Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » I just got baptized - Yea!

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
I just got baptized - Yea!
Striker
Member #10,701
February 2009
avatar

You still had to ask for forgiveness even if you were baptized, though, and I worried about sinning once or twice between praying for forgiveness and suddenly being flattened by a truck.

In hinduism you go to heaven if you have the name of god on your lips in the moment you die, regardless what you did before. Question is if you can remember this in the moment you are flattened by a truck.

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

Most people I know would be saved, since they'd exclaim "ZOMG!" as the truck hit them.

The only way Trump is going to be involved in a landslide is if the land surrounding the White House collapses into the Earth's core. -- bamccaig

Striker
Member #10,701
February 2009
avatar

And they say it even applies if you have accidently or randomly a name of god on your lips.

In germany we have a margarine called "Rama". If you would go to a shop and say "please give me a package Rama" and you would die in that moment, you would go to heaven, no matter what you did all your life...

Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
avatar

Striker said:

In hinduism you go to heaven if you have the name of god on your lips in the moment you die, regardless what you did before. Question is if you can remember this in the moment you are flattened by a truck.

I'd love to see some sources on that. In my understanding of Hinduism, you only reach their analogue of "heaven" once you've reached enlightenment (broken free of incarnation). There are of course several sub-types of Hinduism (four I think?) so I guess they could differ in that aspect.

-------
Sweden: Free from the shackles of Democracy since 2008-06-18!

Mark Oates
Member #1,146
March 2001
avatar

How come there isn't something that's believable? ???

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

How come there isn't something that's believable? ???

Look within yourself. That is all.

The only way Trump is going to be involved in a landslide is if the land surrounding the White House collapses into the Earth's core. -- bamccaig

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I'm glad to hear that, because I didn't say you couldn't reason about them. We do that all the time on this forum alone, clearly. ;D

So I assume you fully agree with Evert's point.

Which is about the same as I said earlier. Once more with feeling[1]: If it exists, it must be natural.

References

  1. I wonder if anyone here gets that reference. No googling or otherwise cheating.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

So I assume you fully agree with Evert's point.

I thought I made it pretty clear that Evert missed my point completely.

/sigh

Since my involvement in this thread started with Jesse L. and ended after a few posts, I think I'm done with everyone else who just jumped in. :P Time to head to work ...

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Striker
Member #10,701
February 2009
avatar

I'd love to see some sources on that.

I don`t know, but it is something many hindus believe. Like Mahatma Gandhi, who was killed by an attentat but in the moment he died he had the name "Ram" on his lips.

They believe some souls go to heaven, but this doesn`t mean they stay there forever. Most are born again after a while. Only very few stay there forever.

If one goes to heaven only because having the name of god on the lips for a moment, it could be he stays there not very long.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I thought I made it pretty clear that Evert missed my point completely.

Maybe you should be a bit more clear. I don't think anyone knew what you were trying to say. What with most of it being rather evasive...

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
avatar

Evert said:

And for anyone who wants to raise that tired old argument that rejecting religion just means you're being close minded

[

video
]

--
Move to the Democratic People's Republic of Vivendi Universal (formerly known as Sweden) - officially democracy- and privacy-free since 2008-06-18!

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

I thought I made it pretty clear that Evert missed my point completely.

Well, clearly you didn't.
Anyway, because I disagree with what you say doesn't mean I "missed your point". Sadly, that type of response is entirely typical for this type of discussion though.
I mean, obviously, your point is so reasonable and well laid-out that anyone who doesn't agree with it must have failed to get it. They couldn't possibly disagree with you for any other reason. That at least is the only conclusion I can draw from a statement like that.
Rather than backing up your point and expanding on your line of reasoning, you play the "you just don't get it" card, conclude the discussion is pointless and walk away. A great pity.

You said:

Main point was that you'll never find natural proof for something generally deemed supernatural, by definition.

