Just for fun...

Which of these statements sums you up the best?

01. I do not want to believe that God doesn't exist, therefore I am a Christian.
02. Though I'd rather be a athiest and get all the hot chicks/dudes, I am an Christian.
03. Faced with the evidence that there is a God, I am an Christian.
04. Athiests are better in bed, and this makes me jealous. Therefore, I am a Christian.
05. I am a Christian because organized religion turns me on.
06. All my friends are Christians, and I just want to fit in.
07. All my friends are athiests and I'm jealous of how utterly cool they are.
08. In spite of the meanness and unfairness and downright sadism (Is.13:16) of my God, I am a Christian.
09. I simply choose to believe there is a God.
10. I liked the perversity of the Bible so I became a Christian to fantasize about whores drinking the wine of their fornication. (Rev 18:3)
11. I am an Christian due to a trauma in my life.
12. In spite of belief being illogical, I am a Christian.

Please choose one of the provided statements that most closely describes you. Thanks for playing along...


Back at ya, Mike. :p

Interesting set of choices, Xev.

Your current description (Nietzschean Christian) doesn't seem to appear in your list.
Does that mean you're an atheist Christian, or that you're a Christian now in spite of yourself, or what?

Originally posted by Xev
Just for fun...

Which of these statements sums you up the best?

01. I do not want to believe that God doesn't exist, therefore I am a Christian.
02. Though I'd rather be a athiest and get all the hot chicks/dudes, I am an Christian.
03. Faced with the evidence that there is a God, I am an Christian.
04. Athiests are better in bed, and this makes me jealous. Therefore, I am a Christian.
05. I am a Christian because organized religion turns me on.
06. All my friends are Christians, and I just want to fit in.
07. All my friends are athiests and I'm jealous of how utterly cool they are.
08. In spite of the meanness and unfairness and downright sadism (Is.13:16) of my God, I am a Christian.
09. I simply choose to believe there is a God.
10. I liked the perversity of the Bible so I became a Christian to fantasize about whores drinking the wine of their fornication. (Rev 18:3)
11. I am an Christian due to a trauma in my life.
12. In spite of belief being illogical, I am a Christian.

Please choose one of the provided statements that most closely describes you. Thanks for playing along...



Fair enough... I'd say 3, and 9 are the closest of the options you listed!

;) ;)

-Mike

Mike:

Oh rats, you're not being very fun.

Tony1: Actually, I was drunk and reading "Also Spake Zarathrusra". I think I started babbling about the divinity of man and love and sacrifice and Jesus and.....

*Xev blushes and changes her title*

*Originally posted by Xev
*Xev blushes and changes her title**

?
Commitment certainly doesn't appear to be a problem for you.
You appear to have none.

I feel this urge to go thru your list and comment, tho.

*01. I do not want to believe that God doesn't exist, therefore I am a Christian.*

You wouldn't be a Christian in this case.

*02. Though I'd rather be a athiest and get all the hot chicks/dudes, I am an Christian.*

There aren't any "hot" atheist chicks/dudes.
Except later.
Atheists are notoriously screwed up.

*03. Faced with the evidence that there is a God, I am an Christian.*

This sounds like a reluctant Christian, but a person would have to go somewhat further.

*04. Athiests are better in bed, and this makes me jealous. Therefore, I am a Christian.*

Ha ha.
Atheists better in bed?
Riiiiiiiight.

*05. I am a Christian because organized religion turns me on.*

Ritual junkie.

*06. All my friends are Christians, and I just want to fit in.*

A person would fit in quite well under these circumstances since ashes don't take up much space.

*07. All my friends are athiests and I'm jealous of how utterly cool they are.*

Cool?
So far, I detect insecurity, confusion, etc, but coolness, no.
Perhaps after the ashes cool off.

*08. In spite of the meanness and unfairness and downright sadism (Is.13:16) of my God, I am a Christian.*

Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
(Isaiah 13:16, KJV).

That's what happens after just about every war, and it is PEOPLE doing that.

*09. I simply choose to believe there is a God.*

Sure. As though you could.

*10. I liked the perversity of the Bible so I became a Christian to fantasize about whores drinking the wine of their fornication. (Rev 18:3)*

Seeing as you dug that up, I'm thinking you might be doing that. except for the Christian part.

