NationStates Jolt Archive

If God is so all powerful, why isn't the Earth in better shape?


Hmm. Interesting you should say this. Could it be that God wants to help people and make the world a better place, but some people just don't believe in him? Theres a little thing called FREE WILL. That could be whats keeping people from God, and why the Earth is turning into sh*t.

Humans apparantly have a problem with beginnings, meaning we can't seem to fathom something existing without reason. Which is why we have faith in the first place - be a funny sort of day when they find out how the universe started.

Alot of us have known how the universe started for a long time. Its all in Genesis 1

Please do. Pterry needs some more fans!
he doesn't NEED more, he has enough, but more WOULD be good.

Yeah, it's about damn time that the welsh had an empire

w00t!

I'm wearing my Welsch American shirt right now.

Okay, I'm not, but I have one!

Three years and counting. =D
Wow! Well, hopefully the old adage about "love conquers all" is true! :D

Here's a link on turtles all the way down.

http://members.tripod.com/TheoLarch/turtle.html

Hmm. Interesting you should say this. Could it be that God wants to help people and make the world a better place, but some people just don't believe in him? Theres a little thing called FREE WILL. That could be whats keeping people from God, and why the Earth is turning into sh*t.
as i have demonstrated on several other threads, free will does not require the ability to do evil. humans could have free will without having the ability to harm one another, so if there is God then He is either unable or unwilling to give us that type of world.

additionally, there are plenty of problems in the world that have nothing to do with free will. the recent tsunami is a great example.

Alot of us have known how the universe started for a long time. Its all in Genesis 1
No, it isn't. Genesis is an allegory and not to be taken literally. :)

Wow! Well, hopefully the old adage about "love conquers all" is true! :D

Thanks! Debating with him about stuff is what keeps our relationship interesting. We do a lot of talking because we're long-distance.

Alot of us have known how the universe started for a long time. Its all in Genesis 1
Beleif is not knowledge. And Genesis doesn't square with some things we know for a fact.

Alot of us have known how the universe started for a long time. Its all in Genesis 1

There is a big difference between knowledge and beleif - the difference is true knowledge rarely starts wars.

Here's a link on turtles all the way down.

http://members.tripod.com/TheoLarch/turtle.html

Just one problem with that.....she was probably crazy!!

Hmm. Interesting you should say this. Could it be that God wants to help people and make the world a better place, but some people just don't believe in him? Theres a little thing called FREE WILL. That could be whats keeping people from God, and why the Earth is turning into sh*t.


Hey, God! I don't believe in you! You gonna come smite me for messing up your world?

*waits*

Well, I was. I dunno about him.

I can't remember exactly, but I think the thing I was reffering to was part of Pratchett's inspiration; the orginal belief about the world being on the back of a turtle, and someone asked what the turtle was standing on, and some woman who believed this said maybe it's turtles all the way down.

Edit- I see someone has already found a link to this story faster and more accurately than my memory.

I can't remember exactly, but I think the thing I was reffering to was part of Pratchett's inspiration; the orginal belief about the world being on the back of a turtle, and someone asked what the turtle was standing on, and some woman who believed this said maybe it's turtles all the way down.

Again with the crazy talk

Oh yeah, I remember that now. That was some funny stuff.

Hmm. Interesting you should say this. Could it be that God wants to help people and make the world a better place, but some people just don't believe in him? Theres a little thing called FREE WILL. That could be whats keeping people from God, and why the Earth is turning into sh*t.
If god wanted people to beleive in him he'd provide proof. Then people could make informed free will choices.

Hey, God! I don't believe in you! You gonna come smite me for messing up your world?

*waits*

I did that once. A hailstorm came up suddenly and trashed the car I was in. Then I drove home wet from the rain and found out my wife left me for another man.

You may think the gun doesn't have any bullets in it, but it's never a good idea to put the gun to your head and repeatedly pull the trigger.

Just one problem with that.....she was probably crazy!!


I think it has a point though - We are stuck in an infinite loop of "who created the created of the created...." And no matter what science and religion we shout, it'll always be the same, we'll always want to go one step further back to see who made the maker.

If every question you had was answered, would you become a Christian?

yep. if you could prove the bible true, then i sure as hell would become a christian. that's the whole point. you can't. the bible is as much true as the myths of the greek and roman gods and goddesses - that is, as far as you believe. anyone can choose to believe in the bible's mythology.

i, personally, believe the christian god exists - just as much as all of the other gods and goddesses. that doesn't mean that He is always correct. anyone can claim that they are the end-all be-all. power comes from those who believe. the power is inside yourself. haven't you ever been in the middle of a crowd of believers? couldn't you feel the power there?

I did that once. A hailstorm came up suddenly and trashed the car I was in. Then I drove home wet from the rain and found out my wife left me for another man.

You may think the gun doesn't have any bullets in it, but it's never a good idea to put the gun to your head and repeatedly pull the trigger.


sorry, you just killed my bull$hit-meter.

I did that once. A hailstorm came up suddenly and trashed the car I was in. Then I drove home wet from the rain and found out my wife left me for another man.

You may think the gun doesn't have any bullets in it, but it's never a good idea to put the gun to your head and repeatedly pull the trigger.

There's some scary and respectable truth to that metaphore. and I doubt he would lie about that anyway. Coincidence is a funny old thing too, but he does have a point - don't tempt your luck, you'll run out of chances to be right very quickly if you start THAT method of disproving.

as i have demonstrated on several other threads, free will does not require the ability to do evil. humans could have free will without having the ability to harm one another, so if there is God then He is either unable or unwilling to give us that type of world.

additionally, there are plenty of problems in the world that have nothing to do with free will. the recent tsunami is a great example.

What you have unsuccessfully demonstrated on other threads is irrelevant. Free will allows us to do both good and bad. Even without the free will argument, however, there is a much better reason why God allows the world to degenerate. Because this world is temporary. It is supposed to degenerate, its only here for a short time. This world really doesnt matter very much, its eternity that matters.

Thanks! Debating with him about stuff is what keeps our relationship interesting. We do a lot of talking because we're long-distance.
Well, I married a Christian fundamentalist and the cognitive dissonance just got to be too much for us, unfortunately. Sigh. We still love each other, we just can't stand to live together for very long! Heh!

I did that once. A hailstorm came up suddenly and trashed the car I was in. Then I drove home wet from the rain and found out my wife left me for another man.

You may think the gun doesn't have any bullets in it, but it's never a good idea to put the gun to your head and repeatedly pull the trigger.
meh. i've been sending that same challenge out for about 15 years, and i've had a pretty great life. the way i look at it, if there is a God up there who would punish me for making such a challenge then i shouldn't be worshipping it in the first place :).

Your theory is flawed. You are proposing that everything needs a maker, well even the creator needs a maker. And when and if you say the creator has always been here, then that means the universe could have always been here. Thats how this discussion is most likely going to go.


Not entirely true. Not everything needed a maker. There had to be something at the very beginning of time that created everything. The Big Bang didn't just come out of nowhere, it had to be created by something, yes. But where did that come from? Stars previous had to have exploded or something in order for that to happen, and explosions before that, and so on. You trace it back, and there is a beginning somewhere. Just so happens, many people think that God created things with the Big Bang. Of course, huge possibility that im wrong, and that sitting in front of a computer in my 6th period class in my pajamas has something to do with this.

I think it has a point though - We are stuck in an infinite loop of "who created the created of the created...." And no matter what science and religion we shout, it'll always be the same, we'll always want to go one step further back to see who made the maker.

True, just one point about the free will thing everyone's on about - if you believe in god, (note the non capital g) then you should have the free will to ask him to help you, and he should have the ability TO help you.

Well, I married a Christian fundamentalist and the cognitive dissonance just got to be too much for us, unfortunately. Sigh. We still love each other, we just can't stand to live together for very long! Heh!

It's been working both ways for us - he got me to have faith again, and I loosened up his uptightness about religion. Compromise, compromise, compromise... =D

What you have unsuccessfully demonstrated on other threads is irrelevant.

quite true. however, what i have successfully demonstrated is quite pertinant to the point i was responding to :).

Free will allows us to do both good and bad.

currently, free will allows us some choices that may be classified as good or bad. however, we are also incapable of many good or bad choices. if human beings currently have free will (which is a whole other discussion entirely) then restriction of our ability to do bad things does not prevent us from having free will.


Even without the free will argument, however, there is a much better reason why God allows the world to degenerate. Because this world is temporary. It is supposed to degenerate, its only here for a short time. This world really doesnt matter very much, its eternity that matters.
ahh, such a charming theory. thank heavens (pun very much intended) that there are people with a brighter view of existence :).

Hey, God! I don't believe in you! You gonna come smite me for messing up your world?

*waits*


Thank you for ferociously misquoting me. He won't punish you, he just can't help you. And yeah, sorry, Im not sure why tsunamis happen. something with an undersea earthquake or something. Science can't disprove faith. Whatever.

Not entirely true. Not everything needed a maker. There had to be something at the very beginning of time that created everything. The Big Bang didn't just come out of nowhere, it had to be created by something, yes. But where did that come from? Stars previous had to have exploded or something in order for that to happen, and explosions before that, and so on. You trace it back, and there is a beginning somewhere. Just so happens, many people think that God created things with the Big Bang. Of course, huge possibility that im wrong, and that sitting in front of a computer in my 6th period class in my pajamas has something to do with this.
So the big bang needed a maker, but god didn't. You know this how?

as i have demonstrated on several other threads, free will does not require the ability to do evil. humans could have free will without having the ability to harm one another, so if there is God then He is either unable or unwilling to give us that type of world.

additionally, there are plenty of problems in the world that have nothing to do with free will. the recent tsunami is a great example.

Two interesting points there. It could be said that free will does require the ability to do evil. It depends on whether you would say that an act where someone does not think about how good or evil the act is can still be a good or evil act. The ability to do good cannot exist without the ability to do evil, as a good act where you could have done nothing but good isn't really any good at all- good requires it to be an accomplishment- someone had a choice, and they chose one option over another.

