Atheists Needed as Human Sacrifices

I disagree. There's a guy up the road who has a Lamborghini Countach. It's a beautiful machine, and sure I want one.

What's so bad about that? Wanting something that others have often makes people try harder to be successful and thus be able to get it.

How is it wrong Woody?

Not at all. You have a problem if you then go and steal their item, kill them so you can try and get their wife, or obsess over the issue. But wanting something that someone else has causes no harm whatsoever, but can make you work harder.

Ok, but religion is a business. If the customer leaves it can cause issues. Basically you pay for someone to pray for you. And of course back then it would have been harder to find new 'victims'. Unlike modern day christians they didn't just go knocking from door to door.

Without trying to get into it too much, again, I would ask how Cain's deeds were evil. The guy made an offering to god, that god showed no respect toward, but instead busted Cain's balls over it. He was playing favourites. As a result of god's actions, Cain killed Abel. Could have been easily avoided.

And I really fail to see how you can go on so much about the problems with jealousy that cause people to kill. It is jealousy that caused god to kill on many an occasion. As the big man says himself:

Exodus 34:14 Do not worship any other god, for the lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous god.

Here he shows just how jealous he is, even stating his name is jealous. As a result to this, he often kills people - such as the jews with the golden calf. They worshipped something else, he got jealous about it and killed them.

The guy is no different to Cain, and yet you use double standards, and belittle Cain while thinking it's ok when god does it. Let's not forget that like us all, Cain was made in god's image. He only has this murderous jealousy because it is a part of his creator. So this entire debate pointing out how bad jealousy is does little more than to argue that your god, (in your own words), 'has a problem'.

Now let's watch as you do a 360 degree turn and now justify murderous jealousy.

Yes, as countless of god's victims would tell you if they weren't dead.

Oh yeah? How? Who did he kill?

And in saying this, why is that an issue? god has killed more humans than anything else in the history of mankind, and yet I don't see you complaining about that. So here we go, you'll scream at how bad murder is, and murders are - and then with your very next sentence justify it completely if your god does it.

Yeah, even the 'all loving' god.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Buddhists and Hindus both have the concept of Karma in their worldview. Buddhists are also incidentally atheists. According to the concept, no one is immune from the effects of Karma. It is independant of your beliefs.

With regard to the occult, it is no different than expecting good things to come from using holy water, taking communion, praying in or out of church, or tithing, only the rituals differ.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Newborns would theoretically have the least Karma, since they haven't done anything yet, although they are said to inherit the Karma of their previous incarnation. But, simply to be born as a human means you are on your way up, to the complete transcendence of Karma.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Your debating tactics are just plain mean.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You know as well as I do that such a question is unanswerable.

Why is killing you bad?

 

I'd happily sit in that chair, watch the woman close her eyes and jiggle around. Then I'd do the same, and then say, "I was just putting it on. How do you know that you weren't?"

There certainly seems to be a dearth of skeptics over there at OccultForums (as well as good php programmers....)

There is no point whatsoever in trying to argue with Woody that the God he believes in is a fantasy. His faith is totally bound up in a) belief in Jesus Christ = Eternal Life, and b) non-belief = eternal separation from God. You can't reason against that, because it doesn't make any sense to Woody to consider God not existing and taking care of his every second of life, since even thinking of the possibility gets you option b). This is not the same as "fear of hellfire", it just makes total sense that there is an eternal life after this one and there's one clear way to ensure you're getting the good kind. The preferability of eternal nothingness compared to eternity in the company of God, Jesus and a few hundred thousand other people who think like Woody, just won't register with him.

 

Would that not then point towards the original statement being inherently meaningless? "Such and such is wrong", doesn't mean anything without an explanation of why it is wrong.

Because then I could no longer sleep with my wife, write interesting forum posts, or drink quality alcohol from Bavaria.

Although you could then add 'whys' to all of these, I have actually answered the original why question.

