Satanism, and you.

James2097 · Sep 5, 2005

Chris Hendriks
I actually think he was referring to the Standing for Nothing part to be synonymous with being open minded, meaning you dont have core religious beliefs but are willing to take the time to learn about any religion, in case it may be the one for you.I may be completely wrong but thats how I percieved it.

You're not wrong, so that makes you right. Well, kinda. I think he meant being open-minded towards everything in life generally, (like scientific discoveries etc) not just different religions...

Grand Prix · Sep 6, 2005

Of course being purely open-minded is impossible, but it's wise to try to understand all possible views you can see through. Yes, I'm referring to scientific discoveries, politics, design, religous views, etc.

James2097 · Sep 6, 2005

Grand Prix
Of course being purely open-minded is impossible, but it's wise to try to understand all possible views you can see through. Yes, I'm referring to scientific discoveries, politics, design, religous views, etc.

Its still a good ideal to aim for.

PS · Sep 6, 2005

Swift
PS, I guess you skimmed through this thread and missed this point. Did you have a response to this or would it be something you agree with?

It's a true statement, but there's no evidence to support Satanism of having anything bad about it (I'm not saying there isn't; abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscnce), but throughout history Christians/Catholics have persecuted others.

...which probably explains why there about eight thousand satanists to about two billion Christians.

"Bull**** baffles brains."

Language PS, language.

Swift · Sep 6, 2005

PS
It's a true statement, but there's no evidence to support Satanism of having anything bad about it (I'm not saying there isn't; abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscnce), but throughout history Christians/Catholics have persecuted others.

"Bull**** baffles brains."

Language PS, language.

Ok, so any religion left to "people" is going to go bad. And since satanism is only about themselves, I can see it taking a bad turn for some, very quickly.

PS · Sep 6, 2005

Swift
Ok, so any religion left to "people" is going to go bad. And since satanism is only about themselves, I can see it taking a bad turn for some, very quickly.

I didn't say that.

Christianity used to be opressive and conformitive, Satanism isn't, so that kind of problem wouldn't happen, whereas a greed-based crime might.

Swift · Sep 6, 2005

PS
I didn't say that.

Christianity used to be opressive and conformitive, Satanism isn't, so that kind of problem wouldn't happen, whereas a greed-based crime might.

Ok, so how is that different?

PS · Sep 6, 2005

Swift
Ok, so how is that different?

I'm not saying it isn't...

I was clarifying my point.

Swift · Sep 6, 2005

PS
I'm not saying it isn't...

I was clarifying my point.

Ah, Ok. Just checking.

Flame-returns · Sep 6, 2005

As an Athiest with Pastafarian tendancys who founded a religion and gained honuary Buddhist status as rewarded by the monks of the London Buddhist Vishara for my tireless work with the Buddhist community, I think I am more qualified than most to give my opinion, here goes:

1- Ps' description of Satanism sounds remarkably like athiesm to me.

2- To my knowledge Satanism has not caused a single war, Christianity HAS.

3- Drawing reference to 2, I conclude that a religion based on a book which states that god has every right to kill gays simply for the act of consensual sodomy (see the tale of the destruction of Sodom.) Has NO right to argue with Satanism on a moral ground.

4- Most if not ALL christians on this thread are morons and racists.

5- Let us respect our equals.

6- This is like the same-sex marriage thread revisited.

7- Satanism is not immoral.

8 (last one I promise)- I encourage satanists to keep on truckin' (or whatever it is you satanists do.) If in doubt refer to my picture of your beloved president earlier in this thread.

Swift · Sep 6, 2005

Flame-returns
As an Athiest with Pastafarian tendancys who founded a religion and gained honuary Buddhist status as rewarded by the monks of the London Buddhist Vishara for my tireless work with the Buddhist community, I think I am more qualified than most to give my opinion, here goes:

That was funny.

1- Ps' description of Satanism sounds remarkably like athiesm to me.

Me Too but oh well.

2- To my knowledge Satanism has not caused a single war, Christianity HAS.

Uh, no. People that called themselves christians started a war. Along with just about every other religion that's been around for a while.

