Philotic Web

BeansBrother

sumimonA, I wouldn't say that's clumsy in the least. But thanks.

BeansBrother

Well, supposedly it has an advantage in the afterlife.

BeansBrother

The need to have something intelligible to come out of something unintelligible.

BeansBrother

Well, that settles it then. That means that we are really clueless until we die, which is when we find out the answer, and by that point, we can no longer tell anyone else the answer.

BeansBrother

Ah... I see now. So for atheists, there is no reason in believing, because atheists are sure "Heaven" does not exist, so atheists could possibly pity theists, while the opposite occurs for theists to atheists, right?

BeansBrother

Because there are certain benefits to having believed while still in an earthly body. Aren't those benefits only applicable if there is an afterlife to be awarded in? So if you don't believe, then there are no benefits to believing, and there are benefits to not believing, e.g. not having to spend ...

BeansBrother

Well, I understand that, but if you get that further notice later after death, then there is no reason to believe that there really will be no notice, because for those atheists/agnostics, they don't believe in an afterlife (or at least some kind of heaven [sorry, I am generalizing, so if I offend a...

BeansBrother

Ah... now I see where you were going with that. And I think that being a giant of intellect would, proportionately keep the same amount of happiness. I think that if someone has, say, 100 "happy points" in their life, then someone with Bean's would have 400. This is only because his whole ...

BeansBrother

Now, Slim, your thought process is circular. Please read the following example. I believe those who do not hear the gospel and have a chance to accept/reject the gospel will be taught and given the choice after death, before the Final Judgment. Now, you are clearly implying that to move onward to &q...

BeansBrother

I am assuming you no longer want to speak of this, or that I am being forced into submission. Either way, I can't do anything about it, but it seems kind of rude that you want to end my point-making without my consent. I guess, so we stop spamming this thread, we should take this to PMs, if you want...

BeansBrother

I will address your post systematically: 1. I created the game called "the Game of Gravity." This is just as someone can create the game of Pictionary. Pictionary is drawing and guessing, that's all. But technically, that's not a game, it's just something that people do. Yet, someone still...

BeansBrother

I don't see where you are going with this, but no. I am leading a rather fulfilling life.

BeansBrother

The point I am trying to get across is that if you are affected by it, you are playing it. Back to my analogy, would you consider yourself playing the game of Gravity?

EDIT: Because if you are effected by the game of Gravity, you are playing it.

BeansBrother

The key word there is "almost." In this game, it does not demand that you actively participate, at least by my understanding of the rules. But, it does demand that you are affected by it . This is just as inevitable as gravity. Gravity does NOT demand that you acknowledge it; as you said, ...

BeansBrother

For the record, the reason : "because people around do it" is not rational, for me.

For the record, I meant that questioning ones existence of their own religion's deity/deitys is natural as a teenager.[/quote]

BeansBrother

I believe a person is much happier before they know about the Game*, and although some people "thrive" on the Game, the Game sucks. HAH! :lol: Sorry, that made me laugh. But anyway, on a more serious a note (well, as serious as anything on this topic can get), this is like denying gravity...

BeansBrother

Not that it's exactly valid, but does it occur to anyone that for centuries or millennia before now, the average life expectancy was only about 35 years... even without the benefit of being a giant genius? Obviously, it was 'enough' for all of them. Sure, their whole culture was adjusted for that l...

BeansBrother

And they're just as annoyingly obnoxious as the soap-box preacher who yells "You're going to hell!" If you don't believe hell exists, why should you stop and listen to him? Yet, if someone does believe in hell, subjectively, the person who "is going to hell" really is going to h...

BeansBrother

Maybe I am just crazy, but I wouldn't care. 20 years is long enough for me.

BeansBrother

Eaquae Legit and Rei: it's called sarcasm :D And thanks for those explanations, zero and A. I could not have said it better myself. EDIT: Except, when you say that not acknowledging the game's existance is the only way not to play the game, even then, one is still playing. The rules of the game are ...

BeansBrother

Everyone can't not un-dis-play the game. It's basic logic, that's all.

BeansBrother

I agree with BW. The Shadow books are books based around war, while I would consider the Speaker books based more around philosophy and morality.

They are different. That's all.

BeansBrother

Also, you said in some other topic that you are a "cultural Jew", so I'm curious how did you reach your atheist conclusions? By cultural Jew, I meant I celebrate the holidays, eat the food, but do not pray, etc. My atheist conclusions probably just come from my age, because I have seen th...

BeansBrother

OK, who voted the third option?! Tell me, so I can rip your eyes out!!!

Ha! Made you think, didn't I?

BeansBrother

I'm a wimp... but I cried at the end of SotG, when Petra is reading Bean's letter, but I get all teary during the riot because I love animals.

GO DIE! YOU CRIED TOO!

BeansBrother

Crazy Tom. Definitely. Because then he wouldn't be so crazy!

BeansBrother

This is like "The Game." In this game, all who do not know about it are winning. The only way to lose is if you know about the game. We play the game our whole entire life. Now, you all know about the game. So you are losing. But what is the point about "The Game?" The point is t...

BeansBrother

Lemme rephrase: Do you think that others treating subjective truths as objective is good or bad? That, my friend, is the key question to all of Earth's faith. If someone treats a subjective truth as an objective one, is, in my personal opinion, what sparked all the holy wars, crusades, and all-arou...

BeansBrother

Very interesting topic. I would consider this a form of religion, however, in it that it believes in a high-being, whether that being conscious, able to be talked to, etc, or not. I personally do not believe in any such thing, a higher being in any way.

BB

BeansBrother

Nomination: School of Rock

BeansBrother

If I could be anyone in Battle School, who I think I would fit, I would be Bean. I am not trying to be cocky, or arrogant in any way, I just think I have his characteristics. I know I am arrogant. I think I am the smartest person in the world. Yet, as you just saw, I admit my faults, just as Bean do...

BeansBrother

I agree with mr_brain. If they leave out the violence, just because it is a book, like other movies (*cough cough* Eragon *cough*), then it will suck, like Eragon did. But, if they leave in all the violence, but do NOT add more to it, then I think it would be an excellent movie, and maybe have a rat...

BeansBrother

I didn't even think of the Godspoken as another example. But your right, I would not to be a Godspoken. Because I just wouldn't be able to stand doing those actions constantly. But I figure that some people live very short lives without being a super genius, and I could be one of those people, so wh...

BeansBrother

Bump.

Personally, I wish.... I mean, it would be cool and what not, but I really doubt it will ever be possible. And who says teleportation is instantaneous at any distance? Have we tested that? Maybe it just goes the speed of light....[/i]

BeansBrother

Add me please

I am June 21st

Search found 71 matches