Why do we need a church to go pray inside? why do we need a priest do read from the bible why do we need to baptise our selfs and deny Satan if we will end up doing bad things in life and wake up the Devil in us? why so many of us waiste so many hours thinking about god, why did so many people die for thier religion.
WHY DOES EVERYONE HAVE TO BELIVE IN SOMETHING?

>>>>Why do we need a church to go pray inside?<<<<

A feeling of sanctity and place to concentrate religious energy. If you believed in a god, wouldnt you feel a little foolish communing with him in the same room you take a shit in? Or sleep and fuck your girlfriend? It gives things greater meaning to know it is there for the sole purpose of religion.

>>>> why do we need a priest do read from the bible<<<<

Clergy study their religion more than the average man will have time to, so their opinions are a little more valid.

>>>> why do we need to baptise our selfs and deny Satan if we will end up doing bad things in life and wake up the Devil in us?<<<

Baptism baffles the shit out of me, but it looks to me like a glorified naming ceremony universal in some form to all cultures that the Church stole and made religious. I still like the idea of officially introducing the child to his family and people and giving him his official name.

>>>>why so many of us waiste so many hours thinking about god,<<<<

People who understand stuff like that do a lot better than people who dont. Genghis Khan was a cool shaman who wasted many hours thinking about god.

>>>>why did so many people die for thier religion.<<<<<

Because they understand that they will die anyway, and would rather be remembered dying for something that will help their society than for living while hding from that and dying in their beds covered with sores and vomitting on themselves.

>>>>WHY DOES EVERYONE HAVE TO BELIVE IN SOMETHING?<<<<

Because deep down they understand the greatest human contradiction; we are all infinitely valuable and totally worthless. There is something bigger than us, and everyone interprets that his own way, and believes in it. Everyone believes in something because there is something out there to believe in.

quote:

---

A feeling of sanctity and place to concentrate religious energy. If you believed in a god, wouldnt you feel a little foolish communing with him in the same room you take a shit in? Or sleep and fuck your girlfriend? It gives things greater meaning to know it is there for the sole purpose of religion.

---

No.

Well then youre idea of god and concentration is obviously vastly different than just about everyone who has ever occupied the planet.

That's not true at all. What about people who worship God/Gods/Goddess in nature instead of a man made building?

Its still usually a certain spot in nature. And even if it wasnt, "out in nature" is away from the same room they shit in, or the place where they sleep and fuck their girlfriends. People will naturally look to commune with whatever gods there may be away from their daily routine. Otherwise, its just part of that routine and loses its magic.

King and Spirit,

I have a theory about:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
[B>>>> why do we need to baptise our selfs and deny Satan if we will end up doing bad things in life and wake up the Devil in us?<<<

Baptism baffles the shit out of me, but it looks to me like a glorified naming ceremony universal in some form to all cultures that the Church stole and made religious. I still like the idea of officially introducing the child to his family and people and giving him his official name.

[/B]

---

After Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Empire, he (and the church) was faced with the problem of making this monotheistic cult palatable to the Roman citizenry.

One major cult at the time was the Mithras (the bull) Cult. The rite of initiation into the Mithric Mysteries placed the initiate underneath a living bull. A knife was thrust into the bulls' heart. The flowing blood from the dying bull, baptized the initiate (does this sound like "washed in the blood"?).

For what it's worth.

Nox

quote:

---

People will naturally look to commune with whatever gods there may be away from their daily routine. Otherwise, its just part of that routine and loses its magic.

---

I don't know about that. Isn't praying in the bedroom pretty common? If you need a church to pray to your diety or it will "lose magic" then you have a pretty weak faith.

There are numerous places to pray. A den, kneeling at the bed or a mat/alter anywhere in the house or backyard, or out in a field, forest, or garden. People can pray anywhere. Being a spiritual person is making communication/worship with your deity a part of your routine and normal life.. not just going to a church once a week and doing a group prayer led by someone else with a big show about it and handing over church donations.

[This message has been edited by TheMouse (edited 05-21-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMouse:
That's not true at all. What about people who worship God/Gods/Goddess in nature instead of a man made building?

---

Then the woods are their temple.

