First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Christianophobia.....
31280 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116 / M
Offline
Posted 3/24/09
The same goes for Muslims. Everywhere there is discrimination, you can't change the fact that people are just like that.
Posted 3/24/09 , edited 3/24/09

o0James0o wrote:


cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:
hate sin, not the sinner? so sin is bad and sinner is good? so i tell someone to kill someone and then he got caught and he should be off and instead i shall be the one who gets prosecuted? heck, hate the sinner not the sin for the sinner is the one stupid enough to commit a sin.


As in, hate their actions rather than the person. I don't think anyone meant the 'sinner' was good, just that we shouldn't hate them. Perhaps. Though I understand actions do define a person, I think this a fair rule to live by under certain circumstances. For example: When a friend does something and you become mad at them for doing it. You don't hate your friend, you hate their action. Killing is an extreme action so I doubt I'd apply it there though, I agree with you on that.


well, let me ask, does action have a will of its own? no? hence, is it not the person who caused the action? so youre telling me that i must hate something that is brainless instead of hating the cause?

also, my position on this is that if a person tells another person to do something, since the person being told have a mind of their own, he/she can deny it. well, maybe under certain circumstances he/she is being threatened but still he/she can deny such actions. the consequences is ,of course, costly tho.

well, i dont think the above example is good... so let me give you another one.
lets take it that i tell someone to jump down the window and that person jumped. am i in fault here because someone who cant think just listened to what i said?


it's the person's fault for committing that action, but should we base our entire judgement on that one action? Depends on the circumstances. We are people and make irrational decisions based on emotion, or without thinking properly. Which is why I'd hate the action they did rather than them for it (with the friend example). I wasn't claiming actions to have a will of their own I was simply correcting your interpretation of the saying. My example is fine, because I have provided one that expresses the saying literally, and one we can understand the reasoning behind the saying with. Surely you don't argue this?
Your examples relevance has confused me. If someone is completely mindless and does as they are told then you should know better, so of course I'd blame you at least partly. You would feel a little guilty at least, no?
Posted 3/24/09

arvin_bfg9000 wrote:

The same goes for Muslims. Everywhere there is discrimination, you can't change the fact that people are just like that.


I am aware of that.
Posted 3/24/09
can't help that...people make misconceptions about christianity & other religions all the time
559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 3/24/09 , edited 3/24/09




-First off, if you're going the screw up the quote system don't make it so that you have half of the actual quote quoted and the other half not. Fix this quote thing because you screwed it up first.


It was messed up when I did it. My fault, nonetheless. I deleted most of the problematic posts so the one inside this spoiler is incomplete.


Not like Christianity slowed down all of science, it's technically not the direct cause anyways. It's the Conservatives in the capital you should be pointing at, not religion. I think Conservative politicians at the say they are against stem cell research probably not because they hate all of it but specific parts: the way they obtain the stem cells (killing babies) and the intention of using stem cells to clone. Cloning isn't going to get far anyways because of genetic reasons. I'd explain but it'd take awhile and you can ask if you care but the point is this is the reason why Conservatives frown upon stem cells (although we like the idea of using them to cure people and create limbs and all).


I did say "Christians," not Christianity. Christianity is a belief, it can only motivate or so.


-Well civil law in general doesn't give people a lot of freedom either but i never hear too many complaints about that. Of the christian laws abortion violates one of the ten commandments, thou shall not kill (or better understanding of it is, don't commit premeditated murder). Because the mother is intentionally going to kill the baby (and because christians believe life starts in the womb) she's intentionally commiting murder no matter how you put it.


Religion is not a civil law; not all people are bound by it; no need to enforce it to everyone. On the abortion-related statements: again, it is the Christian beliefs, not everyone else. Though, it is not really that big of a concern as abortion is legal (not sure if it is nationwide though).


-Ya I know a lot of bible christians say this, especially the fundamentalists guys on my campus, and I'll tell you they're annoying as hell when they're in your face. I personally don't like those people, they're not in the same line of christianity that i recognize anyways. All Christians do believe that God wants us to recognize him but it's not neccessarily true that just because we believe in him or recognize him that we'll go to heaven. Plus the way they spread the message is just plain retarded, I don't even think the apostles were even that forceful.