The tsunamiu- bloody hell, the vicar of my village actually wrote a letter to our local paper trying to blame it on the evil atheists in the world, so even though you're right, it had nothing to do with good or evil, that doesn't stop some people from trying to say it did.

sorry, you just killed my bull$hit-meter.
he makes challenging God sound like throwing out a chain letter! :)

you better believe, and pass the letter on to at least 15 people, or else you'll go bald and snakes will attack you!

If science could prove everything, we wouldn't need religion. If religion could prove it all, we would still need science anyway and, if they were both wrong, we're pretty screwed. If they're both right, everyone's happy.

Ok, i'm talking rubbish now. :p

So the big bang needed a maker, but god didn't. You believe this how?


edited for correctness.

If god wanted people to beleive in him he'd provide proof. Then people could make informed free will choices.

He did provide proof. Theres a good book out there called The Case For Christ by a man named Lee Strobel. Good book for skeptics.

quite true. however, what i have successfully demonstrated is quite pertinant to the point i was responding to :).
[snip]


The problem is that that's a cop-out. Saying "I have proved this to other people before, it is therefore true" is a stupid thing to say. I have proved that God exists to other people before but am not going to bring that up here, because the conversations Ive had with other people are irrelevant.

edited for correctness.
?

currently, free will allows us some choices that may be classified as good or bad. however, we are also incapable of many good or bad choices. if human beings currently have free will (which is a whole other discussion entirely) then restriction of our ability to do bad things does not prevent us from having free will.


In regards to Christianity, seeing as that is the religion this thread is about- Christians say the evil is in the decision to act rather than the act itself, so restricting people's ability to do bad things does not make us any less evil, so we retain the potential to do evil.

i know i need to be more tolerent of people bashing me but what about schools you cant read your bible you cant were a crucifix or youll get in trouble THATS NOT FAIR do you think its persicution in schools?
As far as I know that is not illegal in anyway in the united states

Two interesting points there. It could be said that free will does require the ability to do evil. It depends on whether you would say that an act where someone does not think about how good or evil the act is can still be a good or evil act. The ability to do good cannot exist without the ability to do evil, as a good act where you could have done nothing but good isn't really any good at all- good requires it to be an accomplishment- someone had a choice, and they chose one option over another.

The tsunamiu- bloody hell, the vicar of my village actually wrote a letter to our local paper trying to blame it on the evil atheists in the world, so even though you're right, it had nothing to do with good or evil, that doesn't stop some people from trying to say it did.

Good and Evil has always bugged me, because nobody, not even a god himself could draw me a straight line. Humanity created morality, and we put, in our opinions, what we want in each box - Each person has a different line - so how can we truly declare evil when we see it? There are obvious ones like not killing, stealing, and eating pet food - but good and evil is like saying black and white - and you'd be a bit loopy to say there isn't any grey inbetween. Infinite shades of grey.....

meh. i've been sending that same challenge out for about 15 years, and i've had a pretty great life. the way i look at it, if there is a God up there who would punish me for making such a challenge then i shouldn't be worshipping it in the first place :).

Well, I don't believe that God intervenes all that often - and He's not half as upset as most people claim He is. He's also a lot more understanding than most people say He is.

I think it was done to me more as a joke. You know, cosmic sense of humor.

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: Which brings to question "Who created God?" And that question brings up more: "Who created the one who created God?" Ad so on and so forth into infinity. lol

ARRG NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!! :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Two interesting points there. It could be said that free will does require the ability to do evil. It depends on whether you would say that an act where someone does not think about how good or evil the act is can still be a good or evil act. The ability to do good cannot exist without the ability to do evil, as a good act where you could have done nothing but good isn't really any good at all- good requires it to be an accomplishment- someone had a choice, and they chose one option over another.

i don't know about that. the ability to do something good does not, in my opinion, have anything to do with the ability to do evil things. how humans conceptualize good and evil is through contrast, so our identification of what is "good" versus what is "bad" might be changed, but i thought the point of Christianity was that morality was an objective quality defined by God...if that is the case, then the ability of humans to commit certain bad acts will not impact how their good acts measure up on the cosmic morality scale. just because humans may not conceptualize "goodness" the same way would not change the objective goodness of their acts.

He did provide proof. Theres a good book out there called The Case For Christ by a man named Lee Strobel. Good book for skeptics.
I haven't read it. Can you summarize? So far all the proofs of god I've seen have fallen into three categories.

1 I don't know how this happened, therefore a god is required to make it happen

2 You can't prove he doesn't exist

3 This prophecy/miracle/whatever is proof of the divine

None of those are convincing

I haven't read it. Can you summarize? So far all the proofs of god I've seen have fallen into three categories.

1 I don't know how this happened, therefore a god is required to make it happen

2 You can't prove he doesn't exist

3 This prophecy/miracle/whatever is proof of the divine

None of those are convincing


You make a good point - all the books, and people I have heard of, their strongest case is not proof, but the lack of DISPROOF, which in affect is the stupidist thing I have ever come across in my entire life.

Well, I don't believe that God intervenes all that often - and He's not half as upset as most people claim He is. He's also a lot more understanding than most people say He is.

I think it was done to me more as a joke. You know, cosmic sense of humor.
Disconnected kindly watchmaker ... if I could believe this is probably the closest to ability to be true (though we would have to make assumptions like kindly and so on) :) though I would be more diest then christian oh well

In regards to Christianity, seeing as that is the religion this thread is about- Christians say the evil is in the decision to act rather than the act itself, so restricting people's ability to do bad things does not make us any less evil, so we retain the potential to do evil.
well there you go. if the decision to commit the evil is what is important, then God could make us able to make those decisions but not able to carry through on them. we could still be tested based on the internal choice, but our choices would not be allowed to perpetuate injustice by taking that choice from others (i.e. through murder we rob another person of their ability to make any choices at all).

I haven't read it. Can you summarize? So far all the proofs of god I've seen have fallen into three categories.

1 I don't know how this happened, therefore a god is required to make it happen

2 You can't prove he doesn't exist

3 This prophecy/miracle/whatever is proof of the divine

None of those are convincing

All of Lee Strobels books are good. If thats all you have heard before, you should pick one of his books up.

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

ARRG NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!! :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
Do be perfectly frank Mr. Smith, you didn't prove a damn thing. You didn't answer the question, you only threw out Bible quotes.

All of Lee Strobels books are good. If thats all you have heard before, you should pick one of his books up.
Can anyone summarize one of his arguments for me?

The problem is that that's a cop-out. Saying "I have proved this to other people before, it is therefore true" is a stupid thing to say. I have proved that God exists to other people before but am not going to bring that up here, because the conversations Ive had with other people are irrelevant.
i did not want to introduce that entire tangent by re-presenting former points. however, the discussion has already gone there, so your complaint is moot at this point. feel free to get on with your life :).

Can anyone summarize one of his arguments for me?

Its a whole series of books! You want a book report on it?! Go read the reviews on amazon.com.

i don't know about that. the ability to do something good does not, in my opinion, have anything to do with the ability to do evil things. how humans conceptualize good and evil is through contrast, so our identification of what is "good" versus what is "bad" might be changed, but i thought the point of Christianity was that morality was an objective quality defined by God...if that is the case, then the ability of humans to commit certain bad acts will not impact how their good acts measure up on the cosmic morality scale. just because humans may not conceptualize "goodness" the same way would not change the objective goodness of their acts.

If an animal is given a number of options, say a number of paths and it can only walk down one, and whichever path it walks down, something good will happen to someone, has that animal done a good act? I don't think Christianity good guarantee that animal a prime spot in Heaven if the path it chose to walk down meant that millions of people's lives were saved.

Eh, time to get off my ass and actually do something today. Have fun debating, folks!

Its a whole series of books! You want a book report on it?! Go read the reviews on amazon.com.
I'll see if my local library has anything by him. I was just hoping someone could give me a brief summary of his argument for the existance of a god.

All of Lee Strobels books are good. If thats all you have heard before, you should pick one of his books up.

One word - smart - why this word? duh.

Pick up any book, like this, which have clever ways of proving god exists, and think about it: Why do they have to try so hard to come up with something? why do we need all these clever smart ass responses to cynics and clever theorys? If god were real, why should it be so damn hard to prove it?

One survival trait I hold dear is this: Truth is easier to prove, a lie is harder to fabricate - I owe my life to that.

I'm not saying that god does not exist, nor cam I calling anyone a liar, what I am saying is though, it looks very suspicious these theorys.

well there you go. if the decision to commit the evil is what is important, then God could make us able to make those decisions but not able to carry through on them. we could still be tested based on the internal choice, but our choices would not be allowed to perpetuate injustice by taking that choice from others (i.e. through murder we rob another person of their ability to make any choices at all).

But we would still have the ability to commit evil, just not be given an opportunity to use our ability.

Disconnected kindly watchmaker ... if I could believe this is probably the closest to ability to be true (though we would have to make assumptions like kindly and so on) :) though I would be more diest then christian oh well

I don't actually believe, though, that God has an actual "instance" that exists as we know existence. I have God as the ultimate abstraction. The proof goes something like this.

In order for something to exist, the abstraction of that object must exist. And, abstractions have abstractions.

Sort of like the programming concept that an Object is an Instance of an abstraction called a Class. And a Class is really an instance of an abstraction called a Metaclass - and so on. Until you reach an ultimate abstraction. The abstraction from which all other abstractions, and existence, is derived.

Not sure if you should worship it - I do believe that Jesus was an "instance" - just as we are "instances" - but we can commune with the abstraction.

In fact, I feel that most people have a need for spirituality in their lives - even if they deny it. That need for spiritual connection is a desire to commune with the abstraction. How you choose to commune with it - or if you choose to not commune with it - is up to you.

