NationStates Jolt Archive

I believe in a million dollars though I have not seen it. Is believing in a million dollars when I have not seen it illogical?

No, because we know it exists because we produce enough money to equal a million dollars.

No, because we know it exists because we produce enough money to equal a million dollars.

And I know God exists because I have seen him in action in my life.

And I know God exists because I have seen him in action in my life.

What instances?

What instances?

I was traveling down the path away from God. A series of events re-awakened my spiriti and it brought me back to the path of righteousness. My life is no longer the wreck it once was. That is just one instance.

I was traveling down the path away from God. A series of events re-awakened my spiriti and it brought me back to the path of righteousness. My life is no longer the wreck it once was. That is just one instance.

I don't understand. You say you were walking down the path "away from God". Nothing wrong with athiesm, seen several nice, intelligent, and healty athiests.

What events?

I don't understand. You say you were walking down the path "away from God". Nothing wrong with athiesm, seen several nice, intelligent, and healty athiests.

What events?

I lost my aunt in November, I lost my grandfather in March. When I got back from spring break I went back to Bible Study because I promised a friend I would and then things just started to happen that reawakened me spiritually.

I lost my aunt in November, I lost my grandfather in March. When I got back from spring break I went back to Bible Study because I promised a friend I would and then things just started to happen that reawakened me spiritually.

Ouch. Sorry.

But really, what proof do you have that a God made Earth? Or that He exists? Or any of it?

Ouch. Sorry.

But really, what proof do you have that a God made Earth? Or that He exists? Or any of it?

Because I felt pulled to Bible Study. I felt pulled to go to Monday Night student worship at the church. I took time off of work to do that. Since then, I cannot get enough of God's word.

I do know that God is real and that he made the Earth. I do not have proof because I was not around when he did it but I know it is true.

Because I felt pulled to Bible Study. I felt pulled to go to Monday Night student worship at the church. I took time off of work to do that. Since then, I cannot get enough of God's word.

I do know that God is real and that he made the Earth. I do not have proof because I was not around when he did it but I know it is true.

If you have no proof it is illogical to believe it.

Now, it is coforting to think that a God watches over us. But it is not, as far as my evidence goes, the truth.

PROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE it.
Ooh, is that familiar?

Again, you make the assertion, showing your inability to discriminate between how you feel about something and whether it is or isn't actually a fact. I imagine you'll endorse another maneuver here. :(


And, of course, it's curious that you needed your professor's advisement on what was supposed to be your own opinion.
Remember? The one you promised to me? That one? Another word you can't keep?

You cant say prove it, remember what happened with the Babelfish

If you have no proof it is illogical to believe it.

Now, it is coforting to think that a God watches over us. But it is not, as far as my evidence goes, the truth.

Then I will pray for you to see the light.

Then I will pray for you to see the light.

You STILL have not provided proof. This is a debate (although a very informal one.) You need to back up your ideas.

You STILL have not provided proof. This is a debate (although a very informal one.) You need to back up your ideas.

I have backed up the truth to what I have been saying. It is there for those who want to believe.

My suggestion is read the Bible and not just read it but do your best to understand it.

I have backed up the truth to what I have been saying. It is there for those who want to believe.

My suggestion is read the Bible and not just read it but do your best to understand it.

No, I have seen no proof at all.

Andf yes, I have read the Bible (though it was quite a while ago.) I found it to be... very contradictory. It doesn't serve as proof at all.

We had a Jesuit scientist Geroge Coyne speak at the university a few nights ago about creation and the concept of randomness and destiny, science and christianity. You can read the article reveiw in our school paper here.

Linky (http://www.marquettetribune.org/285959423976325.bsp)

but, i think my favorite quote from all of it was this...


"As Galileo said, scripture was written to teach us how to go to heaven, not how heaven goes,'" Coyne said.



interesting....

No, I have seen no proof at all.

Andf yes, I have read the Bible (though it was quite a while ago.) I found it to be... very contradictory. It doesn't serve as proof at all.

Then I feel sorry for you for not understanding the truth.

I have backed up the truth to what I have been saying. It is there for those who want to believe.

My suggestion is read the Bible and not just read it but do your best to understand it.
Do you realize how insulting what you just said is? How do you know that the people talking with you have never done their best to understand the Bible?

I'm willing to bet that several of the people who have talked with you on this thread have spent more hours studying the Bible and Christian history than you have, but you feel entitled to act as though anybody who doesn't agree with you must not have done their homework.

If you want people to respect your faith and your beliefs, I suggest you stop trivializing the spiritual journeys that other people have taken.

Then I feel sorry for you for not understanding the truth.

How is something contradictory the truth?

