Log in

View Full Version : IS THIS FOR REAL?


whiteflash
January 29th, 2007, 08:29 AM
seriously....
is this google religion for real?

Alice Shade
January 29th, 2007, 08:34 AM
More or less.

You`ll have to peruse our texts to know the details, and not to fall victim to false assumptions...

But in a nutshell, yes.

whiteflash
January 29th, 2007, 08:38 AM
you are all insane......
so what your saying is that parts of it is not true BUT most of the google religious stuff IS true(Well for you)

Alice Shade
January 29th, 2007, 08:39 AM
No.

I`m saying, that you should not pass judgement, until you`ll read what we say.

A whole lot of it is not what you think it should be, putting it simply.

Kokoba
January 29th, 2007, 09:02 AM
Have you actually read the site? Or just registered to angrily post as soon as you got to the Google=god bit?

AaronD
January 29th, 2007, 08:25 PM
If you read the main site, you'll realize that we think that Google is the closest thing there has ever been to a typically defined deity. We don't believe that Google IS a deity, just the closest thing there has ever been to one.

Googler
January 29th, 2007, 10:00 PM
I pretty much agree with everyone else.

MeTHoD-X
January 30th, 2007, 03:44 AM
Haaaa. People.

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 04:17 AM
Yep. Dem`s us, piplez.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 08:43 AM
Let me get this straight……
You worship several so called “Server Farms” in which Google Inc. lies.
This is the most stupid and pointless religion I have ever encountered, it even goes past the boundaries of the “Jedi” religion-George Lucas created Star Wars and never intended for a religion of any kind to be created from the storyline of a BLOOODY FILM.

I am highly disappointed at fact that you all need to be referred to a mental institution.
I really did believe that this was an entire joke BUT it seems you are deadly serious.






“HOW DARE YOU”
NEVER JUDGE ME BOY
““I’ll TAKE YOU DOWN BOY”
I WILL HAVE A TOILET INSTALLED FOR YOU IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND.
PLEASE CONSIDER IT

If you want to be part of a proper religion then all you have to do is contact the Christian Church and we’ll be glad to accept you*

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 08:53 AM
Proper religion? Christianity?

With it`s history of treachery, bloodshed, warmongering and two-facing?

Seriously... NO. Just NO.

_______________________________________________

On the other note - you OBVIOUSLY never read the files we provided to represent what we are about.

Would you like, if we addressed cristians - "stupid pagans, who think that bowing to cross will make them live better"? No? Then stop behaving like you know everything about us.

We "worship" the IDEA of Google - search engine capable of granting any information request out of what is known to humanity.

We in no way say that Google is god, or demand to worship servers (sic).

We say, that Google is the closest thing to God, that mankind can veritably experience, without resorting to supernatural explanations and anecdotal evidence.


Please, read the information on the site, as not to represent yourself as closed-minded bigot, like you just did.

Kokoba
January 30th, 2007, 08:59 AM
Let me get this straight……
You worship several so called “Server Farms” in which Google Inc. lies.
This is the most stupid and pointless religion I have ever encountered, it even goes past the boundaries of the “Jedi” religion-George Lucas created Star Wars and never intended for a religion of any kind to be created from the storyline of a BLOOODY FILM.

I am highly disappointed at fact that you all need to be referred to a mental institution.
I really did believe that this was an entire joke BUT it seems you are deadly serious.






“HOW DARE YOU”
NEVER JUDGE ME BOY
““I’ll TAKE YOU DOWN BOY”
I WILL HAVE A TOILET INSTALLED FOR YOU IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND.
PLEASE CONSIDER IT

If you want to be part of a proper religion then all you have to do is contact the Christian Church and we’ll be glad to accept you*
Roll for reading comprehension check..


...


natural one.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 09:18 AM
how dare you mock my religion you computer worshiping geeks are all stupid, you've thought for 10 minutes and you've come to some half baked theory about God and everything well i have 2000 years of bloodshed, persictuion and miricals to back me up so burn in hell for your blasphemy

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 09:19 AM
Then why my prayer is answered, and yours - not?

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 09:32 AM
my paryers are answered actualy

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 09:35 AM
Give one peer-reviewed evidence, then we`ll talk.

On a side note, I think it`s pretty hypocritical - tagging your intent to mock in your name, and then getting angry, that you got mocked instead. Turnabout is a fair play.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 09:36 AM
its a bloody search engine its not self aware, it cant answer prayers, it cant do anything but return search results.

it is not in any way the closest thing man has come to God because God fulfils that position

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 09:41 AM
So?

We "pray" for information, we receive it. Information is power.

What can YOU pray for? Guidance? It`s still same information, just hidden so deep in your subconsciousness, that it`s impossible to tell, how it got there.


