모든 토론 > Steam 포럼 > Off Topic > 제목 정보
이 토론은 잠겼습니다.
RagingRumskullian 2018년 3월 22일 오후 6시 31분
Who Is the Coolest Person Ever to Live on Earth?
Read title.
RagingRumskullian 님이 마지막으로 수정; 2018년 3월 22일 오후 6시 31분
< >
전체 댓글 114개 중 76~90개 표시 중
76561198344401750 2018년 3월 24일 오후 1시 41분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:
Radene님이 먼저 게시:

Well he had a dozen of bloggers who were fascinated with him. I mean, literally, that's what'd happen today. They'd write blogs.

And the most religious people would crucify the man for being a commie. Sharing? Love thy enemy? Turn the other cheek? That's all so...marxist. Such a bleeding heart liberal, the guy.

I find it really funny, actually.

You're killing me, Radene. How can you even have an opinion on Jesus when you clearly know so little about Him? Have you never heard the parable of the talents? Or anything else he taught about self-improvement? Have you noticed that Protestantism is pretty devoted to that?

I'm afraid you seem to be in posession of one of the most idiotic misconceptions about Jesus ever to enter popular culture. It stems from the church, naturally, and the "virtue" of charity that churches just happen to rely upon, which pretty much ends up meaning that they rely on guilt.

Jesus never taught anything like that, that's just dependence, and stupidly counterproductive to boot. If you're rich, and you give your wealth to the poor, now they're the rich, so you effectively just denied them entrance to the Kingdom of Heaven.

What Jesus taught was faith, determination, and hard work to bring the Kingdom to Earth. Even if you're not religious, you must agree that the human condition is a constant desire to escape the human condition, and those qualities would be necessary. They're how we invent things and build better lives for ourselves.

Insofar as charity is concerned, Jesus only taught that He would treat us as we treated the least of us. That doesn't even remotely equate to boundless generosity, or Communism, or perpetual passivity. It just means that you give everyone a chance or two, completely in line with capitalism, which offers infinite chances as long as you're alive and are working for yourself. Spiritually, Jesus offers redemption from sins, but only if you "go and sin no more" or at least TRY to sin no more.

Secularly, that makes perfect sense as well. Obviously, one's condition and the condition of the world will not improve if the same mistakes keep being made. There has to be a filter for failure in order for anything to progress. Capitalism does it through the market. Jesus did it by denying entrance to Heaven if people would not accept common sense.

Another big one that gets misinterpreted is "love thy neighbor as you love thyself." It does not mean do everything for your fellow humans, that would be silly. Who would even know what to do? It means respect their self-interest as you do yours. Well, unless I'm mistaken, that's rather the foundation of neutral and negative rights, isn't it? What an amazing coincidence that the idea cropped up among a bunch of people who revered Jesus as Lord.

You can joke all you want about blogging, try to draw modern parallels, but the fact remains that Christ brought about a series of events that transformed the world into a better place in ways no carpentering Jewish peasant could possibly have forseen. If you think He is not the Son of God, He might as well be compared to every other human on the planet.

Accepting May90's argument, that it was all just a coincidence, is difficult for me to do because of the sheer odds involved and the conscious effort to replicate the feat. Many people have tried to change history, develop cult followings, even as martyrs, but not a single one has ever come close to the billions of followers Christianity has. Only Islam competes, and it does so with all the force required to make completely backwards totalitarian states that account for their shameful lack of progress as a people. When Muslims want to prosper, they go to Christian countries. I guess you could say Muhammed was influential, but not in any good way if societal progess is used as a yardstick.

Athesim, and most of its proponents, are pretty much just sacrificial lambs at this point in history. They lie dead by the hundreds of millions, or are socially invaded and out-bred by people with far more capable, permanent, and socially cohesive drives. Chistianity plays the quality game, Islam plays the numbers game. Atheists don't have a special snowflake's chance in hell competing with either. They never have. The empirical evidence proves it. Every time an atheist state is established it wipes itself out before any religion even has a chance to, amazingly populated by a bunch of religious people who wouldn't convert after decades of social enginerering.

The sheer logistics are mind-boggling, and yet atheists feel "empowered." But by what? It certainly isn't by any sense of higher purpose in most cases. Usually, they are just fueled by a hatred of religion in the face of overwhelming statistical evidence that religion works, while claiming to be rational. I like to call them "mental adolescents." All they know is rebellion against an established order, but since they have nothing to replace it with by their own examples and often their clueless, utterly disastrous attempts, they really are rebels without a clue.

A lot of atheists tend to be actual Communists, or influenced by such thinking, which is everywhere, and the day that stupid half-asssed method of thinking gets anywhere, call me a comrade. But it's never going to, people just don't work that way, Deus Vult. If there is no God willing it, there might as well be.

