NationStates Jolt Archive

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.
If you admit the existance of supernatural entities who can break the rules of nature, how can you do any science? That's why creationism is unscientific. Also, since most all creationist arguments are based on old science that's been replaced with more correct models, it's dishonest.

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


lol!

all of their arguments are the same thing!

science: we have seen a process that happens anually and leaves behind visible remains. these remains show that the (earth/universe) must be at least <number> years old!

religion: well, it only looks that way because god wanted it to look as if there has a pre-creation history.

lol!

all of their arguments are the same thing!

science: we have seen a process that happens anually and leaves behind visible remains. these remains show that the (earth/universe) must be at least <number> years old!

religion: well, it only looks that way because god wanted it to look as if there has a pre-creation history.
Yeah, great. 1 God made things look old so he could trick you. 2 Maybe the laws of nature vary randomly. Two great explanations. One could also suggest 3 Maybe witches are making it look as if the bible is wrong, trying to corrupt the faithfull.

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?

Exactly. Why spend the time making up an elaborate creation hoax, and then blow it when creating humans (I think free will is probably a kind of "escape hatch" for religons to escape questions over this)

It's quitting time and I need to get started on my weekend. See you all on monday. It's been fun.

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?i would admit i was wrong but i dont need to worry because im right

i would admit i was wrong but i dont need to worry because im right
As you put it:


Proove it.

Your right im wrong


Thank you

Wow, how very....



Dumbassish.

i don't quite understand why this is such a big deal between Christians (or another religion) and non-believers, personally as a christian i don't see why this is such a big problem. i have faith in God, in his grace, in his love, and it is easy for me to accept that he made the universe. the bible account of creation just gives us an overview of creation. why waste space in the bible talking about things we're never going to understand? and anyway, the bible is about the truth of God, in his qualities, about how we should relate to him and others.

Young earth/ old earth? thats not the point, dont get side tracked into this debate that will not be answered by us here (only God will truly be able to do that) but focus on the truths of God. like the grace he gives us to be forgiven for sins?

the science also, science is just a study of the Universe we live in. if God created the universe, then we are studying his creation, don't use it as an argument. and the evolution debate, don't think that because of science it is right and creation is wrong. i'm even saying i'm right about the universe being created. both mechanisms need each individual to have faith in each. bith are not cold hard fact. i have faith in God and that he created the universe i live in, and he created me. i have faith in this, and i would like to be respected for that.

i only became a christian a year ago, and already i have found so much prejudice against me for believing this, and people throwing out the evolution debate when it is almost like a triviality to me. not that i dont understand the process, i am a science student going on to do biochem at Uni next year, and its not that i'm just shunning the theory because of my beliefs.

as i say proove it

what will you do if your wrong
"Well, I tell you, if I have been wrong in my agnosticism, when I die I'll walk up to God in a manly way and say, Sir, I made an honest mistake." - H. L. Mencken

so thats it?

so thats it?
so what's it?

youll just accept that basic hell for eternity because of your selfish pride?

youll just accept that basic hell for eternity because of your selfish pride?
what hell? what selfish pride?

if God made me, and if God is all-knowing, then He knows exactly why i cannot assume his existence. He knows that i am being honest to myself, that i am living as honorably as i can, and that i will be fully prepared to admit my error if i am ever given sufficient reason to believe in Him. if He would send me to hell for being the kind of person who refuses to submit to gullibility and fear, then He's not a God i should be worshipping...it may sound melodramatic, but i would rather be sent to hell than live my only human life as a coward and a fraud.

my lack of faith in God isn't due to any particular pride, but rather it is exactly the opposite. i believe my human faculties are far too limited to ever be able to determine if God exists or not, and therefore i refuse to be so arrogant as to assume i know what God is or what God wants. i refuse to accept the prideful claims of other humans who say they have the ability to know God's will. i embrace total humility when it comes to my ability to know of God.

youll just accept that basic hell for eternity because of your selfish pride?


i don't believe that there is a hell.

i believe that after we die, we will go to the floading island of mandango, and spend eternity enjoying the pleasures that await me there.


prove me wrong.

i dare you

you wouldn't be submitting to fear God doesn't want you to fear him he wants you to love him and believe in him because he created you

you wouldn't be submitting to fear God doesn't want you to fear him he wants you to love him and believe in him because he created you

Then stop appealing to fear to try to convince.

you wouldn't be submitting to fear God doesn't want you to fear him he wants you to love him and believe in him because he created you
you were the one who implied God would send me to Hell for failing to believe...i would say that threatening an eternity in a torture dimension qualifies as using fear tactics.

at any rate, He did not see fit to give me sufficient faculties to know whether or not He is real, so i assume that He was either unable or unwilling to do so. if He was unable, then He will understand that i had this inevitable limitation because even He could not overcome it. if He was unwilling, He clearly does not want me to know of Him (at least not yet) and thus would not reasonable be displeased with me for acting according to the mind He gave me. if He understands or intentionally caused my limitations but will then seek to punish me for them, He would then be an unjust God and i would not want to bow to Him anyway.

i have no more reason to believe in your God than i have to believe in Allah, Zeus, Thor, Baal, or the Mother Goddess. rather than presuming to make a choice of which God is real, i admit my limitations and my inability to know which (if any) of the gods is real. if your God truly does hate pride, then i don't think i'm the one who needs to be fearing His wroth.

i don't believe that there is a hell.

i believe that after we die, we will go to the floading island of mandango, and spend eternity enjoying the pleasures that await me there.


prove me wrong.

i dare you


i'm still waiting

ill use verse. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begoten son that whoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting life john 3:16

i don't believe that there is a hell.

i believe that after we die, we will go to the floading island of mandango, and spend eternity enjoying the pleasures that await me there.


prove me wrong.

i dare you

With pleasure.

Since we have a book that is thousands of years old, that contains within its bindings hundreds if not thousands of theories that have never been proved wrong beyond a doubt, stating that those who put their faith in God will go to heaven - where does your belief come from? At the risk of lowering myself to the level of most of these so-called bible-bashers, your belief is even more unfounded than you're making ours out to be.

In short - leave us alone. This "forcing of faith upon other people" is called good will. Those christians who go about spreading the word CARE about you sadarses that are bashing us to hell and gone. Why else would they be urging you to believe so you can go to heaven instead of hell? Wouldn't you rather take a chance to believe so you can go to heaven if it turns out there IS a God? It doesn't even cost you anything.

ill use verse. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begoten son that whoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting life john 3:16


sorry, we only accept unbiased sources here.

plus, you haven't proven me wrong yet.


neither have you proven yourself right

ill use verse. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begoten son that whoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting life john 3:16
that's not proof of anything. give me one reason why i should believe the words of your holy text, but not the words of any other holy text. keep in mind that the entire myth of Jesus was stolen directly from the myth of Horus, so your book is already lacking in credibility.

sorry, we only accept unbiased sources here.

plus, you haven't proven me wrong yet.


neither have you proven yourself right

With pleasure.

Since we have a book that is thousands of years old, that contains within its bindings hundreds if not thousands of theories that have never been proved wrong beyond a doubt, stating that those who put their faith in God will go to heaven - where does your belief come from? At the risk of lowering myself to the level of most of these so-called bible-bashers, your belief is even more unfounded than you're making ours out to be.

In short - leave us alone. This "forcing of faith upon other people" is called good will. Those christians who go about spreading the word CARE about you sadarses that are bashing us to hell and gone. Why else would they be urging you to believe so you can go to heaven instead of hell? Wouldn't you rather take a chance to believe so you can go to heaven if it turns out there IS a God? It doesn't even cost you anything.

you were the one who implied God would send me to Hell for failing to believe...i would say that threatening an eternity in a torture dimension qualifies as using fear tactics.

at any rate, He did not see fit to give me sufficient faculties to know whether or not He is real, so i assume that He was either unable or unwilling to do so. if He was unable, then He will understand that i had this inevitable limitation because even He could not overcome it. if He was unwilling, He clearly does not want me to know of Him (at least not yet) and thus would not reasonable be displeased with me for acting according to the mind He gave me. if He understands or intentionally caused my limitations but will then seek to punish me for them, He would then be an unjust God and i would not want to bow to Him anyway.

i have no more reason to believe in your God than i have to believe in Allah, Zeus, Thor, Baal, or the Mother Goddess. rather than presuming to make a choice of which God is real, i admit my limitations and my inability to know which (if any) of the gods is real. if your God truly does hate pride, then i don't think i'm the one who needs to be fearing His wroth.
thats just it he gives you chances to get to know him

Wouldn't you rather take a chance to believe so you can go to heaven if it turns out there IS a God? It doesn't even cost you anything.
Pascal's wager is crap. if Allah is the real God, it could cost us a bundle to worship your God. hell, if the Catholics are right and the Protestants are wrong, it could cost us a ton to worship the wrong God. and if you all are wrong (which i believe you are) then we lose the most of all, because we will have failed to completely experience the only existence we shall ever have.

personally, i think i have far more to lose by taking my chances on your beliefs than i do remaining agnostic.

that's not proof of anything. give me one reason why i should believe the words of your holy text, but not the words of any other holy text. keep in mind that the entire myth of Jesus was stolen directly from the myth of Horus, so your book is already lacking in credibility.xplain this "myth"

Pascal's wager is crap. if Allah is the real God, it could cost us a bundle to worship your God. hell, if the Catholics are right and the Protestants are wrong, it could cost us a ton to worship the wrong God. and if you all are wrong (which i believe you are) then we lose the most of all, because we will have failed to completely experience the only existence we shall ever have.

personally, i think i have far more to lose by taking my chances on your beliefs than i do remaining agnostic.

In that case, why not leave us alone and let us get on with our lives, instead of constantly biting at our heels proclaiming we are wrong at every twist and turn? You are the people who tell us to not force our beliefs unto anyone - yet, here you are, doing it right now...

*snip*.


my turn.


the mystical being, whose name is unable to put to speech, appeared to the great prophet zarwegh in the year of 2289.4 GE (about 228BC)

from that moment on, zarwegh himself has appeared to us in appirations, and helps us to see the great truth to what the supreme being has to offer.

for a simple $28.75 a month, or one hour of prostration before the Holy Icon, we recieve access to the floating island of mandango.



how can you possibly say that the 'bible' written by so-called 'prophets' is true, when i have seen zarwegh himself?


[/mockery of the christian death cult]

In short - leave us alone. This "forcing of faith upon other people" is called good will

Just like the Crusades? Or maybe the policies of the Spanish in SA, or the Inquisiton, or the Puritans in New England? Or even more recently, what about what a lot of the things coming from the far right. I still remember the classic Ann Coulter quote "invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity" This kind of "good will" has caused more trouble than any other ever has and ever will.

In that case, why not leave us alone and let us get on with our lives, instead of constantly biting at our heels proclaiming we are wrong at every twist and turn? You are the people who tell us to not force our beliefs unto anyone - yet, here you are, doing it right now...
i beg your pardon? i'm not trying to force you to believe in anything, i'm simply pointing out why Pascal's wager is stupid, and why there is no more concrete reason to believe in Christianity than there is to believe in any other religion or superstition. i don't "bite at your heels," i actually am often in the position of actively defending religious freedoms, so if you aren't prepared to thank me for my efforts on your behalf then you can at least just chill the hell out and quit pushing your persecution complex at me.

my turn.


the mystical being, whose name is unable to put to speech, appeared to the great prophet zarwegh in the year of 2289.4 GE (about 228BC)

from that moment on, zarwegh himself has appeared to us in appirations, and helps us to see the great truth to what the supreme being has to offer.

for a simple $28.75 a month, or one hour of prostration before the Holy Icon, we recieve access to the floating island of mandango.



how can you possibly say that the 'bible' written by so-called 'prophets' is true, when i have seen zarwegh himself?


[/mockery of the christian death cult]

y'know, they say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit... I guess they were right.

The thing here is, you are absolutely purely intolerant, ignorant and a general bastard when it comes to our, as you put it, quotes and all, "theories". And I reiterate, here you are trying to make me believe in this zarwegh character, while you flame us out like an exploding oil refinery for even mentioning God's name?