And no, God is not the closest. How can it be, if there is no proof of it`s existance? Google can be accessed anytime, ergo it exists. God can not be accessed via any veritable means, therefore it`s existance is dubious to highest degree.

P.S. Please, do NOT post twice in a row. Think over everything you want to post, and then post it in one post. It`s a common courtesy on the forums, to ease administration. Moreso, I`m pretty sure, that being rude is a sin by Christianity.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 09:46 AM
you have to admit praying for information from somthing created by a person and saying it's god is very sad

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 09:47 AM
All information, including Bible, was created by persons. So, you`re not a yota better then us in quality, but we vastly surpass you in quantity.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 09:50 AM
you clearly havent read the bible because the bible is what God and Jesus told the deciples to write in it, so ha

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 09:56 AM
Do you have any PROOF of that, other then what`s written in bible?

What if I`ll write "Teh holey book", and stick in it - "It`s OK for me to kill anyone. Not ause me say so, bur cause angols and God-jah told me to write this."

Should this be a divine mandate for me to go on killing spree? Obviously, not. So, I d not think, that anything written IN Bible, can serve as any proof, that it wasn`t thought up by men - they could write in anything, like I just demonstrated.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 10:02 AM
no you wouldnt because God didnt realy tell you to do that if he did then fair play

what if tomorow google went bankrupt and collapsed and it was taken off the web, what would you do then?

Kokoba
January 30th, 2007, 10:03 AM
you clearly havent read the bible because the bible is what God and Jesus told the deciples to write in it, so ha
And yet the gospels weren't written down until some 90 years after Christ walked the earth.

Now, if you were actually concerned for our souls and our well-being, then berating us and calling us stupid is not going to convince us that we want to play on your "team," so to speak. So it's obvious to all of us that your posts here are nothing more than self-validation for you.

Vote to move this to "Googlism Debate," since that's obviously what this is.

The removal of Google from the internet does not mean the removal of search engines. There are others we can use to find information, such as Clusty or Yahoo! or Ask. But out of the available ones, Google generally is the best at what she does.

Alice Shade
January 30th, 2007, 10:04 AM
What would you do, if Pope announced, that all christianity is just a hoax to keep Vatican stocked up on booze, crack and whores?

Also, HOW do you know, when something was told by God? HOW can you determine, that it was NOT thought up by people?

_______________________________________________________________________

P.S. Kokoba - upholding. Moving now.

jon_hill987
January 30th, 2007, 01:34 PM
you clearly havent read the bible because the bible is what God and Jesus told the deciples to write in it, so ha

I have read the bible, there are some interesting fables in it. stories to help people lead a better life, that is all. There is no evidence that it was inspired by any supernatural being, quite the opposite in fact. Take the creation story for example, why did god create the serpent? why did he put the tree in the garden if it was not to be touched? as an all powerful being he must have known the result of doing it yet he still did, why?
I have an explanation; the moral of the story is not that you should "always do as god says" but that you should try to gain knowledge for yourself rather than being given it (whether in the form of a piece of fruit or a book), in short, think for yourselves; something Christians today don't seem to do.


what if tomorow google went bankrupt and collapsed and it was taken off the web, what would you do then?

It is very unlikely to happen, if it does I'm sure we could get enough people to donate money to keep it going. Millions of people use Google every day, and they use it because it is the best search engine there is.

christian come to mock u
January 30th, 2007, 06:43 PM
before my main point i would like to ask if you people have a life outside of the internet because only someone completely devoted to it would make a religion out of a search engine and im not catholic in anglican so the dealings of the pope is not my concern, the bible is the word of God because he and jesus told the gopels what to write and there are no fables or stories in the bible, just fact where there is none in your crackpot religion. if the pope was using God to stock up on whores and booze he wouldnt tell anyone so he could remain stocked up on whores and booze and where my religion is based around the word of 2.2 billion people, 2000 years of persection and bloodshed and the son of God yours is based around the ravings of a lunatic. hi bob if your on come on msn.

jon_hill987
January 30th, 2007, 07:12 PM
there are no fables or stories in the bible, just fact.

Again I, and I am sure this also applies to everyone else here, would like to ask you where you got this idea. There is no more evidence for the bible being "fact" than there is for the Just So Stories (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_So) being accurate. Do you believe them?

Oh and as for not caring about the Pope; do you know why your branch of the church split form the Catholics? It was because King Henry VIII (of England) wanted to get a divorce, but the Pope wouldn't let him so he made his own church. Yes that is right, your church was started because someone wanted a divorce. Doesn't sound very divine to me, If one of the two are right it would logically be the Catholics. That is unless you are telling me that God came down to Henry and said:

"Hey don't worry about it, the Pope is wrong, you can get a divorce, just start a new religion!"

