[Trasher02]

Originally Posted by kingcoffee

Also, what's wrong with having a tatto? People have been tattooing themselves for thousands of years! It's a human cultural institution. It's more prevalent throughout human history than marriage (maybe, I don't really know if that is true, but it could be). And why is it "gay"? He doesn't have a tatto of two cowboys eating pudding while they fuck each other in the ass! Now THAT would be "gay". The tattoo means something very important to him. Let him have his tattoo. It's just when people get dumb tattoo's of stupid things for all the wrong reasons is when tattoo's get annoying.

I just don't like tattoos.
Don't take the "gay" too hard, I'm a dumbass teenager. I think everything is gay.

[acousticrock87]

It's also impossible to prove at this moment that anyone you're talking to on here isn't a computer program. But it would be stupid to think that. To say "all beliefs are unprovable so don't even try" is philosophically lazy, when you just don't want to look into it.

And the supernatural can be demonstrated if it exists (which, as coffee said, we don't know.) I think you mean to say that you believe that it hasn't been demonstrated.

[kingcoffee]

Well, Im just saying, one day you could offend the wrong person and they could be gay or a gay sympathizer and they could get extremely upset by it and who knows, they might kick yr ass. It's best not to say things like "gay" when refering to things you don't like and not say things like "nigga" or "ho" when refering to gys and women. It's ignorant and unbecoming of intelligent, decent human beings. You just never know who will take it too seriously and just kick yr ass. I've seen it happen once in a coffee shop near the bus stop downtown. It was hilarious.

[Lipslikewindows]

I think I would agree with the "lazy" accusation. No offense, King. It seems ignorant to think you KNOW the existence/lack of existence of God is unknowable. If God really wanted to be known, he could pull it off, I would imagine. But he would probably allow people to hide behind philosophy or political correctness or laziness so that they could continue to "not know" at the same time. I'm not saying you're doing this. I don't know you. But I do think that, at some point in their life (and I don't know this for sure), if someone really REALLY, really, REALLY wants to find out if there's a God, and there really is one, they'll find him/her/it. Maybe they won't know everything about said God, but they'll know enough to get by, and to be healed, completed, and enlightened.

[kingcoffee]

It's ok for people to be soothed by their faith in something bigger than themselves. That's just part of human nature. All I'm saying is that no one can be completely correct in their assumpstions and beliefs in a Higher Power. If something works for a person, then that's cool. I have plenty of friends who are devout religious people of many denominations and faiths. I have no problem with this. I was merely commenting on the small-mindedness of claiming that one faith with one set of beliefs is supreme to all others. There are many people in many walks of like who get by in their everyday lives by using different faith based methods and practices and beliefs. I just disagree when people claim that their way is the right way for everybody rather than what works for them individually.

[Lipslikewindows]

But what if they're not assumptions? What if one religion really is correct? I'm not talking about what people have turned that religion into (Taliban or Pat Robertson) but what the religion was actually founded on (and I'm not saying that's instantly discernable either...could take decades to figure out). I think it's entirely possible that one religion is correct. A lot of people would say that all the religions are essentially the same if you look close enough. I would say that if you look close enough, they're actually essentially different. Either one's right or their all wrong (in my view).

As far as getting by in your everyday life with ______ religion, I'm not sure that's really the point...

[k-krack]

Originally Posted by kingcoffee

Thurston was brought up catholic. He has a tattoo of a Latin cross on his left upper arm. Lee is Italian so he was most likely brought up Catholic, too. I don't know if any of the band members are still practicing Christians or other faiths. They probably all grew up with some sort of religious tenets considering that 90% of Americans consider themselves religious.

has that not come to be known as the "Sonic Life Cross"? (sorry if i'm wrong, but that's what i have been calling it)

[Cantankerous]

Originally Posted by kingcoffee

Also, what's wrong with having a tatto? People have been tattooing themselves for thousands of years! It's a human cultural institution. It's more prevalent throughout human history than marriage (maybe, I don't really know if that is true, but it could be). And why is it "gay"? He doesn't have a tatto of two cowboys eating pudding while they fuck each other in the ass! Now THAT would be "gay". The tattoo means something very important to him. Let him have his tattoo. It's just when people get dumb tattoo's of stupid things for all the wrong reasons is when tattoo's get annoying.