In short - leave us alone. This "forcing of faith upon other people" is called good will.

you want to help us?

get out of our faces.

get out of the churches

get into the labratories and schools.

create a cure for something or teach impoverished children how to read.



just think: the guy who could have cured cancer didn't get a chance to go to college because he spent his free time on his knees in the confessional instead of studying biology.

I'll tell u the truth i respect everyones opinion even if i believe them wrong and i wont hurt them or anything if i think there wrong. No im going to try to persuade you to my faith.

In short - leave us alone. This "forcing of faith upon other people" is called good will. Those christians who go about spreading the word CARE about you sadarses that are bashing us to hell and gone. Why else would they be urging you to believe so you can go to heaven instead of hell? Wouldn't you rather take a chance to believe so you can go to heaven if it turns out there IS a God? It doesn't even cost you anything.

exactly, i wouldn't be able to live with myself if i didn't tell people about God, how selfish would i be? having this amazing relationship and eternal life but keeping the secret?

you want to help us?

get out of our faces.

get out of the churches

get into the labratories and schools.

create a cure for something or teach impoverished children how to read.



just think: the guy who could have cured cancer didn't get a chance to go to college because he spent his free time on his knees in the confessional instead of studying biology.


How can we get out of your faces if we live in the same world?

How can we get out of the churches completely when it only takes as little as an hour per week?

How can we get into the laboratories and schools if a) we are already in most of them, and b) you agnostic/atheist/whatever people are so detremental of us? would we WANT to be there?

y'know, they say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit... I guess they were right.

The thing here is, you are absolutely purely intolerant, ignorant and a general bastard when it comes to our, as you put it, quotes and all, "theories". And I reiterate, here you are trying to make me believe in this zarwegh character, while you flame us out like an exploding oil refinery for even mentioning God's name?


the point is: i'm not.

i don't believe in zarweigh any more than i believe in god.

i'm putting you in our shoes.

you know this zarweigh character is drivel and don't want to hear it.

why should we think that god is anything but drivel?

you've given us just as much reason to believe god as i have given you to believe zarweigh

in response to this thread, i'm gonna say, that bible bashing IS FUN! ;)

how can we proove God's existance to you?

you agnostic/atheist/whatever people are so detremental of us? would we WANT to be there?

we're detrimental of you because you waste your lives in wasted worship of something that does not exist, instead of truly doing some good

how can we proove God's existance to you?

i don't know, why don't you try?

the point is: i'm not.

i don't believe in zarweigh any more than i believe in god.

i'm putting you in our shoes.

you know this zarweigh character is drivel and don't want to hear it.

why should we think that god is anything but drivel?

you've given us just as much reason to believe god as i have given you to believe zarweigh

Actually, you've told a (rediculous) story about having SEEN him yourself a couple millenia ago, while any Christian can supply you with a book translated from ancient Hebrew, *written* thousands of years ago (i.e. it's not a two-thousand-year-old word of mouth issue). There's a distinct difference...

can your prove God does not exist no that is were faith comes in

i don't know, why don't you try?
i dont know how when you wont listen or give me a chance without getting offensive

can your prove God does not exist no that is were faith comes in


was that even english?

i'm serious on this one, that doesn't follow any grammar/syntax rules i've ever heard of

we're detrimental of you because you waste your lives in wasted worship of something that does not exist, instead of truly doing some good

There you go again. You preach to us about tolerating gays, other religions, and even you, but you don't tolerate us and our beliefs?

i get personal response from God, not from Zarweigh. i dont have some blind faith that only follows rules.

do you want me to tell you of the christian faith to try to prove God to you

i'm serious on this one, that doesn't follow any grammar/syntax rules i've ever heard of

I'm guessing its the new English, kind of like fuzzy math.

i dont know how when you wont listen or give me a chance without getting offensive


i got offensive because the book you 'proved' it from was written by people who were obviously as delusional as i pretended to be when i wrote the zarwegh bit.

if someone wrote that thing about zarwegh a thousand years ago in ancient hebrew, would you believe it?

was that even english?

i'm serious on this one, that doesn't follow any grammar/syntax rules i've ever heard of


... or are you one of those phobics that are afraid of anyone unlike you? It appears that you're willing to belittle anybody's anything, not just religion...

i got offensive because the book you 'proved' it from was written by people who were obviously as delusional as i pretended to be when i wrote the zarwegh bit.

if someone wrote that thing about zarwegh a thousand years ago in ancient hebrew, would you believe it?

Ah, but you're assuming they were delusional. They hold too much truth for their writers to have been delusional. But yes, if someone wrote that thing about Zarwegh a thousand years ago in ancient hebrew I would consider it, but it wouldn't make enough sense to believe.

i got offensive because the book you 'proved' it from was written by people who were obviously as delusional as i pretended to be when i wrote the zarwegh bit.

if someone wrote that thing about zarwegh a thousand years ago in ancient hebrew, would you believe it?if he was in my Bible as a good prophet then yes i would believe he existed

There you go again. You preach to us about tolerating gays, other religions, and even you, but you don't tolerate us and our beliefs?


oh, i'll put up with it.

waste your life all you want, and i'll put up with it.

i won't be happy about it.

i'll stop tolerating you when you try to convince me to waste my life the way you are.

I think it was probably a joke.

Ah, but you're assuming they were delusional. They hold too much truth for their writers to have been delusional. But yes, if someone wrote that thing about Zarwegh a thousand years ago in ancient hebrew I would consider it, but it wouldn't make enough sense to believe.


of course they were delusional!

you even said as much!


you called me delusional (in not as many words, but that's the basic idea) for believing that zarwegh appeared to me in a vision.

god appeared to the hebrew prophets in visions no more credible than mine, so why are they not as delusional as you made me out to be?

xplain this "myth"
Horus was the only son of God (Osiris), begotten with the virgin Meri, born to her and her husband Seb (tr. Jo-Seph) who was of royal descent. his coming was announced to his mother by an angel. he was born in a cave (as some translations of the Bible say that Jesus was), and his birth was heralded by a brilliant star in the east. shepards witnessed his birth, and three wise men (solar dieties, in this case) came to visit him shortly after his birth.

Herut (Herod) tried to have him murdered while he was still an infant. an angel appeared to Horus' mother and told her, "Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child." (remember than an angel told Jesus' father to "Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt.)

Horus came of age at 12, and there is a break in his life history between the ages of 12 and 30. at 30 he was baptized in the river by Anup the Baptiser, (who was subsequently beheaded).

Horus was taken from the desert of Amenta up a high mountain by his arch-rival Sut (a.k.a. Set), who was a precursor for the Hebrew Satan. there Horus was tempted, but he resisted the temptation.

Horus had 12 followers, or "disciples," who followed him for much of his time on Earth. Horus performed miracles, including walking on water, casting out demons, healing the sick, and restoring sight to the blind. he "stilled the sea by his power." (Jesus ordered the sea with a "Peace, be still" command.)

Horus even raised the dead. Asar was an alternate name for Osirus, Horus' father, who Horus raised from the dead. he was referred to as "the Asar," as a sign of respect. translated into Hebrew, this is "El-Asar." the Romans added the prefix "us" to indicate a male name, producing "Elasarus." over time, the "E" was dropped and "s" became "z," producing "Lazarus."

this miracle resurrectionin occured in a city called Anu; Hebrews added their prefix for house ('beth") to "Anu" to produce "Beth-Anu" or the "House of Anu." since "u" and "y" were interchangeable in antiquity, "Bethanu" became "Bethany," the location mentioned in John 11.

Horus was trasfigured on a mountain. he delivered a key address referred to as the Sermon on the Mount.

Horus was executed by crucifixion, was accompanied by two thieves, and was buried in a tomb. he then descended into Hell, resurrected after three days, and his resurrection was discovered by several women.

Horus is commonly portrayed in pictures of the Virgin Isis holding infant Horus. his common title is KRST, the anointed one ("Christ" is Greek for "annointed one"). he is also known as the good shepard, the bread of life, the lamb of God, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, and the winnower (all names which are sometimes given to Jesus).

oh, i'll put up with it.

waste your life all you want, and i'll put up with it.

i won't be happy about it.

i'll stop tolerating you when you try to convince me to waste my life the way you are.


Fair deal, makes me happy.

i dont hate you because you do not agree in fact the oposite i love you people as God loves me

if he was in my Bible as a good prophet then yes i would believe he existed


but if he appeared in his own book you would not believe him?

why do you choose your prophets, of all people, to believe, and not the ones like zarwegh?

my opinion on religion.IT IS A GIANT HOLE OF HYPOCRISY AS IS DEMOOCRACY!/

but if he appeared in his own book you would not believe him?

why do you choose your prophets, of all people, to believe, and not the ones like zarwegh?


because there aren't any of these ancient hebrew texts proclaiming Zarwegh as the prophet/god/whatever.

but this is funny, a second ago you said you'd put up with it. Wouldn't you want to, from that point on, just ignore the thread? that would probably have been the most sensible thing to do, otherwise this sh*tstorm would just start all over again...

so God gave the egyptians prophesy of the birth/life of Jesus pretty accurately, we can show through other historical facts that jesus lived/died when the bible says he did. pretty good corroboration.

Because my prophets tell of the One True God the God of abram of isaac

because there aren't any of these ancient hebrew texts proclaiming Zarwegh as the prophet/god/whatever.

but this is funny, a second ago you said you'd put up with it. Wouldn't you want to, from that point on, just ignore the thread? that would probably have been the most sensible thing to do, otherwise this sh*tstorm would just start all over again...


'put up with is not the same as 'leave unquestioned'

if you want to question me on scientific laws and theories that have been proven to me, feel free to do so


and besides, what makes the hebrew texts so believable in the first place that you need to look to them before you accept any other prophets?

of course they were delusional!

you even said as much!


you called me delusional (in not as many words, but that's the basic idea) for believing that zarwegh appeared to me in a vision.

god appeared to the hebrew prophets in visions no more credible than mine, so why are they not as delusional as you made me out to be?

I said our prophets were delusional? Musta been an accident then. In any case, how on earth could prophets, thousands of years ago, describe a chain of events in the book of Genesis that portrays the Big Bang and the scientific explanation of the creation of earth so precisely?

'put up with is not the same as 'leave unquestioned'


and besides, what makes the hebrew texts so believable in the first place that you need to look to them before you accept any other prophets?

because these hebrew texts are the only ones. No other religion has texts that were translated from Hebrew that was written thousands of years ago. Even Islam branched off Christianity.

Because my prophets tell of the One True God the God of abram of isaac

How do you prove that the One True God is really true? After all, cant all other religos make a similar claim? Furthermore, if I were to find a collection of ancient scrolls that proclaimed the "one true X" by the prophet such and such, would that provide me with an equal basis of proof?

because these hebrew texts are the only ones. No other religion has texts that were translated from Hebrew that was written thousands of years ago. Even Islam branched off Christianity.
there are several religious texts which predate the Bible by several thousand years.

how on earth could prophets, thousands of years ago, describe a chain of events in the book of Genesis that portrays the Big Bang and the scientific explanation of the creation of earth so precisely?


show me the quotes from the prophets.

really, i would like to hear the part about evolution in the bible, it will fuel my later debates.

Because that's a misinterpretation and frankly bullshit.

In any case, how on earth could prophets, thousands of years ago, describe a chain of events in the book of Genesis that portrays the Big Bang and the scientific explanation of the creation of earth so precisely?
that's easy: they didn't.

show me the quotes from the prophets.

really, i would like to hear the part about evolution in the bible, it will fuel my later debates. the bible says that creation

How do you prove that the One True God is really true? After all, cant all other religos make a similar claim? Furthermore, if I were to find a collection of ancient scrolls that proclaimed the "one true X" by the prophet such and such, would that provide me with an equal basis of proof?

No, that would create doubt. The reason we believe in the One True God is because, as I said before, there is only one set of scripts, and that one set of scripts only talk about that One True God.

Anywho, I've got a meal to cook. Thanks for the interesting debate everyone, and to you especially, Dementus. Hope there's no hard feelings, really :)

the bible says that creation
1. Say whaaaaat?
2. Bible. Not. Word. Of. God.

because these hebrew texts are the only ones. No other religion has texts that were translated from Hebrew that was written thousands of years ago. Even Islam branched off Christianity.


not true.

islam branched from judism, for one thing, and there are ancient norse myths, ancient celtic myths, and ancient myths from india that were written before the hebrew ones.

the mahabarata, for one (the indian creation story) was written well before the tanach

that's easy: they didn't.