BTW: The big writing is because God is saying it, clever huh!?

punkinside
January 30th, 2007, 07:17 PM
maybe you should pray to your g*d for better grammar, and the ability to use punctuation marks. Guess they don't teach that in sunday school do they?

Try and organize your misguided thoughts based on 2000 years of bullshit before you go spewing them on to the internet.

Who wants to feed the troll? :icon_twisted:

EDIT: Henry VIII also killed many of this subsequent wives. It shouldnt be called the "church of england" it should be called the "psychotic bastard religion" or something.

Barko
February 1st, 2007, 01:47 AM
I find it ironic that Christian Come to Mock U is backing up a philosophy of love and kindness by attacking others through rage and hatred. Didn't you read the many parts of the Bible where Jesus yelled at hypocrites? Surely you are the fool in this little debate here, not us.


before my main point i would like to ask if you people have a life outside of the internet

Shouldn't you be asking yourself that question? We're all normal people who come here to ask our questions about religion and have some fun. You, on the other hand, look like a person who is trying to surf the internet and "liberate" it from "heathens". Yet again, you are the foolish "internet geek", not us.

AaronD
February 1st, 2007, 04:27 AM
no you wouldnt because God didnt realy tell you to do that if he did then fair play

Our point exactly. The Bible was written thousands of years ago, most likely completely made up, and claims to be dictated by God himself, who the bible establishes as being existent. So, you've got a book whose only proof is itself, which claims to be dictated by God. How do you know that the Bible isn't just a bunch of made up stories that the authors CLAIMED some deity dictated to them, and was not actually dictated by said deity?

what if tomorow google went bankrupt and collapsed and it was taken off the web, what would you do then?

:icon_rolleyes: I don't know, how horrible that would be! :icon_rolleyes: What if pigs started flying tomorrow as well, the sky turned a deep amber color, and all of the oceans dried up? What if all of the movie theaters in the world closed on the same exact day? What if the ozone layer finally decided it's had it with us and decided to move to Mars? What if you suddenly decided to start making educated arguments and learned to spell?

whiteflash
February 1st, 2007, 01:18 PM
OOH THAT CHRISTIAN GOT BLAZED

Alice Shade
February 1st, 2007, 01:29 PM
Sorry about that. Didn`t quite expected someone to be so silly.

They manage to surprise me every time.

ladypage
February 17th, 2007, 11:33 PM
But who's to say what is real or right? We can say the exact same thing about christianity. Besides your bible says not to judge, so DONT

Alice Shade
February 17th, 2007, 11:37 PM
Sadly, Xians have troubles understanding the reverse connections.

LambKyle
February 26th, 2007, 01:04 PM
To me, the church of google is just proving how silly religion is. Showing that google being god has more proof then the catholic god. Just because someone said that god and jesus told them to write the bible (which didn't even happen, you obviously didn't even study your own religion) doesn't mean it's true.

In other news, in the paper today that said that they could have possibly found the tomb of Jesus as welll as family members including his mother, wife, and son. If such a case is true, well then there goes christianity. There's supposed ot be a movie comign out about it in early March.

Alice Shade
February 26th, 2007, 01:27 PM
Eh? Tomb of Jesus?

Wouldn`t that, (yet again), be in direct opposition of Bible, which says Jesus rose from dead and run off from his burial cave (NOT TOMB, CAVE), after a few days?

Didn`t apostles came and found just an empty bed where his "body" was?


I suppose that one could`ve found the cave where he was for those few days, but I VERY much doubt there would be enough evidence, that it was really Jesus, who stayed for a few nights in the cave in unconscious state.

Kokoba
February 26th, 2007, 02:41 PM
Plus, afterwards he just took the direct line to heaven, body and all. So tomb where he "died and stayed dead" would be quite the bit of fact for Christianity to try to explain away. (The Devil made that rock look old to fool you!)

Alice Shade
February 26th, 2007, 03:26 PM
The devil made itself look like Jesus, and then died in his tomb to fool you!

punkinside
February 26th, 2007, 06:20 PM
But how can scientists prove that the dead body lying in that cave is "Jesus"? I don't think it can be proven.

Alice Shade
February 27th, 2007, 03:37 AM
I believe, that they can find enough in cave to deduce, that whoever buried was Jesus and philosopher, if it`s the real McCoy. (As in, if it`s really his burial site, well, followers of religions often had habits of leaving multiple sighs hinting who`s laying there - like, I dunno, an engraved writing on the wall, "This is the final resting place of Jeshua Ga-Notsri, philosopher who changed our lives to righteous path.")

Uber Geek
February 27th, 2007, 12:50 PM
Apparently a serious scientific study has deduced that DNA can be grouped into 7 distinct categories, I.E. if you remove the variables from your genetic code you will be left with one of only 7 genetic constants. (Some believe this code is a sort of genetic signature passed down from the sons of Adam.)