YEAH! YOU TELL EM!

[k-krack]

Originally Posted by kingcoffee

Also, what's wrong with having a tatto? People have been tattooing themselves for thousands of years! It's a human cultural institution. It's more prevalent throughout human history than marriage (maybe, I don't really know if that is true, but it could be). And why is it "gay"? He doesn't have a tatto of two cowboys eating pudding while they fuck each other in the ass! Now THAT would be "gay". The tattoo means something very important to him. Let him have his tattoo. It's just when people get dumb tattoo's of stupid things for all the wrong reasons is when tattoo's get annoying.

Like cherries, and the words "sexy mama" or "anything else that sounds totally dumb and meaningless" on their lower backs. and in response to my own previous post.. i hadn't read the rest of the thread, and others have called it the Sonic Life Cross.. so... cool....

[acousticrock87]

Originally Posted by kingcoffee

It's ok for people to be soothed by their faith in something bigger than themselves. That's just part of human nature. All I'm saying is that no one can be completely correct in their assumpstions and beliefs in a Higher Power. If something works for a person, then that's cool. I have plenty of friends who are devout religious people of many denominations and faiths. I have no problem with this. I was merely commenting on the small-mindedness of claiming that one faith with one set of beliefs is supreme to all others. There are many people in many walks of like who get by in their everyday lives by using different faith based methods and practices and beliefs. I just disagree when people claim that their way is the right way for everybody rather than what works for them individually.

Well first of all, you have to realize that if someone tells you that a faith like Christianity is "soothing," there is a severe lack of understanding somewhere. In order to believe in a heaven, you have to believe in a hell. Jokes aside, hell is one of the scariest possibilities imaginable. Even if you believe you're going to heaven, the thought of others going to hell cancels out any form of comfort contained in the religion. Religion is not soothing by any means, unless you choose to manipulate it like that.

The other thing is, I know what you're saying about people claiming to know the one true religion. For one person to say "you're wrong, I'm right" is pressumptuous and unconfirmable. However, someone is right. Not two different beliefs can be correct. You can have a belief that everything is correct, or that two beliefs are correct (as long as they don't contradict, which is difficult), but you cannot believe that one person who believes in Islam and disbelieves Hinduism, another person who believes Hinduism and disbelieves Islam, and a third person who has picked and chosen different areas in each to believe or disbelieve, are all correct. They may all be plausable, but either one is correct, or they're all wrong. We can discover one that makes a lot of sense relative to the others, we just can't know for sure.

[atari 2600]

different cultures interpret the religious experience differently, but in essence, most of the underlying principles are the same.

religions, in their pure philosophic form, bring the wisdom of the ages as a tool to possibly help center & discipline oneself. but, over time, power corrupts all religions; this describes much of the book of history & sadly, slants far too much of "the wisdom of the ages" to boot.

since all belief begins with doubt, the more dogmatic the religion the less it can actually instruct & the more it tends towards divisiveness & destruction; the more mutually exclusive & fundamentalist a religion is, the lesser the relative value of its particular interpretations of teachings.

most people are religious due to the institutionalized social construct of it all and actually are religious mostly through obligation, & ultimately, through fear.

religion, if not vital to one's being, quickly becomes rote meaningless routine; routine grounds us, but routine also conditions us to not receive anything new...what edifies can also poison...there is a balance to be struck in all things.

dogma is far more parts pretention than instruction; couple that flaw with inherent hypocrisy & religion isn't very attractive.

religion's saving grace is that, on its purest level, it lifts the veils of denial (far too often these days, devotion to a religion only serves to increase one's denial though) & can lead to self-knowledge that assists one on the stages of life's way.

[Cantankerous]

i will be an atheist until the day i die, which obviously explains why i got a hindu god tattooed on my arm.

[atari 2600]

the tattooing of your body with a religious symbol is a religious act, however muddled your intentions are to your conscious mind.

religion shares much territory with the arts (& much with quantum physics as well...both ends of the same continuous spectrum of evolutionary consciousness), but institutionalized religions tend to reject this over time as a threat. religion is the cipher, the mark on the wall of our cave of shadows...it is a symbol through which we simultaneously represent & also interpret the world & ourselves. It serves as the guide for our thoughts, intents, actions & behaviors, how we devote our time & energies, and how we organize our minds & our lives.

atheism itself is actually a religious choice, & most often, an essential one for a time.

[krastian]

Tattoos rule.

[sonikjuice]

1. You don't have to believe in hell to believe in heaven. Where did you get that from? You can believe whatever you want to believe.

2. It is possible that nobody is right or that many religions are somewhat correct. I'd be willing to bet that nobody is 100% correct.

Originally Posted by acousticrock87

Well first of all, you have to realize that if someone tells you that a faith like Christianity is "soothing," there is a severe lack of understanding somewhere. In order to believe in a heaven, you have to believe in a hell. Jokes aside, hell is one of the scariest possibilities imaginable. Even if you believe you're going to heaven, the thought of others going to hell cancels out any form of comfort contained in the religion. Religion is not soothing by any means, unless you choose to manipulate it like that.

The other thing is, I know what you're saying about people claiming to know the one true religion. For one person to say "you're wrong, I'm right" is pressumptuous and unconfirmable. However, someone is right. Not two different beliefs can be correct. You can have a belief that everything is correct, or that two beliefs are correct (as long as they don't contradict, which is difficult), but you cannot believe that one person who believes in Islam and disbelieves Hinduism, another person who believes Hinduism and disbelieves Islam, and a third person who has picked and chosen different areas in each to believe or disbelieve, are all correct. They may all be plausable, but either one is correct, or they're all wrong. We can discover one that makes a lot of sense relative to the others, we just can't know for sure.

[Lipslikewindows]

Yeah, I'd agree that you can believe in Heaven and not believe in Hell. But, at least in Christianity, you have to believe in the existence of Hell. You just don't necessarily have to think it's populated by anyone. Hell's existence is only necessitated by the possibility that someone could refuse to accept God's forgiveness/love and choose to be on their own instead. In Christianity, Heaven isn't a reward/carrot, Hell a punishment/stick. Heaven is just the place where God's love is allowed into people's hearts. Hell, locked from the inside, is a place people choose to be, where God respects people's wishes to leave be left alone.

BUT, like I said, it could be empty.

[Lurker]

Originally Posted by Cantankerous

upper-upper? like towards the shoulder? his sleeves are usually too long to see.

!

 

You can see that tattoo on this picture

[Lurker]

Whenever religion is brought up on this board people always start talking complete psuedo philosophical/spiritualist shit, no one thinks reasonably and no one listens to each other.

[habanero]

Yea, but you have to admit that people have been getting tattoos in the last 10 years, just like people wore their hair long in the 60's and 70's. It has become a laughable, trendy, fashion statement. Difference being, when tattoos become out of vogue, it will be a hell of alot harder to do away with.

[atari 2600]

Originally Posted by acousticrock87

It's also impossible to prove at this moment that anyone you're talking to on here isn't a computer program. But it would be stupid to think that. To say "all beliefs are unprovable so don't even try" is philosophically lazy, when you just don't want to look into it.

And the supernatural can be demonstrated if it exists (which, as coffee said, we don't know.) I think you mean to say that you believe that it hasn't been demonstrated.

I am with you in a belief in God & your argument is apropos to non-believers, but God is in no way "supernatural." God is manifested in Natural Law. All living systems & all matter in the Universe is ultimately, One and all the energy in the Universe equals exactly zero which is proven by the Law of Conservation of Matter & Energy, thus rendering your use of the prefix "super-" extraneous & potentially misleading.