*11. I am an Christian due to a trauma in my life.*

I stubbed my toe, therefore there is a God?
Unique.

*12. In spite of belief being illogical, I am a Christian.*

Belief isn't illogical.
Belief in something which is untrue is.

Entering into the foray..

I'm just going to comment on Tony's comments :)

1. You wouldn't be a Christian in this case.

Your assumption here is just as bad as the bad assumption you so eloquently pointed out.

2. There aren't any "hot" atheist chicks/dudes.
Except later.
Atheists are notoriously screwed up.

All generalizations are wrong. Instead of puffing the electronic equivalent of hot air and saying 'Atheists are notoriously screwed up.' why not give something to back it up? If you don't, it results in pure, pointless, bickering. I won't bother arguing with you here, I'll just note that I'm somewhat of an atheist.

3. This sounds like a reluctant Christian, but a person would have to go somewhat further.

If they believe based on evidence, that makes them 'reluctant' for not just automatically believing?

4. Ha ha.
Atheists better in bed?
Riiiiiiiight.

Probably, because they're smarter. :)

5. Ritual junkie.

Yep.

6. A person would fit in quite well under these circumstances since ashes don't take up much space.

Is your last name 'Hitler' by any chance?

7. Cool?
So far, I detect insecurity, confusion, etc, but coolness, no.
Perhaps after the ashes cool off.

Organized religion's strength in numbers compared to atheism's minority - insecurity - hah! Confusion - somewhat, but more like thinking. Coolness - more likely - because atheists are usually more independant - as demonstrated by their not allowing themselves to be indoctrinated, and on and on..

8. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
(Isaiah 13:16, KJV).

Wow, you can quote things out of context. Good job.

9. Sure. As though you could.

Yep, it's surprizing that people could. Sad, but true.

10. Seeing as you dug that up, I'm thinking you might be doing that. except for the Christian part.

No! The christian part is complementary. :)

11. I stubbed my toe, therefore there is a God?
Unique.

Not really, just pathetic.

12. Belief isn't illogical.
Belief in something which is untrue is.

You're simply wrong. Belief is illogical. Logic is simply accepting what can be substantiated to be true for the time being, 'belief' as it is traditionally thought of and defined, it where logic ends, and pithy ignorance begins. Belief, is the precise point where new information is rejected, and the process of logic stops - because you've already decided to believe in whatever it is you're believing in.

'Belief in something which is untrue is.'

What?

-Distortion

Probably, because they're smarter.

*Bows*

Tony1:
?
Commitment certainly doesn't appear to be a problem for you.
You appear to have none.

Commitment to my drunken musings on Nietzsche? Not really. I do, however, have "do not read "The Antichrist" while under the influence of booze" on a post-it note on my fridge now. :p

*Grins and notes that "The Antichrist" is hardly tolerable without booze*

There aren't any "hot" atheist chicks/dudes.
Except later.

Touche!

Atheists are notoriously screwed up.

Notoriously? I have some reputation I am unaware of?

Ha ha.
Atheists better in bed?
Riiiiiiiight.

Now you are just contradicting revealed wisdom of Sciforums.

I suspect we are. Life and sensation is much more intense for us, in general, because we do not believe in afterlife.

Of course, the whole thread was simply to be a smart-arse to Mike, who really started this....

A person would fit in quite well under these circumstances since ashes don't take up much space.

Wha! I thought I was going to burn forever!

*Pouts*

Your God could at least pick an eternal punishment for me and stick to it. Not that I can really change His mind, but not knowing is a bit annoying.

Xev, I forgot to mention...

Nice thread, sure to elicit some highly entertaining responses. Would have been more entertaining on a christian fundamentalist forum though :)

Originally posted by Distortion
By Tony1
4. Ha ha.
Atheists better in bed?
Riiiiiiiight.

Probably, because they're smarter. :)

Atheists...smarter?...

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! What a bestial comment!!! :rolleyes:

All generalizations are wrong.

Except for that one?

Originally posted by ~The_Chosen~


Probably, because they're smarter. :)

Atheists...smarter?...