If an animal is given a number of options, say a number of paths and it can only walk down one, and whichever path it walks down, something good will happen to someone, has that animal done a good act? I don't think Christianity good guarantee that animal a prime spot in Heaven if the path it chose to walk down meant that millions of people's lives were saved.
well, for one thing, i don't see why heaven needs to be exclusive. if everybody could be a good and kind person, why would that be a bad thing? would it be so lousy to have everybody worthy of heaven? i dont think so. but any way...

there can be varying degrees of goodness to a variety of choices, and there can be many choices which are simply neutral. it's almost never a case of one good choice versus one bad choice, or even one good choice versus several bad choices...adult morality simply doesn't work that way. our choices are mixes of good and bad, and the "right" answer may not even be the same from person to person.

for instance: i can choose to be a nice and productive citizen, and can choose to never make a single consciously wicked decision in my life. however, if you are a good and productive person who ALSO goes out of your way to do additional good, then one could say you are "more good" than i am, because you have contributed more "goodness" to the world than i have. neither of us has done anything wicked, but we have varying levels of "goodness" because of the choices we have made. if you feel the need to impart differential rewards to people, this would be an easy way to do it.

I'll see if my local library has anything by him. I was just hoping someone could give me a brief summary of his argument for the existance of a god.

I will bet money on it that there is no way of a brief explanation - you will probably find 100's of little ones, which somehow to some people - add up to a whole lot more.

maybe, the parts are not worth more than their sum.

One word - smart - why this word? duh.
[edit]
Why do they have to try so hard to come up with something? why do we need all these clever smart ass responses to cynics and clever theorys? If god were real, why should it be so damn hard to prove it?

One survival trait I hold dear is this: Truth is easier to prove, a lie is harder to fabricate - I owe my life to that.
[edit]


Thats about the poorest argument Ive ever heard against God. Your argument makes all great scientific findings seem like lies, afterall it is so difficult to prove the existence of an atom (used to be, anyway).

i know i need to be more tolerent of people bashing me but what about schools you cant read your bible you cant were a crucifix or youll get in trouble THATS NOT FAIR do you think its persicution in schools?

Um...I think it's proselytizing that's forbidden in schools. If you're not bashing everyone else over the head with your beliefs, insisting that they must believe the same way or burn in hell for all of eternity, then whatever books you quietly read on your own time (e.g., your lunch period) should be perfectly acceptable.

As for wearing a crucifix - I just don't get that one. What would you think of someone wearing a hangman's noose or a guillotine around their neck? That's just plain morbid, in my opinion. *shrugs*

Thats about the poorest argument Ive ever heard against God. Your argument makes all great scientific findings seem like lies, afterall it is so difficult to prove the existence of an atom (used to be, anyway).
Let the kid have some fun eh?

I've been handed pamphlets that lumped Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and Satanists into the same category, or pamphlets that encourage their readers to go about stoning homosexuals.


I lump them in the same category too. I call it people. Or maybe "people with religious beliefs".

They might get adjectives, like "people with religious beliefs generally in accord with mine"=Buddhists and "people with slightly harmful beliefs"=Satanists (Satanism is a symptom, not a disease! As is all religion; but especially Satanism). Or maybe Buddhists=people like Jesse and Muslims=people like Taahir.

Stoning homosexuals: bad! Homosexuals getting stoned: good! :->

ok who is sick of the people who call us as Christian crazy or insane cause we have a faith is ressurection when they dont think other religions are. post your ops

I don't care what you believe. Believe that god is a purple cow and to be saved you have to eat parsley at every meal, sing "I'm a Little Teapot" and only wear rayon.

I don't care. It doesn't interest me (unless you start engraving lists of your beliefs on courthouses or something, in which case stop spending public funds on it, dammit).

What I do care, is when you fundamentalists make laws to rule everyone (no matter what THEY believe) based on YOUR religion and quotes from YOUR holy book. In a world where abortion is allowed and gays can marry, Christians of your sort would STILL be free to have monogamous, straight relationships and carry all your babies to term no matter what the circumstances. But when you outlaw things based solely on your religion's principles rather than according to the will of society, you restrict everyone and, in a sense, make us follow your religion against our will.

There are some crimes that are universally acknowledged as wrong across the board but abortion is highly debatable--it all depends on when you define the beginning of life, which is a highly philosophical question. Gay marriage? Please, that doesn't threaten the sanctity of marriage (sanctity? another religious word applied to a basic legal contract) as much as people having frivolous marriages that last 48 hours or people who divorce, remarry, divorce, remarry etc etc.

But you've put some folks in high places who want to ram these laws (which don't reflect the will of all the people) past and restrict all our freedoms. Not because they share your beliefs necessarily, but as a sop to you so that you will keep empowering them, voting for them, defending every stupid policy they enact on other things. Laws like that won't even stop abortion or gay sex, it will just mean people have to break laws and run risks in order to live their normal lives. You want to ban books, video games, movies, songs, anything that conflicts with your world view. You want everything pitched at a ten-year-old level and everything to be black and white. With us or against us. Saints or evildoers.

I hate you for that. I hate you a lot. It has nothing to do with Jesus. It has everything to do with whom you're voting for. It has everything to do with your trying to brand everyone who doesn't follow your religion as deviant and trying to force us to live like you by any means possible.

I also hate the fact that people who bring up things like this are invariably incredibly illiterate, so it feels like you're talking to a three-year old with brain damage. English, honey, it's our native tongue; you might want to learn to use it sometime. That is, if you want to actually talk to people rather than just spew a collection of random misspelled phrases.

I just feel depressed even contemplating all this. We live in different universes. I'd shrug and say "live and let live," except for the fact that people like you want people like me to convert or disappear.

Thats about the poorest argument Ive ever heard against God. Your argument makes all great scientific findings seem like lies, afterall it is so difficult to prove the existence of an atom (used to be, anyway).


poorest? How so? You can easily prove the existence of an atom, equipment exists - science is based on fact, religion is based on faith, you can not tell me that proving that there is a god is equal to proving the existence of an atom?

there can be varying degrees of goodness to a variety of choices, and there can be many choices which are simply neutral. it's almost never a case of one good choice versus one bad choice, or even one good choice versus several bad choices...adult morality simply doesn't work that way.


This comes back to the question of whether there is an objective level of good and evil, as Christianity says there is. If there is, there can be no neutral acts. All acts have consequences that will affect the Universe for ever after that, in varying degrees of importance. Thus, the total effects of an act must either weigh up at least slighty good or slightly evil. If good and evil acts require them being done consciensciouly, then yes there can be neutral acts.

I will bet money on it that there is no way of a brief explanation - you will probably find 100's of little ones, which somehow to some people - add up to a whole lot more.

maybe, the parts are not worth more than their sum.
I just checked some of the reviews on Amazon. It seems he's relying on outdated science and the basic "Science can't explain this, therefore god did it" argument. I might look over his books in my local library, but it seems very unlikely that he can make a good case for the existance of god considering the reviews I read.

This thread is entitled "bible bashers" and so, as a bible baseher myself, I shall now bash the bible.

It is among the most terrible works of literature in the history of mankind.
I tried to read Genisis chapter 5 and almost died from the resulting agony.
The notable exception is, of course, the 23rd Psalm. My word is that a wonderful poem.

It's been working both ways for us - he got me to have faith again, and I loosened up his uptightness about religion. Compromise, compromise, compromise... =D
Excellent! I wish you both the very best! :)

poorest? How so? You can easily prove the existence of an atom, equipment exists - science is based on fact, religion is based on faith, you can not tell me that proving that there is a god is equal to proving the existence of an atom?

Equipment exists now, but not back when Dalton, Thomson, and Rutherford began "trying so hard" to prove that atoms exist. The same applies to all of science. Relativity is not easy to prove yet it may be true. Most of the worthwhile scientific theories are not easy to prove.

I just checked some of the reviews on Amazon. It seems he's relying on outdated science and the basic "Science can't explain this, therefore god did it" argument. I might look over his books in my local library, but it seems very unlikely that he can make a good case for the existance of god considering the reviews I read.

Religion trying to fill in scientific gaps? it's been like that for a longggggggggggggggg time, and those gaps can only get smaller more or less right? Like I said, it's cleverly done, but generally like my earlier post said, it's all mainly based on not being able to disprove god.

Equipment exists now, but not back when Dalton, Thomson, and Rutherford began "trying so hard" to prove that atoms exist. The same applies to all of science. Relativity is not easy to prove yet it may be true (though actually, recent findings have Einstein on the ropes). Most of the worthwhile scientific theories are not easy to prove.

Granted. and like poor galileo, you could not persecute anyone in this day and age for beleiving in something - my problem is this - Even theorys start losing credibility over time, without some form of proof or another - even the tiniest of a grain keeps it alive - as so with god theorys, the problem is, the god theory still hasn't been proved nor disproved, and it's been out there for much longer than any single scientific theory - a theory is a theory right?

I tend to think more like a scientist when it comes to IF's, I don't want to be right or wrong - either would be great :p

This comes back to the question of whether there is an objective level of good and evil, as Christianity says there is. If there is, there can be no neutral acts.

why not? there are plenty of acts which seem to be morally neutral...for instance, choosing between an orange and a grapefruit for breakfast. choosing to watch baseball rather than hockey on television. choosing to take your kid to the museum rather than the zoo. there may be practical reasons why one is better than the other, but these are not choices that people would classify as "good versus wicked" choices.


All acts have consequences that will affect the Universe for ever after that, in varying degrees of importance. Thus, the total effects of an act must either weigh up at least slighty good or slightly evil.

i don't see why there shouldn't be some acts that result in equilibrium states.

also, i don't see why one would expect the "morality" of a person's choice to be determined by the infinite and unknown cosmic repercussions of that choice, rather than on that individual's (limited) knowledge, ability, and intent.

for instance, if i save a drowning child, most people would call that a "good" act. if that child grew up to be the next Hitler, the world could be said to have been adversely effected because of the huge amount of evil i enabled. however, would that make my act of rescue into an "evil" act, even though i had no possible way of knowing that i was doing wrong? i would say no, because it is not reasonable to expect finite human beings to anticipate and act based upon the infinite variables of the possible outcomes of the universe.

