The Energon Pub

Are humans being the spawn of aliens really more far fetched than basing an entire religion on a zombie? A religion which celebrates a zombie by simulating ritualistic canabalism?

Meh. It's religion, don't expect it to make any sense.

I'll take Christianity, Judaism, etc more seriously than Scientology when even a single shred of evidence supporting their claims is presented.

Until then, I will rank them all up there with the claims of some drunken psycho in a sandwich board ranting on a street corner.

Professor Smooth wrote:I'll take Christianity,

As I said before, a religion which worships a zombie and simulates ritualistic cannablism.

Judaism

TBH, I find the old testament to be just as if not more unbelievable than anything I've heard or read about scientology.

etc more seriously than Scientology when even a single shred of evidence supporting their claims is presented.

Yes, because Jesus, Moses, and Muhammed left behind buckets of physical evidence.

Until then, I will rank them all up there with the claims of some drunken psycho in a sandwich board ranting on a street corner.

Isn't that basically what Jesus and his Apostles did? Without Constantine and Theodosius Christianity would have died in ancient times. Christians should be venerating them if anyone. They made it all possible.

Professor Smooth wrote:I'll take Christianity, Judaism, etc more seriously than Scientology when even a single shred of evidence supporting their claims is presented.

Until then, I will rank them all up there with the claims of some drunken psycho in a sandwich board ranting on a street corner.

How dare you insult sandwiches!

Scientology is ridiculous, because it's new.

As unbelievable as it is, it's getting all this bad press because people are comparing it to the likes of the other reigions that have been around for so long.

When Christianity first came about, what happened? I do believe they were persecuted, their prophet killed, all this other crap.

Why? Because it was the new religion on the block.

Now, while I believe that Scientology is retarded as hell, and it's followers should be slapped around a little. Scientology is going through the exact same thing(relatively) as Christianity did.

Saying Scientology is bad because Hubbard tried to perform a ritual way back before he created Scientology, is like saying Clinton should never have been president because he smoked a little pot way back when.

lkavadas wrote:

Professor Smooth wrote:I'll take Christianity,

As I said before, a religion which worships a zombie and simulates ritualistic cannablism.

Judaism

TBH, I find the old testament to be just as if not more unbelievable than anything I've heard or read about scientology.

etc more seriously than Scientology when even a single shred of evidence supporting their claims is presented.

Yes, because Jesus, Moses, and Muhammed left behind buckets of physical evidence.

Until then, I will rank them all up there with the claims of some drunken psycho in a sandwich board ranting on a street corner.

Isn't that basically what Jesus and his Apostles did? Without Constantine and Theodosius Christianity would have died in ancient times. Christians should be venerating them if anyone. They made it all possible.

amen brother!

just becuase alot of people beleive in somthing old does not make it true, or we're back to flat earthers again.

Whoa, now! I can't allow myself to be misunderstood on this. I am an atheist, 100%. I don't support Christianity, or any other religion. I find them all to be incredibly harmful and unbelievable.

I just don't think that Scientology is any more "out there" than any of the religions that have been around for centuries. All organized religions deserve to be treated with scorn and contempt until they provide a shred of evidence for their claims.

I think what most people's problem with Scientology is that it rates people as to how much they are saved. That and the fact that they actually make you pay money to evaluate the purity of your soul. Not the case with Christianity and Buddihsm, where being saved is based on a personal, intimate relationship with god, or karma, or what have you. True, if you go to a church on Sunday, they pass around an offering plate, but the nice thing is, you don't have to pay. It would be nice if you did, but ultimately your soul does not depend on how big fat your checkbook is.

Dr Buffalo wrote:I think what most people's problem with Scientology is that it rates people as to how much they are saved. That and the fact that they actually make you pay money to evaluate the purity of your soul. Not the case with Christianity and Buddihsm, where being saved is based on a personal, intimate relationship with god, or karma, or what have you. True, if you go to a church on Sunday, they pass around an offering plate, but the nice thing is, you don't have to pay. It would be nice if you did, but ultimately your soul does not depend on how big fat your checkbook is.

unless scientology is right. come on you can't say scientology is wrong becuase it's not like other religoens without some evidence.