He's not saying that this is an absolute - that it will have its effect on everyone, just that it does work for the ones that go. I can appreciate the inside of temples and I don't believe in any of the dogma.

see user, these are your typical atheists.

king, i believe in God.

i don't need a church.
i don't need to pray.
there is no written text of God.
i was baptized, but not by choice.
there is no satan.
nobody died for my idea of god, and nobody's killed in the name of what i consider god.

everyone believes in something, because absolute truth does not exist.

suicide bombing is a perfect example.

some people think suicide bombing as a legitimate form of protest or resistance.

some people think suicide is a stupid waste of life.

contrasting opinions which is right, which is wrong?

whose to say which is right or which is wrong?

which do you believe to be right or wrong?

I believe in kitties.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lostmind:
see user, these are your typical atheists.

---

I think he's just a kid. But I sense that he will someday grow to be a fine articulate atheist. 'The force in this one is strong'

how can you belive in god and not in satan?
Arent you afraid of him? how can you belive in good and not in the bad? makes no sence....

well....If I am correct...to quote the christian bible...GOD created satan originally as satan...since god is all knowin' he would have know satan would rebel against him...therefor god is evil and good...one in both...he controlls satan ultimatly by havin' him created.....if god had just created us... and no opposite force to oppose him, why would we worship him in the first place?...so don't look at it as good and evil...but rather a being....2 in one....

Older Hebrew texts say Satan is not the evil one, hes just like caught in the middle. Leviathan is the evil bastard, the exact opposite of God, and has existed independent of Gods creation for as long as God has. God and Leviathan are opposing forces, and neither needs the other to exist. Leviathan has his own kingdom and shit, and fought God over the ability to create the material world. God won and can create, and Leviathan cant. The idea of evil being independent of good and not springing from it is common in many religions.

And you asked why people go to Church. I told you, its a better feeling than praying at the foot of the bed you fuck your girlfriend in. People who go feel the Church is there only to recieve the energy of the righteous in their best of dispositions. How is this hard to understand? Also...religion is a social thing. There are other people at Church. Last I checked, I couldnt run into a guy from across town I liked talking theology with at the foot of my bed.

quote:

---

how can you belive in god and not in satan?

---

Durr... you don't have to be Christian to believe in a god.

quote:

---

And you asked why people go to Church. I told you, its a better feeling than praying at the foot of the bed you fuck your girlfriend in.

---

I'd personally rather do anything personal and spiritual in a bedroom instead of near a bunch of people. If someone is that much of a church-going Christian, then what would they be doing "fucking a girlfriend" in their bed anyway?

[This message has been edited by TheMouse (edited 05-22-2002).]

I am getting very, very frustrated that the word religion, church, god, holy, sacred, etc, is always synonymous with Christian. Die.

i don't believe in good and bad as concepts carved in stone.

events occur,

our opinions of them define them as good and bad.

if i agree with something it is good in my eyes.

am i good or am i bad?

there's people on here who like me and people on here who don't.

which group has the correct interpretation of me?

i guess that would depend on your opinion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lostmind:
i don't believe in good and bad as concepts carved in stone.

---

I agree, but you have to admit that the dynamic of good vs bad has been used repeatedly throughout history, by government and religion alike, to manipulate the masses.

Ever read Vonnegut's 'Cat's Cradle'? It's hilarious.

Probably because there is a good and bad. If you didnt think that was true youd have no need to argue with anyone; nothing that happened could be right or wrong. You could watch your sister get raped right in front of you without a twinge of rage or remorse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Probably because there is a good and bad.

---

Not always. Sometimes it's fabricated. There is always a right and wrong though.

quote:

---

If you didnt think that was true youd have no need to argue with anyone

---

I argue to learn.

Why learn if nothing is good or bad? you already agreed with me though, but changed the wording to right and wrong; same fuckin thing, so I guess that ends this part of the discussion. I bet the kid who began the thread didnt expect immediate, simple and logical answers to every question thats teased his infantile brain since he realized he didnt like CCD.

Hey Spirit of '22, you just have a answer to anything don't you?

What if peolpe were evil themselves (And WE ARE, just look at how many wars we made. We always blame all the evil shit on Satan, but it's actually we who are evil.) Maybe we don't wan't to go to heaven and do all that fruty, sissy shit. What's the use of going to heaven if you can't sin. I like to sin. People like to sin. It feels good. Maybe we all like to go to hell. I shure as hell don't want to sit next to some old faggot up in heaven, no mater how good it could feel.

