I think a more interesting question is, why does God hide himself from some people but not from others? We hear all these stories about personal experiences with God. How come God chooses to reveal himself in such cases?
For some people, they never had any experience at all. This is mind boggling to me.
Because some people are delusional, while others are not. God is a mental image or a feeling. It is a product of an overactive human imagination. I think this God concept was needed to help us survive in the magical world we saw all around us. So, the idea of God is an evolutionary adaptation, IMHO. |
|
|
|
...
why not pick option 2, enjoy your life, live once and maybe twice ! how does believing in God keep you from enjoying your life?
...
It depends on which God you choose to believe in. Do you enjoy killing gays or infidels? Stoning women for adultery? If yes, then you might enjoy your life and believe in God (Yahweh, Allah, Jesus etc). If you don't, then your God will punish you severely and you will burn in hell for not obeying what he told you must do or else. Now, I would recommend you pick Sun as your God. We know what Sun is, and it does not ask you to kill anyone. Without Sun there would be no life here on Earth. Dogs are also good Gods. They love you no matter what, will put their lives on the line to save you, are always there, you can see and touch them, they are real. Unlike the Gods people invented. |
|
|
|
Two Facts of Life
1. You can not convince an atheist to believe in God
2. You can not convince a God-believer to become an atheist.
#2 is not true. I was a strong believer, then I turned 12. Did someone convince you to change your belief, or did you change your own belief by yourself? It was a slow process, but piece by piece the Catholic storyline stopped making sense. Reading Bible accelerated my loss of faith. What a bunch of hogwash! Stoning, killing babies, cutting off hands, flat Earth, talking snakes, 6000-year-old Earth, 6 days creation, living in the stomach of a whale etc. Too much to stomach. Read any science textbook, then re-read the Bible again. See what you get. I bet you, you will not get through Genesis before you become an Atheist. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1367154.0 |
|
|
|
A few weeks ago ,I had a long debate with an Atheist friend, a debate about the existence of God. we have been trying to ignore such a debate for a while but it had to take place.
since i can not prove that there is a God , simply because you can't close your eyes and expect to see the light ! but i finally won the debate and opened my friend's eyes.
so after a long debate that led to no way. I had to ask my friend a simple question, and this goes to all the Atheists.
Since death is certain,what is the risk that each of us is taking now ? who is risking more ?
when we die, there are 2 possible scenarios
1- (there is no God) That's the end, , no judgment, no saving,no hell fire, no heaven.
2- (there IS God) resurrection will happen, judgement will happen, disbelievers will go to hell fire.
To me as a believe am risking nothing, i will be good with both scenario mentioned above, it's either heaven or nothing ! so i am not risking anything !
To my Atheist friend, he is good if scenario number one happen, but he sure as hell won't be good if it turns out that there is a God, its either hell or nothing!
so the certain fact here that Atheists are taking a great risk for almost no reward.
now as an Atheists i want you to explain to me why would you be taking a big risk even if it has a 1% chance of failure?
Problem with your logic is that you don't know which one of the 3000+ Gods to believe. You are probably wrong picking your God in which case you will burn in hell (if there is a God that created hell for people so that he can watch them suffer for eternity :-) ) Another option is that there is a God and nothing happens after you die, i.e. simulation is over and the atoms in your body are recycled to create something else. So there could be two different options: 1. There is no God, i.e. nothing happens after you die. 2. There is God, nothing happens after you die. God does not give a fuck about this insignificant planet in the middle of nowhere. I am pretty sure God concept was invented by insecure, ignorant people to make themselves feel better. So I would not worry about these childish stories. Pick option #1 and enjoy your life. You only got one life to live. |