And as my parting comment: They did. :) Read the book of Genesis in the Bible, it's all there. You can correlate every word in there to the scientific explanation of the creation. Even Evolution - "God sculpted the man to His image" - instead of "God Created the man to his image"...

1. Say whaaaaat?

As I said before, its the new English.

And as my parting comment: They did. :) Read the book of Genesis in the Bible, it's all there. You can correlate every word in there to the scientific explanation of the creation. Even Evolution - "God sculpted the man to His image" - instead of "God Created the man to his image"...


And I, with enough effort, could probably portray Genesis as the rise of Microsoft. The Bible is often so vague as to mean almost anything.

"And God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten OS"
Enough said.

Your faith should be manifest in who you are and who you are becoming, not in religious icons or reading the Bible when you should be studying. :)
Excellent post. Rock on.

Your faith should be manifest in who you are and who you are becoming, not in religious icons or reading the Bible when you should be studying

now that i can agree with.

it sounds a lot more like buddhism, which is not a 'religion' really because it is not about gods and the supernatural, but rather, progressing the self to its utmost potential.

The enforcement of the separation of church and state varies by jurisdiction.

Why, for example, do some public schools in the US (but not all) set up prayer rooms for Muslims, but forbid setting aside rooms like this for anyone else?
First of all, sorry if this is the same as someone already said, because I didn't have time to read through all 30-odd pages of unsupported opinion.
Second, my point: Although it would make sense to provide prayer rooms for all faiths, it is most important to Muslims because they are required, by their faith, to pray five times a day in the direction of Mecca. For this they need a prayer mat, and something to indicate direction. Christians, on the other hand, need only go to church on Sundays, though many go several times a week. What they are doing here for Muslims is analogous to if school interfered with a Christian's weekly service. They would have to build a chapel.

Anyone who wants to have a calm, non-flaming discussion with me on this can TG me, as I probably won't find my way back to this thread.

Horus was the only son of God (Osiris), begotten with the virgin Meri, born to her and her husband Seb (tr. Jo-Seph) who was of royal descent. his coming was announced to his mother by an angel. he was born in a cave (as some translations of the Bible say that Jesus was), and his birth was heralded by a brilliant star in the east. shepards witnessed his birth, and three wise men (solar dieties, in this case) came to visit him shortly after his birth.

Herut (Herod) tried to have him murdered while he was still an infant. an angel appeared to Horus' mother and told her, "Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child." (remember than an angel told Jesus' father to "Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt.)

Horus came of age at 12, and there is a break in his life history between the ages of 12 and 30. at 30 he was baptized in the river by Anup the Baptiser, (who was subsequently beheaded).

Horus was taken from the desert of Amenta up a high mountain by his arch-rival Sut (a.k.a. Set), who was a precursor for the Hebrew Satan. there Horus was tempted, but he resisted the temptation.

Horus had 12 followers, or "disciples," who followed him for much of his time on Earth. Horus performed miracles, including walking on water, casting out demons, healing the sick, and restoring sight to the blind. he "stilled the sea by his power." (Jesus ordered the sea with a "Peace, be still" command.)

Horus even raised the dead. Asar was an alternate name for Osirus, Horus' father, who Horus raised from the dead. he was referred to as "the Asar," as a sign of respect. translated into Hebrew, this is "El-Asar." the Romans added the prefix "us" to indicate a male name, producing "Elasarus." over time, the "E" was dropped and "s" became "z," producing "Lazarus."

this miracle resurrectionin occured in a city called Anu; Hebrews added their prefix for house ('beth") to "Anu" to produce "Beth-Anu" or the "House of Anu." since "u" and "y" were interchangeable in antiquity, "Bethanu" became "Bethany," the location mentioned in John 11.

Horus was trasfigured on a mountain. he delivered a key address referred to as the Sermon on the Mount.

Horus was executed by crucifixion, was accompanied by two thieves, and was buried in a tomb. he then descended into Hell, resurrected after three days, and his resurrection was discovered by several women.

Horus is commonly portrayed in pictures of the Virgin Isis holding infant Horus. his common title is KRST, the anointed one ("Christ" is Greek for "annointed one"). he is also known as the good shepard, the bread of life, the lamb of God, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, and the winnower (all names which are sometimes given to Jesus).
wow, this got no response...remind me not to bother researching my posts in the future :).

wow, this got no response...remind me not to bother researching my posts in the future :).


don't you hate how ungrateful people are when you prove them wrong?

sheesh... :rolleyes:


:p

Bottle, I read it. i agree with you, so there wasn't much for me to say. Fascinating and uncanny though. :)

Yah, you're kinda right.

To go to heaven, your life must have been at least 51% good deeds, otherwise you're screwed. However, the only other way to get to the Muslim version of 'heaven' is to commit suicite by killing 'the infidels' (eg: strapping a bomb to your chest and walking into a church). The only problem is that everyone who isn't Muslim is instantly an Infidel.

I, myself, am proud to be a Christian Infidel, and I will fight to the death to keep that title.
I don't know you well, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that this is complete and total sarcasm. If so, you may 1. skip this next part or 2. enjoy it.

WHAT!!!?!??!
1. Suicide sends you straight to Muslim hell.
2. The word "jihad" refers mainly to inner stuggle... self-improvement.
3. The people who recruit suicide bombers are distorting the Koran for their own vile purposes.
4. It is stated in the Koran that a good Muslim will respect Jews and Christians, even though they believe them to be wrong in their beliefs. There is an example where if a church and a mosque are on fire, the good Muslim will help put out the fire in the church to show good will.
5. WHAT??!!

peace

Bottle, I read it. i agree with you, so there wasn't much for me to say. Fascinating and uncanny though. :)
oh, thanks...i actually meant "response" as in "bitching and/or some form of rebuttal from those touting the Bible as truth."

i thought it would bug them just a little to know how much of their Savior myth was written long before Jesus supposedly walked the Earth...but i guess not...?

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

Don't think you're crazy, just superstitious. All beliefs in the supernatural are superstitions.

I imagine they only hear what they want to hear.

not suprising, though.

when a new religion wants to take hold, the easiest way to get supporters is to make it similar to their old religions.

put the holidays around the same time, make the famous figures sound the same, and the new populous doesn't have to make too great of a leap of faith to go from one to the other.


if you tell them that they have actually been worshipping your god, just under a different name, they won't feel bad about praying differently either.

the end result: the people have basically the same lives, but the old religious government has been uprooted in favor of a new religious government, which is exactly the intention of the people who started the new religion in the first place.

when a new religion wants to take hold, the easiest way to get supporters is to make it similar to their old religions.

Totally true. Christmas is directly correspondent to Saturnalia, and this was done to help converts from the Roman pantheon adjust to the new belief. Many others also came from pagan roots, such as Easter.

Many Christian's who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration of Independence as "proof" of a Christian America. The reason appears obvious: the Declaration mentions God. (You may notice that some Christians avoid the Constitution, with its absence of God.)

However, the Declaration of Independence does not represent any law of the United States. It came before the establishment of our lawful government (the Constitution). The Declaration aimed at announcing the separation of America from Great Britain and it listed the various grievances with them. The Declaration includes the words, "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America." The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold today, and we have more than thirteen states.

Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets and believers, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. It represents a historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our government.

Of course the Declaration stands as a great political document. Its author aimed at a future government designed and upheld by people and not based on a superstitious god or religious monarchy. It observed that all men "are created equal" meaning that we all get born with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men." Please note that the Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity. It bears repeating: "Governments are instituted among men."

The pursuit of happiness does not mean a guarantee of happiness, only that we have the freedom to pursue it. Our Law of the Land incorporates this freedom of pursuit in the Constitution. We can believe or not believe as we wish. We may succeed or fail in our pursuit, but our Constitution (and not the Declaration) protects our unalienable rights in our attempt at happiness.

Moreover, the mentioning of God in the Declaration does not describe the personal God of Christianity. Thomas Jefferson who held deist beliefs, wrote the majority of the Declaration. The Declaration describes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." This nature's view of God agrees with deist philosophy and might even appeal to those of pantheistical beliefs, but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.

Unlike most governments of the past, the American Founding Fathers set up a government divorced from any religion. Their establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves of its origin; they knew this as a ubiquitous unspoken given. However, as the United States delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of the U.S. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the U.S. goverenment to a foreign nation. Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington's last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Joel Barlow wrote the original English version of the treaty, including Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.

So here we have a clear admission by the United States in 1797 that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all U.S. Treaties do (see the Constitution, Article VI, Sect.2: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.")

Although the Treaty of Tripoli under agreement only lasted a few years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the American government.

As I said.. Deal with it. :eek:

Ffc2 :mp5: asks me for proof and still no response? :confused: :headbang: You would think he'd jump at the chance to try and disprove known facts. :headbang:

the author and finisher
Don't forget "editors" and "cutting room floor"
See "Nicea" before, after, et cetera.

Ffc2 :mp5: asks me for proof and still no response? :confused: :headbang: You would think he'd jump at the chance to try and disprove known facts. :headbang:
proof seems to shut that troll up pretty nicely, i guess. :)

HA HA!!! I'm back from some Halo 2. Sooooo... what'd I miss?

A lot, I guess. Almost 600 posts in the thread also :cool:

I think the last post I saw was #395? Or something around that? Guess I missed a lot!

ok first why isnt the earth in better shape. Because man messed it up during the time he sinned and second were is Jesus my suggestion in read the book of revelation in the N.T. last book of the Bible for the awnser
That bloody-fanged "redeemer" psychopath is not even CLOSE to the Jesus of Nazareth.
That was, as i'd posted before, the fevered wet dream of a mentally syphilitic maniac and nothing else, none come to pass or anything. He wasn't on sabbatical, he'd been OUTCAST so he, under the influence of his own personal interpretation of events and cause, had a vision in a cave about the kind of redemption that much of the NT tried to leave behind in the OT as the obvious deficiency of unity between the "LOVE" of the two disparate godmentalities so damning and yet so imminent, pervasive and scurrilous simultaneously ( - not unlike many impressions left to the listener of the majority of Slipknot's material)
The truly damned are the ones who require redemption through that accursed chapter. Try living and deeding, eh? Not polishing swords and stones for revenge worthy of a scorned 3 year old.

fuck who ever says anything bad about my faith :mp5:

Wow, Bottle, you did quite a bit of research there. I never got the opportunity because of three people at once instantly slamming what I had to say against the wall.

I think the last post I saw was #395? Or something around that? Guess I missed a lot!


pages 35-present were pretty interesting.

i basically stated that we should believe christianity no more than we believe every other hogwash cult that crops up, and we had an interesting discussion on that

Yeah, but its mostly back and forth. I myself have had no hard feelings or anger about anything or anyone, so it was more of a laidback discussion for me.

pages 35-present were pretty interesting.

i basically stated that we should believe christianity no more than we believe every other hogwash cult that crops up, and we had an interesting discussion on that

That's kinda mean. I strongly support Christ the Lord Jesus. But I guess that that's obvious already, isn't it?

That's kinda mean. I strongly support Christ the Lord Jesus. But I guess that that's obvious already, isn't it?


yes, but they were still unable to give me any real reason.

i guess in terms of interesting debate, it's worth reading.

at least, i find it so

Is that FfC2 kid still here? If he left when I left, I guess there was nobody left to defend the faith. Musta been quite a one-sided argument. Unless someone else found the thread.

Ah well, might be worth practice.

That's kinda mean. I strongly support Christ the Lord Jesus. But I guess that that's obvious already, isn't it?


oh, and make no mistake, i like what the man said.

there's nothing wrong with peace and turning the other cheek and loving all of mankind and all that, i just don't believe that

1) he is divine

2) he should be worshipped any more than, for example, gahndi

I think the problem was he made too many weak/illogical arguments. Still, it was interesting.