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! What a bestial comment!!! :rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]

If one takes the average IQ of theists and compares it to the average IQ of atheists, they'll probably find that theists are lower. Not because of superiority, but because theism is an integral part of developing countries. In Africa, many people are deeply Muslim, as well as very poor and, as a result of poverty, very dense, same with the Middeast and South Asia (I will include Hinduism here because although it is not monotheism it is theism), as well as Austronesia (Indonesians and Malaysians are Muslims, most Filipinos are Christians) and South America.

Atheism is reserved mostly for educated people and people forced not to believe. (generally the latter half is a minority of atheists, and i wouldnt consider them true atheists)

"Ha ha.
Atheists better in bed?
Riiiiiiiight."

Forgetting even the point Xev makes - keep in mind atheists (on an average) have much, much more sex than theists and learn how to please many more women. If you wait until you marry to have sex you'll only ever learn how to please one woman. Any guy can tell you that how to please differs slightly (or sometimes largley) from woman to woman. And, who's to deny that practice makes perfect?

Originally posted by Tyler
... keep in mind atheists (on an average) have much, much more sex than theists ...
Oh, you don't know my christian ex...

Maybe he does :D

If he knew her, he would know better about christian women. Or at least that one.

It seems as if this forum is largely just a rant war as opposed to something productive, or else maybe this thread has just degenerated, anyhow..


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All generalizations are wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Except for that one?
-A4Ever

You apparently missed the inherent contradiction in the statement. 'All generalizations are wrong.' is a generalization. It's self-contradictory, and kind of a joke, to be taken in jest, but obviously you didn't get that.

Next time you want to pointlessly nit-pick at someone's semantics, make sure you know what you're talking about.

Atheists...smarter?...

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! What a bestial comment!!!

GB-Gil saved me the effort of typing it out..

'If one takes the average IQ of theists and compares it to the average IQ of atheists, they'll probably find that theists are lower. Not because of superiority, but because theism is an integral part of developing countries. In Africa, many people are deeply Muslim, as well as very poor and, as a result of poverty, very dense, same with the Middeast and South Asia (I will include Hinduism here because although it is not monotheism it is theism), as well as Austronesia (Indonesians and Malaysians are Muslims, most Filipinos are Christians) and South America.

Atheism is reserved mostly for educated people and people forced not to believe. (generally the latter half is a minority of atheists, and i wouldnt consider them true atheists)'

I'll also add to that - there have been survey's and at places where the average IQ is higher (in general), there tend to be more atheists.

Go see if you can find any christian fundamentalists at MIT or Harvard, if you'd like :)

'Oh, you don't know my christian ex...'
-Adam

Not very 'christian' then, is she? :)

-Distortion

Originally posted by Tyler
Forgetting even the point Xev makes - keep in mind atheists (on an average) have much, much more sex than theists and learn how to please many more women. If you wait until you marry to have sex you'll only ever learn how to please one woman. Any guy can tell you that how to please differs slightly (or sometimes largley) from woman to woman. And, who's to deny that practice makes perfect?

You atheists are laughable.

Why are you only counting a fraction of the theists? :rolleyes:

Not all religions outlaw premarital sex. Also, I had a coupld of Catholic and Christian gfs...they end up breaking their "beliefs"

So shut the fuck up already. That was a stupid generalization.

Trying to place one over the other is sad, judging others in that manner is sad period. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Distortion
It seems as if this forum is largely just a rant war as opposed to something productive, or else maybe this thread has just degenerated, anyhow..

You degenerated it fool.

You apparently missed the inherent contradiction in the statement. 'All generalizations are wrong.' is a generalization. It's self-contradictory, and kind of a joke, to be taken in jest, but obviously you didn't get that.

Next time you want to pointlessly nit-pick at someone's semantics, make sure you know what you're talking about.

Is that your narrow perspective of "intelligence"

People that judge like you cause much hatred, trying to prove something that isn't worth proving.

GB-Gil saved me the effort of typing it out..

'If one takes the average IQ of theists and compares it to the average IQ of atheists, they'll probably find that theists are lower. Not because of superiority, but because theism is an integral part of developing countries. In Africa, many people are deeply Muslim, as well as very poor and, as a result of poverty, very dense, same with the Middeast and South Asia (I will include Hinduism here because although it is not monotheism it is theism), as well as Austronesia (Indonesians and Malaysians are Muslims, most Filipinos are Christians) and South America.

