The road to the End of Religion: How sex will kill God

[BADecker]

Love that you folks are still bumpin this epic thread. Have you had your taint licked today? Cause I did, and it felt great.

Gonna get myself licked off again tomorrow, too.

Spiritu tuo conteram discipulorum Christi.

image

image

image

Hora aditus.

Now, now. You don't know for a fact that you are not going to die first. I don't know why I bother... you might be dead already. For sure you are dead in trespasses and sin.

[1715569355]

1715569355

[1715569355]

1715569355

[1715569355]

1715569355

[Beliathon]

So is this still the coolest and sexyist thread om this forum or what?

I think so.

[n2004al]

"The experience tells us that Christian lovemaking should be the most passionate, erotic, playful and super-satisfying expression of sexuality known to humankind. This is because our sexuality is a powerful gift of the Creator."

Taken from "God's Rules for Sex" (http://www.todayschristianwoman.com/articles/2008/september/18.76.html)

Those are the most essential words that testify that sex and God are in perfect harmony with each other. So the title of this thread is the most wrong thing conceptualized by the OP. No matter the different people say those words remain in mind and make every christian sure in his sexual life. I am not a believer but I am an fair person. As such I like the truth. And the truth is in above words.

[J. J. Phillips]

I think so.

Oh, that's cute. Pretending like you think. Kids say the funniest things.

[Losvienleg]

"The experience tells us that Christian lovemaking should be the most passionate, erotic, playful and super-satisfying expression of sexuality known to humankind. This is because our sexuality is a powerful gift of the Creator."

Taken from "God's Rules for Sex" (http://www.todayschristianwoman.com/articles/2008/september/18.76.html)

Those are the most essential words that testify that sex and God are in perfect harmony with each other. So the title of this thread is the most wrong thing conceptualized by the OP. No matter the different people say those words remain in mind and make every christian sure in his sexual life. I am not a believer but I am an fair person. As such I like the truth. And the truth is in above words.

The title meant that non-marital sexual relations will kill God and everything that is good, the same way the termination of pregnancy is actually doing it. It meant that too much people are not virgin at their wedding (if they even make a wedding !) ! In short, it says that the people suffer for big illness.

[Blawpaw]

I seriously believe that humanity will only be absolutely free when the whole idea of religion becomes obsolete. Once religion is banned, Humanity will be ready to have an evolution leap.

[Losvienleg]

I seriously believe that humanity will only be absolutely free when the whole idea of religion becomes obsolete. Once religion is banned, Humanity will be ready to have an evolution leap.

When religion will ne obsolete : mentally disordered faggots will pop worldwide ; people will have sex younger and younger without being married ; a lot of people will divorce, something that isn't permitted. And since the religion and God are the Truth, they will never disappear.

[Beliathon]

When religion will ne obsolete : mentally disordered faggots will pop worldwide ; people will have sex younger and younger without being married ; a lot of people will divorce, something that isn't permitted. And since the religion and God are the Truth, they will never disappear.

[BADecker]

I seriously believe that humanity will only be absolutely free when the whole idea of religion becomes obsolete. Once religion is banned, Humanity will be ready to have an evolution leap.

When religion will ne obsolete : mentally disordered faggots will pop worldwide ; people will have sex younger and younger without being married ; a lot of people will divorce, something that isn't permitted. And since the religion and God are the Truth, they will never disappear.

That's right. If religion were ever going to be obsolete, it would have happened over the thousands of years that have passed us by already.

Graham Hancock and others - Youtube search on "Graham Hancock" - have shown that our civilization, close to worldwide that it might be, is not the first worldwide civilization. Hancock has proven from archaeology that 12,500 years ago there was a worldwide civilization that was more advanced scientifically than ours in some ways.

If God were going to fail from among us, it would have happened long ago. Anti-God people will only destroy themselves.

[Beliathon]

Woohoo! Congrats everyone on getting this thread 20,000 views! You've all contributed to a world with less superstition and shitty mythos!



Also more orgasms and less violence.



Also death to capitalism!



Smoke weed ever' day! Cops are not your friend.

[BADecker]

Woohoo! Congrats everyone on getting this thread 20,000 views! You've all contributed to a world with less superstition and shitty mythos!

image

Also more orgasms and less violence.

image

Also death to capitalism!

image

Smoke weed ever' day! Cops are not your friend.

The shitty myths are going strong. One of the shittiest of them is that there isn't any God. A second is that He doesn't have any control. A third is that, since God doesn't exist, He can't be patient and merciful, hoping that as many as possible will be saved.

Smoke a little weed every day, but don't overdo it. Don't legalize weed. Rather, repeal all laws against it. And if anybody ODs on it, his friends and relatives need to pay the hospital that saves him. And if he harms or kills anyone because he is high, "eye for eye; tooth for tooth; hand for hand; life for life."

[Beliathon]

"The experience tells us that Christian lovemaking should be the most passionate, erotic, playful and super-satisfying expression of sexuality known to humankind. This is because our sexuality is a powerful gift of the Creator."

Taken from "God's Rules for Sex" (http://www.todayschristianwoman.com/articles/2008/september/18.76.html)

TAKE YOUR HERESY ELSEWHERE YOU DIRTY LITTLE HARLOT!

The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Corinthians 7:3-5

Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.

Corinthians 6:18

But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 5:28

For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God;

Thessalonians 4:3-5

Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.

Colossians 3:5

“Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.

