Where do you think we go when we die?

[Venetia]

Damn it, I don't know him well enough to know when he's joking and when he's not. He uses the same sarcastic inflection when he's writing seriously and when he's joking, I guess that's the funny part ... I'm running off no sleep right now and my judgment is stunted.

@ Pineda, who obviously was being truthful, I don't "think I'm in the best position". That's the confusion thing I was talking about. If you don't think about it how can you think you're "in the best position"? I don't think I'd want to share a heaven with such a jerk who abolishes folks who are misguided or are unsure, anyway.

Bleh, I've put more thought into this than I like. What a pointless argument, trying to argue over beliefs. But I guess I'm the most pointless one of all ... Since I started it >_>

[huge sigh]I've probably opened another can of worms here ... I'll just shut up.[/huge sigh]

 

[Red Dawn]

@minkoff and Pinedaxp
Dont say that shit like its fact. You dont know for sure, the only evidence you have is a book in which most things are unproved and what other religious people around you have said.

Andy is right, physically we go in a wee box in the ground or get burnt to ashes, but mentally its impossible to tell. Logic says that when our brains stop working we can no longer think, but just as there is no proof of the existence of a soul, nor is there any proof that one doesnt exist. Nobody knows. You dont know, you only think, and your beliefs arent based on logic or fact, but on faith.

pinedaxp said

claimed not to believe in anything

what do you mean, claimed? I dont really have any religious beliefs. Im like Venetia, I dont label any beliefs because i dont have any. Also Mink said people say theyre atheist cause they think its cool, people actually can be atheist! Ahhh youre stupid. I havent been brought up with a religion, so i have no reason to pick one. I can look at it anatically(is that a word? i mean like analyzing type thing), without bias, and i choose no religion because most of them are as likely as the others. Religious people, exactly what is it that makes you think that other religions are bullshit? The only thing is that you think your religion is correct. And what exactly makes you think that?
Serious question. Why do religious people believe in their religion? Is it just because they were raised into it, or is it something more?

And to wrap it up,

PS: Atheists posts and some others are expected, as usual

what the hell is that supposed to mean?

 

[Andy6000]

@minkoff and Pinedaxp
Dont say that shit like its fact. You dont know for sure, the only evidence you have is a book in which most things are unproved and what other religious people around you have said.

Andy is right, physically we go in a wee box in the ground or get burnt to ashes, but mentally its impossible to tell. Logic says that when our brains stop working we can no longer think, but just as there is no proof of the existence of a soul, nor is there any proof that one doesnt exist. Nobody knows. You dont know, you only think, and your beliefs arent based on logic or fact, but on faith.

pinedaxp said
what do you mean, claimed? I dont really have any religious beliefs. Im like Venetia, I dont label any beliefs because i dont have any. Also Mink said people say theyre atheist cause they think its cool, people actually can be atheist! Ahhh youre stupid. I havent been brought up with a religion, so i have no reason to pick one. I can look at it anatically(is that a word? i mean like analyzing type thing), without bias, and i choose no religion because most of them are as likely as the others. Religious people, exactly what is it that makes you think that other religions are bullshit? The only thing is that you think your religion is correct. And what exactly makes you think that?
Serious question. Why do religious people believe in their religion? Is it just because they were raised into it, or is it something more?

And to wrap it up, what the hell is that supposed to mean?

Alright, I'm going to put this part in extra large child-book sized text to make sure you read it.

STOP POSTING IN THE SYMPOSIUM IF YOU CANNOT READ CORRECTLY OR USE COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS

Firstly, you talk to minkoff taking his post completely literally. And then you turn around and make believe like you actually read my post. You realize the first thing I said was "he was being sarcastic" right?

Secondly, people believe in their religion not because it's logical, they believe because of (this one's a kicker) faith. Faith is defined by believing in unsubstantiated, or uncertain things. You have faith that what you see and feel is what's actually there, and religious people take it a couple miles farther and have faith that there's something beyond that. It's actually a pretty attractive ideal. They don't believe because it's logical, they believe because if they didn't, then their life is largely.. Meaningless I guess? I don't exactly subscribe to this viewpoint (hence agnosticism), but I can understand it.

I know I'm not the most stunning role model for this, but at least I know what I'm talking about, RESPECT OTHERS' BELIEFS MORE. You're cruising for more than angry posts towards you if you keep posting like I've seen in two threads so far.

