The Atheism/Agnosticism Thread

Do you think God exists?


  • Total voters
    262

punjab47

महाबलामहावीर्यामहासत्यपराक्रमासर्वाग्रेक्षत्रियाजट
Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
1,059
Likes
598
Utterly and completely wrong. Now, from next time when you decide to act psychiatrist.. DON'T.

Order. The fact is that I want order and there is none in this world. My manhood, is pretty satisfactory actually. But no matter what I say on this forum, you won't believe me. I could only prove my life's achievements (regarding my manhood) if I knew you personally. So lets leave it at that. State. Wrong again, because I have a pretty clear picture of my future regarding all aspects of my life.

Would you mind getting back on topic now instead of showing your hatred towards Atheists because your brain is not evolved enough to understand how they think?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Order is created at the edge of a Sikh's sword. Manhood is related to violence, you're fooling yourself if you think 'economic achievements will make you a ksytria.

In fact, you insult the very name with your conduct

Edit - BTW, your individualist diatribes only further show your christian anarchist leanings as you respond to collectivist ideals or civilizational programs with personal examples.

You see yourself as superior or 'equal' to all the rest, similar to jesus.

For one order state manhood are all based on hierarchy which is what a 'god' figure implies.

That atheists like you are usually feminine only doubles this point.

One aspect of 'religion' is simply something for the idiots & children to follow so they don't unnecessarily impede the progress of the truly gifted.

Will be entertaining to hear your aaptard whining & crying though. We're all the same, who are you to judge, you superstitious backwards as#hole.

I should exist thread before I cause more destruction, as others have you handled. Lol,
 
Last edited:

punjab47

महाबलामहावीर्यामहासत्यपराक्रमासर्वाग्रेक्षत्रियाजट
Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
1,059
Likes
598
@Kshatriya87 we know full well how christians think on this forum, it's been gone over endlessly.

Especially the evolved brain holier than though mentality the heaps of trash who convert to abrahamic culture adopt.

I'll leave debate with you for those, who care for it.

Was just showing you something, which is there for all to see now.
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,136
Likes
16,039
Country flag
Order is created at the edge of a Sikh's sword. Manhood is related to violence, you're fooling yourself if you think 'economic achievements will make you a ksytria.

In fact, you insult the very name with your conduct

Edit - BTW, your individualist diatribes only further show your christian anarchist leanings as you respond to collectivist ideals or civilizational programs with personal examples.

You see yourself as superior or 'equal' to all the rest, similar to jesus.

For one order state manhood are all based on hierarchy which is what a 'god' figure implies.

That atheists like you are usually feminine only doubles this point.

One aspect of 'religion' is simply something for the idiots & children to follow so they don't unnecessarily impede the progress of the truly gifted.

Will be entertaining to hear your aaptard whining & crying though. We're all the same, who are you to judge, you superstitious backwards as#hole.

I should exist thread before I cause more destruction, as others have you handled. Lol,
@Sakal Gharelu Ustad : this guys arguments are senseless and he is abusing. Please take care of this or I will start replying him in kind.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,136
Likes
16,039
Country flag
Look there are mythologies. I do not have answer to all your questions. Actually, the questions are as difficult as answers.

The monotheistic creeds solved it by claiming a vengeful God who created everything in a week and then lords over it and pardons his true followers. Dharmic mythology on the other hand thinks everything is in "Shunya" and the world is just a manifestation of understanding itself. Hence the doer and seer are same.

It is like in quantum mechanics, where if you try to observe something you do not observe it correctly because your action of seeing it changes it. So in dharmic mythology, the creator who creates the world to understand himself gets confused in the creation. And the entire cosmic dance which follows after that is just to understand oneself.
Well at least now we are getting somewhere unlike the other Punjabi freak who doesn't know what he is talking anout.

This argument is difficult for me to comprehend as the ultimate power in the universe should be able to control the outcome of his creation.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,136
Likes
16,039
Country flag
Good is opposite of bad or absence of bad.