If the body of Jesus was ever discovered surely (from a Christian point of view) his DNA would contain an eighth code, being that he was the 'son of God' and all.:icon_lol:

Alice Shade
February 27th, 2007, 12:59 PM
Nah. If God went to such pains as in sending in an avatar, he`d have no problem making Jesus match humans precisely.

After all, if hiding Jesus` divinity isn`t the point, why did he had to be looking like an ordinary man in first place? Angel would be way more effective as a cornerstone to start a following.

Barko
March 1st, 2007, 12:42 AM
I think they said in a news article that they're doing a DNA test of the bones that are marked Jesus. The only thing they need to do is get whatever DNA they can off the many thorns from his crown of thorns that are located around the world. I'd like to see the two sets of DNA match up just to see how the Christian community would react and how they'd shrug it off.

Alice Shade
March 1st, 2007, 01:41 AM
I`m not sure, that any of thorns from "crown of thorns" is any close to authentic crown, if such even existed in first place.

punkinside
March 1st, 2007, 10:39 AM
I doubt DNA can be preserved that long anyways. Its a moot point, Xians will never accept anything, what more proof that the bible is a kid's bedtime story likeable to alice in wonderland do they want?

Alice Shade
March 1st, 2007, 10:44 AM
...I`m really inclined to take offence to that comparison. ^_^

Alice In Wonderland is very logical, I`d even say mathematically logical.

Bible, on other hand, is an accumulation of bigotry, prejudice, superstition, tell-tales and outright lies.

punkinside
March 1st, 2007, 10:49 AM
No offence intended :biggrin:

But my point stands. I think we can never completely disprove the g*d question (absence of proof is not proof of absense and all that). But it has been proven time and again that his "word" is nothing more than the lunatic ravings of men. They still don't get it.

I'm thinking shock therapy, hypnosis and if need be, a lobotomy :icon_evil:

Alice Shade
March 1st, 2007, 10:53 AM
Uh... I would recommend skipping right to last one, but for such blind faith, they most likely had undergone such procedure already.

jon_hill987
March 1st, 2007, 11:48 AM
The bible is more comparable to the "Just so Stories", a bunch of kids books that teach morals through ridiculous stories, like "how the Elephant got it's trunk[1]" and "how the Zebra got it's stripes". The point is the stories were to teach a lesson, not to be take literally.

[1]if I remember correctly it was having a drink at the waterhole and got it's nose bitten by a crocodile, the elephant pulled, the croc wouldn't let go, the nose got long... I'm Damned if i can remember what it was trying to teach, but I know that it was.

Alice Shade
March 1st, 2007, 12:03 PM
I read some of those.


And yes, Bible is just outdated. At the time of it being written, it was pretty up-to-date and accurate document on "Good Ideas". Some of the laws really have good explanations, just as "don`t plant two crops in one field", for example (Planting crops densely and close to each other would`ve lead to issues with pollen spread, and was plainly negative for rotation scheme.).

Of course, nowadays, those laws are either explained much better, either debunked, and thus, Bible loses it`s relevance.

Saramon
March 9th, 2007, 11:08 PM
One thing that always got me was Constantine, and The Council of Nicea, the simple fact that this is a recorded event in our history, where Constantine merged Paganism, and Christianity, into at least somewhat what it is today, simply to unite his empire, and prevent a civil war.
After Rome got out of the empire business, what better to stay in the minds and hearts of the whole world then to captivate them through a belief system. Which is a better way to make money, to have them pay for their life, or pay longer for their eternal life.

Not to mention in the The Council of Nicea, that several books of the bible were left out, and retranslated to make Jesus into a diety (Christians of the time, mearly though Jesus as a "Great Teacher", Constantine needed something someone, or somegod to hold Rome itself together.

Final note on this topic Contantine, was not baptised until his death bed, so apparently he did not fully believe what had been made up by him, and the other members of his counsil.

Kinda sad, I don't think our "Mocker" will ever read this, but if read and researched, it might just make him think about the up and comings of his religion

On the note of the tomb of Christ, I am not sure if the shroud of Turin has blood on it or not, they could try to match DNA with that, possibly the Spear of Destiny will have some on it as well, but again, I am not sure how long the DNA in blood lasts, but I am sure that it would decay by now, the only real way to know for sure is DNA in the bone marrow, but as far as known to me, we wouldn't have anything to test it against.

Alice Shade
March 9th, 2007, 11:33 PM
Well... If people really had sense of humor, bone marrow could be just used as DNA template to clone "Jesus" - whom could be just compared to the stereotypal imagery of Jesus, and thus, determined to be veritable Jesus, or not.

punkinside
March 9th, 2007, 11:39 PM
I read somewhere that the first time the shroud of turin was allowed to be examined by independent scientists, it was proven somehow that the stuff was pigs blood. I'll try to find a link as soon as I have time.