EDIT: oh also to hit the other side of the fence...

PINEDAXP: there are people that believe other things. Believe it or not, but not every atheist is out to get you and to shove an m16 down Jesus' throat. You are being just as bad (if not worse) than red_dawn and his idiocy. "PS: Atheists posts and some others are expected, as usual" is not acceptable at all. It's like if I went around and whenever I talked about anything religious I said, "I bet some fucking retarded Christians are going to come in this thread and ruin it." Not exactly the best of things to hear, you know?


-----------------

So if you read nothing I wrote, then take this away: shut it, before I shut it for you.

 

[Minkoff]

there are two kinds of atheists:

the idiot fucking fifteen year olds who like to go around screaming "FUCK GOD WOO" and debate religion because it makes them seem BADASS

and the "REAL" atheists who pretty much look and act just like everyone else but don't believe in god

then there's the third category which is the christian view of atheists as people with giant horns growing out of their heads and bubbling green skin who devour children

EDIT
i fall into the third category

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

antler horned bastard spewing your lies and frothing your bile all over the place!

You also forgot the subcatagory to the 1st that involve the 30 year old cult like leader wannabes with socially no life outside that of thinking hitting on a chick is "you dig em uncut?" who believe in conspiracies and, while they consider themselves atheists, are more about the sociopolitical conformation by the hands of the evil Christians with their horns and bubbling frothy skin.

 

[Lackluster]

"I do not believe in an afterlife, although I am bringing a change of underwear." -Woody Allen


Pretty much sums it up.

 

[Red Dawn]

@Andy.
Yup, the fact that i cant tell sarcasm in text means i cant read.
I am a person
I like to drink milkshake
I like playing sports
My favourite computer game is Diablo II
Which of those 4 statements was sarcastic? You dont know? exactly. The 3rd one was, by the way. Somebody had better up the text font size for andy because evidently he cant read.

And then you turn around and make believe like you actually read my post. You realize the first thing I said was "he was being sarcastic" right?

I read your post. I agreed with what you said subsequent to the sarcasm bit. I read the sarcasm bit but didnt take much of it, because i thought minkoff sounded serious and that you had misinterpreted

Secondly, people believe in their religion not because it's logical, they believe because of (this one's a kicker) faith.

The only bit in my post i see that relating to is this sentence, because thats the only bit that that is relevant to people believing in religion on what basis. The only other time i mention logic is when i say logic dictates that when we die, we are dead in all ways.

You dont know, you only think, and your beliefs arent based on logic or fact, but on faith.

But that cant be right, because in that sentence it says right there people believe in their religions because of faith. And you calling me an idiot for not knowing that. Hmmm...

And i do respect peoples beliefs, Im bitching at him because hes preaching to me. Im not saying 'No what you are saying is wrong youre stupid' Im saying 'Dont say what you cant prove like its already been proven'
K i think ive explained all the things that you somehow managed to misinterpret. Is there anything i havent explained? I dont really get in arguments on purpose, but whenever somebody says something really dumb i get this major urge to flame them. Most of the time im not really angry, though.

 

[Andy6000]

@Andy.
Yup, the fact that i cant tell sarcasm in text means i cant read.
I am a person
I like to drink milkshake
I like playing sports
My favourite computer game is Diablo II
Which of those 4 statements was sarcastic? You dont know? exactly. The 3rd one was, by the way. Somebody had better up the text font size for andy because evidently he cant read.

I'll make this easy on you: I know what you're thinking. For the purpose of this forum, I'm fucking omnipotent. Do I know Minkoff? Yes. Was Minkoff being sarcastic? Yes. Did you for some reason shrug off what I'd made obvious and type a response as if you were completely right(when in fact being completely wrong)? Yes.

A simple direct quote is a tough way to convey sarcasm, there's several factors when dealing with it in text. Context. What are you talking about? You're saying shit that isn't controversial in the slightest, you're saying it in a way that sounds like stating simple facts, and for all intensive purposes, they may as well be facts for all I know about you. Note the subtle difference between your statements and Minkoff's. One is stated like a religious zealot, and the other is stated like a random person would state if they were stating the obvious. Religion is a touchy subject that people oftentimes approach from a satirical view. Sports is not. (oh and a side-note? I guessed sports. You're obviously a person, I've no reason to doubt milk shakes, and between Diablo 2 and sports, sports is the obvious one, considering you're sitting on a computer posting like the [supposition] ignorant 14 year old you are, people that like sports would type differently)

And moving on past the pretty obvious definition of sarcasm... My little diatribe towards you and PINE there was about how both of you just state shit like it's an absolute. Nothing is absolute. You can't say any more certainly that we rot in a box after death than he can say that we go hang out with zombie jew jesus up in the clouds.