Woody says that wanting something somebody else has is wrong. I am now asking him why he states it as being wrong. It's a perfectly valid question, and he must have some sort of answer to it or he wouldn't have made the statement to begin with.

 

But you, knowing very well that there can be no proper reason, ask anyway only to hound him and trap him.

No you haven't. You have neglected to show why no longer sleeping with your wife etc. is wrong, therefore to say you have "actually answered the original why question" is to plead with me to take your response in unquestioning faith. As the keyword here is "wrong", any response which does not address the keyword itself, but rather resolves to skirt the inquiry is dishonest.

For parallel:
Q:Why do you say the sun yellow?
A:Because I see yellow when I look at it.

This answer too, like yours, begs the question: "But why do you say it is?" All Woody needs to do is say "Well I have my own interpretation of the commonly accepted definition of wrong", just as here the responder only needs to reply "I have my own subjective perception of what yellow is". In doing so, both parties acknowledge that their interpretations are not necessarily universal. This problem translates into your question as any response too must necessarily beg the question.

Just food for thought.

 

Hi guys a member found this thread, I presume by trying to search for the original Occult Forums thread, and I must say I found it very amusing. For the record I just wanted to say, whatever I do, the lingo doesn't mean the same thing as what you see on television on so-called occult movies or ongoing programs. Secondly I have never used drugs, don't drink, smoke, well...I do drink alot of Starbucks.

Basically what I want to say is that, while I joke around on Occult Forums alot and am very relaxed there amongst my fellow magicians, the rituals you see described there are not as dramatic as you are thinking, and they do work. Earlier in my life I was very adamant about occult not existing (I was raised in a magician's social circle and family life was occult friendly) I went through this whole rebellious phase of studying science, and being very logical and sensible. Until I read the James Gleick book on the (then) groundbreaking Chaos theory, I was very rigid and inflexible. Then, as an experiment I started trying to use old techniques I had been taught to influence my world. The results -to me- were undeniable and fantastic, and also unrecordable (except for the fact that I do have extraordinary good luck)

Thank you for discussing us. We occultists are people too, and some of us are very intelligent, fun loving people who respect science as a sister art, and do enforce a certain level of discretion and logical analysis in our work.

Your ideas of an evocation and all this chair sitting and jiggling sound more like a strip tease, by the way

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The results -to me- were undeniable and fantastic, and also unrecordable

How convenient...

We occultists are people too, and some of us are very intelligent

Theists are people too, yet they also live a fantasy.

And that's intelligent?

 

Lady,

So real occultists don't have the same abilities as say "the Charmed Ones" right?

And would you see the occult as essentially good or evil, or is it more about how it is used - e.g. like nuclear power can be used for good and bad.

 

What are you talking about? The question asked to the person who made the statement, does not in any way trap him or cause any problems other than pedantic issues such as the one you're trying to raise.

Yes I have.

You didn't ask me about sleeping with my wife, you asked me why it's wrong to kill me. The "because..." was the answer, and as such the question has been satisfied. If you then ask why not sleeping with my wife is a bad thing, that's an entirely new question.

I really don't see the problem here. The guy makes a statement of fact: "wanting something that someone else has is wrong". The statement needs a reason, whatever that might be to him.

It could be that he views it as wrong because:

"god says so", "it causes murders", "it takes the focus away from your own possessions"..

Any one of those satisfies the why question, but of course might bring up new related questions.

It really isn't an issue, and I fail to see why you'd make it one.

It's not an issue of faith, it's an issue of opinion. I'm asking him why he considers wanting something that someone else has as wrong. He can't answer correctly or incorrectly - it's not a test. All I want is his opinion on why it's wrong. He must have some kind of answer to that because he made the original statement. Something must give him the impression that it's wrong, whether that be god, voices in his head, leprechauns or any other reason he has to believe it's wrong.

Dishonest what? I'm asking for his opinion on why he sees it as wrong. There is no right or wrong answer, and no truth or lie. You're really taking it too seriously.

Sure, but it's a separate question.

Well of course he's got his own bloody interpretation. That's what I'm asking for, and exactly why I'm asking.