Do you realize how insulting what you just said is? How do you know that the people talking with you have never done their best to understand the Bible?

People can read the bible. Anyone can do that, but it is far more difficult to understand it. Most people don't try to for what Pythagoria was saying. Forgetting the fact that it is two different testiments with 2 different set of rules.

I'm willing to bet that several of the people who have talked with you on this thread have spent more hours studying the Bible and Christian history than you have, but you feel entitled to act as though anybody who doesn't agree with you must not have done their homework.

When they question God's word, they show themselves to be unworthy. He who accepts Christ understands the truth.

If you want people to respect your faith and your beliefs, I suggest you stop trivializing the spiritual journeys that other people have taken.

They should respect the beliefs of others regardless.

How is something contradictory the truth?

Consider it two different sets of rules. The Old testiment was the rule of the day then God changed the rules when he sent His Son to die for us.

No.

And even if there was a God, she wouldn't deserve our worship.
How do you know if God is a Man or a women. You addresed the sublime being as a she. It could be neither. God moves in a mysterious way.

People can read the bible. Anyone can do that, but it is far more difficult to understand it. Most people don't try to for what Pythagoria was saying. Forgetting the fact that it is two different testiments with 2 different set of rules.



When they question God's word, they show themselves to be unworthy. He who accepts Christ understands the truth.



They should respect the beliefs of others regardless.

1st: Even the SAME Testaments have contradictory things in them. The SAME Testaments.

2nd: Yes, yes, someone who doesn't believe something with no proof is unworthy... yeah... Unworthy for what?

3rd: Yes, but you must respect our beliefs as well.

How do you know if God is a Man or a women. You addresed the sublime being as a she. It could be neither. God moves in a mysterious way.

The bolded is on vast understatment. True but an understated one :D

Consider it two different sets of rules. The Old testiment was the rule of the day then God changed the rules when he sent His Son to die for us.

But even those two sets contradict themselves. And what proof do you have Jesus ever even existed?

3rd: Yes, but you must respect our beliefs as well.

You are indeed correct and I do however I will not tolerate persecution of my faith and that is precisely what is happening on this board.

But even those two sets contradict themselves. And what proof do you have Jesus ever even existed?

for starters, the muslim faith considers Him to be a prophet.

Now I'm off to file a complaint with a professor about his conduct in class. BBL.

I know God exists, but since my knowledge comesfrom revelatory experiences that can not be produced in a lab, I can not prove it. Therefore, I don't expect anyone to believe me.

Having said that, I think most religions are rubbish, from a spiritual point of view, though they do serve many social functions.

An interesting thing about the Christian Bible is this: it can be used as a mystical tool. Read what Jesus said, and do it. Give your shirt to the homeless, renounce wealth and violence, do good, avoid evil, and you may have a revelatory experience too. A state of grace.

Does this mean Yahweh exists, or that Jesus was the son of God? No. To me, it means that the Jews who wrote the Bible knew some nifty Zen tricks and were trying to communicate them in a way that their audience would understand.

Do good, avoid evil.

You seem to be still under the impression that certain rules govern everything.

In order to use inductive logic, this has to be true.

Yet we have made it clear that no rules govern random decay. No rules. That is why it is random. We have proven that there are no rules governing it.

We have proven no such thing. In fact, we have very clear rules about it. We know that decay happens exponentially in time. We have calculated half-lives for nearly every element. In other words, we have discovered rules that govern decay.

We cannot predict when it will happen. The radiation cannot predict when it will happen. It is impossible from anyones point of view to predict, and that has been proven.

This is the silliest thing I have ever heard. It is impossible to prove any such thing. We know that we cannot currently predict it. That in no way "proves" that it simply cannot be predicted.

By your logic, science should have ended years ago when we couldn't predict anything.

Determinism involves the capacity to predict everything.

Only if one is omniscient. I hardly think you would suggest that human beings are omnisciient.

And because we are not, we will always see the illusion of randomness.

In order to use inductive logic, this has to be true.

No it doesn't? How the hell did you come to that conclusion?



We have proven no such thing. In fact, we have very clear rules about it. We know that decay happens exponentially in time. We have calculated half-lives for nearly every element. In other words, we have discovered rules that govern decay.

I was referring to the point at which a beryllium atom will decay, not how much of it will decay.



This is the silliest thing I have ever heard. It is impossible to prove any such thing. We know that we cannot currently predict it. That in no way "proves" that it simply cannot be predicted.

Why don't you learn a thing or two about quantum mechanics. Then tell me it isn't true.

By your logic, science should have ended years ago when we couldn't predict anything.

Science isn't just about prediction :rolleyes:


Only if one is omniscient. I hardly think you would suggest that human beings are omnisciient.
And because we are not, we will always see the illusion of randomness.

