Controversial RELIGIONS & SPIRITUALITIES : Conversations
- Thread starter Logiko
- Start date
Atheism is the rejection of god claims because they dont have the necessary evidence supporting them. Alot of people believing in X doesnt mean X is true.
Also why the focus on major religions? Because its convenient to your argument?
Congrats, doesnt change the fact that different religions are mutually exclusive
Also why the focus on major religions? Because its convenient to your argument?
Post automatically merged:
Congrats, doesnt change the fact that different religions are mutually exclusive
I have noticed you have posted a lot of Bible verses
forgive me if this is a bit improper of me to ask, but did becoming religiously Christian have anything to do with your detransition?
While I know there are many pro lgbt churches, I have to admit I’ve always viewed devout Christians on the opposite spectrum from pro lgbt folk
forgive me if this is a bit improper of me to ask, but did becoming religiously Christian have anything to do with your detransition?
While I know there are many pro lgbt churches, I have to admit I’ve always viewed devout Christians on the opposite spectrum from pro lgbt folk
The concept* of god unique and omnipotent can't exist simply because its not something that can be universally described.
The existence of a extra powerfull and sentient entity is possible, but its not something I would call "god" and it would not be something that we should subtit to either.
No matter the level of power, no matter the level of knowledge, no matter the rank or hierarchy status, no one should submit to anyone.
The existence of a extra powerfull and sentient entity is possible, but its not something I would call "god" and it would not be something that we should subtit to either.
No matter the level of power, no matter the level of knowledge, no matter the rank or hierarchy status, no one should submit to anyone.
Yes.
Imagine that an omnipotent and all powerfull being suddenly appears to the population, how would you call him a god if no one can agree on what a god is ?
The answer is simple, you cannot because there are too many definition of god, so this being would not be described as a god, but as something else.
Imagine that an omnipotent and all powerfull being suddenly appears to the population, how would you call him a god if no one can agree on what a god is ?
The answer is simple, you cannot because there are too many definition of god, so this being would not be described as a god, but as something else.
This is a fair point but in the case of a god there are too many major difference between certain definition such as sentience or the level of power for example, therefore its impossible to make everyone agree that something that appear is "a god"
"Something" can exist but it just can't be called a "god" as demonstrated before. For that something to be called a god, the definition would need to be close enough universally. That's not the case.
Is a god something that creates the universe ?
Is a god something that is all powerfull and omnipotent ?
Is a god something that is perfect ?
Is a god something that can come from nothing and autocreate itself ?
Is a god something that can interfere or not interefer in human/planet level beings ?
Is a god something with a beard ?
Is a god something with no face ?
Is a god something that is neutral ?
Etc.
There are thousands of question and a lot of the answer are contradictory in term of definition. For example, a perfect god can't be neutral it has to take the side of the good but this would contradict the fact that a god must take no side.
Its even possible that something else can create the universe, but should something that create the universe be called god ?
All of these questionning is important and the reason why the concept of god will always and only stay as a concept.
A good example is Loki in the final season (spoiler) technically, at the end of the story, Loki possesse a lot of power, but should he be called a god anyway ? Though question. I have an answer, but someone might have another. Therefore the concept of god can't be really applied to him, more the concept of extrapowerfull maintenance guy. You get me ?
"Something" can exist but it just can't be called a "god" as demonstrated before. For that something to be called a god, the definition would need to be close enough universally. That's not the case.
Is a god something that creates the universe ?
Is a god something that is all powerfull and omnipotent ?
Is a god something that is perfect ?
Is a god something that can come from nothing and autocreate itself ?
Is a god something that can interfere or not interefer in human/planet level beings ?
Is a god something with a beard ?
Is a god something with no face ?
Is a god something that is neutral ?
Etc.
There are thousands of question and a lot of the answer are contradictory in term of definition. For example, a perfect god can't be neutral it has to take the side of the good but this would contradict the fact that a god must take no side.
Its even possible that something else can create the universe, but should something that create the universe be called god ?
All of these questionning is important and the reason why the concept of god will always and only stay as a concept.
A good example is Loki in the final season (spoiler) technically, at the end of the story, Loki possesse a lot of power, but should he be called a god anyway ? Though question. I have an answer, but someone might have another. Therefore the concept of god can't be really applied to him, more the concept of extrapowerfull maintenance guy. You get me ?
And I apply this to something real. My point is that if "something" real appear, it will be impossible to objectively described it as a god as too many definition and too many difference of definition are present on the planet.
If something real appear the anwser will therefore be to invent a new term for the "something" or to described it in another way.
If something real appear the anwser will therefore be to invent a new term for the "something" or to described it in another way.
I became Christian AFTER detransition, not because of it. In fact, my Christian beliefs came over two years after my initial decision (even back then I was very atheistic).
I do not believe in pro-LGBT churches and think they are an affront to the values of the bible. Devout Christians SHOULD NOT hate LGBT folk. In fact, we are taught to hate the sin, not the sinner. We forgive the sinner. We pray for them. We show mercy, compassion and are taught to care for all.
As you might know, Jesus met with prostitutes and tax collectors. He showed compassion to them. We should too. Show them a holy way of life.
However, on this front, I have nothing against homosexuality in concept, though I do not think we should allow 'Gay Marriage' (Note, this does not mean Gay Union). The reason for this is because in the bible, marriage is between One man and One woman with the intent of having children. To sort of try and subvert these values is an affront to the faith that holds marriage as one of it's primary rituals of worship.
However, I do think homosexual union should be allowed and afforded the same legal and tax benefits. So long as it is not a 'Holy Union' through the Church.
I do not believe in pro-LGBT churches and think they are an affront to the values of the bible. Devout Christians SHOULD NOT hate LGBT folk. In fact, we are taught to hate the sin, not the sinner. We forgive the sinner. We pray for them. We show mercy, compassion and are taught to care for all.
As you might know, Jesus met with prostitutes and tax collectors. He showed compassion to them. We should too. Show them a holy way of life.
However, on this front, I have nothing against homosexuality in concept, though I do not think we should allow 'Gay Marriage' (Note, this does not mean Gay Union). The reason for this is because in the bible, marriage is between One man and One woman with the intent of having children. To sort of try and subvert these values is an affront to the faith that holds marriage as one of it's primary rituals of worship.
However, I do think homosexual union should be allowed and afforded the same legal and tax benefits. So long as it is not a 'Holy Union' through the Church.
