Re: Religion Thread

by **iliander** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:42

Yes... But look what I've wrote:

Does that mean that they can't have it?

by **spangopola** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:44

He probably mean that 'not all' gods can have 'wings/flying machines', but he didn't say there are no examples. Razz

by **iliander** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:48

So then what did you want to say? Razz

Anyway, I'm creating a new religion. :lol:

by **spangopola** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:51

Alpacakanism, a South-American polytheism based upon worshiping and praising a kind of holy creature known as the Alpacas?

by **iliander** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:53

Eh?

But don't worry, my priests will come to convert them! The Dude, again

by **peugeot407** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:55

Does that mean that they can't have it? Look here, it's a picture of a Zoroastrian god

Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion, which means there cannot be "a Zoroastrian god", but always "the Zoroastrian god". It's not hard...

peugeot407

by **iliander** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 22:58

Oh yes, I forgot. But that doesn't take away the fact that it's piloting a flying vehicle... A disc with wings = a flying disc. :lol: grinning

by **peugeot407** Sun 26 Jun 2011 - 23:09

I'm not even sure it's Ahura Mazda portrayed there, but even if it is: It's a deity, not a human... Of course they are portrayed in different ways than they really would be, because we cannot see them (and thus we can't even be sure they exist).

Do you really think that Catholics invented circular hats because saints are always portrayed with halo's around their head? Or that the Egyptians managed to create creatures that were half dog-half human just because that's the common way in which Set is displayed. I hope the answer to this is no, but basically you're saying the same about Zoroastrianism.

Actually, if you were to live 2000 years in the future and you'd dig up some film poster for Lord of the Rings, would you believe that in the year 2011, there were Elfs and Dwarves and Orcs and whatever stupid creatures the film has in it? Of course not!

De moraal van dit verhaal: Things aren't always as they are portrayed. It's mythology, that's all. I'm not saying you can't be right, but I'd say it's highly unlikely and certainly not something that can be based on a couple of cutout figures in caves.

peugeot407

by **iliander** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 4:50

I'm sorry to break this with you, but that's wrong, wrong, wrong. Let me further explain...

I'm not even sure it's Ahura Mazda portrayed there, but even if it is: It's a deity, not a human... Of course they are portrayed in different ways than they really would be, because we cannot see them (and thus we can't even be sure they exist).

Of course the ancients could see them. They never said you cannot see them. They aren't going to invent something out of nowhere. Even some encounters of them are written down. Like Ezekiel and numerous others. I mean, if they portrait them, they are telling us that they can be seen.

Do you really think that Catholics invented circular hats because saints are always portrayed with halo's around their head? Or that the Egyptians managed to create creatures that were half dog-half human just because that's the common way in which Set is displayed. I hope the answer to this is no, but basically you're saying the same about Zoroastrianism.

About Catholics: They say themselves that it is a sign of holiness... They never said that it in fact were hats... So that's a useless example, sorry.
About Egyptians: Those creatures were there before the Egyptians, it is very well possible that it are some sort of hybrids which survived the great flood, which then were honored, because they were the last remaining of the gods. I know, this sounds like fantasy, but you cannot ignore things just because it seems too "fantastic", do you have any idea of what we are capable of doing these days? If ancient people would witness something like that, I'm sure they would put them under one or multiple of these categories:
- Holy
- Divine
- Supernatural
- Done by the gods
If each and every culture literally tells us about the gods, which for them existed and were present, we cannot just ignore them. It is forgotten history, which people don't want to accept anymore, because it is classified as a "myth". But remember, those ancient people did not think it was a myth, they were writing down history.

Actually, if you were to live 2000 years in the future and you'd dig up some film poster for Lord of the Rings, would you believe that in the year 2011, there were Elfs and Dwarves and Orcs and whatever stupid creatures the film has in it? Of course not!

Oh no please... That's somewhat the exact same thing as my sister ones said to me. That would be clear that it is some sort of fantasy story, and if we look at the ancient stories, they WROTE DOWN HISTORY. Please don't make ridiculous comparisons with the Lord of the Rings, it doesn't make sense, I could tell you hundreds and hundreds of things which makes it impossible of what you just said, but think logically for a moment please. Neutral

De moraal van dit verhaal: Things aren't always as they are portrayed. It's mythology, that's all. I'm not saying you can't be right, but I'd say it's highly unlikely and certainly not something that can be based on a couple of cutout figures in caves.