Corinthians 6:13

[bojan92]

I am really feeling sorry about your approach towards the religion.. actually the kind of culture you want to prevail can only be found in the animals. Do whatever you want to do, wherever you want to do and with anyone you want to do. The Might is right kind of thing will destroy everything. More Orgasms = Complete debacle of already shaking society. By the way we already cannot see a society anywhere in you so called industrialized nations. Everything there is rotating around two things sex and money, no moral values are left. People can be found in conditions of a total intimacy openly in parks, this is something that was observed among the animals only but now we have such people who feel proud for getting indulged in such things.

If your religion is a failure than it does not means that whole of this phenomenon is a failure

[bojan92]

Believe me, I don't want to offend you but its interesting see anit-God peoples dying! the way they cry at their beds in pain and stress is enough to remind us and them their thoughts. Today, you are young and energetic you can speak any kind of shit but tomorrow when you will have your legs in the grave you will feel and see how empty your life is. In case of an absence of the religion, your children will be free to treat you however they want. No one will help you in crossing the road, as there will be nothing to bind him for doing good deeds, no one will give you a glass of water even. That time, you will never think of the orgasms, you will look for some comfort that is going to remain absence from your life. You wont receive any manifestations that comes from a family system
 

[Beliathon]

If your religion is a failure than it does not means that whole of this phenomenon is a failure

All religions are failed sciences. Religion and science seek the same thing: to explain existence, give us purpose and meaning. Religion just makes up the answers, while science is the only surefire method of pattern recognition.

[the joint]

If your religion is a failure than it does not means that whole of this phenomenon is a failure

All religions are failed sciences. Religion and science seek the same thing: to explain existence, give us purpose and meaning. Religion just makes up the answers, while science is the only surefire method of pattern recognition.

Correct, science is a surefire method of pattern recognition, and it exceeds at this because it makes the blanket assumption that observation does not causally effect what it observes.  This assumption is scientifically unfalsifiable.  In other words, it says, "We're going to concede to this one unscientific assumption in order to make the whole of scientific methodology valid." While this makes it valid, it places an impenetrable upper limit upon scientific exploration, and any concept beyond this limit -- which includes the aforementioned assumption and also all existing mathematical and logical principles upon which scientific theorization is utterly dependent -- cannot be explored by empirical science.  Empirical science and accompanying evidence have no business concluding upon the existence or non-existence of God.  "There is evidence for God" is absurd because there never could be, and "there is no evidence for God, therefore it's silly to believe in God" is equally absurd because evidence is irrelevant, anyway.  There's no evidence for abstract mathematical laws, either, but we believe in them and use them all the time anyway because they are self-consistent, logical constructs.

Religion as a faith-based system cannot explore beyond the upper-limit of scientific methodology, either.  But philosophy, logic, and mathematics can. 

[1aguar]

[Science] makes the blanket assumption that observation does not causally effect what it observes.  This assumption is scientifically unfalsifiable.  

Actually, this assumption has already been falsified by mathematics and confirmed by recent experiment.

The observation is affected by choices made by the observer, as quantum mechanics seems to teach.

Observers in modern physics truly become participants in their observation, whatever that observation might be.

Source:
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/Numbers/Math/Mathematical_Thinking/observer.htm

[the joint]

[Science] makes the blanket assumption that observation does not causally effect what it observes.  This assumption is scientifically unfalsifiable.  

Actually, this assumption has already been falsified by mathematics and confirmed by recent experiment.

The observation is affected by choices made by the observer, as quantum mechanics seems to teach.

Observers in modern physics truly become participants in their observation, whatever that observation might be.

Source:
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/Numbers/Math/Mathematical_Thinking/observer.htm

It can be falsified via other methods, yes.  But by experiment, only indirectly, not directly.  There is no such thing as a quantum mechanical or metaphysical experiment in the directly-observable sense, but there can be evidence that is suggestive of quantum mechanical or metaphysical behavior which cannot be explained in a classical physics context.  But in general, yes.

[1aguar]

In other words, it says, "We're going to concede to this one unscientific assumption in order to make the whole of scientific methodology valid."

So, this "one unscientific assumption" turns out to be false (generally), correct?

While this makes it valid,

How can it be "valid" when it starts from a (generally) false premise?
Oh, I see that in formal logic the definition of "valid" states that an argument can have false premises and still be valid.
How convenient for science that it can be based on a falsehood and still claim "validity"!
As a result, scientists can ignore overwhelming evidence by claiming that "more research is needed" before coming to a "conclusion", when in reality there is no possibility in coming to a true conclusion in a valid way if the premise is mistaken!

it places an impenetrable upper limit upon scientific exploration, and any concept beyond this limit
...
There's no evidence for abstract mathematical laws, either, but we believe in them and use them all the time anyway because they are self-consistent, logical constructs.

There is evidence that some part of the personality survives death, some of the time.
Note the 52 points on the near-death site and the case of the dead chess master, among others...
This refutes humanism, defined as the idea that man is the guarantor of all knowledge and reason, and therefore it indicates that either there is no substance to knowledge and reason (i.e. non-humanist atheism), or all knowledge and reason is founded and guarantied by a Supreme being.

The proof of God is not contingent upon any metaphysical conclusion, only that the one evaluating the evidence concludes that knowledge is valid and has substance, and that no cogent rebuttal of these 52+ points (of knowledge) exists. Therefore, it is theoretically possible to prove a Supreme being using logic and empirical evidence.

My definition: A supreme being who is the founder and guarantor of knowledge.
My proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.5300

[arnav95]

I can guarantee u that God will not die if we had sex. Why would he die...? If he does not want us to have sex he/she has got infinite ways to express that to us.