NationStates Jolt Archive

The question is flawed.

God didn't 'come' from anywhere... he's ALWAYS been here, he'd just fallen down behind the couch.

:)?
i wish he had grabbed my remote control while he was back there. sigh. just another reason to be pissed at god

i dont find the question flawed at all. i find the answer (not your answer, THE answer) to be flawed.

not that one should insist on scientific answers to religious questions.... or religious answers to scientific ones...

scientifically, its perfectly FINE to say "we dont know". its not hypocritical to not know an answer. when the theory of evolution was first proposed, the mechanism of evolution was unknown. some people thought that muck spontaneously generated worms and that cutting off a dogs tail through the generations resulted in tailless dogs.

the knowledge of DNA didnt come until 100(ish) years later. did not knowing how it worked make the theory of evolution wrong?

How about:

The material that was inside the Big Bang, was the material left over from the previous incarnation of the universe?

How about:

The 'catalyst' of the Big Bang was a prior incarnation of the universe collapsing in upon itself?

Thus - energy and matter are both perfectly preserved, and always have been, and always will be... no?

Next!

Fine, but what created the material that was in the first big bang?

Also, Kip Thorne is a professor in Physics, more importantly that of the study of black holes. I used to have one of his books around here, lost it some time ago though. Good read. I used to study astrophysics so I know what I'm talking about.

I simply have one question for all you athiests out there.

What created the material that was inside the big bang, or in fact the the big bang itself?

Also, don't forget about the conservation of matter and energy which states that matter nor energy can be created our destroyed.

Oops, looks like science just got hypcritical...
The good thing about reductionist science is the way for years theorists or experimenters say to the science establishment that they have found out this or that. The establishment will say "no that is not correct using the current thoeries so you are wrong and to be shunned by the establishment!"
This can go on for years till one day more evidence is gathered and the establishment say, "yes you're right and were right all along, next!"
And so Science is advanced by a small step.
Faith on the other hand says " we believe that this is right and all you non believers are wrong so must perish"
mmmmmm?

I had to be precision, I'm afraid... I'm so late to the thread, I've just got to build a body count...;)
Well, i'm sure they have the intellectual discipline to bother looking those kinds of things up before making fools of themselves the next time. Or not, and they like the attention *shrugs*
So, how do you feel about the "Pagan Influences in Christianity" development? You three have an awesome run there. I recommended Corneliu "Lightning Rod" to it about how many Genesis creation versions there are.

Why would the energy 'run out'?

More to the point... where would it 'run' to?

If you view the universe as a 'simple harmonic motion' of expansion and collapse, our REAL WORLD experience tells us that the harmonic motion will gradually decrease... but that is ONLY because there are external forces operating on it, and the system is not 'contained'.

But for a real braintwist... what if we assume that the lifespan of each incarnation of the universe is, effectively, eternal...? So - it doesn't really matter if energy IS lost, because infinity minus one is...?

well i would thing that collapsing and expanding would get weaker and weaker against gravity until it becomes a singularity.

also, wasnt it proven that the universe is expanding, therefore disproving any theory about collapse?

(my apologies to anyone i missed there, which are probably quite a few)
Does this mean you had no appreciation for my thread regarding proper hats for men a short while back? I feel hurt...

i wish he had grabbed my remote control while he was back there. sigh. just another reason to be pissed at god

i dont find the question flawed at all. i find the answer (not your answer, THE answer) to be flawed.

not that one should insist on scientific answers to religious questions.... or religious answers to scientific ones...

scientifically, its perfectly FINE to say "we dont know". its not hypocritical to not know an answer. when the theory of evolution was first proposed, the mechanism of evolution was unknown. some people thought that muck spontaneously generated worms and that cutting off a dogs tail through the generations resulted in tailless dogs.

the knowledge of DNA didnt come until 100(ish) years later. did not knowing how it worked make the theory of evolution wrong?

Ah, you know I was just messing' wit' ya. ;)

Regarding 'evolution'... it is one of those little curiousities that pleases me so, that the term 'survival of the fittest', was NOT coined by Darwin... or any follower of the 'Darwinian' school of thought. It was actually coined by Herbert Spencer - a dedicated Lamarckist (those that, as you discussed above, thought the phenotype 'led' the genotype... erm... that the giraffe had a longer neck because he 'stretched'.)

Yes there is a God, but he doesn't make the world a perfect place.

in science if it is proven today it may stay as a corner stone forever or tomorrow new evidence comes to light and suddenly the fact is different.
And so Science advances one more small step.

Fine, but what created the material that was in the first big bang?

Also, Kip Thorne is a professor in Physics, more importantly that of the study of black holes. I used to have one of his books around here, lost it some time ago though. Good read. I used to study astrophysics so I know what I'm talking about.

What is this 'first' big bang of which you speak?

The 'first' big bang was spawned from the remains of the universe before it, just like all the others, before and since.

Honestly, you humans. You think in SUCH three-dimensional terms...

What is this 'first' big bang of which you speak?

The 'first' big bang was spawned from the remains of the universe before it, just like all the others, before and since.

Honestly, you humans. You think in SUCH three-dimensional terms...

I always thought it was an instability in the ten dimensions?

Does this mean you had no appreciation for my thread regarding proper hats for men a short while back? I feel hurt...
Don't feel hurt! :fluffle:

Wait, was i there? Did you just pilfer some compassion out of me? I don't have that in good measure.

Well, i'm sure they have the intellectual discipline to bother looking those kinds of things up before making fools of themselves the next time. Or not, and they like the attention *shrugs*
So, how do you feel about the "Pagan Influences in Christianity" development? You three have an awesome run there. I recommended Corneliu "Lightning Rod" to it about how many Genesis creation versions there are.

Pagan Influences... that's one I'm still in, right? :D

Sometimes I lose track of the thread, in favour of attention to the material... I believe it is one that Muravyets has been doing some sterling work in, and another showcase for the talents of Tropical Sands.

How can anyone argue 'one creation' in Genesis? There are clearly at least two (because things are listed in 'temporal' different orders)... and there is another, shorter 'condensed' version only a few chapters later... if I recall correctly.

And then, of course, once you get to the Gospels, the whole thing gets AT LEAST one more 'rewrite'.

Ah, you know I was just messing' wit' ya. ;)

Regarding 'evolution'... it is one of those little curiousities that pleases me so, that the term 'survival of the fittest', was NOT coined by Darwin... or any follower of the 'Darwinian' school of thought. It was actually coined by Herbert Spencer - a dedicated Lamarckist (those that, as you discussed above, thought the phenotype 'led' the genotype... erm... that the giraffe had a longer neck because he 'stretched'.)

so youre saying i should stop praying for my remote?

its interesting how much they got right while utterly misunderstanding how it happened.

in science if it is proven today it may stay as a corner stone forever or tomorrow new evidence comes to light and suddenly the fact is different.
And so Science advances one more small step.
Yeah, i'm waiting for that step away from the Newtonian measure of gravity as experienced on our macroscopic scale ... as well as when they recall the boiling and freezing points of water. Then we can really get cookin' with the science!

Pagan Influences... that's one I'm still in, right? :DYep!

Sometimes I lose track of the thread, in favour of attention to the material... I believe it is one that Muravyets has been doing some sterling work in, and another showcase for the talents of Tropical Sands.Utterly agreed.

How can anyone argue 'one creation' in Genesis? There are clearly at least two (because things are listed in 'temporal' different orders)... and there is another, shorter 'condensed' version only a few chapters later... if I recall correctly.

And then, of course, once you get to the Gospels, the whole thing gets AT LEAST one more 'rewrite'.Apparently, Corneliu can argue "one creation". He doesn't necessarily win with that attitude and limited ammunition, but he sticks it out nonetheless.

well i would thing that collapsing and expanding would get weaker and weaker against gravity until it becomes a singularity.

also, wasnt it proven that the universe is expanding, therefore disproving any theory about collapse?

Why should 'gravity' have any effect on the series of events? What effect does gravity have in the space BETWEEN universes, in the 'serial universe' model? Is it not just as possible that the gravitational field we experience, is a function OF the amount of mass in the universe? Thus - when our universe 'resets' - so does our gravity?

Regarding 'proving' the universe is expanding... ah - this is one of those things... how do you 'prove' anything?

But - if the universe IS expanding... and indeed, if it IS accelerating... perhaps there is a function OF that acceleration that we are not allowing for... like - yes it IS accelerating, but that the underlying rate of aceleration is decreasing?

Eventually- were that the case, the acceleration would eventually become a deceleration... and then a stasis... and then a gradual acceleration back the way it came.

Or - what if different components of the universal material are accelerating at non-constant rates? You'd end up with 'eddies in the flow'... which would build a 'turbulence' of matter, around which other matter would collect.... And, once those gravity wells got big enough, they would arguably be able to exert a deceleration effect on the (at that point, still accelerating) frontiers...

so youre saying i should stop praying for my remote?

its interesting how much they got right while utterly misunderstanding how it happened.

Ah - science freely admits it advances as often by accident as by design.

And, hell... we wouldn't have it any other way. :)

(So long as 'the method' is preserved, of course).

And - there's your problem... you prayed FOR your remote, rather than, obviously, TO it. If you'd have prayed TO it, you'd have had it back ages ago, along with a pair of lost socks, a quarter and... for some reason... a small pink comb.

Why should 'gravity' have any effect on the series of events? What effect does gravity have in the space BETWEEN universes, in the 'serial universe' model? Is it not just as possible that the gravitational field we experience, is a function OF the amount of mass in the universe? Thus - when our universe 'resets' - so does our gravity?

Regarding 'proving' the universe is expanding... ah - this is one of those things... how do you 'prove' anything?

But - if the universe IS expanding... and indeed, if it IS accelerating... perhaps there is a function OF that acceleration that we are not allowing for... like - yes it IS accelerating, but that the underlying rate of aceleration is decreasing?

Eventually- were that the case, the acceleration would eventually become a deceleration... and then a stasis... and then a gradual acceleration back the way it came.

Or - what if different components of the universal material are accelerating at non-constant rates? You'd end up with 'eddies in the flow'... which would build a 'turbulence' of matter, around which other matter would collect.... And, once those gravity wells got big enough, they would arguably be able to exert a deceleration effect on the (at that point, still accelerating) frontiers...

i took basic astronomy, so now your over my head. i will just nod. *nods*

history and religion are my thing, anything else i have only average knowledge about...

Apparently, Corneliu can argue "one creation". He doesn't necessarily win with that attitude and limited ammunition, but he sticks it out nonetheless.

I guess you have to respect the determination?

I can see how you can read it as 'one creation'... but if it IS 'one creation', it is two CONFLICTING accounts of 'one creation'.

Ah - science freely admits it advances as often by accident as by design.