And about the next quote... this lovely thing from yourself

You dont know, you only think, and your beliefs arent based on logic or fact, but on faith.

You realize how this is pretty much completely saying that that's bullshit? It completely implies that his faith is bullshit, that he's just basing his life on something that doesn't have any validity.

Oh also about this part: "I dont really get in arguments on purpose, but whenever somebody says something really dumb i get this major urge to flame them. Most of the time im not really angry, though." Try spelling correctly, or maybe being able to write language better than a fucking four year old before trying to criticize someone else.

Interpretation is everything, and thus, if you can bring someone in that will agree that I am the one in the wrong here with my logic (beside yourself or some dumbass friend, someone that can spell correctly at least), then I'll make an attempt to re-word for you and your friend.

EDIT: oh I almost forgot. You know how on those standardized tests you hate so much they have that stupid English section where you have to draw comparisons and analogies between words? Yeah there's more to reading than just skimming over shit and taking it at face value. Audience, purpose, tone, motivation, all of these affect the message. GETTING that message is an important skill that I suggest you learn.

 

[Red Dawn]

Okay. Whatever. Change my sarcastic things to
I am the best person
Milkshakes are the best drink
Sports is the best activity
The best computer game is Diablo II
Now those statements arent completely random, and instead are pushing an opinion. Not quite the degree of minkoffs, but still.

You can't say any more certainly that we rot in a box after death

I didnt. You did, and i said that you were right. Actually maybe i did... but i was saying it in agreement with you.

You realize how this is pretty much completely saying that that's bullshit?

No. That wasnt the intent. I was saying that he couldnt say that stuff because he had no proof of it. The only proof is his faith.

5th paragraph... My mozilla firefox spellcheck didnt pick up any spelling errors. Just missed apostrophes and stuff, and i cant be bothered fixing it. You saying 'learn to write better than a 4yo' is dumb, i can write fine. Maybe it could make a little more sense, and i typo a lot, but so what? Everybody typos, and the odd spelling errors dont change the reading difficulty enough for me to bother fixing them. And stuff.

Interpretation is everything, and thus, if you can bring someone in that will agree that I am the one in the wrong here with my logic

Im not really saying that youre 'in the wrong'. Im saying that youve misread some stuff of mine, and you seriously need to calm down.
Man youre way too aggressive, I thought somebody was being serious when they were being sarcastic and youre writing long rants about how much of a moron i am. The post above is 3 main arguments, the first was criticizing my reasoning, totally valid, Thats perfectly fine, the second is telling me what i mean from a statement something which i dont mean, something moderately irrelevant, the third is dissing my spelling. Thats pathetic. Youre just looking for things to insult. Why do you continue? Just calm down a bit, count to 20 and all that, then answer my questions and correct my mistakes without implying my inadequacy in every other sentence.

 

[Andy6000]

Okay. Whatever. Change my sarcastic things to
I am the best person
Milkshakes are the best drink
Sports is the best activity
The best computer game is Diablo II
Now those statements arent completely random, and instead are pushing an opinion. Not quite the degree of minkoffs, but still.

I didnt. You did, and i said that you were right. Actually maybe i did... but i was saying it in agreement with you.

No. That wasnt the intent. I was saying that he couldnt say that stuff because he had no proof of it. The only proof is his faith.

5th paragraph... My mozilla firefox spellcheck didnt pick up any spelling errors. Just missed apostrophes and stuff, and i cant be bothered fixing it. You saying 'learn to write better than a 4yo' is dumb, i can write fine. Maybe it could make a little more sense, and i typo a lot, but so what? Everybody typos, and the odd spelling errors dont change the reading difficulty enough for me to bother fixing them. And stuff.