Alice Shade
March 9th, 2007, 11:46 PM
Pig`s blood is quite close to human blood, actually. Pigs are even used as test animals for various medicinal stuff connected with heart and blood system. So, should be pretty tough to separate two for sure.

jon_hill987
March 10th, 2007, 12:56 AM
Not if there is any trace of DNA left.

Alice Shade
March 10th, 2007, 08:02 AM
I don`t think they were quite up to snuff with DNA matching at the time Turin`s shroud was examined first.

As far as I know, even now, DNA matching only takes a few strands, and could be mistaken - especially with ~2000 years deterioration.

Ahria
March 10th, 2007, 12:58 PM
...I`m really inclined to take offence to that comparison. ^_^

Alice In Wonderland is very logical, I`d even say mathematically logical.

Bible, on other hand, is an accumulation of bigotry, prejudice, superstition, tell-tales and outright lies.

Ok maybe I get flamed but here goes.

I believe the Bible has merit, I also believe that it is grossly abused, misquoted and used as a motivation to conduct terrible evils. Also the amount of times the Bible has been translated and rewritten is unbelievable, and with any translations or rewrites, messages are lost or distorted. Even a simple comparison of the King James version to the American New Version has huge differences.

I am sort of Christian (although I hate that label because what it has been associated with) basically what I mean is, I do believe in a greater force, it makes no difference to me whether its a he or a she or whether she is black, yellow, white or blue.

I could never take the Bible word for word, as I believe a lot has been lost and rewritten to suit people motives but the overall message of the New Testament to me is that we all should be tolerant, non judging and have compassion and understanding for each other. Personally I think those are good ideals and principles to have, even if they are difficult to uphold.

PS I also loved Alice in Wonderland

Alice Shade
March 10th, 2007, 02:53 PM
Eh.

We don`t argue, that Bible was a very forward text for it`s time. We argue that it`s a spiritual guide for today`s society.

In the conditions of bronze age and beginning of medieval, Bible was a profoundly sound manual for organising prolific stable society.

But Bible is not religious text. It`s political text. It`s manual on social engineering, which envelops society from all sides. It`s an "operation system", if you will - base for building successful MEDIEVAL society.

However, right now, Bible lacks the flexibility and relevance to be used in it`s original purpose. A whole lot of societies started on it. However, as societies progress, and discover new demands and features Bible can not supplement, it`s time to switch to something else.

Thus, bible-thumping is a bad thing, which regresses society back into bronze-age mentality.

And I DO say regress, because a lot of ideas, which are sound even now (profoundly sound and kind, I must say), are outright ignored, or overlooked. Similarly, everything, that inconvinces Xians, is promptly discarded as irrelevant and outdated, while similar passages, which inconvenience someone else are touted as ultimate truth.

Bible had lots of sound ideas. But right now, the voice of Bible is the voice of hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

Ahria
March 10th, 2007, 11:48 PM
I think the voice of the Bible are people who are abusing it for their own good, the Bible as it stands is just a book with some good virtues, you cant condemn it for how people use it rather condemn the people.

It also cant be the ultimate truth as it has been redone way too many times, but its inherent message is there people just tend to ignore it.

Religion is still the easiest way to incite a crowd to war because it gives a justification to what they are doing and to alleviate their guilt. Look at the crusades, Spanish inquisition, the invasion of southern and central America they have all used the Bible as a excuse to conquer.

People always find a excuse for their own motives but for the past centuries the Bible has been punted as 'it' and people because of blind faith and lack of common sense and intelligence have just followed. At the end of it I cant blame the Bible, its a book with some value to it, I do, however, blame the people using it for their own gain.

I am going to quote a verse 1 Corinthians 13 Verse 4 - 7 to illustrate something.

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

It has and always will be one of the most powerful messages I have ever read. As a mother, a daughter, a wife, a sister and a friend I know those words to be true. They are hard to live up to make no doubt. And I get it right mostly with my son, whom I have total unconditional love for.

At the end of the day the people punting the Bible as a excuse for war, well they obviously haven't read the damn thing, if they had they should hang their heads in shame and do grevious bodily harm to themselves.

It has been the failing of men each and every time to use religion, not just the Bible as many other religions are just as guilty, as their justification to harm and abuse those around them.

I honestly believe at the end of the day think God is looking down at those people and going WTF!!!!

PS. On another note the Christian faith was one of the first to move away from the female goddesses. Considering in the time it was written and how the Old Testament is written I cannot for a second doubt that there was not some political motivation.

Alice Shade
March 11th, 2007, 12:31 AM
Of course. On all counts.