Well, some Christians do want you to believe in their God indirectly. I did exaggerate those, though.


Btw on subject, hate crimes are wrong and do need to be recognized before too much time passes. It's a good thing that girl brought it up, just that the thread got out of hand, and she's not helping. (I ain't either but I wasn't the one who started the thread)


She is actually helping, except that she happened to be defending herself instead of what she brought up.


-If you're going to to say "Christians deserve more respect" at least have the decency to refrain from saying anything. Choose whether to be sarcastic or not, it's hard to figure out what the meaning behind what you're trying to say.


They do deserve respect, but I was putting a distinction between the ones who force/persuade others to believe them from the rest of the Christians. I do apologize for putting it sarcastically, though. It was indeed hard to comprehend and offensive.


-I don't suppose any atheist will ever understand or want to understand that there's a world beyond the physical world.


Actually, atheists only believe that there is no deity, so that is a generalization. They might actually believe in something beyond a physical world if you can prove it. Sadly, I doubt that, speculations are not evidences after all.


-Dipstick, not all Christian are like that. Damn, stop stereotyping. And if you're going to streotype at least point out groups of christianity, there's Catholics and then Protestants, and then like at least three subdivisions of prostantantism (even though there probably are more subdivisions than I know)


I did say "a number of Christians." "A number" does not necessarily mean it is all of them.

Your example of pointing out group is problematic. They are the same generalization. It is based from person to person. True, I sound hypocritical--and I admittedly am an hypocrite, but there is a reason why words such as "some" are there.

[quote[-Think of it this way. If Bill Gates told you his autobiography and you wrote that down and published it in a book, who made the story?

Depends. Original story is from Bill Gates but I wrote it. I could have modified it. Also, the problem with that analogy is: there is no evidence of a God existing, but that is a very different topic so let us not argue on that.


One quote, you're going to disprove Christianity through one quote, wow. Gonna look up the context of this and get with you on this later.


I was not disproving Christianity. I cannot. I know it exists. By the way, I can provide you more quotes if you want.



-Some people out there just make the organization that they're respresenting bad. Piltdown Man for anthropologists for example.


But the truth remains that they are part of the organization. And they are still recognized as Christians. Besides, it is more like they have their own interpretations of it than they are representing it bad. They (not all of them) might be thinking that that is the best for their organization. The fundamentalists for example. They are the extremist Christians but they are staying true to their Bible without being swayed by the reality around them.


And for that one who quoted me:


StephyKot87 wrote:
Image This is getting really annoying how many times I had explain it over and over again. Also I do respect people who all "sinners" and others with different faiths. Its obvious we all born with sins; nobody, including Christians, aren't perfect. About explaining my view and how I feel; I not saying for all Christians.


Enforcing your beliefs again while defending yourself?
Basically, you made the thread to feel better about yourself and how you like science and all instead of actually the Christian community as a whole? Great. Just great.


Its obvious we all born with sins; nobody, including Christians, aren't [sic] perfect.


I hope you just worded this wrong. "Nobody aren't perfect" is implying that everyone is perfect.

By the way, it is not obvious that we are born with sins; Not every human is Christian or whatever.
Posted 3/24/09

StephyKot87 wrote:
Okay, I guess I did not make it clear.

I am aware other religions have been discrimination too, but Christianity is no different than any other religions. People took negative impressions of Christianity, based it with political issues, and historical past that lead to the stereotype, and end up took offended by a Christian symbols in arts and public. When political correctness is concern, Christianity is been treated unfairly.

Usually because of that, it sometime leads to violence and vandalism towards Christianity. When there are events like that, media ignore it or making it bias: make symphathy towards the attacker and accusing Christianity for the fault of the action. If its Judaism or other religions had been attack, a lot a people and media shows an oppisite view.