Now answer this ,,|,,--_--,,|,,

What if wars are only thought of as evil because cowards write your history and philosophy? What if being what you are supposed to be, as programmed by nature, is actually the exactly perfect epitome of righteousness, and everything that strays from that is whats evil?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
What if wars are only thought of as evil because cowards write your history and philosophy? What if being what you are supposed to be, as programmed by nature, is actually the exactly perfect epitome of righteousness, and everything that strays from that is whats evil?

---

What if this, what if that? We are far from perfect. VERY FAR. I know what we are and we are not 'good'.

Now to think of it, look at all those priests raping and abusing those children. Men of god. Hheheheheheh. What if it happend to your children? Would you loose your fate?

quote:

---

Originally posted by XeNobiTe:
...What if it happend to your children? Would you loose your fate?

---

No, but the priest will have met his.

if it causes you a problem to post your opinion on my questions then dont bother replying, and maybe you do find an anwser to all, but sure hell, all your anwsers are not exact, nor pertinent. not saying this to make u feel bad about your IQ. but only to tell you that i seek opinions of other because i myself already know where i stand religously and socialy.
But im trying to start a debate here. so have my next queston: religion is a guidance to a better life. a better life by imposing rules and traditions. why do some people only them self having a good life only if they have faith in god???

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
...but changed the wording to right and wrong; same fuckin thing

---

I didn't change shit. I made a distinction. Right/wrong is not the same as good/bad. And good/bad does not exist in every situation that it is protrayed as existing in.

quote:

---

...so I guess that ends this part of the discussion.

---

Not yet. It would look bad on your part because you're wrong and I'm right, and I intend to give you a good ass kickin'.

quote:

---

I bet the kid who began the thread didnt expect immediate, simple and logical answers to every question thats teased his infantile brain since he realized he didnt like CCD.

---

I thought your initial answers were good but I think they were incorrectly interpreted as your beliefs. What's CCD?

King,

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
so have my next queston: religion is a guidance to a better life.

---

How about the people who gobble up the stuff from Swaggart et al and send in their donations? How about the David Korish crew? How about....(fill in the cult)? Do these examples meet your criterion of a better life?


Nox

It would be stupid to use cannibals to argue against meat-eating, just as it is stupid to talk about Jim Jones when discussing religion. How about the 4 billion people made stronger through religion?
And there is a good and bad. I never said in every situation there was one, but a general theme of the universe is good and bad. Even animals have a good and bad; its why giraffes have long necks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Even animals have a good and bad; its why giraffes have long necks.

---

Giraffes have long necks because their ancestors, which had shorter necks, could not reach the remaining vegetation during times of famine, nor could they see their natural predators approaching and thus became meals.

So you're saying long necks are good and short necks are bad?

How about grocery store checkout lines? Short = good, right? I thing I've got the hang of it now. Let me try another...

Penises are like giraffes necks...

Spirit,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Even animals have a good and bad; its why giraffes have long necks.

---

Great post...sounds like you had some great hooch too. This one makes as much sense as the one I made one sunday morning after a few beers for breakfast (god having bad breath).

Nox

>>>>Giraffes have long necks because their ancestors, which had shorter necks, could not reach the remaining vegetation during times of famine, nor could they see their natural predators approaching and thus became meals.<<<<<

Exactly. Not being eaten by a predator and surviving to have children is the root of good. Its what drives nature along. I was not saying long is good. How simple can a mind be?

i disagree user-x, there is no right or wrong either.

"I agree, but you have to admit that the dynamic of good vs bad has been used repeatedly throughout history, by government and religion alike, to manipulate the masses."

to manipulate the masses?

or to influence public opinion of right and wrong,

when you convince somebody of your point of view you do not consider it manipulation,

yet when somebody is convinced of that which is in opposition to what you feel, they have been manipulated.

spirit i think knows what's up,

"Probably because there is a good and bad. If you didnt think that was true youd have no need to argue with anyone; nothing that happened could be right or wrong. You could watch your sister get raped right in front of you without a twinge of rage or remorse."

as a matter of absolute truth they don't exist,

as a matter of personal bias and opinion they must exist.

if they didn't ideals would not advance, it is good to fight for your ideals, and that which you consider right and wrong,

it is also prudent to subject yourself to the ideals of others while it is popular thought, until you can get enough people on your side to make it an issue.

good and bad, right and wrong do not exist as a set in stone way things should be,

on a personal level they do and have to or we would digress into an anarchal state where will would be imposed by those that thought it proper to impose will.

even pacifistic ideals must be fought for, or you will continue to live in a violent world.

and maybe you'd even see a perspective you never thought of before, that the warmongers are searching for the same thing a peaceful existance where their views are enforced.

