This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Define "God"

124»

Comments


  • As to answer your final question, there is a difference. Other religions still rely on a list of rules to get you to Heaven/Nirvana/Enlightenment. Christianity does not.
    It most certainly does. That the individual moved toward God, Love, Truth, and Being, and away from Satan/Evil, Hate, Falsehood, Isolation, and Absence. That is part of the definition of Evil they have: a corruption and absence of Good.
    And if you want to ban me for doing this for what I believe is the 2nd time now, go right ahead. I probably deserve it.
    Chill out, this is not some great martyrdom you have taken.
    I know. I'm just saying that there is this whole deal about it being a rule, and I continue to break it. So, if he really wants to enforce it, I am suggesting that banning me is a logical step. If he just locks a thread when he finds one, but lets the perpetrators off, then the rule becomes kinda inefficient. We can easily make new threads just as quickly as Scrym/other moderators can close them. He has to find people who start religious arguments and stop them from starting religious arguments if he wants there to be no more religious arguments. I'm just sayin'. That, or ban anyone who disagrees with his religious viewpoints, which is kinda discriminatory.
  • Which rule do you refer to?
  • edited May 2009
    And if you want to ban me for doing this for what I believe is the 2nd time now, go right ahead. I probably deserve it.
    I won't ban you ever, as long as you continue to have proper spelling and grammar. We don't ban religious argument either.

    What we do ban is pointless repetition clogging up the forum. These arguments have been made infinity times before, and will be made infinity times again. If anyone is actually interested in reading them and thinking about them, there are plenty of old threads you can search for and read that have all the same points. A thread like this serves no purpose other than to satisfy the psychological frustrations of the people typing in it.

    Religious discussion is allowed if you bring something new to the table, which I do not see here. Our test for brining something new to the table is whether or not you can refute the most fundamental anti-god argument, the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Judging from your response, it seems that you do not even fully understand the FSM argument itself. If you would like to achieve that understanding, Google is your friend.

    If the forum had recurring threads with arguments about berries, and none of the threads ever tread any new ground, we would probably close those as well. It has nothing to do with the topic of religion itself. It has to do with clogging up the forums with a bunch of gigantic and identical threads.

    If you want to discuss something religious in nature, that is fine as long as it does not tread the same old territory that has been tread before. This thread was a perfectly acceptable thread when people were simply discussing definitions of god. As soon as it turned around and came back to the same old question of does god exist, or not, that is when the closing stick comes in.
    Post edited by Apreche on
This discussion has been closed.