That's why Hindus have three basic elements:

Rajsic- +ve
Tamsic- -ve
Satvik- neutral
Right. But how does this fit with the concept of duality that @OneGrimPilgrim said. I can understand there won't be any good if there is nothing to compare it with. But then this is kalyuga. What about duality in other yugas?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

punjab47

महाबलामहावीर्यामहासत्यपराक्रमासर्वाग्रेक्षत्रियाजट
Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
1,059
Likes
598
Well at least now we are getting somewhere unlike the other Punjabi freak who doesn't know what he is talking anout.

This argument is difficult for me to comprehend as the ultimate power in the universe should be able to control the outcome of his creation.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Who says he can or cannot? Or even wants to, you continue to have a slave mentality where unless Christ jesus beef wala or mohammad pedo bhai make you a king they're all liars.

You look to take instead of give & that's something we can't fix. It's problem with your upbringing, you're free to pm w.e nonsense you have to reply with if it derails here.

I've spent decades studying your kind and my people centuries fighting it. Doubt you'll have anything interesting or new to say..
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,136
Likes
16,039
Country flag
Who says he can or cannot? Or even wants to, you continue to have a slave mentality where unless Christ jesus beef wala or mohammad pedo bhai make you a king they're all liars.

You look to take instead of give & that's something we can't fix. It's problem with your upbringing, you're free to pm w.e nonsense you have to reply with if it derails here.

I've spent decades studying your kind and my people centuries fighting it. Doubt you'll have anything interesting or new to say..
Anything new or interesting? To your horse shit? Absolutely not. Keep your stupid thoughts in your sad little pagdi.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

punjab47

महाबलामहावीर्यामहासत्यपराक्रमासर्वाग्रेक्षत्रियाजट
Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
1,059
Likes
598
Anything new or interesting? To your horse shit? Absolutely not. Keep your stupid thoughts in your sad little pagdi.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
And there's where you overstep your aukaat & become an Internet troll.

Here's why you're a degenerate:

Religion, philosophy, and ideology rest upon a foundation ofmyth. Myth is the lifeblood of a system of thought, it is the soil in which in grows; without the foundation of myth, a system of thought is sterile.

Before going further, it would be useful to define what a “myth” really is. In common parlance, “myth” is used to connote something false, or brings to mind quaint fables that are of value only for entertainment. This is a superficial view, myth, to quote Jonathan Bowden is

the commingling of emotional reality with what is understood to be fact. It is noumenal truth, as Aristotle said 2000 years ago, the idea that certain things are artistically and emotionally true irrespective of what you think of them factually.

Myth is more than the attempts of pre-scientific man to understand his world, and certainly more than entertaining bedtime stories. Myth communicates at a subconscious, emotional level through the use of allegory, symbolism, poetic imagery, and metaphor. Myth is the portrayal of human nature in allegorical form. It resonates because the gods, goddesses, heroes, and creatures depicted are representations of various drives and facets of human nature; they are archetypes that embody all facets of the human condition. These archetypes are the noble and base parts of human nature made flesh, condensed into the figure of the mythic hero, the god, or the monster.

Rather than communicating his values through an abstract system of ethics, which could reach only the proverbial “one percent” of humanity capable of understanding philosophic thought, the mythic artist embodies his values through his creation, through his gods, heroes, and villains. Because of this, myth is able to instruct both the foolish and the wise. The foolish comprehend only the surface-level meaning of the myth, and are enriched, brought to a higher level of consciousness than they would have achieved without the art of the myth-maker. The wise are able to read the myth as allegory, rather than as literal truth, and create systems of theology and philosophy based on the foundation the the artist created. Myth is the medium that communicates both to the masses and the elites; it shapes the moral landscape of society as a whole. The mythic artist creates a worldview in which man can conceive of himself as something other than a naked animal on a rock hurtling through the void. He adds significance to life; his work allows man to sublimate the baser parts of his nature in service of something transcendent.