And, hell... we wouldn't have it any other way. :)

(So long as 'the method' is preserved, of course).

And - there's your problem... you prayed FOR your remote, rather than, obviously, TO it. If you'd have prayed TO it, you'd have had it back ages ago, along with a pair of lost socks, a quarter and... for some reason... a small pink comb.
why didnt i ask you to begin with? i need to learn to go to the experts when i need help.

i took basic astronomy, so now your over my head. i will just nod. *nods*

history and religion are my thing, anything else i have only average knowledge about...

*Sigh*... I didn't even take basic astronomy... I just have a VERY hungry head, and it will eat books on just about ANY subject. :)

why didnt i ask you to begin with? i need to learn to go to the experts when i need help.

Ah - you would have asked me, eventually... it's just, I've been SO busy with all those typewriterless monkeys...

I guess you have to respect the determination?

I can see how you can read it as 'one creation'... but if it IS 'one creation', it is two CONFLICTING accounts of 'one creation'.


some would argue that they are complementary. the first account given about the order of events, then the second account being focused on man. i would also argue against the idea of two different authors, because it is not uncommon for an author to use different terms or style in a single piece of work...

*Sigh*... I didn't even take basic astronomy... I just have a VERY hungry head, and it will eat books on just about ANY subject. :)

i read books on many subjects, but sometimes, in this case science, i dont retain that much of what i read...

Ah - you would have asked me, eventually... it's just, I've been SO busy with all those typewriterless monkeys...
lolol

shoulda taken them to the rome library

now how long am i gonna have to wait for the new "pagans of rome" cd to come out??

lolol

shoulda taken them to the rome library

now how long am i gonna have to wait for the new "pagans of rome" cd to come out??

I thought we were going with "Goyim of Rome"? And - hopefully soon... I can't wait to be fantastically - and slightly blasphemically, perhaps... rich. :D

some would argue that they are complementary. the first account given about the order of events, then the second account being focused on man. i would also argue against the idea of two different authors, because it is not uncommon for an author to use different terms or style in a single piece of work...

I would argue against the idea of 'two' authors, at all. I have no doubt that the first accounts were 'authored' over a number of years, and that what we are looking at, should best be termed as 'two editors', if anything.

I certainly can't get ENOUGH distance between me and the idea that 'Moses' was the 'author' of all of the Pentatauch texts.

I would argue against the idea of 'two' authors, at all. I have no doubt that the first accounts were 'authored' over a number of years, and that what we are looking at, should best be termed as 'two editors', if anything.

I certainly can't get ENOUGH distance between me and the idea that 'Moses' was the 'author' of all of the Pentatauch texts.

i agree about moses...

Yes, you're right. But, I believe the earth was created 5,000 years ago, about. Everything else, dinosaurs, neanderthals, homo erectus, it ws all put here by Satan to try to manipulate our thoughts.

I understand your point. You have data to back it up. But my religion is not based on data. EVERYONE will believe data if presented to them. My religion is based on what you cannot see. No, my faith is based on what you cannot see.
does that mean that you would never keep a fossil in your house or perhaps even TOUCH one because it is literally a tool of satan?

I certainly can't get ENOUGH distance between me and the idea that 'Moses' was the 'author' of all of the Pentatauch texts.
i never realized that there were people who thought that. it was odd to see someone defend it.

Continuing on this point, anyone who wants to see various translations of the Bible should head on over to Biblegateway.com. There are a LOT of different translations. From what I see, Cornelieu either has one of the New International Versions or the Darby translation... unlikely, as it refers to 'Jehovah' and not 'God', while Dempublicents1 and I have access to the King James version or one of all the other English-language versions listed, which seem to agree with it (e.g. The Contemporary English version: So the LORD took some soil and made animals and birds...).

I actually generally use the NRSV - Oxford annotated version. It isn't listed on Bible Gateway, unfortunately.

Not big on the King James version, since its been through so many translations of translations. I prefer something that goes back to the original, since the best would be to be able to read it myself in the original languages.


genesis 2:19 -

ַיִּצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים מִן-הָאֲדָמָה, כָּל-חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה וְאֵת כָּל-עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וַיָּבֵא אֶל-הָאָדָם, לִרְאוֹת מַה-יִּקְרָא-לוֹ; וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יִקְרָא-לוֹ הָאָדָם נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה, הוּא שְׁמוֹ

translated as - And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them; and whatsoever the man would call every living creature, that was to be the name thereof.

i took hebrew for three years and suprisingly i remember most of it...

Thanks!

I was thinking about a friend I lost to breast cancer awhile back and how she didn't deserve to die. She had an asshole husband for many years. He was abusive, and when they got divorced, he would go to their sons wrestling meet.. with his bimbo girlfriend.

She was always kind and a good listener to anyone who talked to her. Since she was a teacher, when she died, everyone lost a good friend. We all were affected by her.

Her son is graduating soon, her daughter is getting married this summer. She was happy and upbeat, even with cancer and going through chemo.

Well.. I started thinking why would God let her die? She was a good person. She shouldn't have been taken, it wasn't her time.

I wasn't relisios to begin with.. but I thought there was some sort of higher being (God). But I don't feel that way anymore. What God would do that to someone?

Do you think there is a God?

EDIT: And why do you feel that way?

I don't think there is a god because i think life is merely a biological accident and our futile attempts to assign a higher meaning to it are merely the by products of us evolving a developed brain.

However futile they are, i still think that we should carry on though:-
"I believe life is for taking, not giving
and i believe the unexamined life is not worth living"

well im still trying to find what i believe. i like debate because it is interesting to hear other peoples opinions. i like to debate in a way that makes me look at things from all angles so that i can get a better understanding of it....

I think that's good. If you ever stop trying to find what you believe, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you'll believe something wrong. The minute you stop questioning and make it an "absolute", you've lost the meaning altogether...

Fine, but what created the material that was in the first big bang?

If it *is* eternal, then it was never created, see? Personally, I believe it was created, but if the Universe itself is eternal, then it needs no Creator.


Faith on the other hand says " we believe that this is right and all you non believers are wrong so must perish"
mmmmmm?

My faith says nothing of the sort. Some people say that, but faith does not.

some would argue that they are complementary. the first account given about the order of events, then the second account being focused on man. i would also argue against the idea of two different authors, because it is not uncommon for an author to use different terms or style in a single piece of work...

The problem is the difference in the order of events and the complete difference in focus and tone. The first account places humankind - all of it - as the pinnacle of a Creation by an all-powerful God, one who needs only speak and God's will is done. The second account focuses on man (gender specificness included) - that all of Creation is made *for* man. It involves a more personified God that can and does make mistakes - and man is not made as the pinnacle, but before much of the rest of Creation. It also gives an order of events, as it were, but the order contradicts that in the first account.

That is, unless my translation is incorrect.

The problem is the difference in the order of events and the complete difference in focus and tone. The first account places humankind - all of it - as the pinnacle of a Creation by an all-powerful God, one who needs only speak and God's will is done. The second account focuses on man (gender specificness included) - that all of Creation is made *for* man. It involves a more personified God that can and does make mistakes - and man is not made as the pinnacle, but before much of the rest of Creation. It also gives an order of events, as it were, but the order contradicts that in the first account.

That is, unless my translation is incorrect.

i just read genesis 1 and 2 again and i can see both sides of the argument. so let me try to explain the side that says they dont contradict each other and see what you think...

two probelms in the text is the order of plants and animals. in genises 1, its says that god planted vegitation and plant life. in genesis 2, it says in verse 5that no herb or vegitation had yet sprung up, because god had not watered the earth. so i see this as meaning that no plants had appeared until after mans creation...

genesis 2:19 does not specify if the animals were created before or after adam. it just says they were created out of the ground and brought to adam to be named.

i do find it hard to beleive that two contradictory accoutns would be written right next to each other...

i just read genesis 1 and 2 again and i can see both sides of the argument. so let me try to explain the side that says they dont contradict each other and see what you think...

two probelms in the text is the order of plants and animals. in genises 1, its says that god planted vegitation and plant life. in genesis 2, it says in verse 5that no herb or vegitation had yet sprung up, because god had not watered the earth. so i see this as meaning that no plants had appeared until after mans creation...

I think that's stretching it. You want it to fit so you find a way.

genesis 2:19 does not specify if the animals were created before or after adam. it just says they were created out of the ground and brought to adam to be named.

It says, "18 Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.’ 19So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. [/quote]

Now, one could argue that God was saying the before Adam was created. But it doesn't make much sense for God to say, "Adam is so alone. I'm going to make him a helper. Oh wait! I already made some!"

One would think, if that were the case, that it would read something more like, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will find him a helper as his partner." You still run into the issue of God basically doing things by trial and error and making mistakes, but at least it makes sense. God saying, "I will make him a helper..." suggests that the partner is not already made - and must be made.

i do find it hard to beleive that two contradictory accoutns would be written right next to each other...

I don't - not if you take them as accounts meant to teach a lesson, and not to be literal truth. It would be like finding two different Aesop's fables next to each other that had contradictory information about the capabilities of a fox. It wouldn't matter, because the points would remain even if the more specific details were different.

For something more modern, it doesn't matter that there are contradictions in the tales of Narnia - that details are different in different books. It doesn't matter because the story still gets told - and it is the point behind the story that was meant to matter, not the nitty gritty details

:D i understand your point. some people do feel that it must be taken literal; even when most of the old testament is poetry using figurative language...

*snip*

That's because you are a skeptic. Skeptics always question things they do not understand.

That's because you are a skeptic. Skeptics always question things they do not understand.

This should be regarded as a high compliment.

I would feel the most genuine pity for someone who doesn't question things they don't understand.

This should be regarded as a high compliment.

I would feel the most genuine pity for someone who doesn't question things they don't understand.

What about people who don't question, period? Believe me I've seen those empty eyes. :eek:

What about people who don't question, period? Believe me I've seen those empty eyes. :eek:

I don't so much fear the empty-eyed "believers", but the ones with eyes of emphatic, self-righteous fervor, beliving so intently and needfully that they might be made to do anything, so long as their "God" calls for it.

I don't so much fear the empty-eyed "believers", but the ones with eyes of emphatic, self-righteous fervor, beliving so intently and needfully that they might be made to do anything, so long as their "God" calls for it.

Do you think Corneliu...

I can be made to do anything for chocolate. Except deny the divinity of chocolate. Not on my Ramen-fueled excuse of a grad student "life" anyway.

My entire point here has been that this fellow's trolling has nothing to do with actual "faith" in "God." It's about some kid who doesn't want to learn stuff, and who like to use God as his cop-out.