A lot of Christians respect and welcome people from different or no faiths and don't bring judgement against people's beliefs. All I saying is people should be aware of bias and violence against some or all Christians, their religion, or the practice of Christianity.
I think the cause are excessive externalization by the mass medias and the general public. Relatively speaking, Christianity is a majority among other religious communities, so the mass medias believe that the Christian community can take the heat when it comes to time to fend for themselves. But that's just the mass medias and the general public's making excuses for their malicious behaviors spawned by their anxiety, while failed to take responsibility for themselves and their actions. So you're right, that's not fair at all.
13326 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Terra
Offline
Posted 3/24/09

cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:
hate sin, not the sinner? so sin is bad and sinner is good? so i tell someone to kill someone and then he got caught and he should be off and instead i shall be the one who gets prosecuted? heck, hate the sinner not the sin for the sinner is the one stupid enough to commit a sin.


As in, hate their actions rather than the person. I don't think anyone meant the 'sinner' was good, just that we shouldn't hate them. Perhaps. Though I understand actions do define a person, I think this a fair rule to live by under certain circumstances. For example: When a friend does something and you become mad at them for doing it. You don't hate your friend, you hate their action. Killing is an extreme action so I doubt I'd apply it there though, I agree with you on that.


well, let me ask, does action have a will of its own? no? hence, is it not the person who caused the action? so youre telling me that i must hate something that is brainless instead of hating the cause?

also, my position on this is that if a person tells another person to do something, since the person being told have a mind of their own, he/she can deny it. well, maybe under certain circumstances he/she is being threatened but still he/she can deny such actions. the consequences is ,of course, costly tho.

well, i dont think the above example is good... so let me give you another one.
lets take it that i tell someone to jump down the window and that person jumped. am i in fault here because someone who cant think just listened to what i said?


it's the person's fault for committing that action, but should we base our entire judgement on that one action? Depends on the circumstances. We are people and make irrational decisions based on emotion, or without thinking properly. Which is why I'd hate the action they did rather than them for it (with the friend example). I wasn't claiming actions to have a will of their own I was simply correcting your interpretation of the saying. My example is fine, because I have provided one that expresses the saying literally, and one we can understand the reasoning behind the saying with. Surely you don't argue this?
Your examples relevance has confused me. If someone is completely mindless and does as they are told then you should know better, so of course I'd blame you at least partly. You would feel a little guilty at least, no?


yes, i do understand your interpretation of the phrase, yet, i just cant get myself to agree with it...

like you said, it depends on the circumstances and things are being banned one after another.

if someone is completely mindless, they deserve not to live. why bother wasting the resources on a mindless person and help that someone to spread the mindless genes? we should instead reward the one who helped us exterminate that rubbish.

i wont feel guilty, when we step on some bug while walking and kill it, do we feel guilty? in my eyes, if a person is mindless, theyre the same as bugs...
13326 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Terra
Offline
Posted 3/24/09

StephyKot87 wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:




You are twisted it what I'm saying.

If you still don't understand or you just playing my words to make me look like a fool, then I don't know what else to explain.


i am trying to show you another point of view, if you havnt notice...

also, it is true that i am trying to add some humor onto my speech (you can call that making a fool out of you if u want... since its basically the same) since humor is the best way to get people to think.



I'm sorry. I guess I miss understand you.


well, maybe you didnt... it is true that i try to make fun of u... but im also trying to teach you how to think... well, it is meaninless to teach someone who doesnt want to learn anyways but please do read over what i wrote and think about it...



I do think, like a lot. So much to the point almost got sinus headache.

I'm not teachin anyone nor see ourselves as victims, its not like that. I want to beware of such things, even though it's not recognized yet.


and i here want you to beware of the world we are living in currently. true that religion might be a major thing back in the days and many people still believe in such today, it is no longer the "major" thing now.
Posted 3/24/09

o0James0o wrote:


cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:
hate sin, not the sinner? so sin is bad and sinner is good? so i tell someone to kill someone and then he got caught and he should be off and instead i shall be the one who gets prosecuted? heck, hate the sinner not the sin for the sinner is the one stupid enough to commit a sin.


