be sound judgement. Failing to do so would be unsound judgement. Or rational & irrational, respectively.

Sound judgement would be dealing with your "shit" rather than redirecting it at imaginary objects. You create a false dichotomy by claiming that your only choices are to act foolish or to act more foolish. There is an option that contains no foolish behavior and you're not even choosing to entertain the thought of that option.


You read what you want, eh? I said nothing about being prejudiced towards any particular group of people.

You didn't? So you didn't make a blanket statement about NSGers? I must have made that part up.


Superstition is per definition an expression of unsound judgement, or not sane, if you prefer.

Really? People who are superstitious are not sane? Really? You're going to have to support that claim or admit you're full of crap.

Amusing that you just defended your anger at an imaginary option as rational and then claim that people who treat things that may or may not be true as if they may be true are the ones that are "not sane". Amusing.


Stating it isn't an expression of how I percieve, treat or think of religious people. Calling a rock a rock likewise doesn't reflect what I think of rocks.

Again, you complete try to avoid the discussion by claiming something as fact, that, actually, isn't. But do you want from a guy who thinks yelling at a sock gnome is the only rational option for dealing with missing socks. Amusing, to say the least.


Further, I explicitly stated I don't personally believe anyone's wholly sane, so you have no basis for believing I'm prejudiced towards any particular group of human beings.

I certainly do. You made a blanket claim about NSGers. That's prejudice, my friend. Not only do I have a basis, but you plainly said it.

If anything, you've only managed to demonstrate that you indeed do not give individuals the benefit of the doubt before you start judging them.

You mean because I judge you, an individual, based on what you, an individual, said. Amusing. Do you even know what you're talking about here?


But don't despair. Through sheer coincidence, you've managed to judge correctly.

Amusing. It's not sheer coincidence that I've judged you as prejudiced based on your blanket statement of the entirety of NSG.

I am indeed prejudiced as fuck towards one particular group of people. Fascists. I fucking hate them. It's still no more than a lucky guess on your party however. The simple fact that I dislike a certain procentage of humanity does not indicate any prejudice on my part, just the recognition that we can't all be friends - perhaps because we aren't terribly rational critters, but that's just speculation.

As for my quip on NSGers, look no further than the two of us. I've already admitted I can't control my temper & you're merrily passing out judgements left & right on the basis of nothing what so ever. It's not reasonable to assume we lot are reasonable, not given the trackrecord of the lot of us. Not that I don't. Being the self-contradicting cynic that I am, I tend to assume being rational is in people's own best interest, and that people act primarily out of self interest. Don't bother telling me that bit of logic is flawed. I know already. Consider it my personal superstition if you wish.

Ha. Merrily passing out judgements left and right, huh? I judged your prejudice towards NSGers based on your prejudiced statements about NSGers. You then, uncoincidentally, seek to expand on those statements and on your generalizations, while chastising me for rightfully recognizing that you are making blanket statements. Again, amusing.

Now, come on, keep digging as if you can dig your way out of a hole. So far it's amusing, so I'm quite hoping you're not done yet.

http://www.dbc.uci.edu/~faculty/wagner/wrbb2.jpg
The evidence is clear.

Rational behavior would be accepting that things are as they are and not make up things to direct your anger at.
I couldn't help but find the relationship between this statement and its context somewhat amusing.

Carry on.