|
|
|
Two Facts of Life
1. You can not convince an atheist to believe in God
2. You can not convince a God-believer to become an atheist.
#2 is not true. I was a strong believer, then I turned 12. |
|
|
|
There are billions of videos on youtube. Not one is from God himself. |
|
|
|
The world could not just happen by chance. A supreme being must have necessitated the existence of the universe and that supreme being can be nothing but God
"nothing but God"? Describe God for me. His name describes him. The Great I am. (Self existent) If think of describing how we came to exist you will get to the point of who created who or what, or how "x" thing was created, if you take the science approach "The world was formed from the explosion of a bunch of gasses and so on", so my question is: How did those gasses form? From what? Do you understand English? Please describe God, in your own words. You're funny, I just gave you a hint, as stated above you need to read the Bible to understand since you may misunderstand my words with a short description. But... I can give you a hand with that though. He is loving, merciful, just, firm and drastic when He has to. Ok, I am going to try one more time, since you are slightly retarded. PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT YOUR GOD LOOKS LIKE! Man why are you insulting? I'm not insulting you even though you haven't learned to read at your age, your question should have been how do you physically describe God? Then the answer to that question would be: No man has seen God, I'm talking about the God of the Bible BTW. If your point is if you haven't seen it why do you believe in him; my next question for you will be: Can you please describe helium or air? Yes we can describe Hellium, we can measure it, test/experiment with it. We can't do that with god because... well, let me give you a hint, it's imaginary, like Harry potter, spiderman or Zeus. The same thing happens with God, you can't see him, however you can perceive his existence, and also test it (we christians don't put God to the test because it is sin). However haven't you seen people with cancer getting cured after a prayer? Cancer is not present in any tests? I can show you a video of a christian inside of his car in flames, the car resulting completely burned also the interior and him getting removed from the vehicle without a single burn and the bible intact, without a single page burned. What else do you want to prove his existence. How about people with cancer who died despite the fact that their whole congregation prayed for them? How about people with cancer who got cured without any praying? You want to test if the Bible or Christians burn in cars? Just sit in the car with your Bible on your lap, pour gasoline on you and set yourself on fire, oh, yeah, I forgot, pray as much as you want. You and your bible will burn. You don't believe me? Try it. I dare you. What you are describing is impossible, I have never seen anyone get cured from cancer minutes after been diagnosed without a prayer. You didn't even asked me to show you the video which proves you are not interested in seeing the truth but in finding a point of discussion. We cannot put the Lord our God to the test. I did not have to. Ask your God to post here and we will be done. |
|
|
|
The world could not just happen by chance. A supreme being must have necessitated the existence of the universe and that supreme being can be nothing but God
"nothing but God"? Describe God for me. His name describes him. The Great I am. (Self existent) If think of describing how we came to exist you will get to the point of who created who or what, or how "x" thing was created, if you take the science approach "The world was formed from the explosion of a bunch of gasses and so on", so my question is: How did those gasses form? From what? Do you understand English? Please describe God, in your own words. You're funny, I just gave you a hint, as stated above you need to read the Bible to understand since you may misunderstand my words with a short description. But... I can give you a hand with that though. He is loving, merciful, just, firm and drastic when He has to. Ok, I am going to try one more time, since you are slightly retarded. PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT YOUR GOD LOOKS LIKE! Man why are you insulting? I'm not insulting you even though you haven't learned to read at your age, your question should have been how do you physically describe God? Then the answer to that question would be: No man has seen God, I'm talking about the God of the Bible BTW. If your point is if you haven't seen it why do you believe in him; my next question for you will be: Can you please describe helium or air? Yes we can describe Hellium, we can measure it, test/experiment with it. We can't do that with god because... well, let me give you a hint, it's imaginary, like Harry potter, spiderman or Zeus. The same thing happens with God, you can't see him, however you can perceive his existence, and also test it (we christians don't put God to the test because it is sin). However haven't you seen people with cancer getting cured after a prayer? Cancer is not present in any tests? I can show you a video of a christian inside of his car in flames, the car resulting completely burned also the interior and him getting removed from the vehicle without a single burn and the bible intact, without a single page burned. What else do you want to prove his existence. How about people with cancer who died despite the fact that their whole congregation prayed for them? How about people with cancer who got cured without any praying? You want to test if the Bible or Christians burn in cars? Just sit in the car with your Bible on your lap, pour gasoline on you and set yourself on fire, oh, yeah, I forgot, pray as much as you want. You and your bible will burn. You don't believe me? Try it. I dare you. |
|
|
|
Ok, I am going to try one more time, since you are slightly retarded.
PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT YOUR GOD LOOKS LIKE!
Nobody has ever seen God.... Yet, someone wrote many books about him/her. Why don't you believe in Snow White or Santa Claus? At least with these two characters we know what they look like (or suppose to look like). With your God, you don't even know what he/she looks like, you have no evidence they exist, yet you believe they exist. This is beyond being delusional. |
|
|
|
The world could not just happen by chance. A supreme being must have necessitated the existence of the universe and that supreme being can be nothing but God
"nothing but God"? Describe God for me. His name describes him. The Great I am. (Self existent) If think of describing how we came to exist you will get to the point of who created who or what, or how "x" thing was created, if you take the science approach "The world was formed from the explosion of a bunch of gasses and so on", so my question is: How did those gasses form? From what? Do you understand English? Please describe God, in your own words. You're funny, I just gave you a hint, as stated above you need to read the Bible to understand since you may misunderstand my words with a short description. But... I can give you a hand with that though. He is loving, merciful, just, firm and drastic when He has to. Ok, I am going to try one more time, since you are slightly retarded. PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT YOUR GOD LOOKS LIKE! |
|
|
|
I think this "All Nations" organization is responsible. There is no ifs or buts about it. Christian brainwashing at its best. How people fall for these cults is beyond me? We need organizations to help people get out of these cults (Christianity, Islam, Judaism etc) before it is too late. |
|
|
|
The world could not just happen by chance. A supreme being must have necessitated the existence of the universe and that supreme being can be nothing but God
"nothing but God"? Describe God for me. His name describes him. The Great I am. (Self existent) If think of describing how we came to exist you will get to the point of who created who or what, or how "x" thing was created, if you take the science approach "The world was formed from the explosion of a bunch of gasses and so on", so my question is: How did those gasses form? From what? Do you understand English? Please describe God, in your own words. |
|
|
|
The world could not just happen by chance. A supreme being must have necessitated the existence of the universe and that supreme being can be nothing but God
"nothing but God"? Describe God for me. Read the whole Bible, and you will come away with a description of God. The fact that you can force yourself to be against God in the face of all the evidence in the universe for God, shows that you have some God-like qualities in yourself, even though you have warped them.  So you don't know how to describe God, right? |
|
|
|
....
There is nothing in common between SA government and Chinese communism. ANC is part of the socialism international which goal is to implement democratic socialism, not communism.....
Yet one more argument laced with misunderstanding about "democratic socialism." But leaving that aside, let's look at the "nothing in common" assertion. Mutual interests are what they have in common, right?Ah yeah sorry. Nothing in common was too broad and carefree. Anyway they have at least the hate of capitalism in common. China is as communist as South African Blacks are Japanese. LOL. China is 6th in the world in number of millionares and second in the number of billionares. Nothing communist about that. The Politburo is run by capitalist billionares. https://www.businessinsider.com/countries-with-most-millionaires-2017-4#6-china-13https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_the_number_of_billionairesIn South Africa, Chinese are after resources. Nothing to do with politics. South African Blacks are too stupid to understand the communist ideology (just like you) and they think they will get stuff for free and the system will magically provide for them, their children and grandchildren. They are driven by the hatered of whites and are looking for something new. And there comes communism. This will lead to disaster. The infrastructure will collapse, the crime will skyrocket. Capital will leave the country. Their credit rating will collapse. South Africa will be on the chopping block sooner rather than later. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is old, outdated, slow and uses too much energy. The price will soon be brought down to a level where miners will abandon it. Prices will continue to be kept lower due to CME futures.
Sell it all now. Come back again when it hits 40k. Thanks for playing. |
|
|
|
This is what happens when you act on your delusion. Where was Jesus? I guess he died when John's brain died. Sad story nevertheless. I blame his parents and his friends for not helping him get out of his religious delusion. |
|
|
|
Hello world.