How does the meaning of determinism change for God?

I was referring to the point at which a beryllium atom will decay, not how much of it will decay.
The significant thing is that *we* cannot predict it, not that it cannot be predicted.

This is why we have science.

When they question God's word, they show themselves to be unworthy. He who accepts Christ understands the truth. .
Unworthy of what?

The significant thing is that *we* cannot predict it, not that it cannot be predicted.

This is why we have science.

No. Science has proven that it is impossible to predict.

No. Science has proven that it is impossible to predict.
Science cannot prove that anything is impossible. Science only supports claims, it does not prove them. Science cannot make the claim that someday, somehow, somewhere a way will be found by someone to predict it.

Science cannot prove that anything is impossible. Science only supports claims, it does not prove them. Science cannot make the claim that someday, somehow, somewhere a way will be found by someone to predict it.

I was using the word proof in the "scientific proof" context, not the "absolute truth" context.

Why are we even talking about this? I don't know how I got into this conversation.

How does the meaning of determinism change for God?
Determinism for God is Truth. For us, with our limited outlook, it means that effects follow causes sequentially in a massive cascade of reality. For God, who is not subject to time, the entire span of everything would be a static picture known all at once. If all is known, there can be no randomness; but if all is not known, then things can be sprung on us.

Determinism for God is Truth. For us, with our limited outlook, it means that effects follow causes sequentially in a massive cascade of reality. For God, who is not subject to time, the entire span of everything would be a static picture known all at once. If all is known, there can be no randomness; but if all is not known, then things can be sprung on us.


Determinism: The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs.

I was making the point that determinism is only true for God because of his divine forsight, but for us things aren't deterministic because from the point of view of any entity within the universe, certain things are truely random and only chosen at the point when the choice must be made.

You have a problem with this?

I was using the word proof in the "scientific proof" context, not the "absolute truth" context.

Why are we even talking about this? I don't know how I got into this conversation.
Yeah, that's pretty much the preferred context for "proof", absolute truth.

There is no 'absolute true' randomness. It only exists from our subjective perspective, and it only exists because we cannot account for all the variables in our predictions.

That's why we have science: a method for us, with out limited outlook, to build a picture of the 'absolute truth' of things. But the picture built is only the accepted picture, it will never be whole --at any moment, another piece can be added that shows us the picture we were looking at is not the whole picture.

Only an omniscient God *can* have the whole picture. We never will.


I don't know about you, but my purpose in pursing "this conversation" is to demonstrate that I actually do understand some things. ;)

Can anyone offer a substantial alternate explanation for universal creation?

'Substantial'?

As in, in comparison to "I don't know how it happened..... erm... 'God' did it!"?

Actually the devil is entirely seperate from god. He seperated himself at the beggining of time, him and a plethera of angels who saught to usurp god. this of course, failed miserabely, and the devil has taken refuge in our dimension ever since, until he is sent to hell after the final battle. no, the devil knows us as well as god, which is why he manipulates us so easily. he plays on our worst fears and our greatest desires.

Not scriptural.

Yeah, that's pretty much the preferred context for "proof", absolute truth.

There is no 'absolute true' randomness. It only exists from our subjective perspective, and it only exists because we cannot account for all the variables in our predictions.

That's why we have science: a method for us, with out limited outlook, to build a picture of the 'absolute truth' of things. But the picture built is only the accepted picture, it will never be whole --at any moment, another piece can be added that shows us the picture we were looking at is not the whole picture.

Only an omniscient God *can* have the whole picture. We never will.


I don't know about you, but my purpose in pursing "this conversation" is to demonstrate that I actually do understand some things. ;)

Ah...no. It's got nothing to do with not knowing all the variables. Never mind. I'm not getting into this.

:D
Well, i gotta dig through my other stuff but the chorus on that one just kinda jumped out at me.

Could have posted something from Nine Inch Nails "Heresy"...

Because I felt pulled to Bible Study. I felt pulled to go to Monday Night student worship at the church. I took time off of work to do that. Since then, I cannot get enough of God's word.

I do know that God is real and that he made the Earth. I do not have proof because I was not around when he did it but I know it is true.

You don't think this just sounds like a 'coping reaction'...?

Then I feel sorry for you for not understanding the truth.

I could say the same...

Consider it two different sets of rules. The Old testiment was the rule of the day then God changed the rules when he sent His Son to die for us.

God didn't send his son to die for us.

You failed to understand the 'point' of the book.

Determinism: The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs.

I was making the point that determinism is only true for God because of his divine forsight, but for us things aren't deterministic because from the point of view of any entity within the universe, certain things are truely random and only chosen at the point when the choice must be made.