I don't care what you believe. Believe that god is a purple cow and to be saved you have to eat parsley at every meal, sing "I'm a Little Teapot" and only wear rayon.

I don't care. It doesn't interest me (unless you start engraving lists of your beliefs on courthouses or something, in which case stop spending public funds on it, dammit).

What I do care, is when you fundamentalists make laws to rule everyone (no matter what THEY believe) based on YOUR religion and quotes from YOUR holy book. In a world where abortion is allowed and gays can marry, Christians of your sort would STILL be free to have monogamous, straight relationships and carry all your babies to term no matter what the circumstances. But when you outlaw things based solely on your religion's principles rather than according to the will of society, you restrict everyone and, in a sense, make us follow your religion against our will.

There are some crimes that are universally acknowledged as wrong across the board but abortion is highly debatable--it all depends on when you define the beginning of life, which is a highly philosophical question. Gay marriage? Please, that doesn't threaten the sanctity of marriage (sanctity? another religious word applied to a basic legal contract) as much as people having frivolous marriages that last 48 hours or people who divorce, remarry, divorce, remarry etc etc.

But you've put some folks in high places who want to ram these laws (which don't reflect the will of all the people) past and restrict all our freedoms. Not because they share your beliefs necessarily, but as a sop to you so that you will keep empowering them, voting for them, defending every stupid policy they enact on other things. Laws like that won't even stop abortion or gay sex, it will just mean people have to break laws and run risks in order to live their normal lives. You want to ban books, video games, movies, songs, anything that conflicts with your world view. You want everything pitched at a ten-year-old level and everything to be black and white. With us or against us. Saints or evildoers.

I hate you for that. I hate you a lot. It has nothing to do with Jesus. It has everything to do with whom you're voting for. It has everything to do with your trying to brand everyone who doesn't follow your religion as deviant and trying to force us to live like you by any means possible.

I also hate the fact that people who bring up things like this are invariably incredibly illiterate, so it feels like you're talking to a three-year old with brain damage. English, honey, it's our native tongue; you might want to learn to use it sometime. That is, if you want to actually talk to people rather than just spew a collection of random misspelled phrases.

I just feel depressed even contemplating all this. We live in different universes. I'd shrug and say "live and let live," except for the fact that people like you want people like me to convert or disappear.


Angry but I can understand where you are coming from

.pdf version at: http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf

This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John:
"Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary:
"Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me:
"Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"

John:
"If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me:
"What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John:
"Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."

Me:
"That doesn't make any sense. Why..."

Mary:
"Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"

Me:
"Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."

John:
"Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me:
"Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"

Mary:
"Oh yes, all the time..."

Me:
"And has He given you a million dollars?"

John:
"Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."

Me:
"So why don't you just leave town now?"

Mary:
"You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."

Me:
"Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"

John:
"My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."

Me:
"Haven't you talked to her since then?"

John:
"Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."

Me:
"So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"

Mary:
"Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."

Me:
"What's that got to do with Hank?"

John:
"Hank has certain 'connections.'"

Me:
"I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."

John:
"But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit of you."

Me:
"Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."

Mary:
"No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."

Me:
"Then how do you kiss His ass?"

John:
"Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."

Me:
"Who's Karl?"

Mary:
"A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."

Me:
"And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"

John:
"Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."

** From the desk of Karl **

Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
Use alcohol in moderation.
Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.
Eat right.
Hank dictated this list Himself.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Everything Hank says is right.
Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
Don't use alcohol.
Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.

Me:
"This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."

Mary:
"Hank didn't have any paper."

Me:
"I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."

John:
"Of course, Hank dictated it."

Me:
"I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"

Mary:
"Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

Me:
"I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"

Mary:
"It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."

Me:
"How do you figure that?"

Mary:
"Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"

Me:
"Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."

John:
"No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."

Me:
"But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."

John:
"There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."

Me:
"Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."

Mary:
"But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."

Me:
"I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."

John:
"Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"

Me:
"We do?"

Mary:
"Of course we do, Item 7 says so."

Me:
"You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"

John:
"Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."

Me:
"But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"

Mary:
She blushes.

John:
"Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."

Me:
"What if I don't have a bun?"

John:
"No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."

Me:
"No relish? No Mustard?"

Mary:
She looks positively stricken.

John:
He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"

Me:
"So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"

Mary:
Sticks her fingers in her ears. "I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."

John:
"That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."

Me:
"It's good! I eat it all the time."

Mary:
She faints.

John:
He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.

hmm.. someone asked for proof of God... I posted my abstraction concept... and not a word about it...

Equipment exists now, but not back when Dalton, Thomson, and Rutherford began "trying so hard" to prove that atoms exist. The same applies to all of science. Relativity is not easy to prove yet it may be true (though actually, recent findings have Einstein on the ropes). Most of the worthwhile scientific theories are not easy to prove.
What recent findings have "Einstein on the ropes?" I haven't heard this yet. Please elaborate. :)

siope, that is a brilliant find.

This thread is entitled "bible bashers" and so, as a bible baseher myself, I shall now bash the bible.

It is among the most terrible works of literature in the history of mankind.
I tried to read Genisis chapter 5 and almost died from the resulting agony.
The notable exception is, of course, the 23rd Psalm. My word is that a wonderful poem.

And for those of you who like the more down-on-the-farm, X-rated sort of reading, try Ezekiel 23.

NOTE: To get the full impact of some of these verses, you may want to whip out the old Concordance from time to time to interpret such euphemisms as "flesh" and "issue" - as in the following example:

Ezekiel 23:20: For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.

And the kids want to be allowed to read this stuff in school??? :D

siope, that is a brilliant find.
I am trying to find the take off of this someone posted on here awhile back

it was how hank applied to ALL world religions ... it was great (if anyone knows of it PLEASE post!!!!)

why not? there are plenty of acts which seem to be morally neutral...for instance, choosing between an orange and a grapefruit for breakfast. choosing to watch baseball rather than hockey on television. choosing to take your kid to the museum rather than the zoo. there may be practical reasons why one is better than the other, but these are not choices that people would classify as "good versus wicked" choices.


i don't see why there shouldn't be some acts that result in equilibrium states.

also, i don't see why one would expect the "morality" of a person's choice to be determined by the infinite and unknown cosmic repercussions of that choice, rather than on that individual's (limited) knowledge, ability, and intent.

But Christianity must. The idea with Christianity is that there is an objective good and evil, as defined by God, and our own definitions of good and evil are irrelevant. Therefore, God must judge acts on the terms of their repurcussions, regardless of the knowledge of the repurcussions that the person commiting the act has. I disagreee with this idea, but that is what follows on from Christianity.

for instance, if i save a drowning child, most people would call that a "good" act. if that child grew up to be the next Hitler, the world could be said to have been adversely effected because of the huge amount of evil i enabled. however, would that make my act of rescue into an "evil" act, even though i had no possible way of knowing that i was doing wrong? i would say no, because it is not reasonable to expect finite human beings to anticipate and act based upon the infinite variables of the possible outcomes of the universe.

Again, I agree with your moral stance; I think your act there would have been a good one, but the logical extension of the teachings of Christianity is that it would have been an evil act. Christianity isn't generally big on the idea of forgiving good intentioned sinners.

hmm.. someone asked for proof of God... I posted my abstraction concept... and not a word about it...
I read it but wasn't going to comment.

Trying to "prove" God's existence is like an ant trying to prove the existence of humans. Ants can't "see" an enitre human because their visiion is too restricted. They can see the effects of huamn activity, but can only prove that the effects are due to something they can't percieve. If God is God, and we are His/Her created creatures, our minds are limited in their ability to "see" God whole.

This is not only why trying to "prove" God's existence is futile, it also explains why arguing about God's existence is futile as well. Whether or not God exists is a matter of belief and faith, not a matter of reason.

I read it but wasn't going to comment.

Trying to "prove" God's existence is like an ant trying to prove the existence of humans. Ants can't "see" an enitre human because their visiion is too restricted. They can see the effects of huamn activity, but can only prove that the effects are due to something they can't percieve. If God is God, and we are His/Her created creatures, our minds are limited in their ability to "see" God whole.

This is not only why trying to "prove" God's existence is futile, it also explains why arguing about God's existence is futile as well. Whether or not God exists is a matter of belief and faith, not a matter of reason.

Very clever point - but you're forgetting one tiny detail - ants have a slightly lower IQ rating than we do.

Very clever point - but you're forgetting one tiny detail - ants have a slightly lower IQ rating than we do.
Also, we're not trying to get ants to beleive in us. Supposedly god is. You would think god would leave some proof, maybe even visit every few decades or so.

My friend said this: "One ant cannot percieve a human, however a large number of ants can share their perceptions of the parts they can see. Even if they cannot percieve the entire human, they could percieve most of afoot or an entirety of a hand, and be able to identify it as a descrete entity"

Why would god go to the trouble of faith in the first place? why not just show himself so we can all get on with things? I find it damn hard to beleive that god would allow such pointless bickering over a simple matter of a single entity powerful enough to create the universe existing or not - oh wait...

Why is beleif the foundation of religion? is that an excuse? or is it a true purpose? if there is a god, then all the other religions caught onto the "faith trick" and got us running around in circles.

[snip]
why not just show himself so we can all get on with things?
[snip]

He will, just not yet.