Is that FfC2 kid still here? If he left when I left, I guess there was nobody left to defend the faith. Musta been quite a one-sided argument. Unless someone else found the thread.


no, some other dude came in and took up the position.

did one hell of a better job than ffc2 (quite obviously)

[edit]: the guy's name was donkelbury

if not creation how did i come about? a random event that doesnt state why we have evolved more over time or a loving creator?
Do you truly believe you have the canvass of intellect to grasp, articulate and understand every intervening factor and cause/effect of your life? Truly?
Some things go on faith, some things go on ignorance, some things go on laziness, but they still go ... "the sun shall set without thine assistance" ....
Truly, if you think you (a person) have enough intellect to assume all the principles of integrity that a god would have to have to accomplish everything it tends to get credit for, you would surpass humanity considerably. To attribute every event that happens to the will of something else really depreciates the integrity of your (a person's) stance. Appealing to supreme beings for might, smite, right ... diminishes your capability to prove worth to yourself for what you are.
I'm not saying humility is wrong ... au contraire, being respectful of what you KNOW is keen. Being respectful of something you (a person) ASSUME or MAKE UP is delusion.
Your random is someone else's certainty. Just depends on your perspective.

Well, you know what? I do.

In fact, I know, as a fact, that he is to be worshipped not only as the promised Savior, but also as God himself. I believe that it is a fine belief as opposed to the science-worshipping atheists out there, but, clearly, the vast majority of you will not be dissuaded from such a path.

oh, and make no mistake, i like what the man said.

there's nothing wrong with peace and turning the other cheek and loving all of mankind and all that, i just don't believe that

1) he is divine

2) he should be worshipped any more than, for example, gahndi
i also don't believe that Jesus was the source of most of the important lessons of the Jesus myth...those lessons were taught long before the time of Jesus, and by many different cultures and Gods. personally, i think the Jesus myth is just about the least original myth i've ever encountered, since there pretty much isn't a single significant part of the Jesus myth that wasn't ripped off from some previous source. i call that plagerism, and i don't regard people very highly when they steal material from sources they don't cite...i especially dislike when they steal material, claim it's theirs, and then claim "their" idea is better than any other idea that's been presented before or since.

Kind of has an "after the battle" feel now...

I myself feel that the majority of people will do good on Earth just because they are "programmed" to do so, like the "categorical imperative" of Kant (was that it? I'm a little rusty)

Well, you know what? I do.

In fact, I know, as a fact, that he is to be worshipped not only as the promised Savior, but also as God himself. I believe that it is a fine belief as opposed to the science-worshipping atheists out there, but, clearly, the vast majority of you will not be dissuaded from such a path.

...

i don't 'worship' science


and: it's a fact that he needs to be worshipped?

prove it.

all facts can be proven, that's part of the definition of fact, so prove it to me

I'm an agnostic, and feel that science provides a better means of explaining the world than religon. Still, I can't totally discount religon.

Anyway, wouldn't an atheist not worship anything in the first place?

I'm an agnostic, and feel that science provides a better means of explaining the world than religon. Still, I can't totally discount religon.

Anyway, wouldn't an atheist not worship anything in the first place?
here's what i think is funny:

religious people often accuse atheists, agnostics, and secularists of "worshipping" science, usually because science is poking some serious holes in religious traditions and myths. the religious folk typically point out incorrect scientific theories that have arisen over the centuries (like the geocentric universe) as "proof" that science isn't as good as religion.

the funny part comes in when you think about who it is that showed those original theories to be incorrect. was it the Church that disproved the flawed theory of the geocentric universe? is it the Creationists who are putting evolutionary theory to the strongest tests? is it the Biblical literalists who are providing the strongest challenges to Big Bang theory? NO. the people who actually test and challenge science the most are SCIENTISTS. the people who disprove the theories are scientists. the people who advance us from step to step along the oft-stumbling path of human discovery are scientists.

scientists do not worship science. they pummel it. they rend it. they grip it with both fists and rip with all their might. where religion strives to reinforce itself and explain away inconsistencies, science tears itself limb from limb over the slightest flaw.

i find that amazingly, wonderfully, hillariously, beautiful.

This is freaking hilarious.

Bible Bashers? I bash your pathetic bible upon the ground.. I keep it in a pool of blood, I use it to roll cigarettes..

I will tell you one thing I do not do with it, I do not use it for life altering decisions, infact I don't use it for any decisions. Well, sometimes I flip it like a quarter.. to decide on things, HA.

So though I find this whole Christian group trying to take over America through lies, I will respond to some people in here.

FIRST - I find it funny that any Christian can claim Catholics are not Christians, for most of the history of Christianity it was the ONLY Christian faith besides the Eastern Orthidox, so where were the baptists? The protestants? THEY DIDN'T EXIST.

SECOND - Not one of the first SIX Presidents has ANY RECORD OF EVER SAYING THE NAME "JESUS".. NOT ONE. If they were Christians why did they not mention Jesus? Because they weren't Christian - They were Freemasons, they believe in a God, not a Christ. They are closer to Jews than Christians.

THIRD - As Christians try and force their religion and ideals upon the masses of America, I will be sure to dance around in a hedonistic, decadent lifestyle well laughing at the Christians. For they have given up the fruit of life for some fake existance.. THEY ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN FAIRYTALES.

Santa is coming to play with you little Christian, the Easter Bunny to.

PLEASE.

It is hilarious.. get a freaking clue, use your pathetic minds.. Think over what your saying.Look at the book you believe in, the one that asks you to worship a God who in the old testament committed more murders or ordered more deaths than Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot.. combined. Funny stuff.

Guess he had a reason though.

AND LET ME SEE A MIRACLE! The Bible says that Christians should be able to heal the sick, handle deadly snakes.. COME ON! LET ME SEE IT!

HA!

It is that Angel who was proud enough to believe himself God; brave enough to buy his independence at the price of eternal suffering and torture; beautiful enough to have adored himself in full divine light; strong enough to still reign in darkness amidst agony, and to have made himself a throne out of this inextinguishable pyre.

Brother Eliphas Levi
Historie de la Magie
Pages 16-17

Admittably, a lot of arguments here I, a mere kid, am quite unable to refute, and I have done my best. The human imagination is quite large, and that is obviously where the ideas that challenge my beliefs and rattle my mind come from. All I can do, by now, is show you the Truth, and let God lead you.
It is clear that I can not argue you into that stage by now.

I can't say that I know everything about God, nor can I say that I can offer explanations to every problems you guys offer me. However, I will try my best, but here, now is the truth:

God, the omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent deity who is the only one, created the universe. A mere six thousand, one hundred years ago, mankind sinned, and was banished from his presence for all eternity.
Without the presence of God, there was little that man could do, and continued in his sin. The only way to claim forgiveness was to kill a perfectly innocent animal.
Until...
Four thousand years after mankind's fall from God, a small child was born, in humble conditions, from a young woman who had not yet had sex, pledged to be married to a humble carpenter. The child grew up, gaining favor with both man and God as he increased his knowledge of what is now known as the Old Testament, and of God himself.
Upon his baptism, the child, now a man, was indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and gained his rightful place as both a temporary man and the eternal God. He spread his teachings, telling people who were, at the time, completely morally degraded, the differences 'twixt right and wrong. He was quite possibly the most popular man at the time.
However, problems brewed...
One man of the twelve who had pledged to follow Jesus became greedy, and, for a mere 30 pieces of silver, betrayed the Savior of the universe. Later, overcome with guilt, the man would hang himself.
Jesus, once a child born of a virgin girl, was scourged, mocked, and tortured a multitude of different ways. His torture was ended with the most painful form of death yet endured, crucifixion.
This happened almost a full two thousand years ago.
For one, brief moment, every sin of every man that had lived, lived, or was to live was placed upon that one, helpless, completely innocent man, that harmless soul. Much like the animal sacrifices of old, but so much bigger, so much more enduring, so much more saving.
The carved-up body was laid to rest in a simple tomb, and, by order of the Jewish Leaders, sealed away tight. However, three days later, an angel pulled back the stone, and God breathed life back into His Son, who walked the earth once more, teaching for a short while before being taken into heaven by a loving Father, leaving his students, the Deisciples, to spread his word among mankind.

Even today, the sacrifice still has its effect on mankind, with hundreds of people taking it every day. By aknowledging their sins, admitting that they've done wrong, and asking the Living Spirit of Jesus to indwell them, despite them being the puny humans they are. The result is fascinating, a full missing third of their life has been filled, and the Holy Spirit dwells in them. They live their lives with the confidence that, whenever they are to die, their sins have been paid for by the Ultimate Sacrifice, and, like billions of others, but unlike so many more billions, will be accepted into God's presence. There their soul will live for eternity with their beloved Savior and His Loving Father.

I guess that's the most important thing I can say, for now.

Fish bones can be found on mountains because the earth is billions of years old, and those mountains were once at the bottom of shallow seas. Tectonic activity pushed them up. If you don't beleive in plate tectonics how do you explain earthquakes?
Uhm, indigestion and the imminent bowel movement of said god?
:confused:

yah, EM, that's pretty close to flamebait.

particularly since the last two pages have been pretty much kinda tame.

more of a 'counting the casualties' than any actual fighting

I'd just like to say I think:-

"To each their own"

If you want to believe in something, fine. If you don't want to believe in something, fine. If you don't want to believe in anything, fine.

the funny part comes in when you think about who it is that showed those original theories to be incorrect. was it the Church that disproved the flawed theory of the geocentric universe? is it the Creationists who are putting evolutionary theory to the strongest tests? is it the Biblical literalists who are providing the strongest challenges to Big Bang theory? NO. the people who actually test and challenge science the most are SCIENTISTS. the people who disprove the theories are scientists. the people who advance us from step to step along the oft-stumbling path of human discovery are scientists.


The Christians fail to attack the scientists' theories because they are afraid. Afraid to go out into the blue, and, ultimately, result in the damnation of millions of impressionable people who eventually turn away a religion that has now hid itself in its own closed. My ultimate goal is to leave the godforsaken closet, and fly. To use science against itself, to, as you say, pummel it, and pull it limb from limb. Not, however, in the name of science itself, but in the name of God. My wish is to be putting evolutionary theories to the strongest tests, my hope is to beproviding the strongest challenges to the Big Bang theory. To leave the crowd and become among the few daring pioneers whom have actually done so. I pray that such is the plan for my life.

*snip*

*snip, but in bold*


i guess you didn't see the part where the whole jesus thing is a plagarism of the myth of horus?

or the part where the universe is older than six thousand years?

nice try, but we all know the fables that you are trying to pass off as true.

now you have to do some actual proving.

Uhm, indigestion and the imminent bowel movement of said god?
:confused:

Tectonic plates move. However, have you seen the story of the great flood? Every piece of land, yes, even the mountains, was covered by water. For those forty days, fish ruled our lands. Many died there, too. Maybe that might explain the "fish on the mountain" thing.

To use science against itself, to, as you say, pummel it, and pull it limb from limb. Not, however, in the name of science itself, but in the name of God. My wish is to be putting evolutionary theories to the strongest tests, my hope is to beproviding the strongest challenges to the Big Bang theory. To leave the crowd and become among the few daring pioneers whom have actually done so. I pray that such is the plan for my life.


and we will thank you for it.

for every attack of a theory, we remove the bits that have been proven false and find new ways to explain what is now unexplained by the gaps.

don't you see?

the ability to question yourself, to make yourself stronger is something that science has that religion does not.

see the first quote of my signature to see why science is the only way to go.

The Christians fail to attack the scientists' theories because they are afraid. Afraid to go out into the blue, and, ultimately, result in the damnation of millions of impressionable people who eventually turn away a religion that has now hid itself in its own closed. My ultimate goal is to leave the godforsaken closet, and fly. To use science against itself, to, as you say, pummel it, and pull it limb from limb. Not, however, in the name of science itself, but in the name of God. My wish is to be putting evolutionary theories to the strongest tests, my hope is to beproviding the strongest challenges to the Big Bang theory. To leave the crowd and become among the few daring pioneers whom have actually done so. I pray that such is the plan for my life.
unfortunately, if you bring your God-belief with you into science you will never be a true scientist, and you will never be able to acheive what you could have without the drag of your bias. you will doom yourself to failure and embarassment, as many have before you. a true scientist must be loyal to the objective reality that can be revealed with science, and cannot be attempting to force data or theory to conform to his beliefs and wishes. a true scientist is the purest agnostic, knowing full well that God is far beyond the scope of his chosen field, and he embraces his own limitations with perfect honesty.

i guess you didn't see the part where the whole jesus thing is a plagarism of the myth of horus?

or the part where the universe is older than six thousand years?

nice try, but we all know the fables that you are trying to pass off as true.

now you have to do some actual proving.