3- Drawing reference to 2, I conclude that a religion based on a book which states that god has every right to kill gays simply for the act of consensual sodomy (see the tale of the destruction of Sodom.) Has NO right to argue with Satanism on a moral ground.

Hmm. The bible states that God created all people. God doesn't create things that are an abomination to him. Hense the person has decided to sin. Do not just pull one concept out of the bible without looking at the context of it.

4- Most if not ALL christians on this thread are morons and racists.

And that wasn't a blanket racist and predjudice statement how?

PS · Sep 7, 2005

Hmm. The bible states that God created all people. God doesn't create things that are an abomination to him. Hense the person has decided to sin. Do not just pull one concept out of the bible without looking at the context of it.

So God didn't create gays? God is all-seeing, all-knowing, and is everywhere you know. If God knows what you're going to do next, then there is no free choice. So either God didn't create gays, or he created them knowing full well that they'd go off and sin with each other causing no harm to anyone else in the privacy of their own homes.

Seems a bit hypocritical, no? Sadistic, at least, anyway.

Just doesn't make sense...

Like the great flood.

Swift · Sep 7, 2005

PS
So God didn't create gays? God is all-seeing, all-knowing, and is everywhere you know. If God knows what you're going to do next, then there is no free choice. So either God didn't create gays, or he created them knowing full well that they'd go off and sin with each other causing no harm to anyone else in the privacy of their own homes.

Seems a bit hypocritical, no? Sadistic, at least, anyway.

Just doesn't make sense...

Like the great flood.

Hello, free will. you can CHOOSE to sin. Just because God knows it doesn't mean you don't have a choice.

The Biblical view of homosexuality is that it is a choice. So if you choose to sin(like every other sexual sin) in the old days you got stoned. Please don't turn this into a homosexual thread now

PS · Sep 7, 2005

Swift
Hello, free will. you can CHOOSE to sin. Just because God knows it doesn't mean you don't have a choice.

The Biblical view of homosexuality is that it is a choice. So if you choose to sin(like every other sexual sin) in the old days you got stoned. Please don't turn this into a homosexual thread now

I'm not going to. I'm saying it was sadistic of God to create a creature he knew would sin.

If he knew he was going to do it, how is it free will? How can someone know you are going to choose to do something, if you're the one making the choice? Unless one is a mind reader, then it's pretty much impossible right now.

And it's interesting how you bring up stonings. . .

No opression you say? No enforcement, you say? In the Christian-time frame, acceptance seems to be relatively new.

Saleen Man · Sep 7, 2005

PS
So God didn't create gays? God is all-seeing, all-knowing, and is everywhere you know. If God knows what you're going to do next, then there is no free choice. So either God didn't create gays, or he created them knowing full well that they'd go off and sin with each other causing no harm to anyone else in the privacy of their own homes.

I may be in over my head, but I read along, and this brought up something interesting to me. "God didn't create gays?" God created man in his own image, which means they were without sin. When the devil tempted Eve in the garden, and she ate the forbidden fruit, that brought sin into the world, and this is the part I am very unsure about, but didn't Satan have domain over the Earth after the first sin was committed? Someone with more of the knowledge of the bible may want to help me out here, but if that's what's written, then technically, did God create gays?

James2097 · Sep 7, 2005

Oh dear. Its not the individual's choice whether they are gay or not. Many gays actually try hard to NOT be gay because of the percieved notion that its sinful. They have families and marry etc, until they realise something just doesn't feel right, and that they are in fact gay. Its totally unexceptable for the church to say being gay is a sin, or that its someone's choice to be gay. Many christians who are gay would probably rather NOT be! They are at no fault at all.

Sorry for talking about gays, but the christian idea that its sinful is just plain rubbish.
Personally, I'm don't really like the idea of bum-sex, but is it sinful? No way. Gays are just loving someone in the only natural way they can - a straight relationship is totally unnatural for them.

IS LOVE SINFUL SWIFT?! Thats pretty much what you can imply from the church's point of view.