"Giraffes have long necks because their ancestors, which had shorter necks, could not reach the remaining vegetation during times of famine, nor could they see their natural predators approaching and thus became meals."

i'm sorry user-x but i have to completely disagree with this.

first you're almost assigning a consciousness to evolution,

second giraffes coexist and always have with animals that graze.

both reasonings you used would've caused their extinction.

if anything a giraffes neck is a hinderance and very limiting in the amount and type of food it can eat.

it can't be a carnivore, because it's food would lie dead on the ground, it can't graze like most herbivores do being grass and small bushes are such a plentiful food source,

it can only eat from trees, that have to have a minimum height.

you'd think evolution would've endowed it with the ability to exist in a more diverse environment,

also having a long neck would not aid in detecting predators,

i've tripped over things that were right in front of me not realizing they were there.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lostmind:
i disagree user-x, there is no right or wrong either.

---

There is if the person making the choice lives in a civilized society. Not everyone will agree on what is right and wrong, but everyone will have an opinion of it.

quote:

---

to manipulate the masses?

or to influence public opinion of right and wrong,

when you convince somebody of your point of view you do not consider it manipulation,

yet when somebody is convinced of that which is in opposition to what you feel, they have been manipulated.

---

You've confused manipulation with good intentioned education. If my government tells me that I can better survive an oil embargo by setting my thermostat at 65, then I've just been educated. If my government tells me we need to develop our strategic reserves now, when the embargo hasn't started yet, then I've been manipulated. In other words, the motive is the key element.

[This message has been edited by user X (edited 05-28-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by IzzyReele:
first you're almost assigning a consciousness to evolution

---

Maybe it does but I was just referring to simple 'survival of the fittest.

quote:

---

also having a long neck would not aid in detecting predators

---

*sits dumbfounded*

quote:

---

i've tripped over things that were right in front of me not realizing they were there.

---

Would that be a copy of Darwin's 'The Origin of Species'?

"There is if the person making the choice lives in a civilized society. Not everyone will agree on what is right and wrong, but everyone will have an opinion of it."

i think we're agreeing and not understanding each other, i think things are right and wrong as well.

but what is right and wrong is not carved in stone somewhere,

despite what christians and jews think.

(i didn't even realize the pun til i typed it.)
in fact i think that's where it originated, moses told some guy not to worship a golden calf, and the guy told him, hey unless it's carved in stone...

a trip to the mountain later what's number 1?

"You've confused manipulation with good intentioned education. If my government tells me that I can better survive an oil embargo by setting my thermostat at 65"

a person could also view it as the government manipulating your lifestyle to further it's own political motives.

"Would that be a copy of Darwin's 'The Origin of Species'?"

good stuff, good stuff.

i can't even reply to that one without making myself look stupid.

** bows humbly **

thats one lil factor that i dont understand in eveolution...
ill try to explain myself: if there's a snake on one side of a river wich has to get to the other, it will take its breath and try to swim across. it may fail, over and over, but one time he will get it because he will be adapted to the water. ( or his desendents ) now with girafes its a complete differnt story, thier necks wont get bigger because they can't reach some plants because they are always other plants to eat. so now tell me why did the animals that evolved into the girafes wanted to get longer necks?
if it made sence to you try n reply.

it made perfect sense to king,

that's why i don't believe in evolution in it's current.

i don't deny evolution, it's inevitable.

there's a controversial biologist who now is trying to prove that darwin's theory is wrong.

there wasn't one bacteria that mutated into a fish, than a frog, than a snake, than a cat, than monkey, than man.

there was one bacteria that mutated into what would become a fish, another bacteria mutated into what became plants, another into what became dogs, another into what became man.

he believes it is quite possible that man and monkey share no common ancestry.

his reasoning, darwin's theory should make more variants in species.

where there were dozens of different kinds of man thousands of years ago, now there is only 1, if darwins theory was correct than thousands of years ago where there was 1 today should be dozens.

he laughs at the 98% similarity between man and monkey saying you cannot see a significant difference in any dna until you back to the simplest forms of life, there is 95% similarity between man and wolf.