Dr Buffalo wrote:I think what most people's problem with Scientology is that it rates people as to how much they are saved. That and the fact that they actually make you pay money to evaluate the purity of your soul. Not the case with Christianity (....)

Some Televangelists seem to disagree.

True, but like I said, if you ever go into a church they won't say your immortal soul depends on putting a dollar in the offering plate.

Dr Buffalo wrote:True, but like I said, if you ever go into a church they won't say your immortal soul depends on putting a dollar in the offering plate.

and this diminishes scientology, how?

The point of religion is that faith holders transcend the need for material possesion to become closer to their respected diety. Now that I think about it, is there an actual God in Scientology? Because if there isn't a supreme being or philosophy then it's more of an origin story than anything else.

Dr Buffalo wrote:The point of religion is that faith holders transcend the need for material possesion to become closer to their respected diety. Now that I think about it, is there an actual God in Scientology? Because if there isn't a supreme being or philosophy then it's more of an origin story than anything else.

not really, the point of some religeons is that, depending on who you ask, but then there are alot of faith holders who would say the point of religoen is to serve their deity, or to uphold a moral code, or to manipulate the masses, or to exalt their deities, or to combat evil, or to spread harmony, or to get a few extra days off work, or to increase human knowledge.


and atheistic religeons exist, like your aforementioned buddhism, or confucianism(sp?)

aslong as you think in a christian mindset objectively comprehending other religions is nigh impossible

My main beef with it is actually that it takes money and grades people on a scale.

I also mentioned Jack Parsons and LHP in here because some of his views derive from Satanism (ex. all people under a certain...tone level...need to be disposed of) and are about as nice and spiritual as an energon blast to the head.

As for all religions being harmful... Whoever said that needs to study beyond the f'ed cycle of the European/Semitic baggage that Western man carries around.

Tell ya what, i was raised an atheist and i was utterly miserable and depressed. Then i found the Divine in my own manner. These days all that upbringing translates into is my ungodly talent with technology. Oh yes, and unlike most Neo-Pagans, im not carrying Christian baggage around. Unfortunately, being an odd cross between a proper wizard and a scientist alienates me from them.

I think that if mankind didnt have religion, he would commit mass suicide upon realizing how grim things are in the physical universe. There is an evolutionary reason for it.

And a final note: The Soviet Union only drove Eastern Orthodox Christianity and the tribal religions underground. Never completely eliminated them. Thus, i say that atheism is probably only an appropriate decision for about 10% of humanity.

So you're saying that it's better to pretend that there was some godly force to worship just because the world is f'n depressing ? There's got to be another way.

there is, it's called cynacism; life's hard deal with it...actually if everyone who wasn't cut out to deal with the real world topped themselves would it actually be that bad?

i'm pretty sure i could find a negative act in the name of every major religeon, wether it's thuggee's for kali, or the yellow Turban rebellion for taoists


i would like to beleive there was some ultimate cosmic justice, it would be nice if there was some guiding narrative, but until someone comes up with something more tangible than faith, i'll agree with hobbs; life is cruel, brutal, but mercifully short. and try to make it through without lying to myself to nurse my own ego.

Well, its not like regimes promoting science and progress have been any better historically.

Or are you guys like most athiests iv'e met who would approve of Stalin? My father is like this, BTW.

I really can't help what i am, frankly, and i really seriously hope that y'all don't think that i need to be locked away in Arkham Asylum or something.

Otherwise, you seriously need help like my dad does because that's what he tried to do to me! And it ain't just him - the ones at USF are worse, i think. Somethings wrong with someone who blithely talks of utopia by any means necessary - i mean that belief has been one common thing about both Megs and Screamer all these decades.... barf.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Speaking of evidence for at least something, anyone here study quantum theory lately? I would reccommend the holographic theory......

PS, Tammuz, i think we have duelling tag lines. lol

You: "I used to be an athiest until i realized i was God"

Me: "Time Transcends the person who does not know the limit of oneself" <- classic 100% Vector

VecPrime wrote:Well, its not like regimes promoting science and progress have been any better historically.

Most Western democracies promote progress, just not relentless progress at all costs. The problem with the USSR wasn't so much that it promoted progress as it was that it killed millions of people.