As in, hate their actions rather than the person. I don't think anyone meant the 'sinner' was good, just that we shouldn't hate them. Perhaps. Though I understand actions do define a person, I think this a fair rule to live by under certain circumstances. For example: When a friend does something and you become mad at them for doing it. You don't hate your friend, you hate their action. Killing is an extreme action so I doubt I'd apply it there though, I agree with you on that.


well, let me ask, does action have a will of its own? no? hence, is it not the person who caused the action? so youre telling me that i must hate something that is brainless instead of hating the cause?

also, my position on this is that if a person tells another person to do something, since the person being told have a mind of their own, he/she can deny it. well, maybe under certain circumstances he/she is being threatened but still he/she can deny such actions. the consequences is ,of course, costly tho.

well, i dont think the above example is good... so let me give you another one.
lets take it that i tell someone to jump down the window and that person jumped. am i in fault here because someone who cant think just listened to what i said?


it's the person's fault for committing that action, but should we base our entire judgement on that one action? Depends on the circumstances. We are people and make irrational decisions based on emotion, or without thinking properly. Which is why I'd hate the action they did rather than them for it (with the friend example). I wasn't claiming actions to have a will of their own I was simply correcting your interpretation of the saying. My example is fine, because I have provided one that expresses the saying literally, and one we can understand the reasoning behind the saying with. Surely you don't argue this?
Your examples relevance has confused me. If someone is completely mindless and does as they are told then you should know better, so of course I'd blame you at least partly. You would feel a little guilty at least, no?


yes, i do understand your interpretation of the phrase, yet, i just cant get myself to agree with it...

like you said, it depends on the circumstances and things are being banned one after another.

if someone is completely mindless, they deserve not to live. why bother wasting the resources on a mindless person and help that someone to spread the mindless genes? we should instead reward the one who helped us exterminate that rubbish.

i wont feel guilty, when we step on some bug while walking and kill it, do we feel guilty? in my eyes, if a person is mindless, theyre the same as bugs...

o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:




You are twisted it what I'm saying.

If you still don't understand or you just playing my words to make me look like a fool, then I don't know what else to explain.


i am trying to show you another point of view, if you havnt notice...

also, it is true that i am trying to add some humor onto my speech (you can call that making a fool out of you if u want... since its basically the same) since humor is the best way to get people to think.



I'm sorry. I guess I miss understand you.


well, maybe you didnt... it is true that i try to make fun of u... but im also trying to teach you how to think... well, it is meaninless to teach someone who doesnt want to learn anyways but please do read over what i wrote and think about it...



I do think, like a lot. So much to the point almost got sinus headache.

I'm not teachin anyone nor see ourselves as victims, its not like that. I want to beware of such things, even though it's not recognized yet.


and i here want you to beware of the world we are living in currently. true that religion might be a major thing back in the days and many people still believe in such today, it is no longer the "major" thing now.
So what's with your "God" complex? Are you fancying yourself as some egotistic & self-centered individual from Death Notes? Well news flash, junior; religion might be out, but spirituality is still here to stay. And you are not the boss of me, so deal with it.
13326 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Terra
Offline
Posted 3/24/09

DomFortress wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


cerisey wrote:


o0James0o wrote:
hate sin, not the sinner? so sin is bad and sinner is good? so i tell someone to kill someone and then he got caught and he should be off and instead i shall be the one who gets prosecuted? heck, hate the sinner not the sin for the sinner is the one stupid enough to commit a sin.


As in, hate their actions rather than the person. I don't think anyone meant the 'sinner' was good, just that we shouldn't hate them. Perhaps. Though I understand actions do define a person, I think this a fair rule to live by under certain circumstances. For example: When a friend does something and you become mad at them for doing it. You don't hate your friend, you hate their action. Killing is an extreme action so I doubt I'd apply it there though, I agree with you on that.


well, let me ask, does action have a will of its own? no? hence, is it not the person who caused the action? so youre telling me that i must hate something that is brainless instead of hating the cause?

also, my position on this is that if a person tells another person to do something, since the person being told have a mind of their own, he/she can deny it. well, maybe under certain circumstances he/she is being threatened but still he/she can deny such actions. the consequences is ,of course, costly tho.

well, i dont think the above example is good... so let me give you another one.
lets take it that i tell someone to jump down the window and that person jumped. am i in fault here because someone who cant think just listened to what i said?