Atheism is reserved mostly for educated people and people forced not to believe. (generally the latter half is a minority of atheists, and i wouldnt consider them true atheists)'

I'll also add to that - there have been survey's and at places where the average IQ is higher (in general), there tend to be more atheists.

So how do you measure intelligence? :rolleyes:

Is a person's IQ all the intelligence one is capable of? What about success in life? Doing good in academics? Choosing the right choices? :rolleyes:

Bullshit I tell you, bullshit. This is pathetic.

"Why are you only counting a fraction of the theists?"

Because it's the topic at hand. Atheists in bed vrs Christians in bed.


"Not all religions outlaw premarital sex. Also, I had a coupld of Catholic and Christian gfs...they end up breaking their "beliefs" "

Here's an idea. There is a percentage of Christians rather large in the US that chooses no premarital sex. I say large because I'm only talking about ACTUAL Christians. Not the people that haven't read a Bible in their life and couldn't tell Mark from Matthew. There is a major difference.

Oh, and yes, I'm well aware of the 'breaking' policy. I don't think you were at the boards during the time but my last major girlfriend was a catholic.

Originally posted by Tyler
Because it's the topic at hand. Atheists in bed vrs Christians in bed.

Great, now where's your proof, or is this only your little opinion?

Here's an idea. There is a percentage of Christians rather large in the US that chooses no premarital sex. I say large because I'm only talking about ACTUAL Christians. Not the people that haven't read a Bible in their life and couldn't tell Mark from Matthew. There is a major difference.

How do you know they live up to their vow? Society has changed, I suggest you check it out.

"ACTUAL CHRISTIANS"? Show your proof then.

Oh, and yes, I'm well aware of the 'breaking' policy. I don't think you were at the boards during the time but my last major girlfriend was a catholic.

The "natural women" is stronger than the "culturally programed women"

That's only if you know how to trigger the natural one to come out.

"Great, now where's your proof, or is this only your little opinion?"

My proof of what? That it's Christian/Atheist? Read the title and the opening message. Plus, the reply was by a Christian.


"How do you know they live up to their vow? Society has changed, I suggest you check it out."

I don't. I assume that there are some people who actually follow their religion. Actually, I know there are some. If you're saying that absolutely none of the people who claim to be virgins before marriage are then I have even less respect for Christians.


I have no idea what your last comment means.

Originally posted by Tyler
My proof of what? That it's Christian/Atheist? Read the title and the opening message. Plus, the reply was by a Christian.

ok :cool:

I don't. I assume that there are some people who actually follow their religion. Actually, I know there are some. If you're saying that absolutely none of the people who claim to be virgins before marriage are then I have even less respect for Christians.

It's VERY VERY RARE for a woman to be a virgin before marriage in 2002.

Hope you know that.

I have no idea what your last comment means.

You should still respect the Christian? Why?

Anyone, me, you, any women will have sex with anyone on two basic terms:

They turn us on enough
They demonstrate VALUE to us

Once we are valuable they will have sex. It is the "natural" way. The socially conditioned women says no!

But in the end, if you turn her on enough and are valuable to her, then the natural women will always prevail.

Yo Chosen, do men go through "that time of month" too?

The "natural women" is stronger than the "culturally programed women"

And the synthetic woman beats both hands down!

That's only if you know how to trigger the natural one to come out.

I suggest a bullwhip.

It's VERY VERY RARE for a woman to be a virgin before marriage in 2002.

Yep, sucks don't it? Damn hard to find virgins to sacrifice to the Great Cthulhu nowadays.

Once we are valuable they will have sex.

"Hey babe, here's a copy of my income tax statement. Fuck me, kitten"

It is the "natural" way. The socially conditioned women says no!

That's damn funny. What the hell sort of women are you dating and can we have them tattooed so that I can stay ten feet away from them at all times?

But in the end, if you turn her on enough and are valuable to her,

Don't forget booze!

Full of nonsense Xev, why don't you contribute more "essential" posts? :D :p

I just got four hours of consecutive sleep, which is more than I've had in a week. Consequently, I am high on getting enough sleep and the effects of doxylamine. No brain no work. :p

P.S: And then there's the vodka.

