What are your beliefs

Author Topic: What are your beliefs  (Read 3221 times)

I like worrying about the life I'm living and not worry about the life I'll maybe possibly probably never live after I die. I know that I'll die thinking about my life in a way that I am happy with myself and how I interacted with the other people of my species, having good moral ground.

I think and think about living in eternity in heaven and I found that it would, after a while, due to severe and chronic soul-crushing depression, suck more than being eternally tortured in hell. You can't enjoy life forever, so stop worrying about what happens to you after you die.

If there is a God that has responsibility in creating the world we live in today, I am damn well sure it has other things to do other than worrying about a construct of it that was the result of an impossibly powerful omniscient creature that would have to defy the laws of physics to do what it does. I like run-ons.

So I am saying no and yes, and yes and no. I don't care, I wanna live my life without a fear of death, because it is natural to hope for the best after death and to fear what everyone doesn't want to believe: the selfish end of yourself. Religion is a personal thing, and it shouldn't be meddled with by "churches" but by individuals.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2015, 10:34:33 PM by Swat 3 »

I don't believe in a god, but I'm not against the possibility. All I know for sure is if there is a god, there has to be more than one, and they're all female. So I guess you could call me an agnostic gynopolytheist.

But who decides how the proper way is to behave? People all have different ideas of what's in the best interest of species survival though. For example you could say that killing elderly or disabled people is morally acceptable because they hold back the rest of society by draining the species' resources and contributing nothing (this matter was also the subject of a well-written Star Trek episode). Many things that people would consider to be a moral-based matter have nothing to do with species survival, such as whether it's morally wrong to torture animals, eat human flesh, wear no clothes in public, physically punish your children, or be involved in petty theft.

I simply don't think Natural Selection is sufficient to explain morality as we know it in the real world. It's not even consistent when it comes to the subject of murder, because everywhere you go, the definition of murder can also be different. In the US i'd be fairly certain virtually everyone (as well as the written laws) would agree that being killed for peacefully protesting - with no malicious behavior - is an act of murder, while in North Korea or Iran it would be just considered a justified death because you went against the State, as the State would be considered the means of ethnic or social survival (so going against it could be interpreted by them as going against the survival of your people).

Meanwhile religions such as Christianity and Islam are eager to specifically define what they do and don't consider murder, and careful study of their texts can give you a fairly specific picture of what is and isn't okay to do under the rules of those religions.
Many of those are still explainable through natural selection if you think back to the time that it actually applied to us as a species.
At this time, the only animals that would be available for you to torture would be animals you depended on, such as farm animals
Cannibalism oftentimes (although not always) involves murder
Ipquarx addressed clothing.
The only thing people would really have to steal would be things that are depended on to survive, like food and shelter. Not a problem for some species, but for a species that lives in groups and depends on everyone in that group, it is.

The remaining things can't really be explained by religion either. If God gave people morality, shouldn't everyone have the same morality, since God created everyone?

Personally I'm an agnostic. I choose to neither state "there is no higher power" nor "there IS a higher power." I simply just leave it at "I don't know, I don't care."

Every religion ever made revolves around one basic law- don't be an ass. They have other laws too. Don't eat X, don't wear Y, don't do Z. But at the core level are teachings of how to be a good person. For that aspect, I appreciate religion.


Used to be a Satanist though. Couldn't really get into it anymore than I could Christianity, but of any religion I've done research on, the laws of earthly satanism seem pretty fair. My favorite rule was probably the 11th earthly law of satanism- When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

The FAQ on the primary website is pretty fun too- go sell your SOULS

The FAQ on the primary website is pretty fun too- go sell your SOULS

someday I'm going to actually drop 200 dollars and hang my certification of being a member of the church of satan right next to my framed picture of Riddler

I don't believe in a god but there could be one

i don't think god(s) is angry with anyone(if there is one) who is skeptical(somewhat like me)
we are all unique; humans are driven by questioning things they don't understand, etc
was this god(s) ultimate goal?

forget if i know, that's just my personal philosophy

I've heard Christianity and Atheism/Naturalistic Science both give pretty good arguments for their positions, but they've each been lacking in answers/decent explanations at different things.
I'd hesitate to group science and atheism together. Science doesn't try to answer anything that it can't test with an experiment. It doesn't say anything about God existing or not existing because it's not a problem that's really applicable to the scientific method.

Like I said in the other thread, you can appreciate critical thinking and the scientific method while still being religious, albeit maybe not as a fundamentalist.


I'd hesitate to group science and atheism together. Science doesn't try to answer anything that it can't test with an experiment. It doesn't say anything about God existing or not existing because it's not a problem that's really applicable to the scientific method.

Like I said in the other thread, you can appreciate critical thinking and the scientific method while still being religious, albeit maybe not as a fundamentalist.
I call myself an atheist but I agree with this point.  I fully understand the possibility of a deity, though I tend to dismiss one based on our religions.  Not out of spite or anything, but since most of our world's religions don't hold up to their own texts it's hard to see them as literal, but I still fully understand them being used as teachings for morals and other things, albeit not necessarily agreeing with a lot these morals.  I mean, biblical epics are always fun to watch.

I don't consider myself agnostic as it implies I'd be willing to consider that a deity may exist, when I don't.  Similar to how science does it; it may not say it isn't there, but it certainly dismisses the possibility and moves forward without considering it a variable in anything we study (outside of theistic sciences and things related)

What I do disagree with is having solid, unmoved beliefs that have been completely disproven by science or mathematics.  Like how some people still believe in geocentrism.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2015, 01:57:41 AM by Lalam24 »

i believe in a thing called love



sometimes i think to myself

how does god exist if i'm not already dead

I may just call myself a deist