I CAN'T do the gosh darn proving, I've already told you that. I try my best, but there seems to be something, weather it is real or not, that you use against me. It sucks.

Christianity, almost every aspect of it, is based off faith. The only thing I can offer you is a rebuttal to your own arguments, as such things have been created. Proving a religion, no, a relationship of faith is impossible. Disproving the ones that are wrong? Say evolution? Such things are easy.
Hopefully, that only leaves Christianity as an option.

Jerusalem's name is irrelevant. There's a town called "Armegeddon," and I don't see any Horsemen around.

A king by that name may exist, but does it mean that David's exploits were real? Does it mean its the same guy as mentioned in the Bible?


No.
There's also this town called Toadsuck, Arkansas ....
Some other one called Hell, too, i don't remember what state, maybe North Dakota. Or Utah, like Moab.
.....?.....

Tectonic plates move. However, have you seen the story of the great flood? Every piece of land, yes, even the mountains, was covered by water. For those forty days, fish ruled our lands. Many died there, too. Maybe that might explain the "fish on the mountain" thing.


and here is why a flood never could have happened the way the bible said it did:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Didn't that 6000 year figure come from Bishop Usher, who developed it during the 16th or 17th century and not God? The timeframe of creation in the Bible is by no means definite, and the phrase "a thousand years are like a day" is debunked here:

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/7547/thousand.html

Christianity, almost every aspect of it, is based off faith. The only thing I can offer you is a rebuttal to your own arguments, as such things have been created. Proving a religion, no, a relationship of faith is impossible. Disproving the ones that are wrong? Say evolution? Such things are easy.
Hopefully, that only leaves Christianity as an option.
you've got it backwards. disproving evolution is rather hard (as nobody's been able to do it for quite some time, and not for lack of trying), but it's very easy to refute most of the claims of Christianity. indeed, the ONLY claims of Christianity which survive scrutiny are the ones which, by definition, can never be touched by logic or science, and those are simply unprovable assertions which have no more value than assertions about magic unicorns.

unfortunately, if you bring your God-belief with you into science you will never be a true scientist, and you will never be able to acheive what you could have without the drag of your bias. you will doom yourself to failure and embarassment, as many have before you. a true scientist must be loyal to the objective reality that can be revealed with science, and cannot be attempting to force data or theory to conform to his beliefs and wishes. a true scientist is the purest agnostic, knowing full well that God is far beyond the scope of his chosen field, and he embraces his own limitations with perfect honesty.

I can do very little on my own. Thus, the only way for me to be able to excel in the field of science is with God's hand. Which is why it must be His plan for me to enter into science.
"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
Even if it means doing it alone against a dozen atheists bent on my destruction.

I read the first 10 or so pages of this thread and decided to jump over the last 30 or so.. haha.. so I don't know what I missed, but I wanted to reply to the earlier stuff, I'm late.. man..

Well, what I say still stands true.

Really, all Christianity and all other religions are about is self hate. They hate themselves, so they believe they must be forgiven. They cannot go on. They have an abortion, drink to much, get out of control or are brought up to believe they sinned just by being born.. and they think that they must be forgiven because of it.

I do not believe in sin. I have never sinned. As the Who said "I don't need to be forgiven". It is a sad state of affairs when adults bring up their children to hate themselves, yet they do it nonstop.

My parents were Christian, I was Christian.. in fact I was a BORN AGAIN FLAMING STREET PREACHING Christian by the age of 14 and by 16 I began having doubts and by 20 (a year or two ago) I cleared myself of the fairy tale, of the worry of a God who has nothing else to do but watch me and complain about me and judge me and torture me. (Oh, he doesn't WANT you to go to hell, he just made it the default destination.)

I don't hate myself, at least not enough to think I need someone to forgive me.


-------------------

It is that Angel who was proud enough to believe himself God; brave enough to buy his independence at the price of eternal suffering and torture; beautiful enough to have adored himself in full divine light; strong enough to still reign in darkness amidst agony, and to have made himself a throne out of this inextinguishable pyre.

Brother Eliphas Levi
Historie de la Magie
Pages 16-17

Disproving the ones that are wrong? Say evolution? Such things are easy.

again, if you disprove something that is wrong, we will thank you, but we will never turn down the path of unquestionable ignorance as you would like us to.

when the heliocentric model was disproved, we moved to the current model.

if, or when, you disprove evolution, we will not go to the bible for answers.

we will find a newer theory, a better theory.

Didn't that 6000 year figure come from Bishop Usher, who developed it during the 16th or 17th century and not God? The timeframe of creation in the Bible is by no means definite, and the phrase "a thousand years are like a day" is debunked here:

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/7547/thousand.html
No, actually, I did the math myself. Added up the chronological records of the bible, combined it with dates we already know, and, Voila! Timeline.
All that remains a mystery is the time BEFORE the Fall of Man.

I can do very little on my own. Thus, the only way for me to be able to excel in the field of science is with God's hand. Which is why it must be His plan for me to enter into science.
"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
Even if it means doing it alone against a dozen atheists bent on my destruction.
ahh, i see you have the classic persecution complex of the Christians...here's a newsflash for you: atheist scientists don't give a damn about you. they think your beliefs are silly and unfounded, but they aren't "bent on your destruction." scientists seek to "destroy" their rivals, and no scientist is going to see you as much of a threat as long as you cling to your God-belief. they're far more interested in "destroying" rival theories which have some chance of being accurate.

You posted the same thing twice, that's probably why my browser froze.

Anyway, what I meant was about YOU people are attacking me from every which way, and I have very little but some books to defend myself with.

You posted the same thing twice, that's probably why my browser froze.
actually, it's usually the other way around.

jolt is not the greatest forum service, and has a habit of freezing occasionally.

timeline:
he typed his message
he hit submit
browser freezes
he hits submit again


viola! double post

no big deal, happens all the time

Anyway, what I meant was about YOU people are attacking me from every which way, and I have very little but some books to defend myself with.
friendly advice, in that case...

before you attempt to challenge theories like evolution or the Big Bang, test your own theory. test your beliefs. REALLY test them. test them harshly and completely. before you claim to believe in the Bible, learn to read the actual Bible. learn the languages so you can read the true words for yourself...no scientist would settle for the garbled translations that have developed over the years. read the histories of the time period when your man-God walked the Earth, and learn all you can of those who wrote his story. learn the histories of your faith and its leaders.

look to your own before you try to press into others.

They may not give a damn about me, but I'm sure that there was a time when the King of England didn't give a damn about the Founding Fathers. I am led to make a dent in the scientific community, and it will happen, through God's will, trust me, I will contribute to such.

jolt is not the greatest forum service, and has a habit of freezing occasionally.

I know what you mean. I keep solitaire running, just in case I have to wait awhile.

Anyway, what I meant was about YOU people are attacking me from every which way, and I have very little but some books to defend myself with.

that's exactly why we are attacking you.

you believe something with little to no evidence supporting it, and we are curious to know how you could possibly believe something that is as likely to be true as it is to be false?

at least in science, things need to have a reasonable amount of evidence before they are even brought forward, and even then they are under constant scrutiny.

false hypothoses don't make it to theories, and even theories are always being revised as new facts come to light.

once again, see my sig.

actually, it's usually the other way around.

jolt is not the greatest forum service, and has a habit of freezing occasionally.

timeline:
he typed his message
he hit submit
browser freezes
he hits submit again


viola! double post

no big deal, happens all the time
yup, that was it...it should be deleted now, though. i try to catch any double posts.

friendly advice, in that case...

before you attempt to challenge theories like evolution or the Big Bang, test your own theory. test your beliefs. REALLY test them. test them harshly and completely. before you claim to believe in the Bible, learn to read the actual Bible. learn the languages so you can read the true words for yourself...no scientist would settle for the garbled translations that have developed over the years. read the histories of the time period when your man-God walked the Earth, and learn all you can of those who wrote his story. learn the histories of your faith and its leaders.

look to your own before you try to press into others.

Thank you for the advice, and, believe it or not, I have. To the best of my ability, I have tested what I believe, and, although there are some knacks in it, my knowledge of the 'other side,' if you will, is incomplete. So my studies are currently into science itself, with a side dish of the Word.

They may not give a damn about me, but I'm sure that there was a time when the King of England didn't give a damn about the Founding Fathers. I am led to make a dent in the scientific community, and it will happen, through God's will, trust me, I will contribute to such.
not unless you radically change your attitude. i'm speaking as somebody who has been building a career in the sciences for many years. you seem far more interested in feeling martyred than you do in researching or supporting your theories, and that's the mark of a crappy scientist-to-be. you could be great, i'm sure, if you were to actually try to become a scientist, but what you are doing right now is nothing of the sort.

Thank you for the advice, and, believe it or not, I have. To the best of my ability, I have tested what I believe, and, although there are some knacks in it, my knowledge of the 'other side,' if you will, is incomplete. So my studies are currently into science itself, with a side dish of the Word.
well, i wish you well in that. science is very harsh, and very very competative, so if you've got the guts to try for it then you're already a step ahead of most of the world. i can tell you that science is a bitch of a mistress, but she's got a powerful kiss when the moment is right :).

that's exactly why we are attacking you.

you believe something with little to no evidence supporting it, and we are curious to know how you could possibly believe something that is as likely to be true as it is to be false?

at least in science, things need to have a reasonable amount of evidence before they are even brought forward, and even then they are under constant scrutiny.

false hypothoses don't make it to theories, and even theories are always being revised as new facts come to light.

once again, see my sig.

Simply BECAUSE I belive it. I can aim the same question back at you, my friend. But I have an (at least I hope I do) unshakeable faith, and will fight to the death (or till I get finger cramp on this infernal keyboard) to defend it.

The first thing anyone should do is question what they blieve. There can be nothing worse than living your life only to find your belief system was nothing but a sham or an illusion. In fact, truly examining what you believe might strengthen your faith, or lead it somewhere else.

By the way, betelgeuse, did you pick your name based on the star or just its name? I was wondering if you are interested in astronomy.

The first thing anyone should do is question what they believe. There can be nothing worse than living your life only to find your belief system was nothing but a sham or an illusion. In fact, truly examining what you believe might strengthen your faith, or lead it somewhere else.

By the way, betelgeuse, did you pick your name based on the star or just its name? I was wondering if you are interested in astronomy.

that's exactly why we are attacking you.

you believe something with little to no evidence supporting it, and we are curious to know how you could possibly believe something that is as likely to be true as it is to be false?

at least in science, things need to have a reasonable amount of evidence before they are even brought forward, and even then they are under constant scrutiny.

false hypothoses don't make it to theories, and even theories are always being revised as new facts come to light.

once again, see my sig.

Simply BECAUSE I belive it. I can aim the same question back at you, my friend. But I have an (at least I hope I do) unshakeable faith, and will fight to the death (or till I get finger cramp on this infernal keyboard) to defend it.
Now, if you'll forgive me, I am gettin rather tired. So I am going to goto sleep.

Simply BECAUSE I belive it. I can aim the same question back at you, my friend. But I have an (at least I hope I do) unshakeable faith, and will fight to the death (or till I get finger cramp on this infernal keyboard) to defend it.
Now, if you'll forgive me, I am gettin rather tired. So I am going to goto sleep.


ok, i'll pretend you did ask it to me:

why do you believe that scientific theories are true?

because the theories are based upon fact.

hard, provable fact, that can be retested and examined, to wean out any hypothoses that are not supported by fact.

the experiments that the facts are derived from are meticulously recorded, and can be reproduced at need.

if i wanted to (and had the equipment to do so) i could buy a copy of a lab journal and follow through on someone's tests, to see for myself how true or untrue the results, and the theories based upon such, are.

it is under the constant self-questioning and self-improvement that leads it to be truer and truer.

never satisfied with what it has, it strives to explain the universe and everything therein in a way that we can know for a fact to be absolutely true.

that is why i follow with the path of science

let me make my point.
If the watch has a design surely it has a maker so for man there has to be a maker. You may say "evolution or the big bang theory" but there a problem with those. The second law of thermodynamics contradicts its evolution theory that goes with it.