The mythological framework of a culture in large part determines its values, its moral landscape. It demonstrates what that society values, what it finds noble, and
what it finds contemptible. A societies myths re-enforces the bonds of community through a shared system of values; it re-enforces man's biologically influenced social nature. Thus if one is to understand a culture, a people—why they hold certain values and why they act a certain way—one must understand its mythic framework.

http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2015/10/14/the-moral-disarmament-of-the-white-race
 

punjab47

महाबलामहावीर्यामहासत्यपराक्रमासर्वाग्रेक्षत्रियाजट
Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
1,059
Likes
598
The mythic framework of the West is a product of Christianity. Christianity became the dominant religion in the West when it became the state religion of Rome during 380 A.D, a position which it held until mid 18th century, when it was superseded by liberalism, the current dominant ideology. This did not entail a rejection of Christianity, rather, liberalism evolved from Christianity; fundamentally, it is Christian morality secularized.

Christianity provided the mythic framework from which liberalism evolved. The moral essence of Christianity is expressed by its central figure, Jesus Christ, who declared,

Ye shall know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:32).
The last shall be first, and the first last” (Matthew 20:16).
“Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5).

These root ideas, conveyed by the authors of the Gospels, were refined into a system of theology by the Apostle Paul, who wrote,

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for all are one in Jesus Christ. (Galatians 3:28)

It is only natural that a system of belief that stresses the brotherhood of man, humility, the centrality of the individual, and holds that possession of truth is key to the salvation of the soul would produce a successor ideology that advocates a morality of universalism, egalitarianism, and individualism founded upon a claimed devotion to scientific truth.

The caveat claimed is used because liberalism, like any other system of thought or belief, has a foundation of myth. The founding myth of liberalism, its "creation story," is that man is solitary by nature. In the words of Thomas Hobbes, the founder of liberalism, man in a state of nature leads an existence which is “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short” and forms communities for the sake of security rather than because he is a social being by nature, as classical philosophy and modern science hold. This conception of man allows the liberal philosopher to create a system of thought in which the individual rather than the community is the key political actor, in which “natural law” is the foundation for the individual's right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Through this founding myth, the liberal is able to conceive of society as a contractual arrangement, as an artificial entity that derives its authority from the “consent of the governed,” who form governments to secure their "rights." The individual and his "rights" thus become the core the value of Western society; any action that neither picks the pocket or breaks the leg of one's neighbor is thus considered legitimate, the toleration of which is sacrosanct. This is further re-enforced by the contention that man is born as tabula rasa, a blank slate, the content of which is provided by his culture and his sensory experiences. This is the moral foundation for classical liberalism, the school of liberalism predominant until the 1930s, and still holds sway in the "Center Right" parties of America and Western Europe.

Modern liberalism, with its emphasis on egalitarianism, was founded by Rousseau, who in his Discourse on Inequality conceives of man as being a "noble savage," who was naturally good in a state of nature, and only acquired vice from civilization. Rousseau contends that convention, tradition, and bad institutions are responsible for the negative aspects of human nature. Thus, they can be changed by social reform movements and legislation. This is the foundation for the therapeutic state, which claims the ability to re-engineer man in its own image, which has been predominant in the Western world since the Great Depression. This strand of liberalism is the moral foundation for "Center Left" parties throughout the Western world, and provides the ideological underpinnings for the secular humanism of the "social justice warrior."

Both of these strands of liberalism are in fundamental agreement that man is born a blank slate, is primarily an economic being, and that the individual is the primary social and philosophical unit. Liberalism, like the Christian theology from which it evolved, holds that history is progressive rather than cyclical, that equality is morally good, and that a universal brotherhood of humanity is both desirable and possible. The difference between classical liberalism and modern liberalism is a difference of tactics, not of fundamental principles.

It is for this reason that the cultural, political, and religious elites in the West support policies that lead to the destruction of their nations, communities, and race.
--
Could go on, quote more but describes you so perfectly you're probably vomiting right now.

Bye.
 