Widely accepted modern evolutionary theory states that man is a separate branch from present day primates. Darwins theories will, as have other pioneers of science, be disproved or refined over time with the advent of new tools such as DNA analysis. Darwin's first and foremost tool was mere observation. He used to record his data by making hand sketches and he sailed in wooden ships.

'Survival of the fittest' as applied to your snake story would be:

The snakes that are better able to hold their breath will be more likely to escape their predators or obtain food by crossing the river. Those snakes live to reproduce and their offspring carry the genes that allow them to hold their breath, i.e. large lungs, bigger muscles with which to swim the current, etc.

The giraffe with longer necks will see the hyena approach, and in turn, run off and live to reproduce offspring with large necks. The short necked ones are meals. Nature didn't intend to grow long necks, but rather provided the mechanism for automatically sustaining itself. If the trees happen to mutate in a manner that only 4' trees will grow, the giraffe will die off as others have for similar reasons.

In other words, nature thinks life is good,and constantly strives to create and defend it. Therefore, there is a good.

i assume you mean god not good, right?

xenobite what isn't perfect about you?

i don't know what we are, you have an opinion of what we are.

you look at war as a bad thing, i consider it a good thing in certain cases, such as the preservation of ideas.

or maybe you would prefer that countries just bow before an aggressor?

that's lame using catholic priests.

it would not happen to my child, he/she would not be in a catholic church, or really any kind of church.

so no it wouldn't cause me to lose my faith.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
In other words, nature thinks life is good,and constantly strives to create and defend it. Therefore, there is a good.

---

It is good.

quote:

---

Originally posted by IzzyReele:
i assume you mean god not good, right?

---

It could be god because it's intensly magical.

*aware that he just used a lame adjective*

Still.. it's too nebulous to put a name of god on it though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by IzzyReele:
you look at war as a bad thing, i consider it a good thing in certain cases, such as the preservation of ideas.

---

Yes, but more often that not, it's waged for gold and that's pretty fucking sad.

War for the sake of war is good. What other than war is a better way to test a people's resolve, will, ingenuity, and unity?

you dont need a long neck to see other animals,
also, there was one micororganism that mutates into others and more and ended up making human cells.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
War for the sake of war is good. What other than war is a better way to test a people's resolve, will, ingenuity, and unity?

---

The answer to this bullshit fascist question is:

'Keeping the peace'.

No its not. That doesnt test anyones will, because all wars can be traced to the will of individuals, and it isnt natural to desire peace above all other things. Keeping the peace is synonomous with, smothering the will. That doesnt test a peoples will then.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
...it isnt natural to desire peace above all other things.

---

I agree, to the extent of defending principles and a way of life that goes with those principles. In that case, war is righteous and necessary, but it is still a necessary evil. It's like cleaning the toilet - if you are not prepared (yes, have the will) to do it, then you will end up sitting in shit. And I'll concede that, if a culture is not tested in war, it can grow fat and lose the ability to wage it, resulting in it's eventual demise.

However, 'War for the sake of war', as you put it, is not good when it means arbitrary aggression.

quote:

---

Keeping the peace is synonomous with, smothering the will.

---

Do you mean that it smothers our natural instincts of aggression and brutality? I don't see a problem with that. What other animal enjoys the sadistic aggressiveness that man does? Any brutal acts that take place in nature are the result of survival or defence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
What other than war is a better way to test a people's resolve, will, ingenuity, and unity?

---

Unity? Maybe cultural or national unity, but not unity of the species. I'll reiterate that 'war for gold' is lame, especially in modern times, when the warriors that waged it don't get to share in the spoils. That's not unity, it's caste warfare.

When I saw your IM handle (btw, you were a stubborn prick about that, weren't you?), I brushed up on my fascism. Is this accurate?
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html

quote:

---

...For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. - Musollini

---

His thinking was not far-reaching enough. If successful, when the entire planet was under his boot, that fascism, with nowhere else to turn, would begin to feed upon itself.