Such propaganda, much wow
Mossy Snake 2018년 3월 24일 오후 1시 44분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:
Athesim, and most of its proponents, are pretty much just sacrificial lambs at this point in history. They lie dead by the hundreds of millions, or are socially invaded and out-bred by people with far more capable, permanent, and socially cohesive drives.
Maybe this was true hundreds of years ago, but take a look at countries like modern China - It's a country that's not openly religious but that's currently the fastest-growing nation in terms of world power and dominance.

Also there have been thousands of religious countries that have died out quickly. Your argument is pretty one-sided.
The sheer logistics are mind-boggling, and yet atheists feel "empowered." But by what? It certainly isn't by any sense of higher purpose in most cases. Usually, they are just fueled by a hatred of religion in the face of overwhelming statistical evidence that religion works, while claiming to be rational. I like to call them "mental adolescents." All they know is rebellion against an established order, but since they have nothing to replace it with by their own examples and often their clueless, utterly disastrous attempts, they really are rebels without a clue.
Before you mention the USSR, please note that they rebelled against a crappy and inept regime (ironically to be replaced by one just as bad), not necessarily against religion.

There's also the fact that many people like to have proof of a "higher power", which there currently isn't unless you believe a bunch of old books and texts. There's nothing really wrong with religion or religious people, but I for one just can't believe any of it myself.

To answer the thread's question, probably Telsa. If he had money he could have done a lot.
Mossy Snake 님이 마지막으로 수정; 2018년 3월 24일 오후 1시 47분
Maude 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 08분 
Tyler Joseph
Nine-ball 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 22분 
Radene님이 먼저 게시:
You should appreciate the people who can make you laugh, you know. Not antagonize them.

Oh, that was antagonistic, was it?


𝓜𝓪𝒚𝓪님이 먼저 게시:

Such propaganda, much wow

Can you define how it was propaganda? I was using logic to make my argument. Do you have any for yours? Do you have one?

You already knew I was going to mention the USSR. You're a clever one. Very perceptive, or at least familiar with the example.

[Also there have been thousands of religious countries that have died out quickly. Your argument is pretty one-sided[/quote님이 먼저 게시:


Yes, it is. Is there any point to a multi-sided argument? Did you want me to make my opponent's points for them? I do that often enough. I'm simply saying that the successful religions are successful. That's merely pointing out empirical evidence. If anything, you should attack my deductions.


Before you mention the USSR, please note that they rebelled against a crappy and inept regime (ironically to be replaced by one just as bad), not necessarily against religion.

That's what all socialists and teenagers think they are doing. Rebelling against an inept regime. People are quite disposed to it, evolutionarily speaking. After all, the tribe doesn't grow and expand with a bunch of common genes milling about in one place, does it? Or were you of a mind to have gay sex with your father?

There's an evolutionary selective pressure behind that, driven by competing life-forms and viruses. If we don't keep selecting new mates, making new offspring, they will out-compete us with their superior reproductive rates and eventually all of us could be destroyed by a virus like smallpox. No human needs to know those reasons, they know them instinctively.

Revolutionaries of the annoyingly common sort are utterly absent any type of wisdom or knowledge. The only thing they know is that society should change. It's an easy instinct to prey upon for the aforementioned biological reasons. Forgive me, but I'm going to use you as a proof.

There's also the fact that many people like to have proof of a "higher power", which there currently isn't unless you believe a bunch of old books and texts. There's nothing really wrong with religion or religious people, but I for one just can't believe any of it myself.

To answer the thread's question, probably Telsa. If he had money he could have done a lot.

You believe in what man couldn't do rather than what a man did? You consider yourself a logical sort of person, why would you even consider Tesla? Would it be equally valid to consider Jules Verne? How about any number of scientists who thought radium was a cure-all?

I'm not going to pressure you any more, but please, think about what sorts of logical conclusions you are making. If you don't have the evidence, and cannot explain yourself, you have nothing.


Nine-ball 님이 마지막으로 수정; 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 25분
76561198344401750 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 32분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:
𝓜𝓪𝒚𝓪님이 먼저 게시:

Such propaganda, much wow

Can you define how it was propaganda? I was using logic to make my argument. Do you have any for yours? Do you have one?

propaganda
prɒpəˈɡandə/
noun
noun: propaganda; noun: Propaganda

1.
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view.

But hey, if you want to worship fictional characters and stuff, feel free.
Radene 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 35분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:
Radene님이 먼저 게시:
You should appreciate the people who can make you laugh, you know. Not antagonize them.

Oh, that was antagonistic, was it?

A little, yep.
Nine-ball 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 40분 
𝓜𝓪𝒚𝓪님이 먼저 게시:

But hey, if you want to worship fictional characters and stuff, feel free.

And if you want to miss the point that religion is demonstrably superior to the nothing you have to offer as an argument, feel free. It won't be JUdgement Day or God coming for you, it will be other people preying on your lack of knowledge first.


Radene님이 먼저 게시:
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:

Oh, that was antagonistic, was it?

A little, yep.