But Christianity must. The idea with Christianity is that there is an objective good and evil, as defined by God, and our own definitions of good and evil are irrelevant. Therefore, God must judge acts on the terms of their repurcussions, regardless of the knowledge of the repurcussions that the person commiting the act has. I disagreee with this idea, but that is what follows on from Christianity.

i don't agree. though the objective place of a given action on the "moral continuum" would (according to this model) be set objectively, there is no particular reason why that continuum would not include the acting being's intent.

also, even if it did not, God could very easily recognize the limitations of humanity and judge the "morality" of our conduct by our actions within our limited understanding; He might know the cosmic moral outcomes, but He wouldn't necessarily have to judge us based on those outcomes.

here's an illustrating example: my little brother once tried to feed a chocolate bar to a pet dog. he did this because he is a sweet little kid, and (as he said) "the puppy was so hungry he cried at me!" he was only trying to be good and generous, and could not possibly have known that chocolate would be lethal to the poor puppy. fortunately we stopped him before there could be icky outcomes, but i think you see the example i'm working at here...my little brother's action would have had a "bad" outcome, objectively speaking, and we adults might know that, but it would be totally unfair to say he was "bad" for wanting to share his candy with the dog.

as we are supposed to be children before God, i don't see why He couldn't extend the same consideration to us.



Again, I agree with your moral stance; I think your act there would have been a good one, but the logical extension of the teachings of Christianity is that it would have been an evil act. Christianity isn't generally big on the idea of forgiving good intentioned sinners.
see, and i don't know if that is the logical extension of Christianity. i thought a major message to Christianity was that everybody makes mistakes (everybody sins), even those of us with the best possible intentions, but that God would see what was in our hearts and judge us by our faith not by our (possibly flawed) actions.

He will, just not yet.

that's sooooooooooooo last millenia :p

Very clever point - but you're forgetting one tiny detail - ants have a slightly lower IQ rating than we do.

Hmmmm...are you sure about that? So far, I haven't noticed any of them killing or torturing their fellow ants who do not believe in the idea that humans are gods who want to be worshipped by them.

Hmmmm...are you sure about that? So far, I haven't noticed any of them killing or torturing their fellow ants who do not believe in the idea that humans are gods who want to be worshipped by them.
Actually I wouldn't mind being god of the ants. I could get my worshippers to work together and steal small valuables for me and in return I'd bless them with leftover food.

Hmmmm...are you sure about that? So far, I haven't noticed any of them killing or torturing their fellow ants who do not believe in the idea that humans are gods who want to be worshipped by them.

Nor do cows, and they arn't gonna win any awards any time soon - I see your point, but it's the wrong way around - the more intelligent we get, the more destructive, not the other way around - Ants arn't smart enough to do such things - they found out that the reason monkeys do it is because they KNOW they're causing pain - intelligence is what sets us apart from peace sometimes.

it is written one may not see God and live

Actually I wouldn't mind being god of the ants. I could get my worshippers to work together and steal small valuables for me and in return I'd bless them with leftover food.


I think you're on to something here ;)

it is written one may not see God and live
that's okay, i would be satisfied with a phone call. :)

it is written one may not see God and live
Isn't that convenient?

it is written one may not see God and live

It is also written that one may not argue with me and live - I wrote it - but you don't hear anyone beleiving it any time soon. Just making a point.

That's an excuse, not a reason.

Be not decieved, God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap galatians 6:7

Be not decieved, God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap galatians 6:7
You do understand that the bible is meaningless to those who don't share your religion, don't you?

Be not decieved, God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap galatians 6:7
okay, we've established that you like the Bible. have you got any thoughts of your own you would like to share?

see, and i don't know if that is the logical extension of Christianity. i thought a major message to Christianity was that everybody makes mistakes (everybody sins), even those of us with the best possible intentions, but that God would see what was in our hearts and judge us by our faith not by our (possibly flawed) actions.

An idea of Christianity is that everyone sins, but as far as my understanding goes, that does not make any of those little sins less evil. I simply means that God does not expect us to be entirely good. Forgiveness relieves the place of burden on the person in question, but they still commiteed whatever evil acts they commited. For God to need to forgive us for minor sins which everyone does without ill intention shows that Christians believe that a sin without ill intention is still a sin, because otherwise it would not need to be forgiven.

We of the "Continent of Religious Forums" cherish our diversity of all faiths. From atheism to rabid Christianity (me) we have it all AND love it all. We all commune and debate the number 42 on www.ReligiousForums.com and so far we really like this place! :D

As for seeing God... everytime I look into a brother or sister's eyes, I catch a sweet glimpse. Yeah, even TVOR!!!

Many, many Frubals on your heads!

it is written one may not see God and live


gee, that's convenient.

did you read the post a couple of pages back?

http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf

it almost perfectly describes what you are doing to us

Come down and sit in the dust , oh virgin daughter of Babylon: sit on the ground without a throne to call your own. IS 47:1

Be not decieved, God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap galatians 6:7
In your first post you mentioned that you were tired of people painting "bible bashers" as crazies. You know what? When you try to justify your arguments by quoting a book of fairytales we don't beleive in, when you insist the world is not billions of years old (and we have proof that it is), when you use your god to try to scare people, you come off as crazy. If you don't like it, exercise some restraint.

I am trying to find the take off of this someone posted on here awhile back

it was how hank applied to ALL world religions ... it was great (if anyone knows of it PLEASE post!!!!)


http://www.wunderland.com/WTS/Ginohn/cetera/hankisms.html

Is it this one?

now why question is if someone had a gun to your head would you be willing to die for your beliefs

now why question is if someone had a gun to your head would you be willing to die for your beliefs
What beleifs? Why does it matter? Nazis were willing to die for their beleif in aryan superiority. Terrorists are willing to die for their beleif in an angry Allah. Being willing to die has nothing to do with being right or wrong.

Come down and sit in the dust , oh virgin daughter of Babylon: sit on the ground without a throne to call your own. IS 47:1

Go forth and consume a muffin. Pyromanstahn 1:1

Quotes from a relgious text mean nothing unless they can be independantly argued for. Alone, after reading what I just wrote, not many people would go off and eat a muffin. If I then followed it up with a rational argument, maybe they would. Don't quote something from the Bible without following it up with a rational argument.

my point exactly

Go forth and consume a muffin. Pyromanstahn 1:1

Quotes from a relgious text mean nothing unless they can be independantly argued for. Alone, after reading what I just wrote, not many people would go off and eat a muffin. If I then followed it up with a rational argument, maybe they would. Don't quote something from the Bible without following it up with a rational argument.
May I please be excused from eating the muffin? I don't have one nearby and I'm still full from lunch.

May I please be excused from eating the muffin? I don't have one nearby and I'm still full from lunch.

You may my child.

An idea of Christianity is that everyone sins, but as far as my understanding goes, that does not make any of those little sins less evil. I simply means that God does not expect us to be entirely good. Forgiveness relieves the place of burden on the person in question, but they still commiteed whatever evil acts they commited. For God to need to forgive us for minor sins which everyone does without ill intention shows that Christians believe that a sin without ill intention is still a sin, because otherwise it would not need to be forgiven.
i see what you are saying, but i still don't know that i agree...i always saw it as God forgives the actual sins we commit but also understands that there are "sin" which are really just mistakes or results of our limited human selves. i figured God would know the difference between minor yet conscious sins (like eating a whole tub of ice cream even though you know it's gluttony) and totally unknowing sins (like my brother sharing his candy with the dog); the first require forgiveness, but i don't think the second do.

now does anyone here fear death

now does anyone here fear death
I'm sure someone does.

now does anyone here fear death

Yes, you're point being? Believing in something because you don't want to be afraid is the worst form of cowardice.

now why question is if someone had a gun to your head would you be willing to die for your beliefs
lots of people across history have died for stupid ideas. people have drank the Kool Aide, allowed themselves to be bitten by deadly poisonous snakes, and committed suicide to hitch a ride on a comet. just because you are willing to die for something doesn't make it real, true, or good.

now why question is if someone had a gun to your head would you be willing to die for your beliefs

Its impossible to tell until you are in that situation. Many people have in fact died for their spiritual beliefs and in ways far worse than being shot. However, Peter, whose faith was unwavering swore he would not deny Christ but he did, 3 times. Its impossible to tell until you are in that situation.

do you and if your refering to me no i dont fear death cause he already paid the price

Be not decieved, God is not mocked: for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap galatians 6:7


They should re-name the bible to :1000 clever come backs to throw at non-beleivers. And that sounds more like a threat to me. I think quoting bible references is the most pointless thing to do in a debate - they're stale arguments, easily overcome, and just add to the tension to a room and simply imply that you don't have any intelligent thoughts of your own - I'm happy to debate with you, but not your bible.

do you and if your refering to me no i dont fear death cause he already paid the price
Why should I fear something that's unavoidable? I'll try to put it off, but when it comes it comes.

now does anyone here fear death
what the hell does that have to do with the accuracy or validity of Christian beliefs? smoking a great deal of marijuana can make a person much less afraid of death, so does that mean that we should all toke ourselves stupid 24/7 to avoid experiencing fear of death?

I dont fear death

Its impossible to tell until you are in that situation. Many people have in fact died for their spiritual beliefs and in ways far worse than being shot. However, Peter, whose faith was unwavering swore he would not deny Christ but he did, 3 times. Its impossible to tell until you are in that situation.
did you know it was peter who also was crucified because he would not denounce Christ

do you and if your refering to me no i dont fear death cause he already paid the price

I didn't suggest anything about you. I just assumed that you were going to use the fact that I am more scarred of death than you as an argument. Why did you ask if anyone is scarred of death?

what the hell does that have to do with the accuracy or validity of Christian beliefs? smoking a great deal of marijuana can make a person much less afraid of death, so does that mean that we should all toke ourselves stupid 24/7 to avoid experiencing fear of death?tha
t doesnt awnser my question though does it

i dont fear death cause he already paid the price
That's something that really bothers me about christianity. "he's already paid the price". Nobody can atone for harm you've done exept for you. I've done some lousy things. The regret is mine to bear. I don't give it away to anyone. It's my burden, nobody else's. Saying that your debt is paid because Jesus died seems kind of like shirking the responsibility for your actions.

tha
t doesnt awnser my question though does it
you want to know if i am afraid of death? nope. not in the slightest. and i have come to terms with death by actually facing it, not by convincing myself that i won't ever die because my magic invisible friend is going to take me to his cloud palace after my body passes away.