it's the person's fault for committing that action, but should we base our entire judgement on that one action? Depends on the circumstances. We are people and make irrational decisions based on emotion, or without thinking properly. Which is why I'd hate the action they did rather than them for it (with the friend example). I wasn't claiming actions to have a will of their own I was simply correcting your interpretation of the saying. My example is fine, because I have provided one that expresses the saying literally, and one we can understand the reasoning behind the saying with. Surely you don't argue this?
Your examples relevance has confused me. If someone is completely mindless and does as they are told then you should know better, so of course I'd blame you at least partly. You would feel a little guilty at least, no?


yes, i do understand your interpretation of the phrase, yet, i just cant get myself to agree with it...

like you said, it depends on the circumstances and things are being banned one after another.

if someone is completely mindless, they deserve not to live. why bother wasting the resources on a mindless person and help that someone to spread the mindless genes? we should instead reward the one who helped us exterminate that rubbish.

i wont feel guilty, when we step on some bug while walking and kill it, do we feel guilty? in my eyes, if a person is mindless, theyre the same as bugs...

o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


StephyKot87 wrote:




You are twisted it what I'm saying.

If you still don't understand or you just playing my words to make me look like a fool, then I don't know what else to explain.


i am trying to show you another point of view, if you havnt notice...

also, it is true that i am trying to add some humor onto my speech (you can call that making a fool out of you if u want... since its basically the same) since humor is the best way to get people to think.



I'm sorry. I guess I miss understand you.


well, maybe you didnt... it is true that i try to make fun of u... but im also trying to teach you how to think... well, it is meaninless to teach someone who doesnt want to learn anyways but please do read over what i wrote and think about it...



I do think, like a lot. So much to the point almost got sinus headache.

I'm not teachin anyone nor see ourselves as victims, its not like that. I want to beware of such things, even though it's not recognized yet.


and i here want you to beware of the world we are living in currently. true that religion might be a major thing back in the days and many people still believe in such today, it is no longer the "major" thing now.
So what's with your "God" complex? Are you fancying yourself as some egotistic & self-centered individual from Death Notes? Well news flash, junior; religion might be out, but spirituality is still here to stay. And you are not the boss of me, so deal with it.

i am fully aware, that is why i hate yet to start anything big... i lacked the power to start anything big... and it doesnt seem like i can gain that power easily since i am not born with a silver spoon in my mouth... well, a plastic spoon for me...
god complex? dont we all have such? i wont mind if you call it god complex but im just a very humanistic person with a determination to change -- of course, that includes fate.
death note, sure, if such thing exist life would be much better.
i might not be the boss of you, but there would always be a boss above you. and if you deny your boss, you shall suffer the consequences. with that said, i aim for the guy being above everyone. god complex of whatever you call it suits me fine.
4557 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Bermuda Triangle
Offline
Posted 3/24/09 , edited 3/24/09

jewishplayer wrote:









Religion is not a civil law; not all people are bound by it; no need to enforce it to everyone. On the abortion-related statements: again, it is the Christian beliefs, not everyone else. Though, it is not really that big of a concern as abortion is legal (not sure if it is nationwide though).

Actually religion kind of runs like civil law. It's just that you don't go to jail for breaking rules, there's just the consequences that already come out the actions. About abortion it's easy to see it that way but a quick way to say from what I've learned about it is that it's like a gateway to other bad things. Similar to the concept of the "gateway drug" except abortion obviously isn't a drug.


She is actually helping, except that she happened to be defending herself instead of what she brought up.

I said it weird, I meant she wasn't helping on staying on topic, she kind of trolling her own thread as well as the rest of us.


Your example of pointing out group is problematic. They are the same generalization. It is based from person to person.

For the most part there are subcatagories of Christian beliefs and just because they're similar on the surface doesn't mean they're the same. That would be like equating Christianity with Judaism and Islamics, that's just about how different the subcatagories are.


Depends. Original story is from Bill Gates but I wrote it. I could have modified it.

We believe that the original scribes didn't modify it so that the message was different. The original documents are hard to find in the first place so we end up making copies of copies. There's even a standard on translating biblical texts. Plus if all done correctly all the books in the bible shouldn't contradict each other.