Thank you for clarifying. Do you have anything to add or should I just leave you to your business?
Mossy Snake 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 40분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:
There's also the fact that many people like to have proof of a "higher power", which there currently isn't unless you believe a bunch of old books and texts. There's nothing really wrong with religion or religious people, but I for one just can't believe any of it myself.

To answer the thread's question, probably Telsa. If he had money he could have done a lot.

You believe in what man couldn't do rather than what a man did? You consider yourself a logical sort of person, why would you even consider Tesla? Would it be equally valid to consider Jules Verne? How about any number of scientists who thought radium was a cure-all?

I'm not going to pressure you any more, but please, think about what sorts of logical conclusions you are making. If you don't have the evidence, and cannot explain yourself, you have nothing.
Except Tesla did do quite a lot despite his terrible luck and circumstances. He popularized AC power for one thing, which is what powers quite a lot of things.
Also Verne was a writer, not a scientist (although he did predict quite a lot).

Again, show me actual proof that Jesus did things such as turn water into wine or got ressurected and I'll believe it. The problem is is that there is no proof of that, so I cannot believe it.
Do I believe that he was a good and important man with good teachings? Yes I do.

Do I believe that there is an all-seeing entity, magic, and whatnot? I don't.

I also accidentally deleted your first point, and since I'm on mobile I don't want to go through the effort of fixing it, so answer me this:
What does any of that have to do with the topic at hand? That could be applied to anything, including the development of religion. Admittedly you're not entirely wrong - many revolutionaries think of the present rather than the future (since we mentioned the USSR, it's a good example).
Radene 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 42분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:

Thank you for clarifying. Do you have anything to add or should I just leave you to your business?

Since we're on opposite banks here, and likely won't move soon, better leave it be.
76561198344401750 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 49분 
Nine-ball님이 먼저 게시:
𝓜𝓪𝒚𝓪님이 먼저 게시:

But hey, if you want to worship fictional characters and stuff, feel free.

And if you want to miss the point that religion is demonstrably superior to the nothing you have to offer as an argument, feel free. It won't be JUdgement Day or God coming for you, it will be other people preying on your lack of knowledge first.

You are the one who is believing that fiction is real. If anyone is displaying a lack of knowledge, it is you, and I have already preyed on that.
𝓜𝓪𝒚𝓪 님이 마지막으로 수정; 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 49분
Alpha 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 51분 
MossyRathalos님이 먼저 게시:
Again, show me actual proof that Jesus did things such as turn water into wine or got ressurected and I'll believe it.
As a Christian your old self dies and you are born again, you could say ressurected. Turning water into wine is symbolic of spiritual development. From water to wine, or like the old alchemists from a base metal to gold. It's a process of developing yourself into something more than you were before. We all struggle to be who we want to be, a more perfect version of ourselves, but being Christian is about trying to do that, and trying to help others to do that also.
Alpha 님이 마지막으로 수정; 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 51분
Killiberke 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 56분 
Strange no one mentioned Snoop Dogg yet.
Nine-ball 2018년 3월 24일 오후 2시 56분 
MossyRathalos님이 먼저 게시:
Except Tesla did do quite a lot despite his terrible luck and circumstances. He popularized AC power for one thing, which is what powers quite a lot of things.
Also Verne was a writer, not a scientist (although he did predict quite a lot).

AC power would not have existed without the free market, which exists solely because of the enlightenment, which I am most certainly attributing to Christianity.

Again, show me actual proof that Jesus did things such as turn water into wine or got ressurected and I'll believe it. The problem is is that there is no proof of that, so I cannot believe it.

Then don't believe it. You can hardly deny the miraculous effect upon society. A strange assertion for a rational person.

Do I believe that he was a good and important man with good teachings? Yes I do.

Do I believe that there is an all-seeing entity, magic, and whatnot? I don't.

That's entirely up to you. Believe, don't believe, it's no business of mine, even according to my religion. Only you can ever accept Christ into your heart. Only you can give yourself salvation.

{qutoe=I also accidentally deleted your first point, and since I'm on mobile I don't want to go through the effort of fixing it, so answer me this:
What does any of that have to do with the topic at hand? That could be applied to anything, including the development of religion. Admittedly you're not entirely wrong - many revolutionaries think of the present rather than the future (since we mentioned the USSR, it's a good example). [/quote]

Which " first point" are you referring to? I'll admit, my logic could be applied to the development of anything, but given empirical data, religion works. I don't understand what you're trying to say.
PL@YER 2018년 3월 24일 오후 3시 17분 
ronald reagan
Legostyle03 2018년 3월 24일 오후 3시 25분 
What happened to this thread?
Legostyle03 님이 마지막으로 수정; 2018년 3월 24일 오후 3시 25분
< >
전체 댓글 114개 중 76~90개 표시 중
페이지당 표시 개수: 1530 50

모든 토론 > Steam 포럼 > Off Topic > 제목 정보
게시된 날짜: 2018년 3월 22일 오후 6시 31분
게시글: 114