On a side note... Swastika does not means anything bad, per ce, but people nowadays treat the symbol with disdain, just because of what it was associated with.

Bible has same problem.

Lunchbox
March 11th, 2007, 08:47 AM
Let's face it, the Swastika faces the same problem as the pentagram. Nothing inherently evil about either one, but because of past associations they're now taboo and frowned upon. Church doctrine took care of the pentagram and more than likely Jewish propaganda was the driving force behind ostracizing the swastika (although who can blame them).

Back to the issue at hand...

The Bible itself, treated as a philosophy, is actually very constructive. Take as an example the ten commandments. They make up the building blocks for civilized society as we know it. Imagine yourself as Moses leading your people to the "promised land". After years of enslavement, you need to pull your people together and get them to create their own society. You know that in order to do that, you need some fundamental ground rules that the laws of your people can be built around. And what's the easiest way to get them accepted without question? Make them the word of God of course. I think Moses was an exceptionally intelligent man who realised the need for basic laws and made sure they would be implemented with as little fuss as possible. I'm sure for good measure things like "Thou shalt worship no other God but me" were added. If you're basing your society's laws on the premise of one religion, you can't very well risk members of that society changing beliefs and switching to a new set of rules. You need 100% buy-in on this one...

But that's just one example. You can find them throughout the Bible. If you're feeling particularly belligerent, you can start asking just what the "fiery chariot" was that Elijah ascended to heaven on.

The big thing to remember is that the Bible is just a collection of recollections of events that transpired. Before they were written down, they would have been passed down by word of mouth and as anyone who's played "broken telephone" knows, that's not the most reliable record-keeping method. In the end, history is written by the victor and we all end up with a version belonging to one particular scribe on the winning team, subtly tainted through the years by historians trying to enforce their own beliefs. Who knows what's right?

The one major difference we can see is between the old and new testaments. The old testament was all about spreading the word of God by any means necessary. It was chock full of smiting the unbeliever and taking an eye for an eye, the same attitude that Christians love to criticise other religions for in the present day. Granted, in the new testament the entire overtone changed to one of peaceful conversion. I can only imagine that Jesus, whoever he may have been, saw the need for a change in church doctrine and was intelligent and charismatic enough to find a way to enforce it. That been said, Christians would be well to remember the dark times in their own history before casting the first stone (to coin a phrase). I'm sure the Moors, Aztecs, Incas and various other "heathens" remember acts committed "in the name of God".

I think it's the same as any religious premise. If you're going to be fanatical about it, you're going to miss the point. If you decide to be logical and accept the teachings for what they are, you just might end up living a quite fulfilling life.

PS Alie in Wonderland was the most constructive use of opium in history ;)

Alice Shade
March 11th, 2007, 09:36 AM
Maybe.

I still hold on to notion, that Bible is mostly political, rather then philosophical, but you have a point, as well.

jon_hill987
March 11th, 2007, 12:00 PM
If you're feeling particularly belligerent, you can start asking just what the "fiery chariot" was that Elijah ascended to heaven on.

Spaceship.

Lunchbox
March 11th, 2007, 12:33 PM
That's just it.

Quite a few interesting inconsistencies floating around in the bible. I also wonder why all of these "chosen ones" had to be alone when God spoke to them. Sorry if it sounds a bit derogatory, but I can't help but think that the best possible way to convert all that faith into pure belief is with a public appearance...

Alice Shade
March 11th, 2007, 12:54 PM
Choir Boy Syndrome?

I don`t know... Maybe speaking to God requires some kind of intimacy.

AaronD
March 11th, 2007, 04:27 PM
Well, we are talking about the being who supposedly cast Adam and Eve out of Eden when they decided to put some clothes on :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

Alice Shade
March 11th, 2007, 04:42 PM
True. So God`s also sexual maniac?

Googler
March 11th, 2007, 04:58 PM
True. So God`s also sexual maniac?

For all of us that remember Zues, from the beginning the 'higher power' in peoples lives has always been sexual, or so it seems.

Alice Shade
March 11th, 2007, 05:58 PM
Sort of. It seems, that it`s more of personal charisma, then plain fucking, though.

Saramon
March 12th, 2007, 04:57 AM
Didn't the "gods" breed with humans to make more gods, and then the gods had intercourse amoung themselves to make better gods.
I don't know greek mythology like a I used to.

Lunchbox
March 12th, 2007, 07:11 AM
I think the whole garden of Eden incident was probably what got the Christian church off on the wrong foot in the first place. As I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the act of eating from the tree was supposed to have made Adam and Eve self-conscious and given them a sense of modesty, which in turn led to them being cast out of the garden. I think the problem with Christianity is that the church interpreted that as meaning we should be ashamed of our bodies, ashamed of our actions and generally live our lives in a state of perpetual guilt. I don't think maniacal sex ever came into it, but primitive humans (by that I mean the first humans, regardless of creationism or intelligent design) lived by their base instincts. They had these body parts which gave them an immense amount of pleasure and you can bet that once the first person figured out that tab A fitted into slot B, there was a fair amount of it going on. That's just primal nature though. I doubt religion ever came into it.