It isn't supposed to be universal. I'm asking Woody why he considers it wrong. I'm not asking for a universally accepted answer.

----------

Unrecordable? Couldn't buy a video camera? See how easy it is to solve problems like that?

 

From what I see, you are giving the impression of attempting to disprove his beliefs to him - show that they are incoherent by your standard. Reading what you wrote, it just didn't strike me like you were merely interested in learning what he believed.

Only curious about your intentions that's all. Let's pull down the wall.

 

Good heavens, a post from the evidently legendary LadyHydralisk!

What you do, however, is not a "sister art" to science. Either you test everything rigourously and strictly examine all alternative (ie naturalistic) causes for what you determine as a "manifestation", in which case you are doing science itself, or you are simply participating in a pastime which has no true repeatability and through which you are truly unable to learn anything useful and new - in the scientific sense.

Chaos theory is the science of extracting some kind of order from the completely unpredictable. I'm gobsmacked that this has somehow inspired you to delve back into utter nonsense. However, Diff'rent Strokes, as they say. I will probably register on Occult and have a browse around.

 

SL,

So you think it is ok to be covetous:

1. Excessively and culpably desirous of the possessions of another. See synonyms at jealous. 2. Marked by extreme desire to acquire or possess.

How about a little Silence of the Lambs? Mighty purty dress there Buffalo Bill!

I see you stick up for your good buddy Cain. What do you think about Abel?


On the subject of being covetous, here are some bible commandments on how to treat your fellowman:

thou shalt not kill.
thou shalt not steal.
thou shalt not commit adultery.
thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor.
thou shalt not covet.

Exodus 20:17
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

This includes you neighbor's fancy car. Keeping up with the Jonses is covetousness.

Snakelord, which of these five commandments do you disagree with besides the last one?

Here in the states a lambourghini makes you a prime target for car thieves. Jaguars are declining in sales for the same reason.

 

Aside from idiocy, I fail to see the worth of your quote.

To a degree sure. Killing Abel wasn't a nice move, but could have been easily avoided if god wasn't so disrespectful and self centred. Of course, at this stage of the game Cain would have had no idea that god has a meat obsession, and is intolerant towards fruit offerings. If you want to know just how much he loves meat, read your bible. He mentions it some 20+ times in Leviticus alone.

Of course Cain murdering his brother probably wasn't the nicest thing to do, but then who are we to judge? If you came round here for a praying session and god came down and said I was cool and you suck, you'd most likely try to kill me too. Many people can't face human to human rejection, how much more severe would it be when faced with godly rejection? Just for second imagine how pissed you'd be if you got to the pearly gates and god turned you away. Now apply a similar feeling to Cain.

But hey, against jesus advice, feel free to judge him.

Here's some more:

If your son is bad, stone him to death.

If you see a witch, stone her to death.

If you see someone working on the sabbath, stone them to death.

(These three negate "thou shalt not kill")

When you kill the enemy, loot all their possessions, young children and woman. Take them for yourself.

The adultery commandment is hard to avoid considering jesus has said that even looking at a woman with lust is adultery. I don't know one man who hasn't looked at a woman lustfully at one time or another. Think back to when you first saw your wife. Not to mention that if you're on your second wife you're also biblically considered an adulterer.

Here's the point: god's commandments are pointless. You accept any you want to and ignore any you want to. We've been through this before and the fact remains that by not stoning witches and saturday workers to death you are in actuality ignoring god's laws. As a result, it is seriously rude of you to even think about trying to quote laws at me thinking they should actually mean anything.

As for the issue, it seems here that your problem does not lie with being jealous or wanting other peoples items, but with the possible outcome caused at the extremes. I too, much like most people, have a problem with murderers and thieves, but that isn't a reason to see wanting things someone else has as bad.

It's like saying because you know a christian that has killed, stolen and had affairs that christianity itself is bad. It's a moot argument.