Im not really saying that youre 'in the wrong'. Im saying that youve misread some stuff of mine, and you seriously need to calm down.
Man youre way too aggressive, I thought somebody was being serious when they were being sarcastic and youre writing long rants about how much of a moron i am. The post above is 3 main arguments, the first was criticizing my reasoning, totally valid, Thats perfectly fine, the second is telling me what i mean from a statement something which i dont mean, something moderately irrelevant, the third is dissing my spelling. Thats pathetic. Youre just looking for things to insult. Why do you continue? Just calm down a bit, count to 20 and all that, then answer my questions and correct my mistakes without implying my inadequacy in every other sentence.

I'm actually pretty calm, and let me answer your implied question of why.

To get you out. You're bringing nothing, you keep posting in random topics, and you don't bring anything to the debate.

Yes, typing like shit means you type like shit. You can't be bothered to take the time to write correctly, why should anyone be bothered the time to read what you say correctly? What right do you even have to bitch about someone mis-interpreting your garbled crap?

Also, me not getting 'what you meant' is irrelevant, I'm taking the perception that is easiest here. When you write "You dont know, you only think, and your beliefs arent based on logic or fact, but on faith." my mind first jumps to how I interpreted it above. You know what that means? That means that most people are just going to take that at face value, and assume you meant what I interpreted it above as. Now, do I believe you ever meant that? No. In my mind, I give people the benefit of the doubt, unless they've proved to me REPEATEDLY that they hold a specific viewpoint and are serious about it. Again, read above why I took that interpretation and ran with it despite not believing that's even what you meant.

And to the first part of your post... You're not going to be able to match the situation. It's highly variable where sarcasm pops out, and the situation that Minkoff walked into and posted what he did was infinitely more complex than the multiple choice you present. Like I said, there are a LOT of factors. How well I know you, etc. etc.

You weren't agreeing with me when you called down other people's beliefs because a few people (to your view at least) were stating them like fact. And hell in that case I give more leeway to the religious person anyways, because honestly, if they don't believe it to be an absolute fact, that's not real faith at all is it?

To end... Shape up or get out. And by shape up, I mean take 5 godamn minutes to read over the shit you push out to write, I promise that I won't insult you nearly as much if you manage to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Oh and also, you'll never get anywhere in a professional environment if you don't know how to write, just figured I'd give you some actual incentive to practice. (PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT AFTER ALL)

 

[Red Dawn]

Well i dont really go over my posts, but looking at it now i dont know what the hell youre talking about. i dont see any errors. Maybe im just dumb. If i was dyslexic you couldnt bitch at me for spelling. I can spell fine, and my spellcheck agrees with me. I write dont instead of don't, who cares, meaning is the same. It really doesnt make a difference. Sometimes it sorta doesnt fully make sense, well i cant help that its the best way i can put it. Could you take an extract and proof it for me? I can see what the problems are and work on fixing them.

 

[Minkoff]

Red dawn you're a cool guy. :thumbsup:

 

[Red Dawn]

Shut up. Lets just start from scratch. Im not a moron, im not thick, I can write better than a 4yo. Andy is just getting psyched up about nothing. Pretend this argument never happened.

 

[Fafnir]

I think we all just decompose and rot away... Unless you were like... pickled or something.... but that's just gross.

Although, being fossilized in amber would be cool....

 

[Red Dawn]

being fossilized in amber would be cool....

Way cool...

 

[Andy6000]

Shut up. Lets just start from scratch. Im not a moron, im not thick, I can write better than a 4yo. Andy is just getting psyched up about nothing. Pretend this argument never happened.

God damn you're good at debating.

(See the sarcasm? Brought about by the stating the opposite of the 'obvious' view)

Also yeah you can write better than a four year old. You can even spell correctly (though that's really half you and half the built-in spell checker you so religiously mention), but let's focus on the other aspects of writing. Sentence 1: fragment, but otherwise fine. Sentence 2: Missing an apostrophe, but otherwise fine. Sentence 3: Missing apostrophes, misuse of a semicolon (followed by the correct use of a comma no less) and whatever error you might call '4yo.' Sentence 4: psyched up is the wrong word choice, that implies that I'm getting 'pumped up', enthusiastic or something. Pissy would be a good replacement for where you're coming from. Sentence 5: a break from the way you're addressing the audience, which is weird and takes the reader out, but no real direct error.

One sentence that was actually correct (more of a 'please consider' than a 'you're wrong') out of five. I'd say you're probably about at the level of a... 12 year old. How old are you anyways? I'm betting 14, and are just lazy with your typing, but 12 is a pretty reasonable conclusion too. Well no by your arguments I'd say 14. 12 is a little young for a kid to start his rebellious 'anti-religion' thought processes.