Of course it's not always the same as it's portrayed, but it has to come from something, and most of the time it's correct. And you can't just say: "It's MYTHOLOGY", because mythology is just a word to describe ancient stories which seem to be impossible or highly unlikely. As I said before, they did not think it was "mythology", that's a word invented to ignore it. And have you any idea of what is written in let's say... The Bhagavad Gita? They tell of 3 flying cities which were floating in the air, but there came a war, and those gods on those flying cities then flew out of it in small craft and started to throw things to each other. One of those weapons (I forgot the name) sometimes hit the ground and the explosion of it was brighter than a thousand suns, also, it created symptoms which highly resemble today's nuclear explosions. People's nails began to fall out...

I haven't talked about Sumerian gods. :lol:
But please, this discussion may not become too big. Razz

by **spangopola** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 5:20

Ili, you're just picking up little details and attempt to expand it.

By the way, there are thousands of invisible fire-spitting alpacas hovering by Uranus, carrying multiple magical staffs, are forming into a circle so big that it creates gravity so big that can engulf twenty thousand Plutos in the speed of light.

Then I will write down such thing, publish them somehow, and entitled: History of Modern Republic of China, 2011

Above statement may be true, according to your logic. You cannot prove that it's false.

by **peugeot407** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 5:30

Spango's right.

peugeot407

by **spangopola** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 5:44

And iliander, have your literature teacher ever told you something about creativity?

by **iliander** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 6:20

Ili, you're just picking up little details and attempt to expand it.

False. Your sentence makes no sense. I try to explain it, because it seems that nobody thinks further. Razz

the way, there are thousands of invisible fire-spitting alpacas hovering by Uranus, carrying multiple magical staffs, are forming into a circle so big that it creates gravity so big that can engulf twenty thousand Plutos in the speed of light.

???

Then I will write down such thing, publish them somehow, and entitled: History of Modern Republic of China, 2011

That makes no sense...

Above statement may be true, according to your logic. You cannot prove that it's false.

No, we are talking about whole religions, things like the gods which appear whole over the world.

Sorry Spango, but what you just said makes no sense...

And iliander, have your literature teacher ever told you something about creativity?

Literature teacher? I don't need that to be creative. Razz

Besides, religions aren't fantasy made up by creative people. It grew because of certain happenings in history. Those stories are in fact HISTORY. Ignoring it and giving it the name "myth" is just... Ignorant.

by **spangopola** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 6:35

Then what I just said is MY religion. Now everything become true.

by **iliander** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 6:48

What? No, no, no, no... You're trying to twist it, so that I would lose my mind, and saying things which aren't true, so you got proof of the theory being incorrect! Arcalion

by **spangopola** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 6:58

Lol, you're just trying to deny my question Razz

by **iliander** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 6:59

You have not asked a single question, my friend.

by **peugeot407** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 8:23

And iliander, have your literature teacher ever told you something about creativity?

That phrase ends with a little character that looks like '?' and is called a 'question mark'.

Wikipedia wrote:The question mark (...) is a punctuation mark that replaces the full stop (period) at the end of an interrogative sentence in English and many other languages.

peugeot407

by **iliander** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 8:25

Well I didn't expect to go back 5 posts! But I already answered to that question.

by **peugeot407** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 8:26

You didn't. Read your answer carefully again.

Literature teacher? I don't need that to be creative. Besides, religions aren't fantasy made up by creative people. It grew because of certain happenings in history. Those stories are in fact HISTORY. Ignoring it and giving it the name "myth" is just... Ignorant.

peugeot407

by **iliander** Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 8:28

What do I have to answer then?

And iliander, have your literature teacher ever told you something about creativity?

I don't know, probably, but I really can't say.

by Nero Mon 27 Jun 2011 - 18:22

This is going nowhere. I mean every time ilander says something, it is disproved by Peugeot and spango, iliander just does not listen and continues arguing his hopeless case.

iliander, come back with some proof, not making up random shit and stringing it together

by **iliander** Tue 28 Jun 2011 - 0:57

Nero wrote:This is going nowhere. I mean every time ilander says something, it is disproved by Peugeot and spango, iliander just does not listen and continues arguing his hopeless case.

iliander, come back with some proof, not making up random shit and stringing it together

No, it is them (no offense :lol: ) who don't listen. Nobody has given even 1 good argument why my (not really my) theory/reasoning would be incorrect. I've only heard some useless and ignorant things. Razz

Random shit? Stringing it together? Sorry, but listening to your words, I see that you would ignore it. Stringing it together is just doing research, and decoding those "myths".

But I gave proof, lots of it, should I quote directly from the Bhagavad Gita then? Razz

I'm afraid to show more, sinceDude doesn't like it.

by **spangopola** Tue 28 Jun 2011 - 1:14

And you can not prove that my theory is false.

by **iliander** Tue 28 Jun 2011 - 1:16

If you keep doing like that we come nowhere... *facepalm*

by Sponsored content