Anyway, the whole inner peace thing can be found just as well in philosophy and common compassion.

VecPrime wrote:Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Isn't it, though? Technically. It's not proof of absence, however.

VecPrime wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

True. However, the lack of evidence of absence does nothing to support a lack of absence.

The cosmic teapot, the flying spaghetti monster, Thor, etc. You can't disprove any of it. But no logical thinking person would believe in any of them.

By your model, you could arrest somebody on the charges of child molestation and imprison them because there is no evidence saying that they didn't molest a child. To do so would be madness.

VecPrime wrote:Or are you guys like most athiests iv'e met who would approve of Stalin? My father is like this, BTW.

This got a laugh out of me. Most athiests are pretty foaming at the mouth angry people. I haven't the foggiest idea why.

I view Stalin as probably the most evil man in human history. On scale of 1-10, 10 being most evil, Stalin makes Hitler an 8.

VecPrime wrote:Well, its not like regimes promoting science and progress have been any better historically.

i can live without faith, but i would die with out science

VecPrime wrote:Or are you guys like most athiests iv'e met who would approve of Stalin? My father is like this, BTW.

stalin? i can't say i approve of his methods at all, but you have to admire his balls

VecPrime wrote:I really can't help what i am, frankly, and i really seriously hope that y'all don't think that i need to be locked away in Arkham Asylum or something.

i understand this, like love, or any emotion, you have no control of it. however emotion is not rational,

VecPrime wrote:Otherwise, you seriously need help like my dad does because that's what he tried to do to me! And it ain't just him - the ones at USF are worse, i think. Somethings wrong with someone who blithely talks of utopia by any means necessary - i mean that belief has been one common thing about both Megs and Screamer all these decades.... barf.

i'm not even sure how to handle this; i don't think any faith based beilef is rational(and acting irrationally is tantamount to insanity), as such "utopia" is for me an impossibility, and another article of faith.

VecPrime wrote:Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

hi, i'm god.

and you are actually a small czechoslovain traffic warden.

this actually one of my favourite arguments(and one we've done many times on this board) in order not to be a hypocrit/biggot, you either must beleive in all faith based reasoning, or none, since if faith is admissamble as evidence, or a lack of evidence admissable as evidence then all propositions based on such reasoning must be equally true, however as the many faith based propositions are mutually exclusive(you can't be christian, and muslim at the same time, for example), you can't actually beleive all faith based without beleiveing in a contradiction(another thing tantamount to insanity)

oh and being God, i'm right; your wrong

VecPrime wrote:Speaking of evidence for at least something, anyone here study quantum theory lately? I would reccommend the holographic theory......

nope.

How can you wave the banner of science and progress without knowing the latest developments?

Tammuz, i think you need help. It's quite obvious to me that you bottle up your emotions due to some form of childhood abuse. Seriously, ive known Transformers with more humanity than I got from your last post.

Unfortunately your precious science knows no cure for the abused.... nothing permanent anyway, just pallative care for the mentally ill.

Using pure logic and rationality, then we should say that it would be hundreds of times more efficient to dispose of the disabled...

See where it leads? It led that way for me. Before, i saw life as worth only the chemicals it is made out of, or maybe the 3.99 suggested by the people who sell lawn darts. A few whacks to the pineal gland later... i believe much differently. (Not physical whacks either)

I think that if not for my faith i would have become a school shooter, what with the way i was treated in that prison known among the students as "Osceola State Pen" (Osceola High - a school here in Tampa Bay that im surprised the Seminole havent done a thing about yet.)

I really dont have a beef with non-belief so long as they're not trying to diagnose me and send me off to the gulag for re-education. But your words...they imply that i am technically insane with all the implications therof.

And that sort of arrogance and hubris is precisely what turned me off of you guys.

You are suggesting that the opinions of a person who does not believe in the fantastic claims of the supernatural holds such views because he was abused as a child, and yet you have the utter hypocracy to demand that other not "diagnose" you.

I just wanted to point this out in case anybody missed it.

You're free to believe whatever you want. Don't, for a second, think that your beliefs are above critique simply because "it's what you believe."

You provide absolutely no evidence for your claim, so why should said claim be given any more thought than those of people who think they are Napolean or that the world is flat?