The watch was made by man. Or by woman. You know, whatever. A watch and a person are two completely different things. For example, most humans are more intelligent than most watches, though I don't want to make too sweeping a generalization here. This is what a beginning logic class would deem "fallacy of false analogy". There are designs in the clouds, did anyone make them? No, the weather did. And that, my friend, is something that does not need a God to be explained.
Throughout history, Gods have come into being in the societies of the world to explain certain things. The fact that we're here. The thunder and lightning. The varying quality of the autumn harvest, the cycles of bounty and famine. We can't explain it, and so we come up with solutions to our problems. Thor didn't last long, and neither did Jupiter/Zeus. We can explain thunder and lightning without them, they are no longer needed. Back then, people made the same arguments about the thunder and lightning and the stars in the sky as you are making about the watch and mankind.
As far as the second law of thermodynamics.... WHAAAA??? Also, I thought you didn't believe in science?
And how does that have anything to do with evolution? The big bang I can kind of see... but evolution?
Oh, perhaps you mean entropy, how things tend to go from more organized to less organized. Yes, well, that's in the universe as a whole. It has absolutely nothing to do with what form life takes, and even life existing.
I could be wrong with this accusation, and if so, I'm very sorry, but here it is anyway: please stop googling sites that claim to prove creationism. If you don't understand the science behind it, all of that stuff doesn't have a B.S. detector to go through. And man, will you clog your carburetor.

and if he raises his kids as islam and christianity is correct it has the same result
I'm sorry, this is really nitpicky, but you can't raise someone as islam. You can raise them as Islamic (sort of... still a bit awkward) or raise them as Muslims.

that's exactly why we are attacking you.

you believe something with little to no evidence supporting it, and we are curious to know how you could possibly believe something that is as likely to be true as it is to be false?

[snip]


you attack people because you are curious to know how they think?! That makes me curious to know how you think, for it makes very little sense at all.

is that why every event has been prooven correct lets take KD for example he has been prooven and how has creation explain fish bones on mountains that are impossible for man to climb at the date that they were at. I can explain that ever hear of noah's flood?
I'm sorry if this is repetition, but ever heard of earthquakes? Or tectonic plates, for that matter? There are ferns under the ice in Antarctica, because the continents have drifted over time. Oh, and yes, we can measure that drift, in case you thought that it was just a way to be in denial about God. That doesn't mean that God put the ferns there. It means that there was a heck of a lot going on in the world before we got here.

is that why mean in cave drawing look like modern day man because they changed
Again, sorry if this is repetition, but WHAT?
First of all, please put a little more effort into your posts. We all make typos, nobody spells perfectly, but at least try.
Next, cave drawings are a few thousand years old. Life doesn't evolve a whole lot in that time. However, we have skeletons of ancient "humans" with pronounced differences that are slightly towards the physiology of monkeys.
Last, cave drawings are not accurate physiological charts. You can't tell small differences from them, even if they were there, which they might not have been.

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

Yes, the sun is getting smaller. Very slowly. As are all stars. You go back billions of years and it's a little bit bigger. Perhaps a noticeable difference from the surface of the Earth, I wouldn't know. But just fyi, the mass it is losing is being transformed directly to heat. It's not like anti-matter, because there is a by-product, but that just means that not all of the mass is being turned into energy, some is staying as mass. E=mc^2. LOTS of energy. Not much sun has to go to burn: it's a slow-burning source of energy that's slated to last another 5 billion years. Now, if it'll last another 5 billion years, and it's not huge, then the fact that it's still here after 5 billion years doesn't mean it was huge. Again, please stop grasping at straws and at least study what you're arguing.

acualy it boosts it alot david himself believed in God and turned out to be one of the most succesful kings in israel history
So did the rest of the kings of Israel. Relevancy, your honor?

Yes, exactly. Sorry for drifting slighty off topic here, but does anyone know if this thing about the Sun getting smaller at the moment is true or not? I'm actually quite curious now.
(again, sorry if repetition)
yes, the sun is getting smaller. It is expelling solar wind as well as LOTS of photons, all of this from the nuclear fusion occuring at the core. Tritium and Deuterium (isotopes of Hydrogen) combine to form Helium. Helium is lighter than the combined Hydrogens, and that "missing" mass is turned directly into heat and light. So yes, it's getting smaller. Very, very, very, very slowly or we'll all be BBQ.

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.
Actually, Relativity (both of them) has been proven. They predict that light will behave a certain way around large masses, and gosh darnit the math comes out perfectly. These predictions were made before the observation, by the way, and not in the way a prophet makes a prediction, either. This says that any time light passes within this distance of and object of this size it will be bent this much. It also explains several things that were known beforehand, like the strange orbit of Mercury that Newton couldn't figure out.
But yes, there are many unproven theories.
And yes, there are some very rare cases where relativity breaks down, and that's why the so-called "holy grail" of physics is a "unified field theory", which would never break down.

Kinda ironic how they still use the term "holy grail."

Actually, Relativity (both of them) has been proven. They predict that light will behave a certain way around large masses, and gosh darnit the math comes out perfectly. These predictions were made before the observation, by the way, and not in the way a prophet makes a prediction, either. This says that any time light passes within this distance of and object of this size it will be bent this much. It also explains several things that were known beforehand, like the strange orbit of Mercury that Newton couldn't figure out.
But yes, there are many unproven theories.
And yes, there are some very rare cases where relativity breaks down, and that's why the so-called "holy grail" of physics is a "unified field theory", which would never break down.

Not to mention you can actually 'see' atoms now using very powerfull mircoscopes, (think they work by electromagnetic feilds and gold or somthing, i know they exist as its part of my chemistry course, i just dont pay much attention)

Clear headed Science 1, Facist Black shirts 0

hey, i'm a christian, and i also don't believe that forcing religion down people's throats is a good idea, however i do believe that it is important2 share faith because i belive that those hu aren't christian will not make it 2 heaven and i wld find it hard 2 live with myself it i i knew that i because i was 2 carefull 2 offend i lost some-one a chance 2 find God, but in the end its people's choice

.

hey, i'm a christian, and i also don't believe that forcing religion down people's throats is a good idea, however i do believe that it is important2 share faith because i belive that those hu aren't christian will not make it 2 heaven and i wld find it hard 2 live with myself it i i knew that i because i was 2 carefull 2 offend i lost some-one a chance 2 find God, but in the end its people's choice

For Jesus' sake, try to spell right.

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

Have you considered the possibility that Pyromanstahn wasn't talking about food? :D

hey, i'm a christian, and i also don't believe that forcing religion down people's throats is a good idea, however i do believe that it is important2 share faith because i belive that those hu aren't christian will not make it 2 heaven and i wld find it hard 2 live with myself it i i knew that i because i was 2 carefull 2 offend i lost some-one a chance 2 find God, but in the end its people's choice

Are you trying to give us the impression that only uneducated people become Christians? If so, good job!

Still going? Anything I miss while I was gone?

Nope. Nothing to see here, move along...

hey, i'm a christian, and i also don't believe that forcing religion down people's throats is a good idea, however i do believe that it is important2 share faith because i belive that those hu aren't christian will not make it 2 heaven and i wld find it hard 2 live with myself it i i knew that i because i was 2 carefull 2 offend i lost some-one a chance 2 find God, but in the end its people's choice

this is the one and only post by this member.


Ffc2, you can take the mask off.

you attack people because you are curious to know how they think?! That makes me curious to know how you think, for it makes very little sense at all.

i attack his ideas because they have not been proven.

when he proves them, i will accept them as fact until a better model comes along and explains what his hypothoses tries to explain.

welcome to the scientific method.

this is the one and only post by this member.


Ffc2, you can take the mask off.


Yes because AUTOMATICALLY when someone agrees with somebody else they must be a puppet nation of that person. Please. :rolleyes:

Yes because AUTOMATICALLY when someone agrees with somebody else they must be a puppet nation of that person. Please. :rolleyes:
That accusation is made at least once in every debate thread.

I'm back, remember Betulguese?

I'm back, remember Betulguese?
No.

Last time I was here, it was page 44.

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.

Assuming your numbers, because I'm lazy:
.01 seconds per year seems a bit high, but even if it isn't, do they say that this rate of change has been constant throughout history? Same thing with the moon. Many things in physics are not linear like that. For example, the moon. The farther it gets away from us, the smaller the force the Earth puts on it... but it's quadratic. That means that if it got twice as far away, the force would be one fourth. Because of this (and I'm no astrophysicist, there may be something I'm forgetting, but this is based on what I know) the speed at which the moon is moving farther away would be constantly increasing. Because of this, thousands and millions and billions of years ago, the orbit would have been almost completely stable, and wouldn't be half the distance that it is now.

You seem pretty respectable in science, so I'm hoping this was a joke of some sort.

You are right. But 3.8 centimeters per year is a relatively fast rate of separation. So, even at its lowest point, the rate would still have been kind of fast. Sooooo... we can do the math, and then we realize that the moon would have been too close to maintain a stable orbit at its current orbital speed. It would have been in an unstable elliptical orbit, and would eventually crashed into earth.

Assuming your numbers, because I'm lazy:
.01 seconds per year seems a bit high,
Actually its .1 secs per decade. I got that from the Guenniss Book of World Records 2005.

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?
(sorry if repeat)
Best-case scenario for creationists, you mean. It doesn't prove anything at all if you take the extreme end of possibility and declare it to be fact. Also, some basic physics:
the speed at which stuff is going around the sun doesn't matter. All of the individual atoms are being accelerated at the same rate, and so, relative to each other, they are standing still (if they are near each other, otherwise they'll be moving in diferent directions). The net force on an object determines acceleration, and so, within the orbit around the sun, the gravitational attraction between particles is completely free to do its stuff.
As for pushing the sun's own out, it's called the Law of Gravitation. F= GM1M2/(r^2). (sorry, I know that's ugly, but you can't really do it properly on line). The radius squared is decreasing the force of gravity. The sun is much, much, much farther away from the moon than the earth is. Compare 93M with about 250K. (both of those figures are approximate). Ok, now square that ratio, multiply by the ratio of the masses, and oh, look, the earth has a bigger effect on the moon than the sun does.

I'm playing RISK, and I'm losing.

...sprouted out of primordial ooze reminescint of the stuff that McDonalds dips their fries in.
I highly doubt we came from vegetable oil...

The "stuff" from which life arose is likely a simple hydrocarbon like methane or ethane, which linked and bonded to form simple amino acids and then RNA/DNA and so on from there, probably starting with viruses and then anaerobic bacteria.

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?

it is fair as the whole point in not wearing religous stuff is so that mupputs that can not be tolorent of other people dont tease or abuse people with religious items on.

Actually its .1 secs per decade. I got that from the Guenniss Book of World Records 2005.
Please tell me this was a joke. Without an emoticon it's sometimes hard to tell.

how can we proove God's existance to you?
I'm sorry, nobody else seemed to comment on this. I'll be brief.
"proove" is not a word. "Proof" has two "o"s, but "Prove" has but one.

because these hebrew texts are the only ones. No other religion has texts that were translated from Hebrew that was written thousands of years ago. Even Islam branched off Christianity.
Have you heard of Judaism? You know, the religion of the Hebrews?
Oh, and Islam branched from both Judaism and Christianity.

Have you heard of Judaism? You know, the religion of the Hebrews?

No. His Christianity is the only religion, remember? By betelgeuse's calculations, I don't even think the universe existed when Judaism aros.