On the other hand, other great civilizations have embraced hedonism as an integral part of life. In ancient Rome it was commonplace to have a bunch of friends over for a piss-up and orgy on a Saturday night. And why not? I mean, God forbid we should ever get any form of pleasure out of our own bodies or actions. Christians, and Catholics in particular, love to condemn anyone who chooses to engage in sex for pleasure, insisting that it's only for procreation. Quite honestly, eating is just for sustenance to keep you alive, but I'm willing to bet that same group of people only eat the nice tasting food i.e. whose taste gives them pleasure.

Personally, I'm glad about the whole apple-from-the-snake-in-the-tree incident. I'm glad I'm self-conscious and aware of my body. The alternative might mean having to sniff the ass of every new person I meet...

GeoffBoulton
March 12th, 2007, 09:03 AM
Never made much sense to me as to why some god would endow people with the ability to enjoy themselves and then expect them not to use that ability. Just the sort of thinking that has messed up so many people.

Alice Shade
March 12th, 2007, 09:16 AM
Supposedly, argument is such, that "God gives a choice."

Aka, all the body parts serve some particular need, and should not be misused... But that`s quite a boring way to live.

On a side note - people were ALWAYS aware that "tab A fitted into slot B" - as it`s the only way for procreation.
As well, as animals are very aware of that, as well. Difference is, that primitive humans were treating sex like animals - per certain conditions. Concept of pleasure was invented a bit later, by spear-wielding cromagnons.

Lunchbox
March 12th, 2007, 01:14 PM
The concept of pleasure was invented? I would have thought humans, primitive or not, could work that out all by themselves. You don't need to be an intellectual giant to realise that this whole act of procreation feels pretty damn good and might be worth doing more often...

Alice Shade
March 12th, 2007, 02:16 PM
It takes abstract thinking to link two together.

Neanderthals, who lacked most of frontal lobes, mated as most mammals do - per biological clock.

Cromagnons, who could make the connection, mated much more often, and therefore, had more children. Coupled with their superior intellect, it allowed them to quickly outgrow neanderthals, and eventually, overtake them completely.

jon_hill987
March 12th, 2007, 02:23 PM
Neanderthals, who lacked most of frontal lobes, mated as most mammals do - per biological clock.

I'm not convinced of that, look at Bonobos, they have sex all the time and it has nothing to do with procreation.

Alice Shade
March 12th, 2007, 03:06 PM
Maybe.

As far as I know, mating by biological clock was cited as one of the evolutional disadvantages of neanderthals vs. cromagnons, but it could be wrong. After all, there are no neanderthals around, nowadays, to test the theory on.

Ahria
March 12th, 2007, 08:19 PM
Sex was outlawed when the female religions went out the door because it gave woman too much power.

Honestly cant see how that has changed though :P

GeoffBoulton
March 12th, 2007, 09:20 PM
Sex was outlawed ...... because it gave woman too much power.

Yes, I think you've hit the nail on the head there

Saramon
March 12th, 2007, 11:15 PM
Realistically that i very true, when base christianity was concieved, I think that that was one of the motions intended, Constantine, as well as the emperors after him, wanted full power of his people, religious and political, and you cannot have divine knowledge if it can be passed to a female as well.

I think that it was done intentionally to merge political and religious control.

Lunchbox
March 13th, 2007, 07:32 AM
That and the fact that women were perceived as being weak on all counts and the notion that God might choose a woman as shi/her vessel on earth must have been almost heretic.

Unfortunately, to quote Ahria, in certain circles some things still haven't changed...

Alice Shade
March 13th, 2007, 03:15 PM
But they will.

In order to maintain status quo, men should remain stronger then women... Which is not true on the nowaday scene.

Lunchbox
March 14th, 2007, 06:47 AM
Why is it so important to maintain that particular status quo? There will always be things that women rely on men for and vice versa. We all know it. That doesn't mean women should always have to take a back seat. For as long as men hold all the positions of power, we, as a civlisation, will slowly stagnate because we lack the alternate perspective a woman would bring. This isn't to say women know better, just that they think differently.

Men will more than likely always remain physically stronger than women. I don't see evolution reversing that aspect. But women, faced with that unchanging fact, have over time adapted and played to their own strengths to the extent where I believe they are now generally stronger than men mentally and emotionally.

And no, I'm not emasculated.

Alice Shade
March 14th, 2007, 10:55 AM
Heh.

My example was proving the impossibility of keeping status quo.