Anyone else think a certain person here with a low post count is sounding alot like another version of Jesussaves?

i'm beginning to think that ffc2 is someone's puppet.

i would say drunk commies (father of jesussaves), but they both seem to be logged on at the same time, and i don't think that's possible.


i don't think this is actually serious.

i see what you are saying, but i still don't know that i agree...i always saw it as God forgives the actual sins we commit but also understands that there are "sin" which are really just mistakes or results of our limited human selves. i figured God would know the difference between minor yet conscious sins (like eating a whole tub of ice cream even though you know it's gluttony) and totally unknowing sins (like my brother sharing his candy with the dog); the first require forgiveness, but i don't think the second do.

I think I'll have to think about this some more. It's a very interesting point. I still feel that Christian beliefs imply a sense that unknowing sins are bad. As I said, I will have to devote some thought to this.

did you know it was peter who also was crucified because he would not denounce Christ
Did you know that Gallileo was tortured and imprisoned because he would not renounce the truth?

i'm beginning to think that ffc2 is someone's puppet.

i would say drunk commies (father of jesussaves), but they both seem to be logged on at the same time, and i don't think that's possible.


i don't think this is actually serious.

beat you to it ;)

hey western, nice try.

i think the problem with that particular speech is that i've heard it one hundred thousand times before. at least.

any pagan nationstates?

I am Pagan. A small bit of background info. I was raised Catholic and because I lived in the South I had many friends that came from other Christian sects such as Baptist. I grew up in the Church listening to the "Word" and also say the "Word" through other points of view (if I slept over a friends house on a Saturday most of the parents took me to there church on Sunday). As I was growing up I looked around me and saw all that most of the christians around weren't following anything that was said in the Bible or in there own Churches. When I was old enough I also came to realize that I was in fact bi-sexual. I don't care how much anyone tries to convince me that Christian dogma teaches to hate the sin not the sinner it's simple not true. If I have to hide who I am just to appease God, who made me and knew that I would turn out this way, then it's not worth my time. There are many other reasons I turned but I won't get into those in this post. You can ask if you want.

The problem I have is that I'm sick of people praying for my soul! I'm sick of Christians telling me that I am a horrible person because I believe something different. I'm sick of telling me that my religion is a FAD! I'm sick of people telling everyone that tolerance is the way and then condemning me. I am a good person and neither you or you God is going to tell me different. I do not go around telling you that you're soul is going to permanently wander the earth because you don't believe in the Goddess, so please please don't tell me I'm going to burn in hell.

I'm sorry if this sounds like a rant. It partly is.

I would also like to point out that without pagans you wouldn't have your holidays or alot of their symbols. ;)

That's something that really bothers me about christianity. "he's already paid the price". Nobody can atone for harm you've done exept for you. I've done some lousy things. The regret is mine to bear. I don't give it away to anyone. It's my burden, nobody else's. Saying that your debt is paid because Jesus died seems kind of like shirking the responsibility for your actions.Christianity 101 He who believes in Jesus and asks humbly for foregiveness will be forgiven

i'm beginning to think that ffc2 is someone's puppet.

i would say drunk commies (father of jesussaves), but they both seem to be logged on at the same time, and i don't think that's possible.


i don't think this is actually serious.
No, I'm not Ffc2. I don't need to get deleted and forumbanned again so soon. Also I have logged on as Jesussaves and DC at the same time. I have two computers in my office.

I think I'll have to think about this some more. It's a very interesting point. I still feel that Christian beliefs imply a sense that unknowing sins are bad. As I said, I will have to devote some thought to this.
yeah, me too...you've given me a lot of food for thought.

wow, this was really fun. i disagreed with somebody, argued a point, and nobody got bitchy or started ending sentences with "and thats why u r stupid!!1!1!!!"

rock on, General forum still has a few sane and rational people after all!

Christianity 101 He who believes in Jesus and asks humbly for foregiveness will be forgiven
I never did anything to Jesus. I don't need forgiveness from a guy who died 2000 years ago. I ask forgiveness from those I've actually wronged.

Forgive them LORD for they not know

That's something that really bothers me about christianity. "he's already paid the price". Nobody can atone for harm you've done exept for you. I've done some lousy things. The regret is mine to bear. I don't give it away to anyone. It's my burden, nobody else's. Saying that your debt is paid because Jesus died seems kind of like shirking the responsibility for your actions.

Yes!!! My uncle once actually said to me that he doesn't feel guilty about anything he's done in his life, because of his faith!

Forgive them LORD for they not know

Actually, please do not forgive me because I've done nothing wrong. These kind of statements are why many non-christians get so angry.

Forgive them LORD for they not know


yep, he's not serious.


now the real question is...

who is he?


any mods here to get an ip check?

yeah, me too...you've given me a lot of food for thought.

wow, this was really fun. i disagreed with somebody, argued a point, and nobody got bitchy or started ending sentences with "and thats why u r stupid!!1!1!!!"

rock on, General forum still has a few sane and rational people after all!

I fell honoured to be reffered to as sane and rational by someone with over 10000 posts. You gave me lots to think about as well.

yep, he's not serious.


now the real question is...

who is he?


any mods here to get an ip check?who am i? i am merely a servant of the One whos sandle strap i am not worthy to unbuckle

Forgive them LORD for they not know

I have heard that said so many times now, mostly as a curse.

Forgive them LORD for they not know

Yes, he is either a puppet or VERY sad. Praying in a post... Unless he thinks God finds it easier to receive prayers via the internet than via the usual way.

I know I need to be more tolerent of people bashing me, but what about schools where you cant read your bible or wear a crucifix or you'll get in trouble. THAT'S NOT FAIR. Do you think its persicution in schools?

Sorry, I corrected for grammar, it was driving me crazy.

Two points here:

1. You can read a bible in class, you just can't preach it to other kids.
2. You can also wear a crucifix all you want, there is no law to stop you.

NOTE: Those laws generally apply unless in France, where all schools have enforced secualrity laws.

But on the rest of the post: no, its not persecution. If you can't read a bible, he can't read a torah, she can't read a qu'ran, etc. . . It is not only aimed against Christianity, its either all or nothing (at least in the US).

On another note - what are the major holidays schools revolve around. Christmas and Easter - two major breaks for students. What faith do they come from? Christianity. Before you cry persecution, take a careful look at what you think is wrong. Maybe its not as horrible as you thought.

on the great day of the lord every knee shall bow to him and confess him as lord

on the great day of the lord every knee shall bow to him and confess him as lord
I won't.

thou hath not a choice

Man, I read this thread thinking there would be a cool comic book posted in here or something. :(

thou hath not a choice

I thought I had free will? Was it just on loan?

on the great day of the lord every knee shall bow to him and confess him as lord


Does saying that make you feel better? like someone saying "one day you'll all be sorry" it's like letting god do your insulting for you. That is not I think, what god intented those words to be used for. I think you should get your own material fast, this is circular and pointless.

thou hath not a choice

yep, this thread's over

thou hath not a choice
So are they printing chick tracts on blotter acid nowadays?

OKAY: Ffc2, stop making pointless posts here about how you will be shown to be right on the day of judgement, its nothing but trolling.

The rest of you: stop feeding him.

OKAY: Ffc2, stop making pointless posts here about how you will be shown to be right on the day of judgement, its nothing but trolling.

The rest of you: stop feeding him.
But it's fun. Look he'll eat anything.

I am not trying to insult anyone i am merely spreading my masters words

It's a little hard to debate religion with slogans from the allmighty book left and right - we're not really feeding him, he's doing that on his own. This topic was going well, we were discussing things sensibly, a little heated true, but that is to be expected - I refuse to see the topic die like this.

But it's fun. Look he'll eat anything.
Seriously! :D

It's a little hard to debate religion with slogans from the allmighty book left and right - we're not really feeding him, he's doing that on his own. This topic was going well, we were discussing things sensibly, a little heated true, but that is to be expected - I refuse to see the topic die like this.then do something

aren't all religons, philosiphies, teachings and other stuff just our mind's stufflins trying to reflect our inner self out into the world so we can understand it more?

or make the process of unifying with our fellow peoples easier?

that's what our way of thinking's about i guess, bad way it is not!!

then do something


I will - I respect your beleifs, but I disagree with your methods - you are not making valid contributions in my opinion, instead you seem to be causing annoyance.

then do something
How do you account for the fact that the bible, in which Jesus says "if someone strikes you on the cheek offer them the other cheek" obviously gives inferior advice than the Satanic Bible, wherein Anton Sandor LaVey says "If someone slaps you on the cheek smash him on his cheek"?

OKAY: Ffc2, stop making pointless posts here about how you will be shown to be right on the day of judgement, its nothing but trolling.

The rest of you: stop feeding him.

I'm not feeding here, you understand, but I think it's quite important that I find out whether my free will is on loan...

thread lock requested, this thread has devolved into trolling, spamming, and outright stupidity by some.

aren't all religons, philosiphies, sciences, teachings and other stuff just our mind's stufflins trying to reflect our inner self out into the world so we can understand it more?

or make the process of unifying with our fellow peoples easier?


HUH?!!!!!!???!?!?!
No, science is a method that tries to remove our "inner self" from our observations of the natural world so we can understand what's really going on out there.

How do you account for the fact that the bible, in which Jesus says "if someone strikes you on the cheek offer them the other cheek" obviously gives inferior advice than the Satanic Bible, wherein Anton Sandor LaVey says "If someone slaps you on the cheek smash him on his cheek"?satan is the faher of lies.

thread lock requested, this thread has devolved into trolling, spamming, and outright stupidity by some.