A little off topic:
Could someone describe the theological differences between Sunni and Shiite Islam. I'm reading about the Middle East and it would help.

here's what i think is funny:

religious people often accuse atheists, agnostics, and secularists of "worshipping" science, usually because science is poking some serious holes in religious traditions and myths. the religious folk typically point out incorrect scientific theories that have arisen over the centuries (like the geocentric universe) as "proof" that science isn't as good as religion.

the funny part comes in when you think about who it is that showed those original theories to be incorrect. was it the Church that disproved the flawed theory of the geocentric universe? is it the Creationists who are putting evolutionary theory to the strongest tests? is it the Biblical literalists who are providing the strongest challenges to Big Bang theory? NO. the people who actually test and challenge science the most are SCIENTISTS. the people who disprove the theories are scientists. the people who advance us from step to step along the oft-stumbling path of human discovery are scientists.

scientists do not worship science. they pummel it. they rend it. they grip it with both fists and rip with all their might. where religion strives to reinforce itself and explain away inconsistencies, science tears itself limb from limb over the slightest flaw.

i find that amazingly, wonderfully, hillariously, beautiful.

Hey, nice post. I'd also like to add that the Church tried to kill/discredit anyone trying to disprove the geocentric universe theory put forth by Ptolemy long before Christ.

No. His Christianity is the only religion, remember? By betelgeuse's calculations, I don't even think the universe existed when Judaism aros.

A little off topic:
Could someone describe the theological differences between Sunni and Shiite Islam. I'm reading about the Middle East and it would help.

Judaism is, or was, the worship of God, but waiting for a savior. If God was worshipped before any other creature that humans could imagine, then, clearly, Judaism was the first relgion, but no longer true, as they still wait for a savior who has laready come.

hey, i'm a christian, and i also don't believe that forcing religion down people's throats is a good idea, however i do believe that it is important2 share faith because i belive that those hu aren't christian will not make it 2 heaven and i wld find it hard 2 live with myself it i i knew that i because i was 2 carefull 2 offend i lost some-one a chance 2 find God, but in the end its people's choice

But not all of us believe that. I don't care that you think I'm going to hell--that's what you believe--and if you're continuing to bother me about it it still counts as "shoving your religion down my throat". If you find if hard to live with yourself without letting every. single. non-religious or whatever person know, imagine how difficult it is to be told every single day by a cultist you're going to burn in the bowels of the Earth because you're not smearing yourself with war paint and chanting hymns to their god and that they can't stop telling you because they feel guilty about it. I don't believe in "God" and nothing you ever say will convince me otherwise short of tangible evidence.

Okay, that was a little extreme, but hopefully this gets the point across.
...oh, and please, please try to spell out your words--it's okay if you spell them incorrectly, but at least make the effort to be intelligible.

You are right. But 3.8 centimeters per year is a relatively fast rate of separation. So, even at its lowest point, the rate would still have been kind of fast. Sooooo... we can do the math, and then we realize that the moon would have been too close to maintain a stable orbit at its current orbital speed. It would have been in an unstable elliptical orbit, and would eventually crashed into earth.
Ok, I'm sorry, I can't leave this alone.
"it's kinda fast so even if it was slower before it would still be kinda fast so there ha!" is how I read your post.
Going back in time, the rate of separation would be slowing down quadratically. Which means no, when we do that math, the moon was in a nearly stable orbit. By definition, a nearly stable orbit must be the starting point of any "normal" orbit. Its lowest point would asymptotically approach 0 (meaning it approaches and gets infinitely close but never quite gets there), not "kind of fast". Oh, and "at its current orbital speed" doesn't work. Conservation of energy, my friend. The farther it gets from the earth, the slower it has to be going.

Hey, nice post. I'd also like to add that the Church tried to kill/discredit anyone trying to disprove the geocentric universe theory put forth by Ptolemy long before Christ.

Why was that? Ptolemy didn't have any ties to the church, and his method was complex clunky, and needed massive revision constantly. I'm guessing it was a pride issue; they didn't want anyone showing up what they believed. Kind of ironic for a religion supposedly centered on meekness and humility.

Oh you guys...you have no idea whats going on.

I have frequent conversations with God, sometimes several times in one day. He appears to me in the branches of the pine tree out back, and we often talk for an hour or more. Normally we only talk about sports and music etc, but after reading this thread I had to ask him what man was really supposed to do.

He replied:
"My son. Do not be distracted by these false religions with their ridiculous beliefs. If you want the true path follow only Scientology. Any other will land you in Hell, where all the homosexuals go of course."

So there you have it, from the mouth of God himself. Scientology. I would have asked him to explain more, but he had to go rape some more virgins to create more apostles.

Seriously though, how can anyone actually believe this BS wholeheartedly? If any religite actually looked into the history of the bible and saw how it was written over hundreds of years in dead languages, translated, retranslated, changed based on the whims of kings, they would throw it in the trash. And let's not forget, the bible was written in a time when people were even stupider that they are today. You've seen the morons that surround us. Imagine everyone in the world is that dumb, or dumber. Those people made up the bible. Any religious leader from that time (i.e. Jesus, Moses, Mohammed if any of them even existed) was just someone smart enough to take advantage of how retarded people were. Yet somehow it all stuck. Saddening.

And let's talk for a minute about that little boy raping trend that happened a while back. This has to decrease you faith here Catholics. These boy-raping priests are God's representatives here on earth. So...doesn't that mean that since they like to have sex with little boys so does God? Yes, because otherwise God wouldn't allow it. Oh well, I guess is gives a good answer to all those grieving parents who are crying and saying "Why?!? Why did you have to take little Timmy so young?!?". Now the have the truth: they are up in Heaven servicing God and the priests.

All meanness aside, I'd also like to point out how arrogant we humans are. If there is a God--which I don't deny or affirm, because while preposterous, it is possible--how ridiculous is it to think that 1) we look like him and 2) that he is subject to the same petty emotions humans are. God gets angry? Uh oh, God didn't have his nap, I hope he doesn't damn me for forgeting to pray! Go gets tired so he had to rest on the 7th day of creation? "Creating those mountains really got me whooped". Yeah right.

Basically, most Christians think God is this whiney asshole of a dude up in heaven. It's like a 4 year old is looking over us.



But to the actual point at hand. If no religious person ever pointed out their religion in any way (or at least as little as I go around advertising that I'm aetheist) then it would be fine. Otherwise shut the hell up.

Boo hoo, you don't get a prayer room Mr. Catholic? Well until I get a room designated for people to think about how much God doesn't exist you can stop needlessly whining.

Actually its .1 secs per decade. I got that from the Guenniss Book of World Records 2005.
Now this HAS to be a joke. .01 seconds per year = .1 seconds per decade. They don't contradict each other. And if the Guinness Book is worth anything scientifically, it would list a particular decade, because it's always changing.

I totally agree. Why is it that so many religions are hypocritical? You'd think the extremists would want to follow their religion to the letter, even the bits they don't like.

Now this HAS to be a joke. .01 seconds per year = .1 seconds per decade. They don't contradict each other. And if the Guinness Book is worth anything scientifically, it would list a particular decade, because it's always changing.

It's hard to tell what's a joke and what isn't. It's kind of a game I guess.

Oh you guys...you have no idea whats going on.
Boo hoo, you don't get a prayer room Mr. Catholic? Well until I get a room designated for people to think about how much God doesn't exist you can stop needlessly whining.

XD Awesome. I'd like one of those rooms.

Wow... 700 posts and climbing. This is really a great discussion.

Really, it's bloody stupid, but it IS funny.

XD Awesome. I'd like one of those rooms.

I would also like to request that us Pagans get Samhain (Halloween), Imbolc, Ostara (spring equinox), Beltane, Litha (Summer solstice), Luchnassad, and Mabon (fall equinox) off of school and work as religious holidays.

Really, it's bloody stupid, but it IS funny.

I love the dialogue between Pacific Northwesteria and Vespucii.

No. His Christianity is the only religion, remember? By betelgeuse's calculations, I don't even think the universe existed when Judaism aros.

A little off topic:
Could someone describe the theological differences between Sunni and Shiite Islam. I'm reading about the Middle East and it would help.


Ok, the Sunnis and the Shiites. Let's see. I had this a ways back in History, so I might have this backwards, but this is the general thing:
One side thought that this dude, Ali, should become the new leader of Islam because Mohammed said he should be.
The other side thought that this other dude, Mohammed's nephew, I believe (because he was the only blood-line descendant) should be the leader because of holy blood and whatnot. So, they argued about that point, but were still basically the same religion, just claiming different leaders.
Then, those leaders had successors, and it became clear that there were two distinct lines of power. They started assassinating leaders back and forth, got really pissed at each other, and split permanently, having holy wars every now and again to this day. I feel really dumb about this, but I forget which was which as far as the choice for succession. Any Muslims around who can clear this up? I'm an agnostic myself, so I don't know much about the history.

Seriously though, how can anyone actually believe this BS wholeheartedly? If any religite actually looked into the history of the bible and saw how it was written over hundreds of years in dead languages, translated, retranslated, changed based on the whims of kings, they would throw it in the trash. And let's not forget, the bible was written in a time when people were even stupider that they are today. You've seen the morons that surround us. Imagine everyone in the world is that dumb, or dumber. Those people made up the bible. Any religious leader from that time (i.e. Jesus, Moses, Mohammed if any of them even existed) was just someone smart enough to take advantage of how retarded people were. Yet somehow it all stuck. Saddening.


I agree with you whole hartedly, i see him evey time i close my eyes, on the face of evey baby, and when i stare at the sun for ages, then i cant see anything but him for about 20 minutes and it hurts a lot.

Na seriosuly all good points, and btw theres a whole branch of theology called biblical criticism im taking a course in it my self, theres a christian in my class and its made her cry on 3 seperate occasions.

Well this is a chance to broadcast your religion without recieving glares from everyone else in the room.

...or is it the other way around..?

George H.W. Bush, (R) as Presidential Nominee for the Republican party; 1987-AUG-27:

"No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

watch discovery channel right now

"No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

Well,
Thank GOD for Bill Clinton :D

Judaism is, or was, the worship of God, but waiting for a savior. If God was worshipped before any other creature that humans could imagine, then, clearly, Judaism was the first relgion, but no longer true, as they still wait for a savior who has laready come.
That is a totally misinformed statement.

"Savior" is a word used RARELY in the Hebrew Bible, and even still uncommon in the New Testament. To say that they are expecting a savior is wrong. Messianic expectations have always been in regards to the Davidic Monarchy, whether political, revolutionary, eschatological, apocalyptic, etc. "Messiah" certainly does NOT connote divinity (given how it's even used to describe a foreign king on the Hebrew Bible), and there were absolutely NO expectations that the Messiah would be divine.

Additionally, are you blaspheming by saying that the Christian God doesn't keep his promises? Look at the numerous covenants of the Hebrew Bible and I suggest you reconsider your opinion about Judaism now being "wrong".

God is unchanging. This a "truth" held dear as one of the central tenets of Christian Dogma.

In the Old Testament, Jehovah, the great I AM rains fire and brimstone upon the wicked, sends ten plagues upon the Egyptians, and parts the Red Sea. He condemns all who stand in the way of the Israelites and the chosen land. He gives Moses the Ten Commandments and Mosaic law, which states "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

In the New Testament, Jesus walks around with his disciples and heals the sick. He calls for all to "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbour as thyself".

Clearly Mosaic law and the new law given by Jesus are in contradiction. It's a good thing Jesus isn't a Christian or he'd be going to hell. Jesus was a Jew.

And another thing, just because something is written in ancient Hebrew, doesn't make it true. Take the Bhagavad Gita for example. It's a hell of a lot older than the oldest book in the Old Testament. And what of other holy books that were eventually declared as pagan by the Holy Roman Empire and all copies burned? Christianity isn't the only option, but most Christians aren't willing to step out of their comfort area. Too caught up in their "persecution complex".

And what of the fact that the Bible declares the Jewish people to be the chosen people of God, Christians must be going to hell because they weren't raised Jewish. The Judeo-Christian God clearly is rascist, because He favors Judaism over Christianity. Doesn't matter if you worship Jesus, because "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me."

Thanks, Bottle for the info on Horus, I was going to post the something similar, but you beat me to it.

Christianity is a branch of Judeism because they believe in the same God

Christianity is a branch of Judeism because they believe in the same God

Nope. The Christians have that f-ed up Holy Trinity garbage (They're all the same God, but at the same time they're not? WTF?!) while Jews still believe in just one God, without any other sons or pieces or anything.