You know, on the other post I mentioned stoning witches to death. You stated that it was irrelevant because you're not an old jew. As a result can I not now do the same? I'm not a jew, old or otherwise, and as such - using your argument, that entire biblical quote is completely meaningless. No?

Again I could just say that I'm not an old jew. Tell me Woody, why do you go against god's commandment to be circumcised, or not to eat pork, or to stone witches to death?

Of course, if it wasn't for the serpent they'd all be meaningless because we wouldn't have morals. Personally I am not bound by or under the bible laws, and as such all of them are irrelevant. For the sake of discussion though I will happily state that number 3 isn't an issue.

 

SL: Of course Cain murdering his brother probably wasn't the nicest thing to do, but then who are we to judge?

Woody: I have four brothers and I would never think of killing any of them. My youngest brother was always mom's favorite. The rest of us were jealous but we didn't kill him. We'd never think of such an awful thing. Why don't you think about it a little yourself? I think Cain was a spoiled brat. He got mad at somebody and then took it out on his younger brother -- he was a sick man indeed. What did Abel ever do to him? You are so busy blaming God that you overlook the victim. And this is how our judicial system works today in america -- everybody has rights except the victim. As a result our criminal justice system is a joke and the ten commandments are hardly even ten suggestions. The OJ Simpsons of this world live to kill again.

 

SL and woody,

Why not apply some common sense to it, and say coveting your neighbor's "whatever" is wrong, if you are not just wanting something like what they have. Is it wrong for a single person to meet a happily married couple and say, I would like a nice husband/wife of my my own? No.
Is it wrong for someone to meet snakelord's wife and say, I want that woman? Yes. They should be able to find someone to mate with that isn't tied to someone else, there are plenty of reasons for that.

 

As I did point out, I'm sure there's quite a difference between your mum and god.

If that's so, he is hardly at fault. Someone becoming a "spoiled brat" is a parenting issue.

If that's so, he's not at fault. 'Sick' people do not have a choice in the matter.

Nothing, but it's beside the point if Cain was sick as you claim or indeed a spoiled brat.

And you're so busy blaming Cain that you overlook the origin of the problem.

I'll have to take your word for it.

And? You see a problem with that? Wasn't it you going on about them being laws for old jews, and that, (from the other post), those laws are meaningless, that it's all about grace, and that indeed jesus said to hang those laws?

You're full of contradiction.

But you are arguing for this to be the way it should be on the other thread. What is the problem?

Cole: By applying common sense, a person would come to the conclusion that the bible is just one of many non-factual documents written by ignorant peoples of millennia ago. As a result, we'd have nothing to talk about.

How is that wrong? If she's a beautiful woman, which she is, why can't other men want her?

Kindly explain.

 

SL: And? You see a problem with that? Wasn't it you going on about them being laws for old jews, and that, (from the other post), those laws are meaningless, that it's all about grace, and that indeed jesus said to hang those laws?

Woody: I do obey the ten commandments, because it is my new nature to do so, not for the reasons you cite. Why don't you read my testimony thread I posted herre. I do obey the ten commandments I do love God, you do not, and this is the greatest commandment: to love God with all your heart, soul, and mind. You think he's an asshole.

Why don't jews make sacrifices anymore/ Aren't they commanded to do that? You need to go argue with a jew.

Here in america, the criminal is viewed as a victim of his upbringing. Nobody is accountable for wrongdoing. Look at what we get as a result. Our judges think just like you do. It's not the criminal's fault -- they are a victim of society. So they are let go to kill again and again and again. This is how your system works and it stinks real bad. Oh- they'e not to blame! Yeah right!

 

Society is somewhat to blame for many crimes, but not exclusively. I mean, you can't raise a family on minimum wage, so people are forced to decide between engaging in some profitable criminal activity, and letting their kids go hungry or without needed medicine. It is wrong to think in black and white terms, you can't separate a person from their environment, someone growing up in rural alaska is unlikely to get busted for dealing crack. The criminal is obviously accountable in America, because it is they who have to do the time, and there are huge numbers of prisoners in America.