NO PLEASE!! I'm sorry, I'll be serious again now. C'mmon everyone, let's be serious again.

why do you wish to be serious?

What does everyone else think about the thing me and Bottle were discussing earlier here? It was about whether Chrisitanity implies that an unknowing sin is still a sin. What does everyone think?

Then we simply move on and end the current trend the topic is going? it seems a shame - this topic was INTELLIGENT not so long ago.

why do you wish to be serious?

Because rational argument is productive. I would've thought that was an obvious one.

satan is the faher of lies.
I've seen more lies come out of creationists. Satanists also don't beleive in a being called satan.

What does everyone else think about the thing me and Bottle were discussing earlier here? It was about whether Chrisitanity implies that an unknowing sin is still a sin. What does everyone think?

What? like the ability to do wrong, but not doing it? that seems a bit.... :eek:

NO PLEASE!! I'm sorry, I'll be serious again now. C'mmon everyone, let's be serious again.
start a new thread to ask your specific question, this one is just dead.

start a new thread to ask your specific question, this one is just dead.

ok, good idea, although not now

I couldn't give a monkey's if the moon was made of cream cheese. What I do find strange is that the so called Christians of middle America are full of blood lust. (The prince of peace??? Vengeance is mine????) They will actively campaign to have someone put to death onthe flimsiest of evidence (even children) (and especially minority ethnic groups). How can it be that if new evidence to exonerate a falsely condemned man, hypocrites of the ilk of Jeb Bush will refuse to pardon and will be backed by the whole ghastly "god loves greed and capitalism" crew. It wasn't what I learnt in Sunday school.
I'm sticking with Ganesha

I fell honoured to be reffered to as sane and rational by someone with over 10000 posts. You gave me lots to think about as well.
haha, i'll take that as a compliment, though NationStates is certainly proof of the old saying that age does not always make one wise...the only thing my 10K post count definitively says about me is that i have far too much free time to be dinking around on the internet! :)

What does everyone else think about the thing me and Bottle were discussing earlier here? It was about whether Chrisitanity implies that an unknowing sin is still a sin. What does everyone think?

I disagree with your point, i cant imagine a benign being damning someone because of something he/she could not possible have known.
Bottle was a lot better at making that opinion into an intelligeble set of posts though :)

Because this world is temporary. It is supposed to degenerate, its only here for a short time. This world really doesnt matter very much, its eternity that matters.

dare i say it?

the mices experiment will soon be done :D

No, science is a method that tries to remove our "inner self" from our observations of the natural world so we can understand what's really going on out there.

oops :D my mistake

well, uh, since everything's in the same universe, It should be meant to work the same way, exept with larger things more complex, like humans compared to cyvilization

therefor our innerselves should reflect onto science, just not in that way.

I disagree with your point, i cant imagine a benign being damning someone because of something he/she could not possible have known.
Bottle was a lot better at making that opinion into an intelligeble set of posts though :)

well, to be fair, we're trying to determine what Christianity has to say about God. you or i might think it's mean for a God to act that way, but that doesn't effect whether or not Christianity states God DOES work that way. i don't know enough about Christianity to answer this question yet...more research is needed! if anybody with more knowledge of the Bible et cetera wants to take a whack at it that would be fine and dandy.

well, to be fair, we're trying to determine what Christianity has to say about God. you or i might think it's mean for a God to act that way, but that doesn't effect whether or not Christianity states God DOES work that way. i don't know enough about Christianity to answer this question yet...more research is needed! if anybody with more knowledge of the Bible et cetera wants to take a whack at it that would be fine and dandy.

Christianity states that god is good though, if they stated that god was more of an elemental force instead of a person objective evil/good acts would be acceptable for me. Thats why i stated "benign being" instead of just being.

Christianity states that god is good though, if they stated that god was more of an elemental force instead of a person objective evil/good acts would be acceptable for me. Thats why i stated "benign being" instead of just being.

I'm more interested at looking into what follows on from Christian beliefs, rather than what it directly states.

now time to apply the funness you claim the earth is billions of years old yet at the same time scientist say the sun is getting smaller every second so if the earth is billions of years old then the sun would have been huge which would have resulted in global burning killing all human race upon the planet in second

Huh? I never heard scientists ever claim that the Sun would be getting smaller? Where did you dig up that nonsense?

Even if that was true (And it's not) there's a simple explanation.


Humans have only been around for less than 1 million years. Even if the sun had started huge, we wouldn't have gotten burned, becuase we wouldn't have existed yet.

Even if that was true (And it's not) there's a simple explanation.


Humans have only been around for less than 1 million years. Even if the sun had started huge, we wouldn't have gotten burned, becuase we wouldn't have existed yet.

Oh ok, never mind i just figured out what he meant:

The sun is converting 4.26 million tons per second into energy via fusion (so yeah, it actually is losing mass). Still, if you add that up to 4.6 billion years, that's still just circa 1/3200 of the sun's current mass. Thus, the sun would have been negligibly bigger. :D

Wow, I just got back, and, over a mere six hours, this topic has gained some weight (a full 25 pages!). It needs to cut down on the Mc Donald's

As a tiny side note: Dueling Dragons at Universal Studios is unbelievably fun. Just got back, and you guys should try it sometime.

I love science, especially space. You started me on an uncontrollable rampage by talking about the sun. But I'll try to hold it back.

Every second, 4 million metric tons of hydrogen (and the occasional ton of helium) are turned into energy by the superpowerful reactions at the unbelievably hot core of the sun. Plug that number into Einstien's E=MC^2 equation, and you have quite a lot of energy.

However, the sun is heavy, and, as that heat travels through the dense layers of the sun, it becomes more controlled, and less energized, not to mention less radioactive. Then it makes the millions of miles from the corona to our atmosphere, losing thousands of degrees of heat until it's barely enough to give you a quick tan.

However, all this power is nothing special: at the surface of the sun, the temperature soars at a 5,500 degrees Celcius. Other stars, however, smash our sun's record at a full 20,000 degrees.

In a mere five billion years, a short time in the vast emptiness of space, our sun will expend its hydrogen reserves, and will also have run out of its by-product, helium. Leaving mostly carbon at its core. Because it is not big, and thus not hot enough, to fuse carbon, the sun will die. Its outer layers, which have swelled by now to reach Earth's orbit, will puff out into space, leaving a cold, dead orb called a white dwarf.

Other suns, however, go out with a bang: supermassive stars like the one mentioned above are capable of fusing carbon, and will do so until nothing but solid iron is left in the core. Since fusing iron takes in more energy then it gives out, the star loses its heat. But it will try anyway, contracting its core, it actually accomplishes this beyond-Herculanean feat for a while, until it implodes from the pressure, and the outer layers fly out at at least one-tenth the speed of light. Such energy released at one time has not been seen since the creation of the universe. In the furious heat of the explosion, rare metals, like gold and platinum, and other heavy elements, like uranium, are formed. Such a death is known as a Type II Supernova.

Type I Supernovae are even crazier, if you want, I can explain them to you, but you probably don't want, do you?

Heh, interesting. Thanks for that detailed info. :)

Btw, Type I supernova? wasn't that the case with a binary and one of them is a white dwarf that consumes the hydrogen shell of it's companion star and then re-ignites fusion, or something like that?

Yah, pretty much, except then the hydrogen shell is swapped 'twixt stars until can be no more, then one star goes through a supernova.

:( Im itching to say more about the universe, but I guess it'll have to wait for later.

fine i get it you dont like me preachin but my king is he the power three. You all are just scared when i say the name Jesus. You may say you preach to much but if you ask me id say i dont preach enough. Ill tell you God is real so dont miss the boat. But since you came off hard ill shove it down your throats. This is the message but it aint me that you mock

But... in response to the "earth being a billion years old" thing, let me state some math and science.

According to scientists, the earth's rotationary speed is increasing about one second every hundred years. Meaning that, every 100 years, the day is one second longer. At that rate, for the four billion years that they SAY our planet's been around, a mere billion years ago the Earth would have been spinning so fast that everything, nailed down or not, would have been thrown off into space.
Also, the moon is distancing itself from earth at the rate of 3.8 centimeters per year. If the earth were as old as they say it is, four billion years ago, the moon would have been half as far away as it is now. Meaning that tides would have been high enough to wipe out the coasts, and it would have been too close to mantain stability in Earth's gravity well, and would have smashed into us.

fine i get it you dont like me preachin but my king is he the power three. You all are just scared when i say the name Jesus. You may say you preach to much but if you ask me id say i dont preach enough. Ill tell you God is real so dont miss the boat. But since you came off hard ill shove it down your throats. This is the message but it aint me that you mock
I think it's funny when you invoke jesus. I only get scared when I realize someday you'll be eligible to vote. :eek:

Wait, who said I was mocking anyone, I'm just stating facts that I've learned, and edited the more atheist parts out of them, adding subtle pieces of information that glorify God.

fine i get it you dont like me preachin but my king is he the power three. You all are just scared when i say the name Jesus. You may say you preach to much but if you ask me id say i dont preach enough. Ill tell you God is real so dont miss the boat. But since you came off hard ill shove it down your throats. This is the message but it aint me that you mock


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

:p :p :p :p :p

But... in response to the "earth being a billion years old" thing, let me state some math and science.

According to scientists, the earth's rotationary speed is increasing about one second every hundred years. Meaning that, every 100 years, the day is one second longer. At that rate, for the four billion years that they SAY our planet's been around, a mere billion years ago the Earth would have been spinning so fast that everything, nailed down or not, would have been thrown off into space.
Also, the moon is distancing itself from earth at the rate of 3.8 centimeters per year. If the earth were as old as they say it is, four billion years ago, the moon would have been half as far away as it is now. Meaning that tides would have been high enough to wipe out the coasts, and it would have been too close to mantain stability in Earth's gravity well, and would have smashed into us.
1 No, if the speed is increasing, it would stand that the earth would have been spinning slower a billion years in the past. Also, has the rate of increase been constant? If not, then your theory is fucked.