Have been away for lon and following HellFish advice I'm starting a selfmod thread. Feel free to say whatever you want as long as it's not trolling.
So why starting this thread? Because there is this sentence I hear and read a lot that always triggers me a bit. Right wing people mockingly saying that you have to be a complete retard to be a socialist and that the argument "it's not real communism" is stupid. This argument is just saying that USSR or whatever "communist" country failure isn't a proof of communism failure because... Well it wasn't real communism.
And this argument is... Perfectly valid though a bit short-sighted.
I dare anyone to give an example of a real communism state in our world, present or past. There are none.
There is this HUGE MISTAKE made by tons of people who believe that communism = no private property = everything belongs to the state. Which is a very brutal and stupid interpretation of communism manifest. Communism doesn't mean everything belongs to the state but everything is owned by the people. In particular for Marxists (which are the most common kind of communists) it's not that there should be no private property but that anything being used in the economy (the means of production) should belong to the workers using them. (Which means very VERY limited private property because depending on interpretation pretty much anything can be considered being part of the economy)
But let's simplify all this by saying that, in communism, the means of production are supposed to belong to the people.
The people.
Not the state, the people. That's where lies the "it's not real communism".
Because what are exactly countries like Venezuela or USSR or Cuba or North Korea? They're countries where state is all powerfull, meaning the leaders are all powerfull. What do you call such countries? Dictatorships. And it doesn't matter if the dictatorship calls itself communist or islamic or democratic or whatever. A dictatorship is just a dictatorship, a country where the people are oppressed by a very small group having the power. It's not communism at all! It's the opposite of communism.
So no it wasn't real communism. But why is it a short-sighted answer? Well because it seems that every time a country adopts communism it falls immediately into a dictatorship. So even if those countries aren't communist, if every country trying to adopt communism falls into dictatorship 2 days later... Well it means that even if there is a slight difference, communism leads to dictatorship.
And that's right. At least that WAS right. Communism means that the people own and control everything equally, but that wasn't possible, what was used was that people were represented by a government THEN this government controls everything (hence the dictatorship).
But maybe we have an alternative solution now. Maybe we can do things differently... What if we didn't use the government to control things? What if we did it ourselves directly? With our technologies we no longer have a use for representative politics. Direct democracy is completely possible.
So I can't say anything for sure of course, but it seems to me that we have new possibility. Applying the new technologies (including blockchains) to create a country where everything is directly controlled by the people, which would be real communism this time.
I don't get it. Are you proposing "no private or state property" rule? Who exactly will control all the properties with no identifiable owners? Without owners, it will be a complete chaos and anarchy. People will walk into a place where you sleep (since we cannot call it your house) and take your personal belongings since they don't belong to you, your TV, the bed you sleep on, your car, your grandfather's watch etc. and you will have to agree to it since those things don't really belong to you. Is this what you are proposing? People sharing everything they used to own with other people? Criminal gangs would control everything in no time. Wild West all over again. I think this is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. It is worse than a communist state idea. You need to distinguish the difference between private property and personal property. ... The socialist ideal is that everyone owns their personal property. The capitalist ideal is that the capitalist class owns everything, including the personal property of the working class. Are you saying that in the capitalist system the capitalist class owns the underwear of workers? Are you well? You should check it out, it might a tumor. LOL.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaTO8_KNcuoI am very familiar with what it means not to be able to own a private property. It is a nightmare. I would not wish for my worse enemy to live under a socialist or a communist system. The right to own a private property is a basic human right, IMHO. |
|
|
|
Capital would flee. Your currency would collapse. An iPhone would cost as much as a doctor's annual salary in your system.
Any more questions?