I think that kind of behavior makes all believers look bad, just as it makes them look bad when some pompous Christian uses Jesus to justify their racism or bigotry. I think any Christian with a brain would be insulted by how this fellow is using their faith to serve his own selfish needs.

But maybe I'm wrong.
This much, I can agree with. If one wants to be a true believer, then one must practice what they preach. After all, "faith without works is dead".

There are many Christians who go to church and believe that they will be "saved", just because they believe. The moment they leave the church, they behave in the most un-Christian like ways. I think that they will be in for a rude awakening.

This much, I can agree with. If one wants to be a true believer, then one must practice what they preach. After all, "faith without works is dead".

There are many Christians who go to church and believe that they will be "saved", just because they believe. The moment they leave the church, they behave in the most un-Christian like ways. I think that they will be in for a rude awakening.

Will it be a ruder awakening if you actually meet them in Heaven later, anyway? Or me? Oh you can find me on 1st Divinity St, Choc Ave. Selling chocolates in Heaven oh yes...yessy yes.

Will it be a ruder awakening if you actually meet them in Heaven later, anyway? Or me? Oh you can find me on 1st Divinity St, Choc Ave. Selling chocolates in Heaven oh yes...yessy yes.
Chocolate is good....you may pass. :D

Do you think Corneliu...

I can be made to do anything for chocolate. Except deny the divinity of chocolate. Not on my Ramen-fueled excuse of a grad student "life" anyway.

Here, we have something called Cadbury Mini-eggs, little candy-coated chocolate eggs. I bought two bags, one is already half gone.

I think Corneliu has made the terrible but tempting trade, giving up one's reason in exchange for certainty, one's guilt for pretended pardon.

After all, if there were no God waiting to bathe people in the blood of his child, forgiveness would have to be found in a lifetime of care and regard for the people in our daily life.

The blood is just easier.

Simply put, yes. And if you do not, as is your right, it's still ok. God believes in you.

That's because you are a skeptic. Skeptics always question things they do not understand.

Actually, I would say that skeptics question everything, even that which they think they understand. And this is exactly what you must do to truly have faith. The minute you stop questioning, you have lost faith.

I doubt very seriously that I understand the stories any less than you do. I simply admit it, where others base their faith in human beings and words, rather than in God.

Edit: Of course, if you meant "skeptic", as I have seen it used before, to mean, "one who discounts religion," you couldn't be more wrong.

Actually, I would say that skeptics question everything, even that which they think they understand. And this is exactly what you must do to truly have faith. The minute you stop questioning, you have lost faith.

I doubt very seriously that I understand the stories any less than you do. I simply admit it, where others base their faith in human beings and words, rather than in God.

Edit: Of course, if you meant "skeptic", as I have seen it used before, to mean, "one who discounts religion," you couldn't be more wrong.

It's got me confused... in this sort of thread, I usually refer to myself as a 'skeptic'... as in, a 'skeptical' or Implicit Atheist.

If Corneliu is dropping you into THAT bucket, I'd argue he was a ways off.

If, on the other hand, he just means that you prefer to question even what you think you KNOW... then I'd probably take it as a compliment, and I actually can't see a negative side to it.

i do find it hard to beleive that two contradictory accoutns would be written right next to each other...

What if they weren't?

What if, for hundreds... maybe even a thousand or so... years, these were conflicting versions, culled from different oral traditions.... and it just so happens, the 'scribes' chose to record both?

I guess you have to respect the determination?Actually, i do. He often brings much needed entertainment. And i can't bring myself to be my usual acerbic bastard self to him most of the time now.

I can see how you can read it as 'one creation'... but if it IS 'one creation', it is two CONFLICTING accounts of 'one creation'.
That's the part he doesn't seem to notice ... or admit.

*Sigh*... I didn't even take basic astronomy... I just have a VERY hungry head, and it will eat books on just about ANY subject. :)
Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! *raises hand frantically*
How 'bout Re:Search ... the Modern Primatives issue?

More seriously, i recommend the Bathroom Reader series (yay, series!)
and
Wallace & Wallechinsky's The Book of Lists (any of the first, but there's a new compendium *does his weasel dance*)
and i could probably go on for quite a while about books worth intellectual voraciousness.

Simply put, yes. And if you do not, as is your right, it's still ok. God believes in you.
"If god is our father', you thought, 'then satan must be our cousin.' Why didn't anyone else understand these important things?"

I think Corneliu has made the terrible but tempting trade, giving up one's reason in exchange for certainty, one's guilt for pretended pardon.

After all, if there were no God waiting to bathe people in the blood of his child, forgiveness would have to be found in a lifetime of care and regard for the people in our daily life.

The blood is just easier.
Moddamn you're good at that phrase turning, ya know?
*bows*

"If god is our father', you thought, 'then satan must be our cousin.' Why didn't anyone else understand these important things?"


Yes.

Yes.
Please forgive me that i didn't provide the crickets or the board-banging. :D

The minute you stop questioning, you have lost faith.

Oddly, I couldnt disagree more, I found, and still find, that once you actually start to question ones faith, is where you lose it.

It would be far easier to simply accept everything the Bible, and the Church tell us, and to simply not put enough thought into what we hear.
It is only when we start to doubt, and discover so many loopholes in the dogma, the ultimate hippocracy, and contradiction that is modern Christianity.

I wonder if anyone who claims to have thier faith tested, really actually has.
How many of them have seen devastation, or events so horrible that ones faith is truly shaken?

I think for most people, getting caught up in thier own little lives of bill payment, and rat racing, the stress of wich causes one to have doubt in the validity of it all...not truly an event wich warrants a change of religion.
In other words, pretentious as it may be, I put forth that most christians have never really had thier faiths truly tested, but nonetheless suggest otherwise.

Its a bit like Christian double-think...

Its true, because God says it is.
and God exists, becuase he said it in a very old book.

Oddly, I couldn't disagree more, I found, and still find, that once you actually start to question ones faith, is where you lose it.

It would be far easier to simply accept everything the Bible, and the Church tell us, and to simply not put enough thought into what we hear.

So why does the Bible deserve this attitude and not, say, government policy?

So why does the Bible deserve this attitude and not, say, government policy?

Come on, critical thinking is over-rated. Why am I here eating Ramen in grad school whereas my old high school buddy is flying first-class and up to his ears in greenbacks as a associate in Law?

Just believing in anything anyone throws at me looks like a swell idea. I'll start by memorizing advertisement jingles...

Please forgive me that i didn't provide the crickets or the board-banging. :D

That's ok. The thought was there.

So why does the Bible deserve this attitude and not, say, government policy?


In my opinion, they both are.
The only difference is that our government has been adopting the "Lie through our Teeth" policy for nowhere near as long.

In fact, look at the most recent American Presidential Eelection.

John Kerry lost, because the American people were ultimately convinced he was weak, and indecisive, and possibly even a shady military officer.
This is becuase more americans let Bush and Rove, and the mud-slinging on television do thier thinking for them.

Its only when we started truly questioning our President, is when he became doubted by the majority.

That's ok. The thought was there.
Well, my head hurt, and it rang when i stood up. It always hurts me when i wake up like this. :D

In my opinion, they both are.
The only difference is that our government has been adopting the "Lie through our Teeth" policy for nowhere near as long.


You are an especially odd person.:fluffle:

You are an especially odd person.:fluffle:


Probably.

But Im also right.

Probably.

But Im also right.

In saying we should have blind faith?:confused:

God is great!

I think there is a god, people die, most who die deserve to live, but god does not decide who lives and dies, he relinquished that a long time ago, that is the work of satan, everything happens for a reason, that reason is not always clear though.

God is great!

God is evil.

I presume we're all talking about Dionysius here are we?

In saying we should have blind faith?:confused:


Umm...unless you missed everything I wrote...I was professing the very opposite.

I belive that blindly following anything, particularly religion, but also politicians, is a stupid, and dangerous thing to do.

I think there is a god, people die, most who die deserve to live, but god does not decide who lives and dies, he relinquished that a long time ago, that is the work of satan, everything happens for a reason, that reason is not always clear though.

This is optimism at its most disgusting. :rolleyes:

God is evil.
How can you say that, he created you

How can you say that, he created you


Like this:

"God is Evil"

Pretty easy, really.

How can you say that, he created you
Actually all the more reason...

This is optimism at its most disgusting. :rolleyes:
It would not be so far-fetched if you believed and had some faith, and I would appreciate it if you did not insult me and my faith

I presume we're all talking about Dionysius here are we?
Nope Bachus is better!

It would not be so far-fetched if you believed and had some faith, and I would appreciate it if you did not insult me and my faith

I smell a puppet...


How strong is your faith?

Strong enough to take a bit of a ribbing?

God is evil.
My god does hurtful things to some people for any reason he chooses you may not understand it but he is a good decent guy and plays a mean game of Air-Hockey.

^^^1080-Post!:D
I smell a puppet...


How strong is your faith?

Strong enough to take a bit of a ribbing?
Will you use Lube?

^^^1080-Post!:D

Will you use Lube?


Yes, but I will put sand in it.

*shrug*

It would not be so far-fetched if you believed and had some faith, and I would appreciate it if you did not insult me and my faith

I don't care what you'd appreciate. I despise all people who reject truth in order to ignore their feelings of inadequacy. It's my freedom to tell you what I think of you as much as it's your freedom to have your own religion.

Yes, but I will put sand in it.

*shrug*
:fluffle:
Oh wait ouch...

:fluffle:
Oh wait ouch...


Sorry...didnt mean to be so...abrasive.

Wouldnt want to..rub you the wrong way.

It could cause some....friction...between us.



Ok im done.

I don't care what you'd appreciate. I despise all people who reject truth in order to ignore their feelings of inadequacy. It's my freedom to tell you what I think of you as much as it's your freedom to have your own religion.
Ah, a south australian, don;'t get me started on what I think off you!

Ah, a south australian, don;'t get me started on what I think off you!


Please...

I'd love to hear it.

Ah, a south australian, don;'t get me started on what I think off you!

I don't intend to.:cool:

Sorry...didnt mean to be so...abrasive.

Wouldnt want to..rub you the wrong way.

It could cause some....friction...between us.



Ok im done.
But i have needs.
Nice guys finish last.:(

But i have needs.
Nice guys finish last.:(


Or, in this case...not at all.

Sometimes love, is a rough trade.

Or, in this case...not at all.

Sometimes love, is a rough trade.
How rough can you get?

How rough can you get?


Well, if you consider using a not-so cleverly disguised series of bad puns for the last half hour, to be rough...then...very.

God is great!

As in 'large' or 'immense'?

I think there is a god, people die, most who die deserve to live, but god does not decide who lives and dies, he relinquished that a long time ago, that is the work of satan, everything happens for a reason, that reason is not always clear though.

So - it was Satan that killed Jesus?