2 See the second sentance of part 1

Oh yes, and, who knows, he could be able to vote now.

I myself am hapy if he is, because then it's just another deterrent for the atheists to get over.

you guys fear God and Jesus

Came on the board just recently and don't have time to read every thread. Could someone please fill me in on what's happening?

you guys fear God and Jesus
No, I fear religious zealots imposing laws based on their chosen myth, whether christian or muslim, on my country.

you guys fear God and Jesus

i cannot fear what does not exist.

i do fear the idiots who act in his name.

Came on the board just recently and don't have time to read every thread. Could someone please fill me in on what's happening?
We've got a new Jesussaves. His name is Ffc2

1 No, if the speed is increasing, it would stand that the earth would have been spinning slower a billion years in the past. Also, has the rate of increase been constant? If not, then your theory is fucked.

2 See the second sentance of part 1

Of course not, the rate would not have been constant. I'm only stating the best-case scenario. From theories about how the Earth (and moon) were created, combined with how the sun was created, it stands to reason that they shouldn't even be there. If all the dirt was moving around the sun so fast, how could it have clumped together? And how would it have created a big enough lump to have a gravitational force that pushes the sun's own out, huh?

Wait, who said I was mocking anyone, I'm just stating facts that I've learned, and edited the more atheist parts out of them, adding subtle pieces of information that glorify God.
If you edit facts by deleting information you don't like and adding information you do like they are no longer facts.

you guys fear God and Jesus

Fear? I have nothing to fear from them. They'll never show up.

Came on the board just recently and don't have time to read every thread. Could someone please fill me in on what's happening?


ffc2 started out by saying that christians are being persecuted for believing foolish myths.

then we talked about the bible and evolution, both of which our side won (basically, the religious types stopped arguing and left)

now, it's a farce, with ffc2 spouting religious drivel at us, saying we're all going to hell, that jesus loves us, that we fear god, yadda, yadda, yadda.

DAD GUMMIT!!! What I edit out is the part that says the sun is already a four-freaking-billion years old. Also, the parts that tell you about the godforsaken 'big bang.'

What I add is minor things, like saying 'the creation of the universe,' rather than 'since the Big Bang,' which you know full well I could have said. Implying a deliberate design.

i cannot fear what does not exist.

i do fear the idiots who act in his name.what will you do if your wrong

Of course not, the rate would not have been constant. I'm only stating the best-case scenario. From theories about how the Earth (and moon) were created, combined with how the sun was created, it stands to reason that they shouldn't even be there. If all the dirt was moving around the sun so fast, how could it have clumped together? And how would it have created a big enough lump to have a gravitational force that pushes the sun's own out, huh?
Dude, you admited to changing facts around to suit your religious belifs. I'm not going to trust anything you post from that point on. Sorry, I need independant confirmation from a serious scientific source to buy into your premise.

Fear? I have nothing to fear from them. They'll never show up.and if they do?

DAD GUMMIT!!! What I edit out is the part that says the sun is already a four-freaking-billion years old. Also, the parts that tell you about the godforsaken 'big bang.'

What I add is minor things, like saying 'the creation of the universe,' rather than 'since the Big Bang,' which you know full well I could have said. Implying a deliberate design. SEE EARLIER MESSAGE

what will you do if your wrong
What will you do if you're wrong about Allah?

what will you do if your wrong


i'm not going to plan for things that won't happen.

i don't plan for the case where god exists any more than i plan for the day that i turn into a giant turnip

what will you do if your wrong

Flick God off for being such a bloody idiot.

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: DAD GUMMIT!!! What I edit out is the part that says the sun is already a four-freaking-billion years old. Also, the parts that tell you about the godforsaken 'big bang.'

What I add is minor things, like saying 'the creation of the universe,' rather than 'since the Big Bang,' which you know full well I could have said. Implying a deliberate design.

Just in case if you missed it on the LAST GODDAMN PAGE!!! :headbang:

In the end, why does it matter if a person believes in a diety or not? Shouldn't what a person does in life take precedence over what they believe?
I think that any person can get to heaven (its existence permitting, if it does) by doing good and helping others.

DAD GUMMIT!!! What I edit out is the part that says the sun is already a four-freaking-billion years old. Also, the parts that tell you about the godforsaken 'big bang.'

What I add is minor things, like saying 'the creation of the universe,' rather than 'since the Big Bang,' which you know full well I could have said. Implying a deliberate design.
Do you honestly think scientists pulled the 4 billion year figure out of their ass so as to discredit the bible? They have facts to back their figures up.

What will you do if you're wrong about Allah?you see you change the question to hide your insecurity of knowing your wrong

and if they do?
I'd tell them what idiots they are for not being up front with everybody from the start.

you see you change the question to hide your insecurity of knowing your wrong


lol

this is jesussaves all over again, all right

you see you change the question to hide your insecurity of knowing your wrong
No, I changed the question to show you how stupid the original question was.

you see you change the question to hide your insecurity of knowing your wrong

So maybe your religious fervor is changing the subject to hide the insecurity about what happens after death?

see you did not awnser the question

lol

this is jesussaves all over again, all right
Right? This is fun. Plus I don't have to do any of the work.

Man will never walk on the moon.

http://www.1stoppostershop.com/products/Impact/space/im_EarthFromTheMoon.jpg



People also say God doesn't exist.

see you did not awnser the question
Sure did. I'll repeat my answer. I'd tell Jesus, god, whatever how absolutely fucking retarded he/she/it is for not telling us what was going on from the beginning.

see you did not awnser the question
What is the question? I might be able to answer it.

Do you honestly think scientists pulled the 4 billion year figure out of their ass so as to discredit the bible? They have facts to back their figures up.


No, I think they pulled the number out of their head because they think they have facts. I read an article about a Carbon Dating experiment that resulted in saying a freshly killed seal had been dead for 20,000 years.

Maybe their facts are faulty.

Man will never walk on the moon.

http://www.1stoppostershop.com/products/Impact/space/im_EarthFromTheMoon.jpg



People also say God doesn't exist.


Those points are not relevant. Making it to the moon was physically possible.


God is not. Simple.

Man will never walk on the moon.

http://www.1stoppostershop.com/products/Impact/space/im_EarthFromTheMoon.jpg



People also say God doesn't exist.
Yeah, that's dumb. You know, some people also think the easter bunny, leprechauns, and elves don't exist. Shit, they have no proof that they don't exist.

thats the problem you didn't listen to it

No, I think they pulled the number out of their head because they think they have facts. I read an article about a Carbon Dating experiment that resulted in saying a freshly killed seal had been dead for 20,000 years.

Maybe their facts are faulty.
You know, they do review each other's data and look for errors.

Crap-OLA.

You people are tough cookies to break, and I can't do too much reading because so many more posts appear between my reading and subsequent writing.

No, I think they pulled the number out of their head because they think they have facts. I read an article about a Carbon Dating experiment that resulted in saying a freshly killed seal had been dead for 20,000 years.

Maybe their facts are faulty.

The carbon dating thing is because carbon dating is ineffective anywhere except within an extremely limited time frame: Too long or too short, and it'll give you all sorts of screwed up answers.

thats the problem you didn't listen to it

I listen to it, but I hear nothing but the rantings of a madman.

Again, the same moon rock was measured to be both 2000 and 200,000 years old

I found this site. It lists a large number of arguments for the "old creation" of the universe. It also lists rebuttals. Compare the two and see which has a stronger argument.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/oldearth.htm

thats the problem you didn't listen to it


look:

your question was: "what would you do if you were wrong about god?"

DC's answer was:" i would tell him what a prick he/she/it was for not letting us all know at the beginning"

then we posed a question to you: "what would you do if you were wrong about allah?"

you have yet to answer.

so tell us:

what would you do if you were wrong about allah?

Hey Ffc2, do you know how to do an exorcism? I think I got a demon making me blaspheme. Fuckin' Jesus fuckass.

If you edit facts by deleting information you don't like and adding information you do like they are no longer facts.

I don't see him doing that at all. However, I do see you doing it with other people's posts, all the time.

Again, the same moon rock was measured to be both 2000 and 200,000 years old

That's even simpler. Carbon dating only works on things that were previously alive.

I don't see him doing that at all. However, I do see you doing it with other people's posts, all the time.
Read his post about deleting the atheist portions of facts and adding words that glorify god. He admits to altering facts. Also, I do everything in my power to be honest. If I misquote someone it's out of human error, not malice.

One of the arguments there is one I love to respond to, the speed of light.

'If the galaxy is 100,000 light years wide, and we can see stars on the other side, how can the earth be young?'

God made the universe mature, as in, galaxies were already made, light had already traveled, and, while there were infant objects, from monkeys to galaxies, there were also those which would appear very old to the eye.
A night sky with only a few stars would look very boring, so God made the light already reach us.

Here is a question I have always had for those who doubt the "old creation" of the earth. Why is there so much evidence for the old creation of the universe? Even if all of it is somehow wrong, why would God even bother with this in the first place? Why wouldn't he just put proof that says "the Earth was created in X, the Universe in Y" and so on? That in no way helps build faith or anything else, so I can't see any real logical reason for doing so.

That's even simpler. Carbon dating only works on things that were previously alive.
They didn't use carbon dating.
I forgot what dating they did use, but it had an age limit of (i think) 2 billion years.

One of the arguments there is one I love to respond to, the speed of light.

'If the galaxy is 100,000 light years wide, and we can see stars on the other side, how can the earth be young?'

God made the universe mature, as in, galaxies were already made, light had already traveled, and, while there were infant objects, from monkeys to galaxies, there were also those which would appear very old to the eye.
A night sky with only a few stars would look very boring, so God made the light already reach us.
That is such a load of crap. If he could spend the time to make that, he could also maybe spend the time to make a world free of malice and war?