But the truth remains that they are part of the organization. And they are still recognized as Christians. Besides, it is more like they have their own interpretations of it than they are representing it bad. They (not all of them) might be thinking that that is the best for their organization. The fundamentalists for example. They are the extremist Christians but they are staying true to their Bible without being swayed by the reality around them.

-About Fundamentalists, the opposite is quite true. To put it short their values are basically literal interpretations of the bible and their founding traditions (like their view of life in general).
-There are many ways to interprete the bible but if there are interpretations that contradict stuff we know is true that interpretation is thrown out the window, not for fundamentalist. It's "whatever God tells you it is" which basically means "whatever it means to you". Fundamentalist accuse other christians, especially Catholics, on tradition and that it's "unbiblical" and because of that such things deviate from God. The opposite is true, the bible itself is evidence of oral tradition. One traditional belief they hold dearly is that the physical world is nil, that is what happens in the physical world isn't really relevent to their life or salvation. But that can be disproven easily, that the physical world is relevent to our overall life.
Posted 3/25/09

o0James0o wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

So what's with your "God" complex? Are you fancying yourself as some egotistic & self-centered individual from Death Notes? Well news flash, junior; religion might be out, but spirituality is still here to stay. And you are not the boss of me, so deal with it.

i am fully aware, that is why i hate yet to start anything big... i lacked the power to start anything big... and it doesnt seem like i can gain that power easily since i am not born with a silver spoon in my mouth... well, a plastic spoon for me...
god complex? dont we all have such? i wont mind if you call it god complex but im just a very humanistic person with a determination to change -- of course, that includes fate.
death note, sure, if such thing exist life would be much better.
i might not be the boss of you, but there would always be a boss above you. and if you deny your boss, you shall suffer the consequences. with that said, i aim for the guy being above everyone. god complex of whatever you call it suits me fine.

You think that the only way for you to affect real change is for you to become a God, when the fact is you're just not happy about yourself as a human being because you see yourself as weak and powerless? Then your so-called "God complex" is just an excuse for you not establishing and improving yourself as a human, because you're too lazy not living your live to the fullest. And while we're on the subject regarding reality, neither God nor Death Notes are real. So now what are you gonna do?

You are not the boss of me because I'm an individual with my own strength and will, while I was able to obtain spirituality by not relying on the old-fashioned and outdated concept of God in the religious context. So until you know the power that be, you're not even your own person, as long as you're just another miserable and sad excuse of a human being.
559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 3/25/09









Actually religion kind of runs like civil law.


I agree with you; It is not a civil law, just "like civil law."


About abortion it's easy to see it that way but a quick way to say from what I've learned about it is that it's like a gateway to other bad things.


I am intrigued with those bad things. Of course, only the ones that are not related to the health of the mother.


We believe that the original scribes didn't modify it so that the message was different. The original documents are hard to find in the first place so we end up making copies of copies. There's even a standard on translating biblical texts. Plus if all done correctly all the books in the bible shouldn't contradict each other.


Basically, you only believe it is not modified. You do not know for sure. The Bibles do not seem to contradict each other, by the way; the Bible just contradicts itself. As in "love thy neighbors" but kill them if they are heretics (not the exact words but I can probably provide quotes such as the last one or some others).


-There are many ways to interprete the bible but if there are interpretations that contradict stuff we know is true that interpretation is thrown out the window, not for fundamentalist. It's "whatever God tells you it is" which basically means "whatever it means to you". Fundamentalist accuse other christians, especially Catholics, on tradition and that it's "unbiblical" and because of that such things deviate from God. The opposite is true, the bible itself is evidence of oral tradition. One traditional belief they hold dearly is that the physical world is nil, that is what happens in the physical world isn't really relevent to their life or salvation. But that can be disproven easily, that the physical world is relevent to our overall life.