Puts a whole knew slant on the story about 'vicarious substitution', if the alleged messiah was actually a snivelling wretch dragged to the cross, and pleading with his last gasps...

It would not be so far-fetched if you believed and had some faith, and I would appreciate it if you did not insult me and my faith

Strange that Christians often feel that way about THEIR faith, but feel quite free to tell everyone else they are idol-worshippers, and/or that they will burn in hell...

Gold Griffin,
If God is all-powerful, he/she can not relinquish power. No matter how much believers try to squirm out of this dilemna, if a God exists then all consequences flow from that omniscience. Joy and love come from God, but so also does pain, cruelty and death. Man created God, and having done so, realized that there were problems with that creation, and created Satan, to explain why we live in a tarnished world.

I can be made to do anything for chocolate. Except deny the divinity of chocolate. Not on my Ramen-fueled excuse of a grad student "life" anyway.

wait, you used the words grad student and life in the same sentence-- i think that, no, wait, i know that that is somewhat oxymoronic.....

In saying we should have blind faith?:confused:

Faith is blind. If it wasn't blind then why do we have faith?

God is great!

Amen my friend.

God is evil.

I can see where your going unless this is just sarcasm or roleplay.

It would not be so far-fetched if you believed and had some faith, and I would appreciate it if you did not insult me and my faith

You'll find that its a habit of those who do not believe in Christianity to insult those who are. There are some though who do respect our beliefs and those are the ones I try to associate with for they are respectful.

I don't care what you'd appreciate. I despise all people who reject truth in order to ignore their feelings of inadequacy. It's my freedom to tell you what I think of you as much as it's your freedom to have your own religion.

And what is your truth Commie Catholics? You sure aren't acting like a catholic.

So - it was Satan that killed Jesus?

Not directly no but it was Satan that got Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus.

Strange that Christians often feel that way about THEIR faith, but feel quite free to tell everyone else they are idol-worshippers, and/or that they will burn in hell...

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.

Presumably as I do not believe in God, I am doomed. So who put me in this peril? God? I did not ask to be born. For what purpose was I created? To satisfy some strange lusts of an uncaring all-powerful being?

And what is your truth Commie Catholics? You sure aren't acting like a catholic.
And there would be many times where it appears that you are not acting like a Christian? Yesterday, Bottle made some comments and while I do not entirely agree with everything she wrote, I can agree on this:

My entire point here has been that this fellow's trolling has nothing to do with actual "faith" in "God." It's about some kid who doesn't want to learn stuff, and who like to use God as his cop-out.

I think that kind of behavior makes all believers look bad, just as it makes them look bad when some pompous Christian uses Jesus to justify their racism or bigotry. I think any Christian with a brain would be insulted by how this fellow is using their faith to serve his own selfish needs.

But maybe I'm wrong.
This much, I can agree with. If one wants to be a true believer, then one must practice what they preach. After all, "faith without works is dead".

There are many Christians who go to church and believe that they will be "saved", just because they believe. The moment they leave the church, they behave in the most un-Christian like ways. I think that they will be in for a rude awakening.

As far as I can see, there may or may not be some all powerful being, but I certainly don't take the bible as historical fact, even though much of it is based on history.

Quite often the Bible seems completly lacking in sense to me. Take Eden for one thing. If Adam and Eve had no concept of good and evil untill they ate the fruit, why were they punished so harshly? It's like locking up a two year old who doesn't know what he's doing in prison. Also, God told them they would die if they ate the fruit. So, if God lies to people, how can you trust him? Thirdly, why put the tree and the snake there in the first place? Why punish the snake for telling the truth? Why, if god is everywhere, was he convieniently absent through the whole snake/fruit incident?

PS : It doesn't actually say apple in the bible - that's just what most artists painted into the scene. Anyone else think that Christianity would be different if it had been the forbidden banana?

Your post is much too logical and sensible. No doubt you will now be attacked by the Faith police for ---------BLASPHEMY!

I have absolutly no problem with 95% of Christians I have emt in my life - As far as I'm concerned, if you have faith and it makes you a better, happier person, more power to you. My problem is with a minority of Christians who use hristianity as an excuse for things like racism and homophobia. I also am not keen on those Christians who take everything the bible says absolutly liiterally (these two groups often overlap). This is not because I am mocking their beliefs, but that they often refuse to listen to anyone elses arguments or beliefs. While I am not so conceited as to think I'll change someones faith in single conversation, I would rather people respect my views as much as they wish their own to be respected.

Not directly no but it was Satan that got Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus.

I don't find that scriptural.

As I read it, Jesus told Judas he would betray him... and Judas obeyed.

Irnland, I believe that religion keeps humanity apart. It seems to me that heaven is a device to ensure compliance with a narrow credo. If the twin threat of hell, and promise of heaven, are removed, we would all be more free to do what we consider to be morally right, rather than having an all powerful being supervising, planning and judging our actions. We are either free without God, or if he/she exists, mere puppets.

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.

And yet, you get all offended when someone says your god is a poor quality knock-off of Zeus...

There is no 'Truth', my friend... not with the capital letters you feel it needs.

Nothing you can prove, anyway.

And, forgive me if I don't take my spiritual education from someone who hasn't even READ the scripture on which their religion is centred.

I was thinking about a friend I lost to breast cancer awhile back and how she didn't deserve to die. She had an asshole husband for many years. He was abusive, and when they got divorced, he would go to their sons wrestling meet.. with his bimbo girlfriend.

She was always kind and a good listener to anyone who talked to her. Since she was a teacher, when she died, everyone lost a good friend. We all were affected by her.

Her son is graduating soon, her daughter is getting married this summer. She was happy and upbeat, even with cancer and going through chemo.

Well.. I started thinking why would God let her die? She was a good person. She shouldn't have been taken, it wasn't her time.

I wasn't relisios to begin with.. but I thought there was some sort of higher being (God). But I don't feel that way anymore. What God would do that to someone?

Do you think there is a God?

EDIT: And why do you feel that way?

I do believe there is a God for a very basic, scientific reason. From nothing comes nothing, and therefore there can never be something when once there was nothing. Follow all that? While I do not subscribe to the church's views on religiosity, I do believe in spirituality. Someone, or something had to create the universe out of nothing. Religion is an attempt to explain something that cannot be explained, nor comprehended by the human mind. Unless you can challenge the laws of physics, you cannot argue that something can come from nothing. While science explains nearly everything in life, there are things beyond our faculties. There is a creator of some sort out there, but he is not the being described in the man made religions.

I do believe there is a God for a very basic, scientific reason. From nothing comes nothing, and therefore there can never be something when once there was nothing.

Except God, right?

That's where your 'science' fails... when you will argue special exception for what you believe, but can't make the same argument for anything else.

Also - what about a cyclic universe? With each universe born from the collapsed ashes of the previous universe, infinitely?

There - if your claim was honest, and you really did "believe there is a God for a very basic, scientific reason..." you must now be AT LEAST a skeptic, no?

I think the reason that these topics get so many posts (despite having been posted approximately ten trillion times) is that no-one is ever able to change another's mind.

Both sides claim that their way is better for society, mistakes in wording get treated as flaws in logic, the bible gets quoted, inconsistencies relating to the quotes get focused on, scientific evidence is brought up, evolutionary biology is called a religion, and so on.

I don't find that scriptural.

As I read it, Jesus told Judas he would betray him... and Judas obeyed.

Luke 22:3 Then Satan enetered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve

And yet, you get all offended when someone says your god is a poor quality knock-off of Zeus...

There is no 'Truth', my friend... not with the capital letters you feel it needs.

Nothing you can prove, anyway.

And, forgive me if I don't take my spiritual education from someone who hasn't even READ the scripture on which their religion is centred.

Oh dude. I have read the scripture. I'm reading it now in fact and I have read it in the past.

Luke 22:3 Then Satan enetered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve

'Satan' meaning 'an adversial spirit', rather than some kind of evil spook.

Unless you ALSO believe that Peter literally WAS 'Satan'?

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.


So God is going to condemn me for all eternity because HE created me with the desire for truth as opposed to faith. He is going to punish me because of how he created me. I wouldn't want to spend the remainder of eternity in his presence. His idiocy would irritate me far to much. I choose hell.

Oh dude. I have read the scripture. I'm reading it now in fact and I have read it in the past.

I beg to differ.

I think, most likely, the NEAREST you've EVER got to the Scripture, is an English translation.

You'll find that its a habit of those who do not believe in Christianity to insult those who are. There are some though who do respect our beliefs and those are the ones I try to associate with for they are respectful.

And you'll find that it's a habit of those who do believe in Christianity to insult those who do not. You don't respect the religion (or lack thereof) of others... why should they respect yours?

You wouldn't be considering the mote in your brother's eye while you've got a beam in yours, would you?

Irnland, I believe that religion keeps humanity apart. It seems to me that heaven is a device to ensure compliance with a narrow credo.

Bear in mind that most religious moral codes are basicly the same - dont kill dont steal, try to be nice to one another. Let's face it, humanity is seperated anyway - by country, by social class, by occupation, by interests - don't blame religion for everything. While it does do harm sometimes, it does a lot of good too.

If the twin threat of hell, and promise of heaven, are removed, we would all be more free to do what we consider to be morally right, rather than having an all powerful being supervising, planning and judging our actions.

Personally I think things would stay the same. Sure, some people would no longer be able to excuse actions with religion, but people can always find another excuse, plus I think religion does keep a lot of people on a relativly moral course.

We are either free without God, or if he/she exists, mere puppets.

You should read Socrates - he made a similar argument - If something is right because god says it is, then we are just following the whims of a greater being. Alternativly, if god says something is right because it is right anyway, then we can arrive at a moral code without his judgement or guidance

I beg to differ.

I think, most likely, the NEAREST you've EVER got to the Scripture, is an English translation.

True. To have an accurate understanding you'd need to read the original text with a thorough understanding of the language used around the time it was written.

'Satan' meaning 'an adversial spirit', rather than some kind of evil spook.

Unless you ALSO believe that Peter literally WAS 'Satan'?

Actually no, Peter was not Satan.

As to Judas Iscariot, prove it wasn't the devil :)

I beg to differ.

I think, most likely, the NEAREST you've EVER got to the Scripture, is an English translation.

I am reading the Bible as I type.

I think the reason that these topics get so many posts (despite having been posted approximately ten trillion times) is that no-one is ever able to change another's mind.

Both sides claim that their way is better for society, mistakes in wording get treated as flaws in logic, the bible gets quoted, inconsistencies relating to the quotes get focused on, scientific evidence is brought up, evolutionary biology is called a religion, and so on.

To be fair, would you expect someones faith and entire system of moral values to be changed completly on the basis of a forum thread (even one as ridiculously long as this one)?

He does love all of us and wants all of us to be in His kingdom but He who does not accept his Son as his Lord and Savior will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

The problem is that you exclude all other beliefs from that of your own. In effect, you were telling the person you would pray for them because they would never be able to know the father due to their lack of faith in Jesus Christ. It's fine that you believe the way you do, but must you force others by guilt to observe as you do. What if they are a devout Mormom, Jew, Hindu, Muslim? Would they then never knowt he father and enter the kingdom of heaven. I know that in your belief system you think this is true, but is it realistic? Do you proclaim that only your form of religion is correct, and therefore are taking great PRIDE in your superiority? For clearly you will reign in the kingdom of heaven as you are a follower of JC. How are modern religions any more correct then those of biblical times? Greeks, Romans, Egyptians. Where is your irrefutible proof that you are correct and all other are wrong? Oh, and "because the bible tells me so" is not a sufficient response.

True. To have an accurate understanding you'd need to read the original text with a thorough understanding of the language used around the time it was written.

And?

So - laziness is the excuse? On something as 'important' as the truth of scripture?

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.

Ahahahahaha! That was a good one. *Sigh* It is a good thing that God burns in Janak for his crimes. I believe in God but only as a blood traitor. My alliegence is to the Creator and the Overlords, the father, sisters and brothers of Lord Ales'erus, the one known as God. And what truth are you speaking of? The Bible perhaps? *Snickers* A dusty old book writen by heathens and blasphemers of the ancient times that contains lies written in blood. The Khal'la give me faith, this is what I believe and hold true...

I dont think theres an exact god as in heaven and hell n all the rubbish, but there is something there tho
people always seem to blame "god" for deaths but hey its all part of life otherwise wouldnt the world be a bit overcrowded

What if they weren't?

What if, for hundreds... maybe even a thousand or so... years, these were conflicting versions, culled from different oral traditions.... and it just so happens, the 'scribes' chose to record both?

thats a good point...

I am reading the Bible as I type.

An English translation?

It isn't prideful to reveal the truth about God. It is my duty as a Christian to spread His love and to spread His word so that others may hear it and believe in Him so that they can enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

I beg to differ.

I think, most likely, the NEAREST you've EVER got to the Scripture, is an English translation.

I am reading the Bible as I type.

Unless you are reading it in ancient Hebrew, you're kind of making his point

Ahahahahaha! That was a good one. *Sigh* It is a good thing that God burns in Janak for his crimes. I believe in God but only as a blood traitor. My alliegence is to the Creator and the Overlords, the father, sisters and brothers of Lord Ales'erus, the one known as God. And what truth are you speaking of? The Bible perhaps? *Snickers* A dusty old book writen by heathens and blasphemers of the ancient times that contains lies written in blood. The Khal'la give me faith, this is what I believe and hold true...

Then I feel sorry for you.

And?

So - laziness is the excuse? On something as 'important' as the truth of scripture?

Excuse for what? What are you on about?

Unless you are reading it in ancient Hebrew, you're kind of making his point

Actually, the Bible is the Bible. Yes there are many translations of it (even linquists differ on the translation of words) but the Bible is the Truth.

It isn't prideful to reveal the truth about God. It is my duty as a Christian to spread His love and to spread His word so that others may hear it and believe in Him so that they can enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Well, seeing as you have the bible in front of you, why not flip to the book of isaiah, where you can read about a Persian king who was sainted for his tolerance of ALL faiths.

Your own book goes against you.

IMHO, it's people like you who give christianity a bad name.

Then I feel sorry for you.

No need for that, my Christian friend. Death comes to us all, for some sonner and later for other. Me? I hope the first so that I can see if God rule or if his siblings rule the kingdoms of the afterlife

Actually no, Peter was not Satan.

As to Judas Iscariot, prove it wasn't the devil :)

Well, apart from the fact that you'd assume Jesus would notice that, and comment on it...

It just doesn't 'fit'. It makes Satan a tool of salvation, rather than what the rest of the Gospel suggests - an opponent of the vicarious substitution.

thats a good point...

Thanks. I have them occassionally. :)

Besides, the newly found Judas evangeline frees him from the traitor charge

To be fair, would you expect someones faith and entire system of moral values to be changed completly on the basis of a forum thread (even one as ridiculously long as this one)?

No, I wouldn't. I was just saying what actually happens. My point is that nobody seems to realise that they can't change each other.

Actually, the Bible is the Bible. Yes there are many translations of it (even linquists differ on the translation of words) but the Bible is the Truth.

The gospels were recorded 60-120 years after the events. Until then they were oral tradition which is obviously susceptible to corruption. Perhaps it's not entirely truthful?

Well, seeing as you have the bible in front of you, why not flip to the book of isaiah, where you can read about a Persian king who was sainted for his tolerance of ALL faiths.

Your own book goes against you.

IMHO, it's people like you who give christianity a bad name.

And I dn't have tolerance for all faiths? If I didn't have tolerance then why do I have a few jewish friends?

No, I wouldn't. I was just saying what actually happens. My point is that nobody seems to realise that they can't change each other.

We do realise that. We just don't care. :p

Excuse for what? What are you on about?


Never mind...

The point I was making is that people do not read the scripture in it's native tongue, and they 'excuse' this, by saying something along the lines of 'it's too hard'.

Seems like a weak excuse, when their immortal soul is in the balance.

Well, apart from the fact that you'd assume Jesus would notice that, and comment on it...

In this case however, it was part of his way to fulfill scripture so why would he call him on it?

Besides, the newly found Judas evangeline frees him from the traitor charge

Are you 100% sure of that?

The gospels were recorded 60-120 years after the events. Until then they were oral tradition which is obviously susceptible to corruption. Perhaps it's not entirely truthful?

personally i would give them an earlier date, by about 30 years or so...

personally i would give them an earlier date, by about 30 years or so...

Why?

Nah. The bastard never answers his mail.

Actually, the Bible is the Bible. Yes there are many translations of it (even linquists differ on the translation of words) but the Bible is the Truth.

The Bible is the Truth?

So - snails leave trails because they melt?

Michal had no children AND she had five?

Bats are a type of bird?

God tempts men... AND God doesn't tempt men?

Who killed Saul? Was it suicide or murder?

Who killed Goliath? Did David slay him (twice), or did Elhanan kill him?

The cock crowed twice? But it also only crowed once?

Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, but he was also eight years old?

Paul's companions heard a voice, but saw no one... AND also heard nothing, but saw a light?

There were twelve apostles between crucifixion and resurrection... but Judas was dead, and Matthias didn't become an apostle till AFTER the resurrection?

And - THAT is just in the English version.

What about the fact that the Hebrew text is very clear that animals have 'souls'?

In this case however, it was part of his way to fulfill scripture so why would he call him on it?

You don't think Jesus would mention that the (alleged) Devil was stopping by for tea?

And I dn't have tolerance for all faiths? If I didn't have tolerance then why do I have a few jewish friends?

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.

Anyone else see the contradicition in these two quotes?

Why?

from what i read from the text and what i would expect to be in there. such as luke 21:6 which says about the temple, "As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down." the temple was destroyed in 70 a.d. by the romans. jesus prophecied that it would be destroyed, but it was never mentioned if the prophecy was fulfilled. do this makes me belive that luke was written before 70 a.d. which is just over 30 or so years after the death of jesus...

also, luke talks about paull in acts, who died in the mid 60's, but luke also doesnt mention the death of paul...

plus, there is alot of debate about the "Q" source, which would have been written very early, probably in the 40's or 50's...

You don't think Jesus would mention that the (alleged) Devil was stopping by for tea?

To fulfill his destiny? no.

from what i read from the text and what i would expect to be in there. such as luke 21:6 which says about the temple, "As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down." the temple was destroyed in 70 a.d. by the romans. jesus prophecied that it would be destroyed, but it was never mentioned if the prophecy was fulfilled. do this makes me belive that luke was written before 70 a.d. which is just over 30 or so years after the death of jesus...

also, luke talks about paull in acts, who died in the mid 60's, but luke also doesnt mention the death of paul...

plus, there is alot of debate about the "Q" source, which would have been written very early, probably in the 40's or 50's...

So it was left out, along with many other things. Not that is matters. 30 years is still enough time for an oral story to be corrupted.

Anyone else see the contradicition in these two quotes?

Only in your mind. I do respect all faiths.

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.
what a beautiful and inspiring faith it is that would have 5.5 billion people alive today doomed to eternal torment through no fault of their own.

So it was left out, along with many other things. Not that is matters. 30 years is still enough time for an oral story to be corrupted.

indeed. i have a book called "gospel parallels" that puts all four gospels side by side. amazingly, you can see how each book takes the same events, or even quotations from jesus, and changes them slightly to fit their puprose of the book. much of the gosepls are beleived to have taken information from the "Q" source as well...

Who killed Goliath? Did David slay him (twice), or did Elhanan kill him?

more than likely a copiest error. which means the bible has mistakes...

what a beautiful and inspiring faith it is that would have 5.5 billion people alive today doomed to eternal torment through no fault of their own.

really. i cant help but think of all the people in the world that are devoted to god, but are not christians. would god throw away all that worship and devotion jsut because they did not "ask jesus to come in their hearts?"

Only in your mind. I do respect all faiths.

Point one : You say that anyone who doesn't believe in God, and that Jesus is their saviour, is doomed to hell.

Point two : Assuming God is just and fair, only evil people will go to hell

Point three : You say you have jewish friends, who therefore do not believe that Jesus is their saviour.

Conclusion : You think your friends are evil. What kind of piss poor mate are you?

You can't say "I respect all faiths, but I think anyone who follows them deserves an eternity of suffering"

really. i cant help but think of all the people in the world that are devoted to god, but are not christians. would god throw away all that worship and devotion jsut because they did not "ask jesus to come in their hearts?"
yes

all those people who have never heard of jesus

all those people who have only heard bad things about jesus

all those people who were evangelized in a way that made it impossible to believe

all those people who believe in jesus but in the wrong manner

the 5.5billion being damned to eternal torment is probably a low estimate.

"Father" and "He" are terms of respect but "Mother" and "She" aren't?

If God has no gender, why use only one gender-specific term for God? Why use a gender-specific term at all?

Why does the Bible sometimes refer to God as a Mother? Was that simply to piss people off?
God has no gender.
However the option of using "it" is kinda direspectful

*snip*

Go ahead and believe what you will. I really do not care to be honest. I know what I believe and that is the Bible.

And no, my friends are not evil. I never equated not being a christian with being evil.