Saleen Man · Sep 7, 2005

James2097
Oh dear. Its not the individual's choice whether they are gay or not. Many gays actually try hard to NOT be gay because of the percieved notion that its sinful. They have families and marry etc, until they realise something just doesn't feel right, and that they are in fact gay. Its totally unexceptable for the church to say being gay is a sin, or that its someone's choice to be gay. Many christians who are gay would probably rather NOT be! They are at no fault at all.

Sorry for talking about gays, but the christian idea that its sinful is just plain rubbish.
Personally, I'm don't really like the idea of bum-sex, but is it sinful? No way. Gays are just loving someone in the only natural way they can - a straight relationship is totally unnatural for them.

IS LOVE SINFUL SWIFT?! Thats pretty much what you can imply from the church's point of view.

OK, this may be for another thread, but I say it has to be a person's choice to be gay or not. I see it like this. If people were born gay, it would be passed down from their parents, in their genetical make-up, correct? So if there was a gay gene, how could it still be around? Gays can't reproduce by themselves, so there's no way that this gay gene could be passed down generations. It'd be impossible for a heterosexual couple to pass this gene down to their kids, as only gay people would have it. But like I said, that's another topic.

"Chrisitans who are gay" - That's not right.

'85fierogt · Sep 7, 2005

Homosexuals (men and women) should look into Satanism then. If their desire is to have "bum-sex"(quoted from james2097) / carpet licking it would be fine as long as they wait for the mating signals and follow the other 10 rules, 9 statements and stay away from those 9 sins.

Swift · Sep 7, 2005

James2097
Oh dear. Its not the individual's choice whether they are gay or not. Many gays actually try hard to NOT be gay because of the percieved notion that its sinful. They have families and marry etc, until they realise something just doesn't feel right, and that they are in fact gay. Its totally unexceptable for the church to say being gay is a sin, or that its someone's choice to be gay. Many christians who are gay would probably rather NOT be! They are at no fault at all.

Sorry for talking about gays, but the christian idea that its sinful is just plain rubbish.
Personally, I'm don't really like the idea of bum-sex, but is it sinful? No way. Gays are just loving someone in the only natural way they can - a straight relationship is totally unnatural for them.

IS LOVE SINFUL SWIFT?! Thats pretty much what you can imply from the church's point of view.

When you look at the types of faith people have, you can't simply take on part or the parts you like/dislike from it to make it look good/bad.

Adam sinned, pure and simple. Did God know it was going to happen. Yes, did Adam know that God knew it was going to happen. NO. Did Adam talk to God(pray) before he did it? No. So, there you have it. Adam used his own free will to sin just like we all can.

So, when you look at homosexuality. God calls it a sin. Just like stealing, fornication, adultery, lying, murder they are all sin. We have the choice within the realm of the bible. It is sin. I didn't say that. That's thus saith the Lord. So please don't say "it's not sin", because it is. Now if you want to disassociate yourself entirely from God and say that then that's fine.

Is love sinful.? Yep, it's sinful. :dunce:

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." So Love is not sinful in the slightest. Expressions of lust can be very sinful.

James2097 · Sep 8, 2005

Swift
When you look at the types of faith people have, you can't simply take on part or the parts you like/dislike from it to make it look good/bad.

Adam sinned, pure and simple. Did God know it was going to happen. Yes, did Adam know that God knew it was going to happen. NO. Did Adam talk to God(pray) before he did it? No. So, there you have it. Adam used his own free will to sin just like we all can.

So, when you look at homosexuality. God calls it a sin. Just like stealing, fornication, adultery, lying, murder they are all sin. We have the choice within the realm of the bible. It is sin. I didn't say that. That's thus saith the Lord. So please don't say "it's not sin", because it is. Now if you want to disassociate yourself entirely from God and say that then that's fine.

Is love sinful.? Yep, it's sinful. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." So Love is not sinful in the slightest. Expressions of lust can be very sinful.

They recently had a big debate in Australia as to whether gay dudes could become priests. The argument was that because they have to remain celebate (no rooting - sorry I'm Aussie) it didn't matter if they were gay. In fact gay priests may be more compassionate and caring, as they are often naturally more expressive of emotion etc. The only potential downside is that the little boys in the choir have to really watch out, and it was scary enough having a straight priest. :sly:

Of course the church decided against gay priests, but gays are still accepted at church and take part with all the other stuff etc... Maybe the church in Australia is just a little more progressive than in other parts of the world, but I don't know really.