Indeed, there are a lot of ways to interpret it, I just used the fundamentalists as an example because they appear to be the radicals. I really do not have anything to say to the rest.
13326 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Terra
Offline
Posted 3/25/09

DomFortress wrote:


o0James0o wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

So what's with your "God" complex? Are you fancying yourself as some egotistic & self-centered individual from Death Notes? Well news flash, junior; religion might be out, but spirituality is still here to stay. And you are not the boss of me, so deal with it.

i am fully aware, that is why i hate yet to start anything big... i lacked the power to start anything big... and it doesnt seem like i can gain that power easily since i am not born with a silver spoon in my mouth... well, a plastic spoon for me...
god complex? dont we all have such? i wont mind if you call it god complex but im just a very humanistic person with a determination to change -- of course, that includes fate.
death note, sure, if such thing exist life would be much better.
i might not be the boss of you, but there would always be a boss above you. and if you deny your boss, you shall suffer the consequences. with that said, i aim for the guy being above everyone. god complex of whatever you call it suits me fine.

You think that the only way for you to affect real change is for you to become a God, when the fact is you're just not happy about yourself as a human being because you see yourself as weak and powerless? Then your so-called "God complex" is just an excuse for you not establishing and improving yourself as a human, because you're too lazy not living your live to the fullest. And while we're on the subject regarding reality, neither God nor Death Notes are real. So now what are you gonna do?

You are not the boss of me because I'm an individual with my own strength and will, while I was able to obtain spirituality by not relying on the old-fashioned and outdated concept of God in the religious context. So until you know the power that be, you're not even your own person, as long as you're just another miserable and sad excuse of a human being.

i think that to get change, there ought be a foundation and a chain reaction. yet, such thing would be impossible for my short lifetime to succeed. therefore, i ought to become god or ,at least, immortalize myself. yes, like you said, i do see myself as weak and powerless. the majority are followers with no brain, but no matter how brainless they might be. their together power is stronger than my solo power. hence, i must obtain a power greater than theirs... and that, requires a long long time...

live life to the fullest and die? heck. thats the fate of all beings. and my raison d'etre is to change my fate. as of now, it is true that there have yet to appear a god nor death note. yet, like all the processors of myself, i seek to create an utopia on earth and i shall be the god. i shall give the finger to the creator and take over his position. yes, it is my dream and it is highly impossible... but not completely impossible...

i might not be above you now but we cant predict the future, or can we? just because youre an individual does not mean you are you. you are a part of the whole. and if a part ,like you, that isnt significant were to be taken away, it can easily be replaced. therefore, if you dont give in to the society when you lacked the power, it is likely that you would be the one who will suffer.


Posted 3/25/09

o0James0o wrote:


i think that to get change, there ought be a foundation and a chain reaction. yet, such thing would be impossible for my short lifetime to succeed. therefore, i ought to become god or ,at least, immortalize myself. yes, like you said, i do see myself as weak and powerless. the majority are followers with no brain, but no matter how brainless they might be. their together power is stronger than my solo power. hence, i must obtain a power greater than theirs... and that, requires a long long time...
And to internalize all of that excuses, it leads to the fact that you're afraid to die. You're only 15 and you're already afraid of dying? You must not be a happy kid while growing up. When was the last time that you made people laugh with you? Or are you the one that always gets laugh at?

live life to the fullest and die? heck. thats the fate of all beings. and my raison d'etre is to change my fate. as of now, it is true that there have yet to appear a god nor death note. yet, like all the processors of myself, i seek to create an utopia on earth and i shall be the god. i shall give the finger to the creator and take over his position. yes, it is my dream and it is highly impossible... but not completely impossible...
You're just afraid of dying without you doing something about the "dying" part. And you're so overwhelmed by your anxiety on death, you'll externalize an delusion such as becoming a God, in order for you to escape from your guilt of having a selfish and weak spirit.

i might not be above you now but we cant predict the future, or can we? just because youre an individual does not mean you are you. you are a part of the whole. and if a part ,like you, that isnt significant were to be taken away, it can easily be replaced. therefore, if you dont give in to the society when you lacked the power, it is likely that you would be the one who will suffer.
At least those who care for me will grieve over my passing, for I shared my life with them and truly cared for them while I was still alive. At the very least, my gift to them will be happiness and laughter, which I shall share freely and endlessly with them. As for you, you're just not happy-making at the moment. In fact, I'll say you're dull, uninspiring, flat, one-dimensional, and in every sense of the word, boring. For you can't even make me laugh.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.