What is everyones problem with "ther is a god , there is not" Well if you insist on this lets not take either the full devotion or kill god route Lets take The look at it as something completely new to you(i include a few non monogastic(i hope thats spelled right) reilgions in this)

lets say God those not exist never had no one even questioned wat was out there?What is the result? COMPLETE ANARCHY.Afew of u may question this but what is the basus for are laws if u think about it. The ten Commandments
look at em thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal

bad point: many a war was fought because of religious divides


science right i choose it because its the only thing even cloose to a "reilgion" that atheists have it has given us great cures to dieseas modern comforts and a greater understanding of our world (some would call this an understanding of "gods work")


bad point:Nukes bio weapons greater death less expence



Finally i want to state that humans fave free will this hurt us more than acts of god sometimes and also helps us when we need it.


ill do some full lenght research and be back again:cool:


PS great tread for a row;)

Go ahead and believe what you will. I really do not care to be honest. I know what I believe and that is the Bible.

And no, my friends are not evil. I never equated not being a christian with being evil.

So, you believe good people who have done no evil in their lives could be sent to Hell with the likes of Hitler and Stalin to burn and writhe in eternal torment simply for not believing?

Seeing as I'm one of those people who'd go to Hell for not believing, I feel like you're equating everyone who isn't Christian with those historical examples of evil. After all, if a non-believer is punished the same way as a serial killer/rapist/genocidal maniac, where do you draw the line distinguishing one as good and another bad?

So where did the 1st humans come from?

They were born from their near-human ancestors.

Go ahead and believe what you will. I really do not care to be honest. I know what I believe and that is the Bible.

And no, my friends are not evil. I never equated not being a christian with being evil.

You said anyone who doesn't beleive Jesus is their saviour will go to hell. How is that NOT equating not being Christian to being evil?

Have you told your friends they are going to hell? Or do they get a free pass because you like them?

So, you believe good people who have done no evil in their lives could be sent to Hell with the likes of Hitler and Stalin to burn and writhe in eternal torment simply for not believing?

Seeing as I'm one of those people who'd go to Hell for not believing, I feel like you're equating everyone who isn't Christian with those historical examples of evil. After all, if a non-believer is punished the same way as a serial killer/rapist/genocidal maniac, where do you draw the line distinguishing one as good and another bad?

"For God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten Son to die for us for whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have ever lasting life."

"except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Not all people are evil. I never stated that they were anyway. However, unless you have fully accepted Jesus as your Personal Lord and Savior, you will not see the kingdom of Heaven.

And pergutory thats a good thing to mention you no not quiet hell not quiet heaven a bit like life actually;)

also that there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE to support Darwinism

They were born from their near-human ancestors.

:rolleyes:

You said anyone who doesn't beleive Jesus is their saviour will go to hell. How is that NOT equating not being Christian to being evil?

Show me where I said that not being a christian was evil? You will find that I never said it. The only one's saying it are you and a couple of others. I on the other hand have never stated that being a non-christian was evil.

Have you told your friends they are going to hell? Or do they get a free pass because you like them?

I tell them about God but if they don't want to accept him, I've done my best.

Just for the record, a lot of my friends are Christians, and they are great. People like you are what is wrong with Christianity. Just because you aren't violent, you feel your intolerance is okay. Newsflash - it isn't

:rolleyes:

I did not expect a more intelligent reply from a person with an invisible friend.

Just for the record, a lot of my friends are Christians, and they are great. People like you are what is wrong with Christianity. Just because you aren't violent, you feel your intolerance is okay. Newsflash - it isn't

I'm actually one of the most tolerant people on Earth. You should come here and meet me and my friends. We have a great time.

I did not expect a more intelligent reply from a person with an invisible friend.

He's more than a friend Hakartopia.

As USSNS said "also that there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE to support Darwinism"

Show me where I said that not being a christian was evil? You will find that I never said it. The only one's saying it are you and a couple of others. I on the other hand have never stated that being a non-christian was evil.


POST 1104 ON PAGE 74 OF POSTS

The Truth is the Truth. He who does not believe in God and accepts Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior will burn in hell.

Either you think your good and merciful god is condemning good people to hell, or else you think that non christians are evil. Try to keep up

Um ... just to corneilia u dont want to go to far down the prophet road.
just saying:p

POST 1104 ON PAGE 74 OF POSTS



Either you think your good and merciful god is condemning good people to hell, or else you think that non christians are evil. Try to keep up

So tell me where I said that those who are not Christians are evil? I'm still waiting.

Um ... just to corneilia u dont want to go to far down the prophet road.
just saying:p

I already know there is no evidence supporting Darwinism. But meh. I'm not going to argue that anymore. I'm just going to brush it off to a secular society that no longer believes in God's Work.

OK. Hold on a second. Are you ACCEPTING that god sends good people to hell, to suffer for all eternity?

OK. Hold on a second. Are you ACCEPTING that god sends good people to hell, to suffer for all eternity?

Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.

POST 1104 ON PAGE 74 OF POSTS



Either you think your good and merciful god is condemning good people to hell, or else you think that non christians are evil. Try to keep up
hes not saying that non christians are evil

he is saying that god sends good people to hell

Good works alone does not get one into the Kingdom of God.

Now I'm off to class.

hes not saying that non christians are evil

he is saying that god sends good people to hell
and furthermore

he is saying that god sends BAD people to heaven as long as they accept jesus christ as their personal lord and savior


its a beautiful and inspiring belief.

and furthermore

he is saying that god sends BAD people to heaven as long as they accept jesus christ as their personal lord and savior


its a beautiful and inspiring belief.

No, It's a copout.

Okaaay, officialy frightened now.

Seriously, I can kind of see the point of view (even if its messed up) of the people who are violent against non christians, if they genuinly believe they are evil, but saying "You're not a bad person just becasue you arent a christian, and you'll still suffer for all eternity"

Thatt goes against the entire spirit of the bible

No, It's a copout.
whats a copout?

its pretty standard protestant evangelical belief. its the logical conclusion of "you are saved by faith alone" and that all sins are equal in the eyes of god.

whats a copout?

its pretty standard protestant evangelical belief. its the logical conclusion of "you are saved by faith alone" and that all sins are equal in the eyes of god.

being saved by faith alone is a copout. It exuses bad behaviour toward your fellow man because you have faith.

Yes, there is a God. Absolutely.

I'll go further and say that I believe this is the Christian God.

being saved by faith alone is a copout. It exuses bad behaviour toward your fellow man because you have faith.
oh

yes it is

it allows you to be smug in your belief that you make it to heaven no matter what while the people who believe the wrong way are doomed.

Oddly, I couldnt disagree more, I found, and still find, that once you actually start to question ones faith, is where you lose it.

It would be far easier to simply accept everything the Bible, and the Church tell us, and to simply not put enough thought into what we hear.

Simply accepting things is not faith. It is accepting what you've been told. At best, it is faith in human beings - in the church made up of human beings - in the Bible written by human beings. It certainly is not faith in God.

It is only when we start to doubt, and discover so many loopholes in the dogma, the ultimate hippocracy, and contradiction that is modern Christianity.

People always assume that the organized religion is all there is. Of course there are problems in dogma, hipocracy, and contradictions - that's what happens when you stop questioning and try to pin something down as absolute! That is exactly the mistake that the Church has made!

I wonder if anyone who claims to have thier faith tested, really actually has.
How many of them have seen devastation, or events so horrible that ones faith is truly shaken?

My faith has been shaken more than once. The most major shake-up was when I first started to truly find my faith, and realized that I couldn't rely on someone else to tell me everything.

I think for most people, getting caught up in thier own little lives of bill payment, and rat racing, the stress of wich causes one to have doubt in the validity of it all...not truly an event wich warrants a change of religion.
In other words, pretentious as it may be, I put forth that most christians have never really had thier faiths truly tested, but nonetheless suggest otherwise.

Questioning your faith doesn't have to come from a trauma. It should come from questing for knowledge - something you cannot do without questioning.

Of course, questioning and "testing" are not the same thing.

Faith is blind. If it wasn't blind then why do we have faith?

If your faith is blind, you have no way to know what you have faith in. Someone told you you have faith in God, but you are blind to the reality of your faith. You might have faith only in the person who told you it was God. You might have faith in something other than God.

If you don't examine your faith, there is no way to know that it is truly faith in God.

True. To have an accurate understanding you'd need to read the original text with a thorough understanding of the language used around the time it was written.

Hence the issues with translation differences earlier, no? Corneliu apparently believes that the translators and editors of his particular copy of his particular English translation of the Bible were infallible. I guess all the other translators and editors didn't get that specialty. Go figure.

Of course, even if we all spoke Hebrew and Greek, we would *still* disagree on some of it, just as those of us who speak English as a first language disagree on what was meant in books originally written in English...

God, Well, I belive there is one, as it says in the bible that good people like the lady that died from cancer go to heaven, she could escape all the pains of the world and go to heaven, and live in the peace she deserves, the next questions that i would be argued agaisnt would be: what about her family? she loved them ( apart from abusive husband) they have their whole lifes ahead of them, and if they are good and try, they will meet her again in heaven, and of course there is no proof of god, but me and mny other people have faith, some things are just unexplicable, no matter how hard science trys, yes i belive god is there, with us, in diffrent ways for diffrent people, and i also belive that even if you do not belive in god, you still can go to heaven as long as youre a good person, as god is merciful and will forgive you for going down another path,

Of course, even if we all spoke Hebrew and Greek, we would *still* disagree on some of it, just as those of us who speak English as a first language disagree on what was meant in books originally written in English...

which is a big part of translation that so many people do not understand. it took me a while to understand hebrew because each word has multiple meanings. some words could have 10 or so meanings depending on its context. as you said, even if everyone spoke hebrew, we would disaggre on what the author ment when he used certain words or phrases...

Actually, the Bible is the Bible. Yes there are many translations of it (even linquists differ on the translation of words) but the Bible is the Truth.

Which one?

If they differ, can they all be Truth with a capital "T"? Or are they maybe truth, but often not literal truth?

And I dn't have tolerance for all faiths? If I didn't have tolerance then why do I have a few jewish friends?

This reminds me of the people who say, "All gays are the evil! But I'm tolerant, really, I have a few gay friends."

If your faith is blind, you have no way to know what you have faith in. Someone told you you have faith in God, but you are blind to the reality of your faith. You might have faith only in the person who told you it was God. You might have faith in something other than God.

If you don't examine your faith, there is no way to know that it is truly faith in God.

I've actually been re-examining my faith for the last month. That was when I realized I drifted away from the Lord and moved back to Him. He will always remain close to me now.

I was thinking about a friend I lost to breast cancer awhile back and how she didn't deserve to die. She had an asshole husband for many years. He was abusive, and when they got divorced, he would go to their sons wrestling meet.. with his bimbo girlfriend.

She was always kind and a good listener to anyone who talked to her. Since she was a teacher, when she died, everyone lost a good friend. We all were affected by her.