PS · Sep 8, 2005

99% of child molesters are openly straighy, just so ya know.

They're also usually chock full of other menal illnesses.

James2097 · Sep 8, 2005

PS
99% of child molesters are openly straighy, just so ya know.

They're also usually chock full of other menal illnesses.

I know. Its about power, not even really sex most of the time. T'was a joke. I'm sure gay priests are pretty much the best bet for the church, if they decided to make gayness not a sin.

Swift · Sep 8, 2005

PS
99% of child molesters are openly straighy, just so ya know.

They're also usually chock full of other menal illnesses.

I'm just wondering what that has to do with what we were talking about.

sicbeing · Sep 8, 2005

Anyone else think that it's possible that gays in bible times were shunned for a reason? Like with the not-eating-pork etc thing, because it was bad for you, I think it's possible that being gay was a "sin" because people didn't want to fear that one day the world's population to be ruled out by gays.

And now, it's more than acceptable (in america at least) to be gay, maybe because it's like cancer, a great "population" controller.

Maybe not I don't know I'm thinking wierd at the moment.

Flame-returns · Sep 8, 2005

Swift
I'm just wondering what that has to do with what we were talking about.

Hello, knock knock, We've moved onto gay sex with regards to Catholic priests. Please keep with the program, moron :rolleyes:

.

Swift · Sep 8, 2005

Flame-returns
Hello, knock knock, We've moved onto gay sex with regards to Catholic priests. Please keep with the program, moron .

That's your response to my critique of your breakdown? Very slick evasion. So, are you going to respond to that or just let it go?

Chris Hendriks · Sep 8, 2005

sicbeing
And now, it's more than acceptable (in america at least) to be gay, maybe because it's like cancer, a great "population" controller.

Wow, I can't believe you actually just compared gay people to cancer, that seems wrong :odd:

Flame-returns · Sep 8, 2005

That was funny.

agree

Me Too but oh well.

agree

Uh, no. People that called themselves christians started a war. Along with just about every other religion that's been around for a while.

Not Budhhism, except the Advanyayayavavavavavavavavavaavyayayayay etc etc group, but they don't count as Buddhists anyway.

Hmm. The bible states that God created all people. God doesn't create things that are an abomination to him. Hense the person has decided to sin. Do not just pull one concept out of the bible without looking at the context of it.

Please explain that again, he made gays in his own image and was happy with what they did. Then one night he got pissed off with them and decided to wipe out two cities filled with them. I'm sorry, that makes very little sense to me.

And that wasn't a blanket racist and predjudice statement how?

It did not apply to all Christians or even MOST Christians simply MOST Christians on this thread, the arguements from a Christian viewpoint have mostly been crap (am I allowed to say crap on a forum?) They simply revolve around the "you're wrong because we say so and this book says so!" arguement that I underlined in a previous post

Swift · Sep 9, 2005

Flame-returns
Please explain that again, he made gays in his own image and was happy with what they did. Then one night he got pissed off with them and decided to wipe out two cities filled with them. I'm sorry, that makes very little sense to me.

no, God makes all people heterosexual. The sin of homosexuality is a choice like all other sin. Including the sin that I've commited.

Flame-returns
It did not apply to all Christians or even MOST Christians simply MOST Christians on this thread, the arguements from a Christian viewpoint have mostly been crap (am I allowed to say crap on a forum?) They simply revolve around the "you're wrong because we say so and this book says so!" arguement that I underlined in a previous post

Ok, we've got a book that has stood the test of time with the figure that SPLIT time as it's figurehead. You're talking about if it feels good do it. The bible is very much against that selfish idiology.

Grand Prix · Sep 9, 2005

Swift
no, God makes all people heterosexual. The sin of homosexuality is a choice like all other sin. Including the sin that I've commited.

Ok, we've got a book that has stood the test of time with the figure that SPLIT time as it's figurehead. You're talking about if it feels good do it. The bible is very much against that selfish idiology.

Are you saying that people can decide to be gay? :scared: