A Rena vs Anti Debate

[Anti Hacker]

okay well first of all there is no proof of this so called lillith ever existing. Also if the creation story is from a myth from another religion then that merely means that God didn't tell humans how he made them. it probably wasn't from amoebas to monkeys though because there is no historical proof of it happening.

Of course it's a myth. I was comparing a myth to a myth, the bible is also a myth. There's no proof of Eve either. I'm not saying God told us how he made us (if he were to exist - why would he?) I'm just saying the religion (which is separate from God) created a myth which it modified from a pure form to a corrupt form. The religion is corrupt. You never cite anything.

Also there is historical proof of darwinism. In fact, there is even RECENT PROOF that darwinism is still occuring even now. Domestication. The dog descended from the wolf through random mutation. It's undeniable. There are museums full of 'Bone Records' showing the process of evolution. We even see random mutations that aren't so successful occuring these days in the form of people with six-fingers per hand etc.

You can't claim we were made in the image of God when one day our image will change again - and will continue to do so forever. We have no image, we mutate. It is foolish to assume that we as humans have finished evolving. We havent. We are imperfect because we have room to improve through mutation. If God made us in his image then he made us imperfect thus stating that God is IMPERFECT. Contradiction within the religion yet again.

second you can't say bad things about religion because darwinism IS religion. the definition of religion is a person's beliefs and opinions of the existence and nature of a divine being or beings. so therefore if you got rid of religion you would also get rid of darwinism. all charles darwin did is create a new religion basically based on hedonism. there is not enough proof to say that man evolved from amoebas. there is evolution but not of that sort.

Wrong again. You just said it yourself "beliefs and opinions of the existence and nature of a divine being or beings" - no devine being or beings in Darwinism. You lose. Plus, it isn't opinion. It's fact. Even if it has some contradictions it has infinitely less than any religion.

secondly if there is no God there is no right and wrong. therefore you are saying that burning, torturing, murdering, raping, hating people because of their race, sex or if they are heterosexual homosexual or bisexual and beating people is not wrong.

Another secondly? Hah, you have an interesting understanding of numbers...

Why do you claim that if there is no God there is no right and wrong? I dispute that. In fact all that says about you is that if you were personally an athiest you might turn to crime. Disturbing. I wouldn't.

Anyway, right and wrong is defined by human values. Just like humans wrote the bible (and defined the values within it. God didn't do that). In fact right and wrong is a concept throughout history which is in a constant state of flux around the world. Because right and wrong can be seen as slightly different in different areas/cultures/times this further proves there is no governing universal right/wrong aka God.

thirdly people can take their religion too far. I will admit that but that doesn't mean the religion itself is evil it just means that the believers took it too far.

If there was no religion, no one could take it too far. Why run the risk? Is your own peace of mind worth the deaths of millions world wide? How selfish.

fourthly if there was no religion people wouldn't care whether or not people thought something is wrong because if there is no religion it can't be right or wrong.

Wrong, social values exist. Athiests and Agnostics alike have values inspired by family units and wider society to protect the human race innately. Therefore religion is not necessary. Your reliance on an external being to tell you what is right and wrong disturbs me. If God appeared and told you to kill innocent babies you would probably do it. Your thinking is dangerous.

fifthly I don't want my kids learning that these religions are okay when everybody knows it isn't
satanism(do everything you can to hurt people at every given chance) hinduism (anybody lower on the system is inferior and anyone higher is superior and that can never change)
darwinisnm (you can do whatever you want because there is no God)
hedonism(doing whatever you want whenever you want.)

these all teach something that is wrong and everbody knows it.

Darwinism never says "Do what you want". It just doesn't offer any structure. You know why? Because family and society are supposed to form this. Nothing else. And nothing fanatical.

Also not all forms of Satanism tell you to hurt people o_O Do you even understand what satanism is? No, because of religious-propeganda.

For example, Laveyan satanists do not nessicerily worship satan as God at all, it's more along the idea or concept of what Satan is:

LaVeyan Satanism is a religion founded in 1966 by Anton LaVey. Its teachings are based on individualism, social Darwinism, self-indulgence, and "eye for an eye" morality, with influence from Friedrich Nietzsche and Ayn Rand, while its rituals and magic draw heavily from occultists such as Aleister Crowley. Borrowing Crowley's terminology, its adherents define Satanism as a "Left-Hand Path" religion, rejecting traditional "Right-Hand Path" religions such as Christianity for their perceived denial of life and emphasis on guilt and abstinence. Unlike Theistic Satanism, which is rejected by the Church of Satan as Christian heresy rather than Satanism, it does not literally worship Satan, but rather uses "Satan" as a symbol for people's natural inner desires.[1]

Anton LaVey established Satanism's first and largest religious organization, the Church of Satan, in 1966, and codified Satanic beliefs and practices in the Satanic Bible in 1969. According to the Church of Satan, there are many Satanists around the world, including both members and non-members. It rejects the legitimacy of any other organizations of Satanists, dubbing them reverse-Christians and pseudo-Satanists. Although exact numbers have never been released, it has been estimated that the number of adherents is in the tens of thousands.[2]

Now stop being so damned ignorant.

sixth i do not wish to end this fight because my arguments are weak I wish to end it because if we don't everybody on this site is going to choose a side and be bitter enemies to the other side. I don't want that to happen but it will if we try to make this argument last.

Not true, heated debate is great. My mother and sister dislike it most of the time but my friend Kim, I and my father rather enjoy it. It's not hate it's just passion! Just because I hate religion that... Doesn't mean I really hate you. In fact I find you rather interesting (although I didn't at first).

seventh okay well the person you quoted has either done no research therefore they are an idiot or they are an eight year old who like you said blindly believes what is spoon fed to them. therefore if they have done no research they probably conceded your argument and are now an atheist. congratulations. you probably turned a reasonably happy person miserable. now first of all God wouldn't send you to hell because you don't believe in him. He would send you to hell because of things you did that you knew was wrong and didn't do things to try to make up for it or he might punish you in some way if you constantly blaspheme him and insult the people who do believe in him. which could actually lead you to hell but I'm not sure.

Sending people to hell because they don't believe in your cause is like when Hitler sent all those people to burn because they were speaking out against him (or were Jewish - God discriminates against homosexuals as Hitler did against many sects of society) - Interesting that it's easy to draw parallells between Hitler and God... >_>;

now I have to get off so adios

Adios.