Direct translation is supposed to be;

'That thing is not dead which has the capacity to continue to exist eternally,
And if the abnormal (bizarre, strange) ones (things, times?) come, then death may cease to be.'

but the English 'poetic' version is;

'That is not dead that which can eternal lie,
And with stange aeons even death may die.'

Its from the 'Al Azif', better known as the Necronomicon of the Cthulhu Mythos,
...of which I'm a fan, lol

thanks miahus
blessed be,
Amy.



- 'Ad Mortis Nos Tripudio' -

I'm surprised this thread is still around, I suppose it's technically a recruitment thread so that makes it different.

Anyone want to debate?

I find it odd how people can believe so strongly in something that they have no evidence for, especially when there are much more rational and empirically backed-up explanations with verifiable physical evidence. If a Muslim was born in the Vatican, then he would likely just as easily end up being Catholic. Science doesn't have all the answers, but the answers science finds have been growing exponentially as time passes. Science isn't error free, but it changes its conclusions when new evidence emerges instead of being a set unchanging dogma that. At least the answers they do find over time are based on observable measurable reality, so it doesn't make sense to me when people believe something written in an ancient book over hard evidence when the 2 contradict.
Religions with all knowing gods that punish people with hell doesn't make sense to me either. If God is all knowing, then free will cannot exist. If God knows everything, then he knows what you will do before you do it, and the only way he could know that is if the future is already decided, and your choices cannot go differently (hence no free will). If there is no free will, then it makes no sense to punish someone with an eternity of suffering over something they had no control of; such a God would be evil. Even if free will exists, it doesn't make sense that finite actions with infinitely tiny effects on the universe as a whole would deserve infinite suffering, after a few hundred years you wouldn't even remember what it was that you did, or that you were ever alive on Earth... seems excessive. I know Islam does have a thing where someone looking up from Heaven can bail you out of jail if they take pity on you, but what if they don't?
Religion in general does have purpose of community and morality, but both these things can be achieved without religion. Nationalism for example (as dangerous as it is) has been extremely successful at creating a sense of community, or basically any ideology. Morality is largely built in, and evolved in not only humans, but various social animals (altruism and senses of justice in chimps for example). Children too young to have learned any moral codes have been shown to instinctually have empathy. Morality exist as a way to maintain group stability; if everyone was allowed to murder, then there would be no sense of security, lying is considered wrong because if everyone lied all the time then language would become obsolete, etc. All that is required for a moral code is the basic understanding of what is good or not good for human happiness and well being, and some empathy.

I must say though 800-1100 AD was a great period for science and mathematics (concept of zero, Arabic numerals which we use today, stars mapped and named, al-gebra, al-gorithms, etc). Bagdad was the intellectual center of the world with free exchange of ideas between a variety of religions and doubters, but then this a$$hole imam called Hamid al-Ghazali decided math was the work of the devil, and destroyed the intellectual enterprise of Islam. Islam deserves some credit.

Wow, this thread is VERY unusual,yet strangely fascinating. It's great to see the religions and atheists get through 6 pages without war breaking out.

History confirms that three related tribes, Jews, Christians and Muslims, have been at war with each other since the birth of Islam. It will never change. Ever. Before that, the Jews fought the Christians.

And within the Muslim faith, when not busy fighting the others, they fight each other like Sunni and Shia.

Just after 911, the US told Pakistan that they would be bombed back to the stone age if they took the Taliban's side in the war on terror. In a public speech, the then military dictator of the only nuclear armed islamic state, openly stated that Pakistani Muslims must employ the tactic espoused by the prophet, to appease one enemy in order to continue the long term fight against both. So they helped the US, not because they supported the cause, but for the reason that Islam cannot fight both the Jew and the Christian at the same time and expect to survive. The long term strategy of islam is to fight both the Jew and the Christian, but on the terms that the Muslims select. They generally select non state actor violence, what we call terrorism. It is a product of the values of the faith. Similar modus operandi can be traced back over hundreds of years, including the many Muslim incursions into India, from the times of Genghis khan. A lot of these raids were Iike modern day terror attacks. Swift, brutal and inflicting mass carnage on innocent and defenceless victims. Justified by Islam.

The faith dictates, that those who are unbelievers, need to be brought to account before God and the faith enlists martyrs to bring the infidels to account.

I do not agree with or support such an ideology however I respect the right of others to follow the ideology of their choosing, but I deny that anyone has any right to inflict their ideology on others using violence.

Quite frankly the whole subject disgusts me.

OK this went from simple small talk to a much bigger scale. Please refrain from using verses from the Quran to promote your argument unless you are sure you know the context of the part, it's meaning, and it's scale. The Quran is a deep book, and even if you study it all your life, you still won't know everything. I think this thread should move away from religion for now.


So to hijack the thread, who be lives US is doing the "right" thing for the right reason, and who thinks it's to scam resources out of other countries? Neither of these are my personal opinions, just playing devils advocate.

all religion causes is pain and suffering . in my eyes i have never met a person of ANY religion that did not judge others as if they were their god.

at least i have yet to see any hate to Buddhist Wiccans so i am perfectly safe :D

Oh yeah, because stupid nationalist atheists with a superiority complex never cause problems. Nationalism has replaced religion in the first world, it is why that stupid world cup is so popular. "GOOOOOAAAAALLLLL MY COUNTRY IS BETTER THAN YOUR'S!!!!!!!"

Religion is a cop out! Our problems as a world wide society are more due to a lack of EMPATHY and true altruism. Ayn Rand has turned this world into the cesspit of self-centered egotistical jag bags it has become.

By the way I AM AN ATHEIST. Just that my atheism has led me to believe, that since there is nothing else out there correcting our injustices, WE HAVE TO BE JUST IN OUR LIVES TO MAKE THE WORLD LIVABLE. Atheism is not a cop out to social responsibilities, in fact it is quite the opposite. Being an atheist makes it so that you understand the fate of the world is based on YOUR ACTIONS not the actions of some god.