God is unchanging. This a "truth" held dear as one of the central tenets of Christian Dogma.

In the Old Testament, Jehovah, the great I AM rains fire and brimstone upon the wicked, sends ten plagues upon the Egyptians, and parts the Red Sea. He condemns all who stand in the way of the Israelites and the chosen land. He gives Moses the Ten Commandments and Mosaic law, which states "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

In the New Testament, Jesus walks around with his disciples and heals the sick. He calls for all to "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbour as thyself".

Clearly Mosaic law and the new law given by Jesus are in contradiction. It's a good thing Jesus isn't a Christian or he'd be going to hell. Jesus was a Jew.

And another thing, just because something is written in ancient Hebrew, doesn't make it true. Take the Bhagavad Gita for example. It's a hell of a lot older than the oldest book in the Old Testament. And what of other holy books that were eventually declared as pagan by the Holy Roman Empire and all copies burned? Christianity isn't the only option, but most Christians aren't willing to step out of their comfort area. Too caught up in their "persecution complex".

And what of the fact that the Bible declares the Jewish people to be the chosen people of God, Christians must be going to hell because they weren't raised Jewish. The Judeo-Christian God clearly is rascist, because He favors Judaism over Christianity. Doesn't matter if you worship Jesus, because "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me."

Thanks, Bottle for the info on Horus, I was going to post the something similar, but you beat me to it.accualy your wrong because the Bible changes at two points were it. One were is says an eye for a eye thats was the Lord talking were later it goes on to say "vengence in mine" so i blew that theory up and two if you ever read the four gospels Jesus says "I am the way and the truth"

Christianity is a branch of Judeism because they believe in the same God

Wrong. It can't be a branch of Judaism because hardly any Christians have any Jewish ancestry. The Judeo-Christian God's chosen people are the Jews. And you aren't one.

One were is says an eye for a eye thats was the Lord talking

What? I don't understand...

both believe in the same God oh and btw the holy trinity are the Holy Ghost God and the Son

Judaism is, or was, the worship of God, but waiting for a savior. If God was worshipped before any other creature that humans could imagine, then, clearly, Judaism was the first relgion, but no longer true, as they still wait for a savior who has laready come.


Wait, did I miss something?

Zeus, Ra, Osiris, Pan, Athena, Isis, Jupitor, Diana, Apollo, Hades, Bastet... countless others. They're what, chopped liver? Humans first wanted to worship (in most places) the sun. If we're using longevity as basis for truth, then the modern-day cults of Osiris are most true, followed by pagan religions that worship the SAME gods the anciente greeks and/or equptians did.

Plus, THEIR prophecies came true almost immediatly

They have holy books as well, that are still around

Yet anyone who worships anything older than Yaweh is considered a "godless heathen"

What? I don't understand...
what dont you understand

The somewhat "unique" sentence structure mostly.

accualy your wrong because the Bible changes at two points were it. One were is says an eye for a eye thats was the Lord talking were later it goes on to say "vengence in mine" so i blew that theory up and two if you ever read the four gospels Jesus says "I am the way and the truth"


"And Jesus said, you have heard it said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. But I say to you now, " something about turn the other cheek (blagh, don't have a bible in front of me)

What most people don't seem to realize was that Jesus was a radical! He went around smashing up churches and spouting heretical statements left and right! If it wern't fo rthe whole resurrection thing, he'd be a heretic, nothing more. REbellious little prick.

Not that I dislike him. I have reason to belive he saved my life.

both believe in the same God oh and btw the holy trinity are the Holy Ghost God and the Son

I'm aware if that. The concept doesn't make any sense to me.

"the Lord hath said vengance is mine"

Wait, did I miss something?

Zeus, Ra, Osiris, Pan, Athena, Isis, Jupitor, Diana, Apollo, Hades, Bastet... countless others. They're what, chopped liver? Humans first wanted to worship (in most places) the sun. If we're using longevity as basis for truth, then the modern-day cults of Osiris are most true, followed by pagan religions that worship the SAME gods the anciente greeks and/or equptians did.

Plus, THEIR prophecies came true almost immediatly

They have holy books as well, that are still around

Yet anyone who worships anything older than Yaweh is considered a "godless heathen"

THANK YOU!!! This is exactly what I get almost every time I tell someone of a Christian background that I am Pagan. I'm labeled a satanist or a heathen.

I never understood the Holy Spirit/ Jesus. If God wanted to proclaim a new covenant, why not just send another national/worldwide revelation? This is how he was revealed to the Jews originally.

accualy your wrong because the Bible changes at two points were it. One were is says an eye for a eye thats was the Lord talking were later it goes on to say "vengence in mine" so i blew that theory up and two if you ever read the four gospels Jesus says "I am the way and the truth"

Wrong. You didn't blow that "theory" up.

Romans 12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

But he never did. He never smote anybody in the New Testament. All the smiting was in the Old Testament, he only made idle threats in the New Testament. I've read not only the four gospels, but also the entire King James Version of the Bible. I've also read several other "holy" books. Have you ever researched anything on the Easter Resurrection? Give me a chronological order with quotes to back it up from each of the gospels and I'll believe in Christ.

"And Jesus said, you have heard it said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. But I say to you now, " something about turn the other cheek (blagh, don't have a bible in front of me)

What most people don't seem to realize was that Jesus was a radical! He went around smashing up churches and spouting heretical statements left and right! If it wern't fo rthe whole resurrection thing, he'd be a heretic, nothing more. REbellious little prick.

Not that I dislike him. I have reason to belive he saved my life.you do realize that Jesus only used violence once and that was to clear the blashphemers out of the temples because they were using the temple to trade money and use other sinful items

both believe in the same God oh and btw the holy trinity are the Holy Ghost God and the Son

They can't be the same God because Judaism doesn't recognize the divinity of Jesus, and "btw" or by the way for those who can't bother to spell things out, neither do I.

Wrong. You didn't blow that "theory" up.

Romans 12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ?Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.?

But he never did. He never smote anybody in the New Testament. All the smiting was in the Old Testament, he only made idle threats in the New Testament. I've read not only the four gospels, but also the entire King James Version of the Bible. I've also read several other "holy" books. Have you ever researched anything on the Easter Resurrection? Give me a chronological order with quotes to back it up from each of the gospels and I'll believe in Christ.*cough revelation cough*

you do realize that Jesus only used violence once and that was to clear the blashphemers out of the temples because they were using the temple to trade money and use other sinful items


You do realize that Christians are nonviolent except when its to burn the blashphemers at the stake and bomb the sinful muslims?

you mean after the muslim radicals attack aka osama and saddam

I'm aware if that. The concept doesn't make any sense to me.

In reference to the Holy trinity. It is my understanding that early church fathers based this off of the Triple Goddess. Because most of the people they were trying to convert were pagan and already believed in a three faced god it would be easier to impose the new belief on top of the old.

*cough revelation cough*


he hasn't done that YET, dearie

*cough revelation cough*

Revelations was a vision to John, not a recollection of history.

*cough revelation cough*

Revelations is a false prophecy that will not occur and was probably writen while the author was on some sort of really nasty drug.

Possibly several drugs.

I would like to just tell Betulguese something (Betelgeuse?).
We (or at least I) am not attacking you. We are having what is called a "debate", although some are more low-brow than others. I have seen deadly logical fallacies on both sides, and at least half-way decent points made on both sides. When I respond to you, and I think when others do as well, it is not to put you down or to put our fingers in our ears. It is to correct your misunderstandings about science and what science says.
You do not seem to be using the scientific method at this point, but if you with to become a scientist that is noble, despite the reasons behind it (i.e. killing science). However, you must know that to find truth you must not start out with something set in your mind. If you decide, right now, that it is scientific truth that Creation happened 6100 years ago, and then proceed to do scientific studies on that issue, you will (purposely in your case, inadvertantly in others) dismiss the evidence against you and proclaim the proof of your already solidified beliefs. Science is not like the Bible: it cannot be interpreted at will to provide any answer you wish and still "hold true". Science is made to be impartial, although we as humans cannot completely fulfill this goal. True scientists admit it when they're wrong, and seek to better themselves through discussion, debate, and experimentation.
In short, when I show that your statements of science are wrong, I am not trying to get you to shut up. I'm trying to give you accurate information about what science says. I <3 analogies, so here goes:
If I were to say that I don't like Christianity because it tells me to eat babies five time a week, you'd have a problem with that, right? Because Christianity doesn't say anything of the sort! You may or may not have a problem with my view of Christianity, but you would be offended that I was basing my decision of something that was false. The same goes with what you say as evidence using science: you claim that science comes to a certain conclusion, or, worse, that you can make it come to a certain conclusion. I don't have any problem with your believe in God and in Jesus, and I think that such beliefs can often have very positive effects on the morality of people. That is sometimes not the case, but I believe it to be the goal. However, I do very much have a problem with your claims regarding science that lead you to that conclusion. If you must obscure facts to retain your faith, your faith is not strong. If you must invent reasons to prove your faith, your faith is not strong. A strong faith does not require reasons. You believe because you do, and because you feel, to your very core, that it is the truth. Trying to buttress this claim with faulty evidence is not only an insult to our collective intelligence, but also to your faith.
Religion cannot be proven or disproven, at its core. "You can't disprove it, so it must be so" is an example of the logical fallacy of "argument from ignorance". Same thing with "you can't prove it so it can't be true". Neither argument is sound. "If there were a God He would want us to know of Him and so would reveal himself" is also not a good argument. You cannot know the will of God, if He does in fact exist. And, to Christians, He has revealed himself, through the prophets and the Bible. Again, no valid arguments can be made. The only arguments for a God follow the line of an inductive explanation: basically, here's a phenomenon to be explained, it would be explained quite nicely if this this and this were true, so probably these things are true. Like the "watchmaker". However, there are many false arguments that can take that form.
The only arguments against a God are either sadly lacking in any substance or are else based upon contradictions in the Bible. One funny example on this is that somewhere in the Bible it describes how the Sun is 50 times as bright as on Earth in Heaven (or something like that, I'm working off of memory here). Crunch the numbers, and you can come up with a temperature for Heaven. It also describes Hell has having rivers of brimstone, and we know the temperature at which brimstone evaporates, and thus cannot be a "river". Turns out, using physics, Heaven is hotter than Hell is. This proves nothing, however. It may be amusing to poke fun at the Bible, but it is inherently impossible to disprove a being who could plant the evidence you use at will.
In short, you can't prove God, you can't disprove God. You can only believe, not, or not be sure. Personally, I'm not sure. I look to science for my answers, because if there is a God, science sure as hell describes His Creation very well, and if there isn't, it's the only explanation out there for how things came to be and how things work.
Thank you for lending me your time.

Ffc2: Have you ever done actual Bible study? Or do you just listen when your pastor spews fire and brimstone from the pulpit?

people think that other reglions are better then other but only remember that there is ONLY ONE GOD!!!!!!

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?

it is completely fair! cause christianity is wronge, why else would they ban them.

The Christians' abuse of Muslims, from the middle ages through imperialism to today, is one of the primary causes of terrorism. The Muslims actually treated Christians and Jews far better than they themselves were treated in Christian lands.

he hasn't done that YET, dearie
fine ill use one of the Lord killing a few people in the N.T. acts 11:20-25

Ffc2: Have you ever done actual Bible study? Or do you just listen when your pastor spews fire and brimstone from the pulpit?
i listen to my greatgrandfather becuz he is a paster

Ffc2: Have you ever done actual Bible study? Or do you just listen when your pastor spews fire and brimstone from the pulpit?
i listen to my greatgrandfather becuz he is a paster

Ffc2: Have you ever done actual Bible study? Or do you just listen when your pastor spews fire and brimstone from the pulpit?
i listen to my greatgrandfather becuz he is a paster

11:20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the LORD Jesus.
11:21 And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.
11:22 Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.
11:23 Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.
11:24 For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.
11:25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:

Where did he kill somebody? Sounds like conversions to me.

i listen to my greatgrandfather becuz he is a paster

You should be reading the Bible on your own, studying it. Not just from your grandfather, or your pastor, or the Cardinal in your area. Personal communion with God is only possible through self-scrutinizing. Or through hallucinogens.