See, naturally females are weaker, and need protection. This is what promoted the current patriarchist tendencies.

However, as Homo Sapiens evolves, women and men both average to close the difference. Why? Because, difference is no longer naturally justified.

So, nowadays, it`s entirely possible to encounter people of opposite gender both stronger and weaker then you (be you man or woman), and therefore, old status quo just does not works out anymore. There is no more justification that "man will be better for job, then woman" or vice-versa, and each case has to be addressed differently.

Not to say, that it`s already done by everyone and anyone, though... A lot of people still hold on to old notions.

nozgrd74
August 2nd, 2007, 11:35 PM
Let me get this straight……
You worship several so called “Server Farms” in which Google Inc. lies.
This is the most stupid and pointless religion I have ever encountered, it even goes past the boundaries of the “Jedi” religion-George Lucas created Star Wars and never intended for a religion of any kind to be created from the storyline of a BLOOODY FILM.
I am highly disappointed at fact that you all need to be referred to a mental institution.
I really did believe that this was an entire joke BUT it seems you are deadly serious.


lol wow you're funny, christianity is a joke, well religion in general actually. How can people worship any of these religions: i.e. christianity, judaism, islam..etc. Christians have so many sections of there religion that can all easily contradict each other. Anyway though the church of google is "worshiping" something that is AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN GET to a God. This site doesn't say anywhere, to my knowledge, that google is god. This site is really just picking on all the farce of mainly the christian religion. :faq:

nozgrd74
August 2nd, 2007, 11:36 PM
oh...i didn't realize how old that post was that i replied to.. oh well :icon_rolleyes:

SAVAGE
August 6th, 2007, 10:45 PM
All religion and those that take any religion seriously are just dad Wankers.

But they will.

In order to maintain status quo, men should remain stronger then women... Which is not true on the nowaday scene.

Men are stronger than women?!?!

Lord_Jereth
August 8th, 2007, 04:22 AM
... there are no fables or stories in the bible, just fact ...

Hmmmm ... let's look in Leviticus on that one, shall we?
ESV Leviticus 11:5 And the rock badger, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is unclean to you.

KJV Leviticus 11:5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

LXE Leviticus 11:5 And the rabbit, because it chews the cud, but does not divide the hoof, this is unclean to you.

NAB Leviticus 11:5 the rock badger, which indeed chews the cud, but does not have hoofs and is therefore unclean for you;

NIV Leviticus 11:5 The coney, though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is unclean for you.

NKJ Leviticus 11:5 'the rock hyrax, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, is unclean to you;

In actual, scientific fact, as opposed to ignorant 4000 year old biblical authors fact(sic), neither Rock Badgers nor Rabbits (choose your translation, here) actually chew their cud. If it looks like a fable, smells like a fable, acts like a fable, moves like a fable and even tastes like a fable ... it probably is one.

pwnd ... :icon_twisted:

:icon_cool: LJ

FaithfulResearcher
August 8th, 2007, 07:15 PM
Alice Shade, are YOU Jesus?;)

You are so DAMn smart!!!:D

Jonathan
August 8th, 2007, 09:34 PM
you clearly havent read the bible because the bible is what God and Jesus told the deciples to write in it, so ha

Well, then by that logic, why aren't you a Mormon? In the 1800s, Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, claiming that the the angel Moroni revealed them to him from God.

So, in the same way the Bible was claimed to have been written through divine revelation, the Book of Mormon was claimed to have been written through divine revelation.

I'll assume, however, that the real reason you believe the Bible is true isn't because it was supposedly written through divine revelation but because you were trained to believe it. Otherwise, what is your argument against believing in Islam, Judaism, Mormonism, and the others? They all claim divine revelation.

RebornGooglist
August 22nd, 2007, 02:22 PM
AGH!! you people piss me off, loosen up you fuckin vaginal belch!!

READ THE PROOF SECTION! It makes ALOT more sense that fuckin christianity!!!

Rand
August 22nd, 2007, 05:07 PM
SAVAGE is gonna love you like nothing else, Reborn.

RebornGooglist
August 23rd, 2007, 02:28 AM
Oh, well i'm definately pro-googlism if you misread my comment!!

Rand
August 23rd, 2007, 02:40 AM
Oh, no one questions your devotion to Googlism, I just think SAVAGE would like you.

Alice Shade
August 23rd, 2007, 08:11 AM
To explain, RebornGooglist...

Your way of putting things lacks eloquence. And although you make up for that by numerous profanities, that`s not quite the equal trade-off, as I always told Savage.

Swearing your head off is as easy as a cowpie, and just about as useful. Saying things semi-correctly, on other hand... That takes a bit of verbal skill to pull off.

RebornGooglist
August 23rd, 2007, 11:39 AM
Mmm hmm...