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,243
Likes
6,810
Country flag
How can bad be absence of good....
because these are relative terms invented by a world born and perenially mired in duality. if there weren't to be any absence, there wouldn't have been any identification of its antagonist. for someone born sightless and remained so, the terms 'red', 'beautiful', etc. are not meaningful as they lie beyond his domain of very unfortunate & limited personal experience. similarly, had there been no duality in nature, there wouldn't have been any understanding of what's good and what's not good (or what's bad), and such. thus, the antagonist is not a separate entity/attribute in itself, but a variation in measured presence of the other. however, if this variation weren't to be present, you wouldn't have realised the presence of that 'other' too. so from 'one' stems the 'other' in this way. and this then leads beautifully to the next logical stage - why life manifests on this plane? to LEARN (about) THIS difference. since there's duality, there's difference, and since these dual attributes are antagonistic to each other, one must go through each, experience, and know. life, is schooling.

P.S. - Brahman/God is not good. its a term associated to the big boss by humans who can't think beyond 'good'-'bad' (due to the 'I' and 'eye') in their 'locked' states. Brahman, since you're well-read, you must've read, is called as 'attributeless'.
 
Last edited:

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,136
Likes
16,039
Country flag
The mythic framework of the West is a product of Christianity. Christianity became the dominant religion in the West when it became the state religion of Rome during 380 A.D, a position which it held until mid 18th century, when it was superseded by liberalism, the current dominant ideology. This did not entail a rejection of Christianity, rather, liberalism evolved from Christianity; fundamentally, it is Christian morality secularized.

Christianity provided the mythic framework from which liberalism evolved. The moral essence of Christianity is expressed by its central figure, Jesus Christ, who declared,

Ye shall know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:32).
The last shall be first, and the first last” (Matthew 20:16).
“Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5).

These root ideas, conveyed by the authors of the Gospels, were refined into a system of theology by the Apostle Paul, who wrote,

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for all are one in Jesus Christ. (Galatians 3:28)

It is only natural that a system of belief that stresses the brotherhood of man, humility, the centrality of the individual, and holds that possession of truth is key to the salvation of the soul would produce a successor ideology that advocates a morality of universalism, egalitarianism, and individualism founded upon a claimed devotion to scientific truth.

The caveat claimed is used because liberalism, like any other system of thought or belief, has a foundation of myth. The founding myth of liberalism, its "creation story," is that man is solitary by nature. In the words of Thomas Hobbes, the founder of liberalism, man in a state of nature leads an existence which is “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short” and forms communities for the sake of security rather than because he is a social being by nature, as classical philosophy and modern science hold. This conception of man allows the liberal philosopher to create a system of thought in which the individual rather than the community is the key political actor, in which “natural law” is the foundation for the individual's right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Through this founding myth, the liberal is able to conceive of society as a contractual arrangement, as an artificial entity that derives its authority from the “consent of the governed,” who form governments to secure their "rights." The individual and his "rights" thus become the core the value of Western society; any action that neither picks the pocket or breaks the leg of one's neighbor is thus considered legitimate, the toleration of which is sacrosanct. This is further re-enforced by the contention that man is born as tabula rasa, a blank slate, the content of which is provided by his culture and his sensory experiences. This is the moral foundation for classical liberalism, the school of liberalism predominant until the 1930s, and still holds sway in the "Center Right" parties of America and Western Europe.

Modern liberalism, with its emphasis on egalitarianism, was founded by Rousseau, who in his Discourse on Inequality conceives of man as being a "noble savage," who was naturally good in a state of nature, and only acquired vice from civilization. Rousseau contends that convention, tradition, and bad institutions are responsible for the negative aspects of human nature. Thus, they can be changed by social reform movements and legislation. This is the foundation for the therapeutic state, which claims the ability to re-engineer man in its own image, which has been predominant in the Western world since the Great Depression. This strand of liberalism is the moral foundation for "Center Left" parties throughout the Western world, and provides the ideological underpinnings for the secular humanism of the "social justice warrior."