Yes please. Tell me what capital would flee and how? That's the one red flag all the capitalists are always swinging like a Damocles sword and I find it very funny as it makes no sense whatsoever. All the capital in your country would flee abroad. Your banks will be insolvent. If you freeze the bank accounts while you implement your system, your country's currency will be worthless on the international markets. Billionaires who would lose money because of your plan would short sell your currency, stocks to ZERO. Most likely than not, the billionaires would make sure your country is invaded and you are executed like Muammar Gaddafi or Saddam Hussein. These gentlemen only hinted that their actions would affect USD exchange rates, look what happened to them. Your country would not be able to buy foreign goods or resources. Your citizens will die of starvation. Some lucky ones will escape before you implement your plan. It is not funny. This is what happened (and is happening) to many countries where social or political environment inhibits foreign investment. Just the fact you are asking this question tells me you did not take any undergrad economics courses. This is economics 101. No country is self-sufficient. The international currency market is where the wars are won and lost. You live in a carefully constructed bubble. |
|
|
|
I don't get it. Are you proposing "no private or state property" rule?
Who exactly will control all the properties with no identifiable owners?
Without owners, it will be a complete chaos and anarchy. People will walk into a place where you sleep (since we cannot call it your house) and take your personal belongings since they don't belong to you, your TV, the bed you sleep on, your car, your grandfather's watch etc. and you will have to agree to it since those things don't really belong to you.
Is this what you are proposing? People sharing everything they used to own with other people?
Criminal gangs would control everything in no time. Wild West all over again.
I think this is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. It is worse than a communist state idea.
Not at all. First thing I'm proposing is a direct democracy, which would get rid of corruption and cooperation between governments and big corporations. Second thing I would propose is more of a nation-owned company concerning the basic needs (health, food, education, real estate...). Which doesn't mean that those companies shouldn't exist without private competition. I'm all in for private companies if they want to compete with national companies no problem with that. But the most important thing here is that I say we need the first thing and... We might try the second. But once the first thing is done then who am I to decide on the second one? I don't see how anyone could refuse the direct democracy with any kind of logical argument. But the social economy system I have in mind is just an idea of how organising our society. We might go in a totally different direction if that's what is wanted. The important thing is the direct democracy, which would already make our CURRENT situation so much better... Reducing the power of big corporation in an incredible way. Capital would flee. Your currency would collapse. An iPhone would cost as much as a doctor's annual salary in your system. Any more questions? |
|
|
|
+1
The privileged (probably white, middle-class kids) arguing about socialism. They have no fucking idea what socialism or communism is.
If you lived under both socialist/communist and capitalist systems you would understand the fundamental flaws and benefits of each system.
They should interview people who lived in socialist and communist regimes.
Instead, they think they "got it", and their interpretation of socialism will work (no matter the evidence to contrary) if they would only get a chance to implement it "properly". LOL.
These guys are a joke. Comedians really.
I described your delusion a bit upper man ^^ I know that socialism is what allowed me to be where I am. I wouldn't have the money to pay for my college without socialism. My dad's first company went bankrupt and by the time he made a more successfull attempt I already had my diploma. Do you suggest that it wasn't thanks to socialism? T here are good and bad sides to both systems and I'd say socialism outweigth capitalism on the good side, although it is again not the main point of this post but all the liberal economist of the forum are trying to argue that so I have to answer this off topic subject... And I am yet to be presented any argument against socialism + direct democracy... mrcash02 is arguing this point right now but I haven't seen anything from you. You are confusing social programs with socialism. You are wrong on capitalism. Capitalism is cruel, harsh but has more opportunities for people who want to work hard. Socialism or communism will provide you with free education, free medical services, and will provide you with jobs after you graduate that will get you through the first week of the month, the rest will be up to you to figure out. Socialism will offer you subsistence living, most of the time you will be literally starving. In capitalism, even with a job on the production line, you can survive the whole month with two weeks pay. You can save money even with a job at the McDonalds. The hardest thing in capitalism is to control yourself and not to buy all the shit you don't really need. That was the hardest part. I could have retired sooner if I did not take expensive vacations, bought expensively jewelry or cars early in my career. Other than that, the hardest job I had was washing aluminum extruder dies in acid (with rubber gloves that had holes), but it paid very well. Almost died there. Do I think workers struggle in capitalism? I think most do because they spend too much, are not educated and are destined for a life on the production lines. Do I think their lives are better than the upper management in the socialist or communist countries, you bet yah. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