Oh and on the topic of criticizing you relentlessly for largely no reason...

Way cool...

This is spam. Clear and simple. Off-topic, along with no actual content either.

 

[Red Dawn]

Dude, just grow up. I have bad grammar, whoopdie freaking doo. Get over it. I dont see why 'shut up' is a fragment, what do i do to make it non-fragment. Apostrophes, who cares? You have to fucking retarded to not understand 'dont' or 'lets'. Some words like we're the meaning changes, but its stilll easily understandable. I wanted to use commas instead of semicolons, I dont see why they are incorrect. Bad word choice? Where im from, 'psyched up' means getting agro, psycho, as slang. I dont say 'pissy'. A 12yo my ass. In an exam at my school, i would get punctuation errors for no apostrophe, but i write them, i just dont type them. The other things wouldnt get marked incorrectly. So According to my schools marking schedule, i would have got perfect grammar. Youre just a nit-picky perfectionist.
In Tests we get graded two ways, level 1-6 based on spelling, grammar & punctuation, And either Y (yet to achieve), w (within the standard) and a (above the standard). level 1-3 is crap, 4 is bad, 5 is what we're supposed to get, 6 is excelling. 70% of english work i get level 6, the rest level 5. I get a/w 50% each. So I excell, according to my school. Maybe my school is slack, we never got taught about fragments, i figured out what they are from microsoft word. I learnt about semicolons one year in school, a few weeks of lessons on various punctuation marks. What i learned doesnt at all contradict what i wrote in the sentence you critiqued.

whatever error you might call '4yo.'

Thats an abbreviation. If it really means so much to you, affects your daily life and so on, I'll start using apostrophes. But sometimes i don't know where to use them, the whole possessive use i was never taught, i just picked it up.

I don't have 'anti-religion thought processes'. Ive felt the same way about religion for years. I'm not against it, i accept the possibility of a god, afterlife etc I just don't choose to believe in it because i don't see any reason to. I look at a religion, see many flaws, I have no faith in it so i cant see past them. I look at another, same again. For all of them it's the same so i choose to believe in none. If i was raised into one it would be different, but nobody around me, no relatives, no friends are religious at all so what would make me become religious? etc etc.

 

[StuntmanBank314]

If you can explain how we can verify empirically the existence of a soul, it remains in the category with dbz characters, good republicans, invisible pink unicorns, the flying spaghetti monster, and god.....all unproven to be existant in the world and today the soul joins the ranks.

 

[Rare]

God damn you're good at debating.

(See the sarcasm? Brought about by the stating the opposite of the 'obvious' view)

Also yeah you can write better than a four year old. You can even spell correctly (though that's really half you and half the built-in spell checker you so religiously mention), but let's focus on the other aspects of writing. Sentence 1: fragment, but otherwise fine. Sentence 2: Missing an apostrophe, but otherwise fine. Sentence 3: Missing apostrophes, misuse of a semicolon (followed by the correct use of a comma no less) and whatever error you might call '4yo.' Sentence 4: psyched up is the wrong word choice, that implies that I'm getting 'pumped up', enthusiastic or something. Pissy would be a good replacement for where you're coming from. Sentence 5: a break from the way you're addressing the audience, which is weird and takes the reader out, but no real direct error.

One sentence that was actually correct (more of a 'please consider' than a 'you're wrong') out of five. I'd say you're probably about at the level of a... 12 year old. How old are you anyways? I'm betting 14, and are just lazy with your typing, but 12 is a pretty reasonable conclusion too. Well no by your arguments I'd say 14. 12 is a little young for a kid to start his rebellious 'anti-religion' thought processes.

Oh and on the topic of criticizing you relentlessly for largely no reason...



This is spam. Clear and simple. Off-topic, along with no actual content either.

Win.

Keeping to the topic, I think we stay dead when we die and then are brought back to life by god later if you were good.

 

[PINEDAXP]

The simplicity of it! I like it... "if you were good" does that include God doesn't care about religions? IMO, I'd say it does. And I'd support it...

To me, God doesn't see religions, he sees only His sons, and the good we've done...

Thus, God will pass on Judgment on us based on the good things rather than the bad actions...