Her son is graduating soon, her daughter is getting married this summer. She was happy and upbeat, even with cancer and going through chemo.

Well.. I started thinking why would God let her die? She was a good person. She shouldn't have been taken, it wasn't her time.

I wasn't relisios to begin with.. but I thought there was some sort of higher being (God). But I don't feel that way anymore. What God would do that to someone?

Do you think there is a God?

EDIT: And why do you feel that way?
All I can say is that there is eithor no God, or there is, but he just doesn't care about mankind.

I"m sorry about your friend. She sounded like a great person. :(

really. i cant help but think of all the people in the world that are devoted to god, but are not christians. would god throw away all that worship and devotion jsut because they did not "ask jesus to come in their hearts?"

And here's a question to really blow someone's mind: Is it possible to follow Christ without knowing you are doing it? To seek God and God's guidance, but never know the story of Christ?


God has no gender.
However the option of using "it" is kinda direspectful

Then simply don't use a pronoun in discussing God. It gets tedious at times, but when you have a theology prof who will count off for any time you assign gender to God, you get used to it. =)

I already know there is no evidence supporting Darwinism.

Of course not, "Darwinism" was left behind by science a long time ago. These days, we have evolutionary theory, which incorporates some of what Darwin said, but leaves out that which has been disproven and vastly expands on the knowledge that he had.

But meh. I'm not going to argue that anymore. I'm just going to brush it off to a secular society that no longer believes in God's Work.

If evolutionary theory is correct, does that mean that it can't be God's work? Does it mean that God suddenly *poof* doesn't exist?

By that logic, you should have concluded that God didn't exist way back when you found out that the sun can't really stand still in the sky - that it would have had to be the Earth that stopped moving. Or maybe when you figured out that insects have six legs, rabbits don't chew the cud, and not bleeding doesn't equal "not virgin".

I've actually been re-examining my faith for the last month. That was when I realized I drifted away from the Lord and moved back to Him. He will always remain close to me now.

Make up your mind. Does faith have to be blind? Or must we examine it?

Make up your mind. Does faith have to be blind? Or must we examine it?

By examining my faith, I read the bible and talked to people as well as my minister.

"blessed are those who do believe and yet have not seen."

By examining my faith, I read the bible and talked to people as well as my minister.

That's it? No prayer? No asking God for guidance?

Do you not believe in a personal relationship with God?

If you didn't ask God for guidance, you weren't examining faith in God, but were instead examining faith in the Bible, and people as well as your minister, and maybe a bit in yourself.

That's it? No prayer? No asking God for guidance?

Of course I prayed. I thought that would've been obvious that I did as well. I guess I should've stated it for those who do not think about the obvious.

Do you not believe in a personal relationship with God?

I do now.

Of course I prayed. I thought that would've been obvious that I did as well. I guess I should've stated it for those who do not think about the obvious.

You may think it is obvious, but it really isn't. Most people who hold so strongly to absolute literal truth of the Bible never bother. All they need is what their copy of the Bible and their preachers tell them. No questioning allowed....

I do now.

Good. So why such knee-jerk reactions to any suggestion that the works of men might be fallible?

You may think it is obvious, but it really isn't. Most people who hold so strongly to absolute literal truth of the Bible never bother. All they need is what their copy of the Bible and their preachers tell them. No questioning allowed....

I pray daily and more than once per day.

Good. So why such knee-jerk reactions to any suggestion that the works of men might be fallible?

The works of men are always fallible.

Even though people die and there lives may not be great, they may even be terrible. Doesn't mean that there is no God sometimes terrible things happen that can't be explained, but later we may find that there is a reason for all of this. While other times the result does show until after we have left this earth ourselves.

My belief is...no.

I pray daily and more than once per day.

Good, glad to hear it.

The works of men are always fallible.

Except the writing, scribing, translating, and reprinting of Scripture?

The works of men are always fallible.

So then the Bible, that you place so much faith in, is flawed. It being the work of men. (The translation into English, at the very least, is the work of men.)

And here's a question to really blow someone's mind: Is it possible to follow Christ without knowing you are doing it? To seek God and God's guidance, but never know the story of Christ?



Then simply don't use a pronoun in discussing God. It gets tedious at times, but when you have a theology prof who will count off for any time you assign gender to God, you get used to it. =)

Well good isea

Jesus! I can't beleave my own eyes! So many atheists! No wonder western civilization is decaying! When something bad happens - it's because of God, but when something good happens - its because us! I read something about God being male or female, those who write this don't understand an single thing about God and Religion. If you want to be taken seriously read the Bible at least. Blasphemy!

Jesus! I can't beleave my own eyes! So many atheists! No wonder western civilization is decaying! When something bad happens - it's because of God, but when something good happens - its because us! I read something about God being male or female, those who write this don't understand an single thing about God and Religion. If you want to be taken seriously read the Bible at least. Blasphemy!

i hope that was satire...

Jesus! I can't beleave my own eyes! So many atheists! No wonder western civilization is decaying! When something bad happens - it's because of God, but when something good happens - its because us! I read something about God being male or female, those who write this don't understand an single thing about God and Religion. If you want to be taken seriously read the Bible at least. Blasphemy!

Are you suggesting that atheists blame God for bad things?

You see the difficulty with that idea, surely...

Jesus! I can't beleave my own eyes! So many atheists! No wonder western civilization is decaying! When something bad happens - it's because of God, but when something good happens - its because us! I read something about God being male or female, those who write this don't understand an single thing about God and Religion. If you want to be taken seriously read the Bible at least. Blasphemy!

If no-one believed in God, no-one would pass off our problems as his doing. Problem solved.

Are you suggesting that atheists blame God for bad things?

You see the difficulty with that idea, surely...

Atheists are not born as such. Somebody becomes Atheist (in most cases) when something bad happens in his/her life (one my friend become atheist because his girlfriend died). Atheists doesnt beleave in God, they just think that our earthly life is - earthly, no God,no heaven,no angels etc. But i suppose you know that cos you are Atheist yourself.

Atheists are not born as such. Somebody becomes Atheist (in most cases) when something bad happens in his/her life (one my friend become atheist because his girlfriend died). Atheists doesnt beleave in God, they just think that our earthly life is - earthly, no God,no heaven,no angels etc. But i suppose you know that cos you are Atheist yourself.

That completely failed to address the question in any way.

You have superimposed your presuppositions of the roots of atheism using anecdotal evidence. I seriously doubt you're prepared to see why that isn't the best idea.

You may find, with broader experience, that tragedy and death actually contribute greatly to religious conversion.

Atheists are not born as such. Somebody becomes Atheist (in most cases) when something bad happens in his/her life (one my friend become atheist because his girlfriend died). Atheists doesnt beleave in God, they just think that our earthly life is - earthly, no God,no heaven,no angels etc. But i suppose you know that cos you are Atheist yourself.
No. People are born atheists. Religious beliefs are then presented to them. Also, having spoken with hundreds of other atheists, very few people become atheists because something bad happened to them, or somebody they know.
Also, your grammar is horrible. It's spelled "believe", no "beleave".

my friend has a brain tumor thats serious and thay cant remove it but i still beleive because some things are natural, no one deserves to get ill or die no one realy knows why it happens but if you rnt realy a beleiver in the first place and the first thing you do is turn around and blame god then dont u think theres summit a little wrong with ur theory? I meen for all u know it could have been caused by her hiusband, or standing 2 near to a microwave. some people (its horribal to say this) are born and they will die realy soon but just because we cant understand everythin that happens in life it dosent meen that we can turn around and blame the easyest person to blame god. I meen thats what people did in the dark ages for goodness sake and we all know now that there is generaly a biological reason, i think that god has given us free will, its up to us to do what we can in life and you never know miricals can happen ur friend may survive yet! never give up hope alway b posative for her and support her! (im waffling now lol) but i know how hard it is 2 loose sum 1 but dont pic the easy optin and blame sum1 who wont fight back.

I've actually been re-examining my faith for the last month. That was when I realized I drifted away from the Lord and moved back to Him. He will always remain close to me now.
If He remains "close to you now", then you are trying your best to do God's will?

Do you renounce support of Bush's war on Iraq, and do you renounce suggestions of a limited nuclear attack on Iran by the US?

Do you renounce the treatment of US detainees in Guantanamo and Abu Gharib?

Do you renounce your earlier statement that you would execute an unarmed prisoner just because your government prefers to call them unlawful combatants?

If He remains "close to you now", then you are trying your best to do God's will?

Do you renounce support of Bush's war on Iraq, and do you renounce suggestions of a limited nuclear attack on Iran by the US?

Do you renounce the treatment of US detainees in Guantanamo and Abu Gharib?

Do you renounce your earlier statement that you would execute an unarmed prisoner just because your government prefers to call them unlawful combatants?
As much as it surprises me that I'm backing him up on this stuff, what does that stuff have to do with a belief in God? The idea that God sends good people to hell for lack of belief and the idea that the "righteous" can "punish" the "wicked" are not far removed, and can be held in perfect synchronisation, regardless of how poorly they otherwise reflect on reality.

As much as it surprises me that I'm backing him up on this stuff, what does that stuff have to do with a belief in God? The idea that God sends good people to hell for lack of belief and the idea that the "righteous" can "punish" the "wicked" are not far removed, and can be held in perfect synchronisation, regardless of how poorly they otherwise reflect on reality.
it has little to do with god and everything to do with being a good christian.

jesus has some pretty harsh things to say about people who dont treat those who are down on their luck with compassion

"whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers that you do unto me"

If He remains "close to you now", then you are trying your best to do God's will?

Do you renounce support of Bush's war on Iraq, and do you renounce suggestions of a limited nuclear attack on Iran by the US?

Do you renounce the treatment of US detainees in Guantanamo and Abu Gharib?

Do you renounce your earlier statement that you would execute an unarmed prisoner just because your government prefers to call them unlawful combatants?

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Good advice. You should take it. Life is not always about scoring points on other people just to bolster your own sense of self-worth. At least, it shouldn't be.

Everybody makes mistakes.

it has little to do with god and everything to do with being a good christian.

jesus has some pretty harsh things to say about people who dont treat those who are down on their luck with compassion

"whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers that you do unto me"
Good Christian? Jesus? Jesus never gave any advice on being a Good Christian. Jesus gave advice on being a good Person that everyone regardless of denomination would do well to at least pay attention to. But that's a sidetrack.

God's will in the context of Corneliu refers to the consciousness of the Christian movement, not of God itself. There is a subtle difference there, but an important one. That one can believe in the Christian God and simultaneously support these injustices is not unfeasible, given that the Christian spirit is merely the reflection of the divine applied by the earthly movement. Whether or not the very real and present God actually supports or wishes these things to be does not change the belief or indeed the perception of the individual that they are so.