Both of these strands of liberalism are in fundamental agreement that man is born a blank slate, is primarily an economic being, and that the individual is the primary social and philosophical unit. Liberalism, like the Christian theology from which it evolved, holds that history is progressive rather than cyclical, that equality is morally good, and that a universal brotherhood of humanity is both desirable and possible. The difference between classical liberalism and modern liberalism is a difference of tactics, not of fundamental principles.

It is for this reason that the cultural, political, and religious elites in the West support policies that lead to the destruction of their nations, communities, and race.
--
Could go on, quote more but describes you so perfectly you're probably vomiting right now.

Bye.
You trolled me first. Didn't even read your posts. Congratulations. You just became the first member I ignore on this forum. Goodbye.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

punjab47

महाबलामहावीर्यामहासत्यपराक्रमासर्वाग्रेक्षत्रियाजट
Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
1,059
Likes
598
You trolled me first. Didn't even read your posts. Congratulations. You just became the first member I ignore on this forum. Goodbye.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
You just proved my point & furthermore show that Romans should have actually fed you people to Lions.

One Buddhist said dharam can be described as a fight against immovable ignorance. Which, abrahamic 'religion' actually is.

Was a sicilian mother algerian father born in boston/nyc too lol.
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,762
because these are relative terms invented by a world born and perenially mired in duality. if there weren't to be any absence, there wouldn't have been any identification of its antagonist. for someone born sightless and remained so, the terms 'red', 'beautiful', etc. are not meaningful as they lie beyond his domain of very unfortunate & limited personal experience. similarly, had there been no duality in nature, there wouldn't have been any understanding of what's good and what's not good (or what's bad), and such. thus, the antagonist is not a separate entity/attribute in itself, but a variation in measured presence of the other. however, if this variation weren't to be present, you wouldn't have realised the presence of that 'other' too. so from 'one' stems the 'other' in this way. and this then leads beautifully to the next logical stage - why life manifests on this plane? to LEARN (about) THIS difference. since there's duality, there's difference, and since these dual attributes are antagonistic to each other, one must go through each, experience, and know. life, is schooling.

P.S. - Brahman/God is not good. its a term associated to the big boss by humans who can't think beyond 'good'-'bad' (due to the 'I' and 'eye') in their 'locked' states. Brahman, since you're well-read, you must've read, is called as 'attributeless'.

Beautifully written...................................
 

sydsnyper

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
1,752
Likes
3,947
Country flag
It does not purport to.... it merely shows the quagmire this whole debate is. On the question of god, every thiest is so sure that it is almost inhuman to question the deity's existence. But leave the theists among themselves, and they will not agree one one feature of the same deity they were so sure of.

This itself casts doubt about the properties of a supreme being that supposedly created us and everyone is so sure of.... :p :p :p

Nice. Still doesn't answer all questions though. :p
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,136
Likes
16,039
Country flag
It does not purport to.... it merely shows the quagmire this whole debate is. On the question of god, every thiest is so sure that it is almost inhuman to question the deity's existence. But leave the theists among themselves, and they will not agree one one feature of the same deity they were so sure of.

This itself casts doubt about the properties of a supreme being that supposedly created us and everyone is so sure of.... [emoji14] [emoji14] [emoji14]
Exactly. Neither side will kneel. This debate has no end.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,762
The question is difficult like every other question in the world. Only naive people expect easy answers.

Btw, all religions can be divided into three groups:
1) Dharmic ones- They are the superset and based on spirituality. They allow syncretism and can accommodate various paths. Hinduism and most of the Pagan/tribal religions will fall in this category.
2) Prophetic ones- They are based on revealed book, jealous God and closed membership. No surprise they pose biggest danger to the world.
3) Agnostic ones- They don't care about the question of God but still have detailed answer on how to attain "moksha". Buddhism is prime example here.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
geoBR Atheism and Orthodoxy in Modern Russia General Multimedia 1
The3Amigos China auto thread China 332
JaguarWarrior Russian civil aviation thread Europe and Russia 44
JaguarWarrior Russia auto thread Europe and Russia 929
Similar threads




Global Defence

Articles

Top