And I went to some length to explain why I disagree with that line of reasoning, mainly because sticking a convenient label on something ("supernatural"), contrasting it with something else ("natural"; "supernatural by definition is not natural") and then using those definitions to proof a point ("because supernatural is not natural, you cannot find natural proof for something supernatural") is circular reasoning. It's exactly the same logic as saying that the sun should not be called a star because stars are little points of light that are visible at night while the sun is a bright disk that's visible during the day, because that is what those terms originally meant.

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

Maybe you should be a bit more clear. I don't think anyone knew what you were trying to say. What with most of it being rather evasive ...

I was clear enough for the person I was talking to originally. Not sure how that makes me evasive, other than I don't want to be dragged into topics that I know from experience will go nowhere ... but I think I was pretty clear about that from my first post. My own fault for not following through I guess. I'll do that now. /goodbye

Evert said:

Anyway, because I disagree with what you say doesn't mean I "missed your point". Sadly, that type of response is entirely typical for this type of discussion though.

You didn't agree or disagree. You talked about something else that I wasn't, and that I was talking to someone other than you about. You're right; that is typical. :)

Quote:

I mean, obviously, your point is so reasonable and well laid-out that anyone who doesn't agree with it must have failed to get it. They couldn't possibly disagree with you for any other reason. That at least is the only conclusion I can draw from a statement like that.
Rather than backing up your point and expanding on your line of reasoning, you play the "you just don't get it" card, conclude the discussion is pointless and walk away. A great pity.

I'm sorry that I won't play your game; I guess you'll just have to take your ball and go home. With that condescending attitude I won't miss you.

Quote:

And I went to some length to explain why I disagree with that line of reasoning <snip>

When I want to talk to you I'll use language and terms you understand. I realize that you disagree, and I see why you disagree, and I see what you disagree with, and a lot of it has to do with the fact that we're not talking about the same thing. And yeah I'm leaving it, not because I thought my point was so reasonable and well laid-out that anyone who doesn't agree with it must have failed to get it, but because I finished. The person I was speaking to understood, the people I wasn't didn't. Any further posts would just be arguing for the sake of arguing. Call me evasive all you like, but I've got better things to do.

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

The person I was speaking to understood, the people I wasn't didn't.

No I'm pretty sure we just don't agree. Understanding and not agreeing is not the same thing, as Evert pointed out.

But hey, if you want to play that game feel free. If it makes you feel superior go right ahead.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001

Striker said:

Like Mahatma Gandhi, who was killed by an attentat but in the moment he died he had the name "Ram" on his lips.

My old computer died with some text on the screen like:
RAM failure FFEDC0:0080DB
I guess it's in Heaven now.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Years of thorough research have revealed that the red "x" that closes a window, really isn't red, but white on red background.

Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest.

Striker
Member #10,701
February 2009
avatar

I guess it's in Heaven now.

and because you made some Allegro stuff with it i suppose he will stay there for a while...

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

With that condescending attitude I won't miss you.

That was sarcasm, in case you missed it.
I don't think you're the type of person to really think what I said, and I wasn't accusing you of being that type of person. But for all the world it comes across that way ("I don't agree with you, you just didn't get my point"). Discussions don't have to end that way, you know better than that.
That's why I called it a pity.

Quote:

not because I thought my point was so reasonable and well laid-out that anyone who doesn't agree with it must have failed to get it, but because I finished. The person I was speaking to understood, the people I wasn't didn't.

Ok, so the person you were talking to understood your point, the rest of us (who disagree) didn't? Again, I'm sure you don't mean to say that "whoever doesn't agree doesn't understand" but you sure don't make it come across that way.
Also,

hmph.

To each his own.

Means he understood? Understood what, exactly?
And if what he understood is "to each his own", you may want to go back and read my first post.

I'm not interested in bashing anyone's religious beliefs here (which would be highly inapproriate, given the origin of the thread). I'm not out to argue or demonstrate that religion is a load of superstitious nonsense (or even saying that it is). All I pointed out is that a statement like

The universe has a definition. If something exists outside of observable reality, or in some supernatural way, the definition of the universe will not suddenly encompass it.

or

you'll never find natural proof for something generally deemed supernatural, by definition.

is hollow unless you specify clearly what is meant by "universe" or "supernatural" and we agree on the definition. Unless you simply want to argue semantics, which is entirely pointless (as in my example of the sun, stars and planets). I gave you my (philosophical) interpretation and why based on those I don't agree with

Quote:

Main point was that you'll never find natural proof for something generally deemed supernatural, by definition.