If you think God is telling you things, whether or not these are consistent with the understanding of God itself becomes irrelevant. The belief and God in the observer become intertwined and inseparable within them through this sensation to such an extent that one can and does mistake one for the other, as aptly demonstrated by our little test subject here.

Anything that appears to us to be obvious demonstrations of "God's Will" cannot be analysed with respect to the "Will of God" perceived by another individual. It might not be the will of God at all, but to them, it is seen to be so, and to try to persuade them otherwise falls within the trap. In fact, no ideas of moralilty or social justice are linkable to these beliefs. The only way to address the issue of the perceived will of God is to look directly at the object of this perception. And of course, more often than not, rather than what they think it is, it turns out to be something much closer to home.

Good Christian? Jesus? Jesus never gave any advice on being a Good Christian. Jesus gave advice on being a good Person that everyone regardless of denomination would do well to at least pay attention to. But that's a sidetrack.

nooo its not a sidetrack. a good christian follows jesus's dictates on what it takes to be a good person. and if they DONT, jesus says that they wont make it to heaven.
matthew 25:45-46 Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen: I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting.




God's will in the context of Corneliu refers to the consciousness of the Christian movement, not of God itself. There is a subtle difference there, but an important one. That one can believe in the Christian God and simultaneously support these injustices is not unfeasible, given that the Christian spirit is merely the reflection of the divine applied by the earthly movement. Whether or not the very real and present God actually supports or wishes these things to be does not change the belief or indeed the perception of the individual that they are so.

If you think God is telling you things, whether or not these are consistent with the understanding of God itself becomes irrelevant. The belief and God in the observer become intertwined and inseparable within them through this sensation to such an extent that one can and does mistake one for the other, as aptly demonstrated by our little test subject here.

Anything that appears to us to be obvious demonstrations of "God's Will" cannot be analysed with respect to the "Will of God" perceived by another individual. It might not be the will of God at all, but to them, it is seen to be so, and to try to persuade them otherwise falls within the trap. In fact, no ideas of moralilty or social justice are linkable to these beliefs. The only way to address the issue of the perceived will of God is to look directly at the object of this perception. And of course, more often than not, rather than what they think it is, it turns out to be something much closer to home.

im not totally sure of what you are saying here, but i think i agree with it.

that when one is sure that god is talking to them, everything they think must be the will of god.

Atheists are not born as such.

I would imagine it's more accurate to sat "theists are not born as such".

No. People are born atheists. Religious beliefs are then presented to them. Also, having spoken with hundreds of other atheists, very few people become atheists because something bad happened to them, or somebody they know.
Also, your grammar is horrible. It's spelled "believe", no "beleave".

That would be his spelling, not his grammar. His grammar sucks as well though.

Of course there is a GOD! It is your duty to serve him. IF you do not you will end up in hell

Of course there is a GOD! It is your duty to serve him. IF you do not you will end up in hell

Would I still go to hell if I didn't believe in it?

Of course there is a GOD! It is your duty to serve him. IF you do not you will end up in hell

I personally do believe in a God. However, I can see why people have so much trouble believing that there is something else. Especially when there are people who are religious fanatics damning others to hell. The truth is that you can't really disprove God. People can only try to disprove the evidence of God. There is no solid evidence that points to the lack of existance of God. However, I will agree that it's quite easy to dismiss stories of the miracles as nothing more than simply that: stories. The truth is that everyone has to suffer, even those who are good. It's really a universal unifier of sorts. Do I know the truth for why people have to suffer? No. I can only tell you that the only way to really come to know, understand, and believe in God is through an examination of self and thinking. Don't expect it to come to you over night.

Of course there is a GOD! It is your duty to serve him. IF you do not you will end up in hell

Which one?

There is no solid evidence that points to the lack of existance of God.

Nor evidence that points to the existence of God.

Yes.

If I bought a brand new car, drove it out of the dealership parking lot and got in a major crash a few blocks down the road, I wouldn't very well have it towed back to the dealership and say, "Why did you sell me this piece of crap?" God made this world. We're the ones that messed it up. He never promised this world would be heaven. But I believe Jesus has gone to prepare a place for me there when this life is over.

I fully understand there are alot of people that do not understand the ways of God. There are alot of people that have had some serious hurts and blame God for that. Afterall, if He is able to do absolutely anything, why would He have not prevented ____________________. But to be fair, none of us deserve the grace of God. Every day we have here is a gift from Him and I believe there is a greater gift to come for those who ask the Lord to be the leader of their life.

I would never propose that faith in God is something I could convince over a thread on a message board. I would never assume the role of the Holy Spirit and think I could make anyone here have faith in God. I haven't always had faith in God. All I can say is, now I do.

I personally do believe in a God. However, I can see why people have so much trouble believing that there is something else. Especially when there are people who are religious fanatics damning others to hell. The truth is that you can't really disprove God. People can only try to disprove the evidence of God. There is no solid evidence that points to the lack of existance of God. However, I will agree that it's quite easy to dismiss stories of the miracles as nothing more than simply that: stories. The truth is that everyone has to suffer, even those who are good. It's really a universal unifier of sorts. Do I know the truth for why people have to suffer? No. I can only tell you that the only way to really come to know, understand, and believe in God is through an examination of self and thinking. Don't expect it to come to you over night.

If you stood from the side of god not existing and tried to prove the existence of god rather than the non-existence of god, you'll find that it's just as much about proving the existence of god as it is about disproving the existence of god.

Sorry: More matter, with less art, lest I be stabbed while hiding behind an arras.

You can't prove the existence of god either, can you?

I think the only way to find out for sure whether god existed is tol kill yourself. Can you imagine how all the Christians would feel if they found out god didn't exist after they died? Oh the dissappointment...

Ofcourse, they'd only be dissappointed for a few seconds before their consciousness blanked out for all eternity.

Can you imagine how all the Christians would feel if they found out god didn't exist after they died? Oh the dissappointment...


Hmmmm... I'm a Christian and I can definitely say my life is so much richer since I asked the Lord to be the leader of my life. So if there were not a God - I have had a much happier and successful life here on earth before becoming food for worms. If there is a God, which I believe with all my heart, I have chosen wisely again.


I wouldn't wish the wrath of God on anyone.

Hmmmm... I'm a Christian and I can definitely say my life is so much richer since I asked the Lord to be the leader of my life. So if there were not a God - I have had a much happier and successful life here on earth before becoming food for worms. If there is a God, which I believe with all my heart, I have chosen wisely again.


I wouldn't wish the wrath of God on anyone.

I'm sure people can make their lives richer, happier, and more successful without the help of God.

All they have to do is to have the strength to try. I think believing in God has helped give you that strength, so I suppose it is rewarding in that regard.

Or maybe going to church just meant that you got out of the house more.

I'm sure people can make their lives richer, happier, and more successful without the help of God.

All they have to do is to have the strength to try. I think believing in God has helped give you that strength, so I suppose it is rewarding in that regard.

Or maybe going to church just meant that you got out of the house more.

Lol! I'm an extrovert.

I would never argue the position that someone can't be happy and successful in this life without God. Sometimes that is what makes people look at this life and believe it's not fair. My faith has led me to believe this world is not really that fair, but this world is not what I'm living for.

I will say that God has given me hope. And he has given me more than happiness but a joy that lasts even while I'm unhappy. I think people usually try to find happiness by things that are self-destructive in the long run (at least that's what I used to do).

To fulfill his destiny? no.

I'd consider that a strange avenue to follow... surely, the idea is that Jesus is the ARCHITECT of his destiny... not some kind of bystander or witness to it.

I find the whole God/Satan dichotomy of Christianity bizarre - especially with all the claims of monotheism - and yet, this constant insistence on Satan as a godlike being.

If Jesus needed to be betrayed by Judas - all he has to do is tell him. The idea that Satan WOULD be, or would NEED to be, involved is just outlandish.

Lol! I'm an extrovert.

I would never argue the position that someone can't be happy and successful in this life without God. Sometimes that is what makes people look at this life and believe it's not fair. My faith has led me to believe this world is not really that fair, but this world is not what I'm living for.

I will say that God has given me hope. And he has given me more than happiness but a joy that lasts even while I'm unhappy. I think people usually try to find happiness by things that are self-destructive in the long run (at least that's what I used to do).

Extrovert also means to turn inside out. I've turned you inside out in my analysis of your source of happiness.

It's a Shakespearian double meaning. Yay!

more than likely a copiest error. which means the bible has mistakes...

Copiest errors are possible - but I think it more likely that the scripture was assembled from existing traditions... and, while the most GLARING errors would probably have been winnowed out, some less noticable material probably slipped through the net.

As an example - I believe the 'Cain and Abel' and 'Esau and Jabob' stories are probably actually the SAME story, told by different people at different times... and just assimilated into the whole text as different accounts, when the scripture was first collected.

:rolleyes:

Don't like the 'near-human ancestors' idea?

I don't see how it is any LESS appealing than being made of dirt, to be honest...

Copiest errors are possible - but I think it more likely that the scripture was assembled from existing traditions... and, while the most GLARING errors would probably have been winnowed out, some less noticable material probably slipped through the net.

As an example - I believe the 'Cain and Abel' and 'Esau and Jabob' stories are probably actually the SAME story, told by different people at different times... and just assimilated into the whole text as different accounts, when the scripture was first collected.

looking at the story of goliath, it wouldnt be too surprising to think that the slaying of goliath was attributed to david as a way of furthering his reputation as a king. something like acient propoganda...

I already know there is no evidence supporting Darwinism. But meh. I'm not going to argue that anymore. I'm just going to brush it off to a secular society that no longer believes in God's Work.

Actually - many more people believe in 'god's work' than believe otherwise... they just don't believe in YOUR little god's work.

Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.

Yest another evasion? What is it you don't like about answering the question that was asked?

looking at the story of goliath, it wouldnt be too surprising to think that the slaying of goliath was attributed to david as a way of furthering his reputation as a king. something like acient propoganda...

Obviously, seeing as giants don't exist anyway.

Maybe he just killed a normal person who was very big, and they changed it to "giant" to make it sound better.

If your faith is blind, you have no way to know what you have faith in. Someone told you you have faith in God, but you are blind to the reality of your faith. You might have faith only in the person who told you it was God. You might have faith in something other than God.

If you don't examine your faith, there is no way to know that it is truly faith in God.

Exactly: "If your faith is blind, you have no way to know what you have faith in".

I can't imagine having ANY kind of knowledge or idea, that I didn't explore the edges of. If you accept EXACTLY what you are told, you are not expressing 'belief'... you are just reciting what you have been told to say.

I'm not entirely sure I'd actually consider that 'faith' at all... if it's never even been questioned.