It seems as if this forum is largely just a rant war as opposed to something productive, or else maybe this thread has just degenerated, anyhow..

You apparently missed the inherent contradiction in the statement. 'All generalizations are wrong.' is a generalization. It's self-contradictory, and kind of a joke, to be taken in jest, but obviously you didn't get that.

It's YOU that needs the sense of humour.

In your 'just an introduction'-thread you said it was nice that noone here knew you. I hope that doesn't mean what I fear it means.

In spite of the fact that this thread has gotten way out of my hands because I'm juggling limited forum time between a bunch of them, and despite the fact that I have to re-write a huge amount of this because someone in my house thought it would be fun to play with the electric panel in the storage room.. here goes...

You atheists are laughable.

So shut the fuck up already. That was a stupid generalization.

First of all, I'll agree with the sentiment that 'all generalizations are stupid', however, I think mines been taken a bit too far and out of context.

For future reference - any generalization I make is to be taken with jest as I don't agree with any generalization, and I usually only make them to see what it'll stir up :)

Besides, I don't really feel bad about saying something like that when it really is quite demonstrably accurate (not to mention obvious) and, since nobody can really prove a generalization either way, who cares?

And finally, I'm not an atheist, per se.

You degenerated it fool.

I didn't 'degenerate' anything. I designed my comments to point out that the question itself was designed to mock christians, for anyone who didn't pick up on that. It seems that none of the 'christians' did.

What I would consider 'degenerating' a thread, is when someone randomly goes around calling people 'fools' and saying 'So shut the fuck up already.' Try to use your intelligence a little more...

Fool ;)

People that judge like you cause much hatred, trying to prove something that isn't worth proving.

If you choose to 'hate' me because I point out flaws in your logic, that's your problem. Once again, if you decide to hate the rare person that comes along because they don't submit to your reasoning because their analytical skills aren't lesser than yours like most people, that's your problem.

Besides, the thread was by design 'atheists vs christians' so why is saying 'Atheists are smarter than christians' not worth proving within the context of the thread?

As I already said, generalizations can't be definitely proved either way - so who cares?

So how do you measure intelligence?

Once again, I'll agree with the sentiment that you can't objectively someone's 'intelligence', nor can it be 'quantified'. However, for general purposes, an IQ test is as close as you can get in that amount of time.


Bullshit I tell you, bullshit. This is pathetic.

Uh-huh.

I suggest a bullwhip.

If only that would work... heh heh heh..

It's YOU that needs the sense of humour.

In your 'just an introduction'-thread you said it was nice that noone here knew you. I hope that doesn't mean what I fear it means.

First of all, I did not say 'it is nice that no one here knows me', but what I meant was that it's fun giving people weird impressions and generally messing with their heads. Either way, it doesn't matter anyway, because you'll get to know me in a way eventually. As for my sense of humor... welll.. :)

-Distortion

ps. 'P.S: And then there's the vodka.' ..... excellent :D

Originally posted by Distortion
I didn't 'degenerate' anything. I designed my comments to point out that the question itself was designed to mock christians, for anyone who didn't pick up on that. It seems that none of the 'christians' did.

What I would consider 'degenerating' a thread, is when someone randomly goes around calling people 'fools' and saying 'So shut the fuck up already.' Try to use your intelligence a little more...

Fool ;)

LOL, I have reasonable causes to do so.

If you choose to 'hate' me because I point out flaws in your logic, that's your problem. Once again, if you decide to hate the rare person that comes along because they don't submit to your reasoning because their analytical skills aren't lesser than yours like most people, that's your problem.

You are somewhat of a perspicacious person. :)

I don't hate you at all, and I deem it will impossible for you to show where I explicitly state I vehemently abominate you, I don't hate on intelligent people. :)

Hate is a harsh word, no?

Besides, the thread was by design 'atheists vs christians' so why is saying 'Atheists are smarter than christians' not worth proving within the context of the thread?

In society people value their intelligence. It is something called pride. It's degenerative to state you are smarter than so and so. It isn't worth proving, it is abrogative and negative, you gain nothing but a much of useless pride.

As I already said, generalizations can't be definitely proved either way - so who cares?

Exactly, but the stating and crux of such generalizations, I will care about.

Once again, I'll agree with the sentiment that you can't objectively someone's 'intelligence', nor can it be 'quantified'. However, for general purposes, an IQ test is as close as you can get in that amount of time.

Depends. What is the objective goal of most tests? To predict an individual's performance. The interpretation of the IQ test ultimately involves predictions about a subject's behavior in that specified situation. What about other "situations"? Emotional intelligence? Then again, if a test is an accurate predictor, it is said to have good validity, which is established by various criteria including the relevance and range of its content. Major psychological testing controversies stem from two interrelated issues: technical shortcomings in test design, and ethical problems in interpretation and application of results.

A test score is a test score. You take it to prove yourself. You don't use it to prove yourself over others, it will only cause hate, jealousy, and possible depredation on your status and liking.

Uh-huh.

It is bullshit to say one individual is smarter than other. But you are comparing groups of people. It can't be proven, and it isn't worth proving.

Uh-huh is right :)

You are somewhat of a perspicacious person. :)

Thank you!

I don't hate you at all, and I deem it will impossible for you to show where I explicitly state I vehemently abominate you, I don't hate on intelligent people.

Hate is a harsh word, no?

Exactly. But I'm sure that you're fully aware that you were the one that said

'People that judge like you cause much hatred'

:)

In society people value their intelligence. It is something called pride. It's degenerative to state you are smarter than so and so. It isn't worth proving, it is abrogative and negative, you gain nothing but a much of useless pride.

Within the context of 'Atheists vs. christians', intelligence is a key issue, as each group wholeheartedly believes that they are more intelligent in their Dogma or position. The question lies in which one can substantiate that belief.

Of course you can't 'prove' something that can't be objectively measured by any standard. And, as we already established, general 'intelligence' can't.

Depends. What is the objective goal of most tests? To predict an individual's performance. The interpretation of the IQ test ultimately involves predictions about a subject's behavior in that specified situation. What about other "situations"? Emotional intelligence? Then again, if a test is an accurate predictor, it is said to have good validity, which is established by various criteria including the relevance and range of its content. Major psychological testing controversies stem from two interrelated issues: technical shortcomings in test design, and ethical problems in interpretation and application of results.

A test score is a test score. You take it to prove yourself. You don't use it to prove yourself over others, it will only cause hate, jealousy, and possible depredation on your status and liking.

A test isn't necessarily to predict an individuals 'performance' - because performance is only a relative term - it means nothing unless it is in terms of a goal. Performance in making money and friends? Permance in walking backwards on your hands? A test doesn't measure 'performance'. A test measures the score relative to the questions. People take it for what they will.

It is bullshit to say one individual is smarter than other.

I disagree. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say that Albert Einstein is much smarter than Britney Spears, for example. But you're right in the sense that we lack an objective base for measurement, wherein lies the problem of deciding who is smarter :)

But.. I digress :D

-Distortion

Originally posted by Distortion
A test isn't necessarily to predict an individuals 'performance' - because performance is only a relative term - it means nothing unless it is in terms of a goal. Performance in making money and friends? Permance in walking backwards on your hands? A test doesn't measure 'performance'. A test measures the score relative to the questions. People take it for what they will.

Not necessarily, the whole point of such "aptitude" test is to test performance in certain potential situations.

It is a measure of "predicting potential"

Look at the SAT's for example (even though I think it is somewhat a bullshit test...but that's another matter :D)

It does measure the score relative to the questions, but people take it as a "performance indicator".

Look at the Army Services Vocational Aptitude Battery(ASVAB), Terra Nova, ACT, SAT, etc.

Because I scored the highest in my school on the ASVAB, the military is trying to recruit me. :)

And what is that test meant for? To predict performance and potential in the military.

I disagree. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say that Albert Einstein is much smarter than Britney Spears, for example. But you're right in the sense that we lack an objective base for measurement, wherein lies the problem of deciding who is smarter :)

LMAO!!!!!! :D :D :D

I have to agree with you on this on...LOL!!

But.. I digress :D

-Distortion

It'll be fun and welcoming having you here :cool:

Until next time....:D