You didn't specify yours ("I was talking about something else") and are clearly not interested in discussing the issue.
Which, again, is a shame, because it's interesting.

On a different note,

My old computer died with some text on the screen like:
"RAM failure FFEDC0:0080DB"
I guess it's in Heaven now.

There's no such thing as Silicon Heaven. So, where do all the calculators go?
(Free karma points for who gets the reference).
(Bonus points for who gets the reference).

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Evert said:

There's no such thing as Silicon Heaven. So, where do all the calculators go?

Totally unrelated to the reference, but wouldn't they follow the magic blue smoke?

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

But hey, if you want to play that game feel free. If it makes you feel superior go right ahead.

Lovely attitude. Why I won't talk about it will continue to be a mystery, I'm sure.

Evert said:

Again, I'm sure you don't mean to say that "whoever doesn't agree doesn't understand" but you sure don't make it come across that way.

Reviewing my posts, I see a lot of agreeing on my part (mostly with Arthur ;D). How this comes across as disagreement instead of misunderstanding I'm not sure, but as you seem to have figured out, I just stopped caring.

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Lovely attitude. Why I won't talk about it will continue to be a mystery, I'm sure.

Interesting. You have failed to realize I just gave you the same thing you dropped on us ::)

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

How this comes across as disagreement instead of misunderstanding I'm not sure

This, mainly:

It was basically semantics to begin with, I suppose. No one has really said anything I didn't already know, so clearly I'm being misunderstood. Main point was that you'll never find natural proof for something generally deemed supernatural, by definition.

I don't "not understand" your point, I disagree with that conclusion. But if you think I misunderstood what you meant, then please clarify what you mean with some actual arguments, rather than saying "you don't understand and I no longer care," like you did again just now.

Is it fair to say that you argue that because "God" (or what have you) is "supernatural", by definition "natural" based reasoning (or investigation) cannot teach you anything about "God" because he is not "natural"? If not, please clarify. It seems to me that it's just repeating what you said in slightly different wording.
I've already explained (in detail) why I don't agree with that line of reasoning and the conclusion (but to summarise, I maintain it's only true if you arbitrarily and ab initio limit the meaning of your words so the statement becomes a truism).

Again, that's a philosophical discussion. It's not about whether religion is right or wrong (we both have opinions about that, but arguing over those is not very enightening) but whether it could in principle be demonstrated to be right (or wrong). I don't see why it couldn't be.

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

I suppose I have then, since I don't recall accusing anyone of feeling superior or being evasive. Perhaps you feel superior now, I dunno. :P I'll just keep agreeing, I guess.

Evert said:

But if you think I misunderstood what you meant, then please clarify what you mean with some actual arguments, rather than saying "you don't understand and I no longer care," like you did again just now.

It's that or ignore you. I'm going to keep doing it until you clue in.

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I suppose I have then, since I don't recall accusing anyone of feeling superior or being evasive. Perhaps you feel superior now, I dunno. :P I'll just keep agreeing, I guess.

Orly?

I'm sorry that I won't play your game; I guess you'll just have to take your ball and go home. With that condescending attitude I won't miss you.

Thats just one example.

Most of your posts come across as "I'm better than you (or know better), and I know it". Maybe you're doing it on purpose I don't know. Either way though your actions say a lot about you.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

I was responding to Evert in kind.

Most of your posts come across as "I'm better than you (or know better), and I know it". Maybe you're doing it on purpose I don't know. Either way though your actions say a lot about you.

It says I feel no obligation to talk about something that I've said repeatedly I'm not interested in. Perhaps you presume otherwise. Think what you like; I don't think I can get much more blunt.

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

So do your presumptions.

I didn't think you'd like getting treated to your own behavior. Most people don't.

Quote:

How about we just say I'm wrong about everything.

I doubt that. But its hard to say when you continue to evade even a civilized rational discussion.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730



Go to: