Seeing the forum main page spammed with pointless religion threads, I finally realized that the main question is, are humans mad?
Both athiests and thiests are mad, don't you think so?
I've now come up with an idea. It's called the Religion Protocol. It is an agreement signed by athiests and thiests. No more endless pointless debating on religion threads.
Reason: We aren't going to change our views, thus we are heading nowhere but pointlessness.
Once you sign the protocol, it is advised that you do not argue or debate on religion threads. You are not forbidden to post on them though. But you should not argue or debate on them. Please do remember this is a protocol, not a rule. This is just a guideline, if you sign it, it means that you agree not to debate and argue on them. If you choose to do so, then I suggest you should not sign this protocol.
We now need people to sign up.
Religion Protocol Signers Pamda Man CEN7777 (Mahesh) candice5
This from paradise engineering abstract. The molecular biology of paradise. "...sadly, if God exists, then He has chosen cunningly to hide His existence from most of His creatures. Indeed a physicist once noted that things make much more sense if you assume the world was created, not by an all-good and all-powerful being, but by a God who is 100 percent malevolent yet only 90 percent effective. Less heretically expressed, if He does lurk benevolently in the background, then one must presumably be confident that He is greater than all of us, not just in the depth, but also the range of His compassion. If so, then He will scarcely favour a more restrictive or mean-spirited project than paradise-engineering - with its commitment to the molecular biology of univeral well-being... Statistically, the bulk of the world's suffering is undergone by members of other species. Sometimes their anguish is ghastly and prolonged. Such suffering doesn't, even notionally, have any redeeming features. It isn't character-building. It never issues in great art and literature. Non-human suffering can't support even the kinds of sophistry we use to rationalise our own ills... Mercifully, as the abolitionist project gathers pace, the pain and malaise of non-humans as well as humans from the Nightmare Era of primordial life is likely to be phased out too. Legacy genomes will be rewritten. The entire global ecosystem will be redesigned. For there is no need to pay homage to the product of selfish genes - as though self-replicating DNA from the old Darwinian era were some sort of secular equivalent to Providence. The genetically pre-programmed well-being of the post-Transition epoch shouldn't, and probably won't, remain arbitrarily species-specific...."
Seeing the forum main page spammed with pointless religion threads, I finally realized that the main question is, are humans mad?Both atheists and theists are mad, don't you think so?I've now come up with an idea. It's...
This forum is for anyone here who wishes to debate on the subject of religion and religious beliefs. Outline your position, whether it be theist or atheist, explain why you hold that position, and then people can debate...
Your first statement should probably be a definition of Islam: is it what the terrorists, using religion for an excuse for jihad, worship or is it what the more peaceful people worship. Or somewhere in between?
Recently I wrote a question and got a bunch of hype on it because one one lady. Me and her have been debating the existence of her "God", and the truth of how old mine are. I know this may seem silly, but she...