You have a problem with this?
Just so! But I submit that the concept of determism only exists "from the point of view of any entity within the universe." Determinism is defined for that entity with its subjective perspective observing the flow of events around it from the limited outlook of one who can only exist in one "point" in time. Randomness is only possible for that entity, in the form of things it cannot predict that are beyond its ability to account for as variables. In fact, determinism is only possible for the entity within our universe, because for the omniscient entity all things in the universe are observed, so all things are true at once. There can be no random things obseved by the omniscient entity, else that entity is not omniscient.

We define randomness, because we have the subjective perspective. We cannot predict some things, we cannot anticipate, and so things can happen unexpectedly.

We have free will, because we have the subjective perspective. We have an outlook on the universe as something happening "all around us," giving us a conceived "self" around which these things are observed. We can "look" with our senses at an outside world, or close our eyes and "look" inwardly at our thoughts, feelings and imaginings that are particular to us, only perceivable subjectively. But always, there is something "doing the looking." That's an act of will. The self, the subject, ourselves, cannot *do* any act that is not our will, else it is not our act. From the point of view of the entity, things can be random, and subjectivity opens up choices for it to make.

I think we are in agreeance.

You don't think this just sounds like a 'coping reaction'...?

Now you should know the answer to this question :D

God didn't send his son to die for us.

You failed to understand the 'point' of the book.

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.

It is quite possible however it is not correct.

You reject the veracity of Scripture, then?

You reject the veracity of Scripture, then?

Nope. I believe in God and His Holy Book.

When they question God's word, they show themselves to be unworthy. He who accepts Christ understands the truth.

If the Bible is God's word, then you have questioned it - in fact denied its truthfulness, in this very thread.

No it doesn't? How the hell did you come to that conclusion?

The fact that it is the only way inductive logic is logical. You cannot use inductive logic without first assuming underlying rules. If there are no underlying rules, then you can never say, "This has happened the same way 1000 times; therefore it will most likely happen the same way on the 1001st." If there are no underlying rules, then you could see the same result 3 billion times, and still have no reason to believe that the next time would be the same.

I was referring to the point at which a beryllium atom will decay, not how much of it will decay.

The two are related. If we know that a certain amount of decays will happen in a certain amount of time, then we know that something must govern the timepoint at which decay happens. Otherwise, we could have a block of beryllium sit for 10 billion years and never have a single decay, while another of the same size might be completely decayed in 1 second, because there are no rules. Of course, there *are* rules. Thus, half of it will decay within the half-life.

Why don't you learn a thing or two about quantum mechanics. Then tell me it isn't true.

Why don't you learn a thing or two about the scientific method? Then you will know that we cannot "prove" anything using it, and that all theories are open to question.

((See, I can be condescending too!))

Science isn't just about prediction :rolleyes:

No, it is about explanation. But one cannot say that one has an adequate explanation if one cannot predict the results of a given situation.

How does the meaning of determinism change for God?

The meaning doesn't. The application does. God is omniscient, and thus knows every single rule and every single variable. Thus, God can actually apply determinism.

Human beings, on the other hand, are not omniscient. We do not know every rule and every variable. Thus, we cannot apply determinsim.

OOOH! When I posted this I had a "I don't know" answer. But for my answer, yes. Reality is just to incredible to think otherwise.

God didn't send his son to die for us.

You failed to understand the 'point' of the book.
ut o

why did god send his son to die?



i hate it when he knows more than i do!

Nope. I believe in God and His Holy Book.

Then you obviously believe that Jesus is both God and God's son, since it is clearly stated in John 1:

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being 4in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. 8He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. 9The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.

10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. 11He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. 12But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, 13who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth. 15(John testified to him and cried out, ‘This was he of whom I said, “He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.” ’) 16From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.

Let's see, the Word is God. The Word became flesh in Jesus Christ, God's son. God has been made known through "God the only Son".

In other words, Jesus is both God's son and God. It is clearly stated.

ut o

why did god send his son to die?



i hate it when he knows more than i do!
Well... Jesus didn't die, did he? :)

I am waiting to hear Grave's answer, too.

In other words, Jesus is both God's son and God. It is clearly stated.
Haha, I don't know about "clearly...." That's usually a synonym reserved for the literal interpretation. :)

Well... Jesus didn't die, did he? :)

I am waiting to hear Grave's answer, too.
he did in the bible. thats all that matters for the purpose of THIS discussion.

did corneliu ever say what denomination he is? im leaning towards jehova's witness but maybe it could be mormon?

Haha, I don't know about "clearly...." That's usually a synonym reserved for the literal interpretation. :)

Yes, and Corneliu has made it obvious that "literal interpretation" is all that he will accept.

OOOH! When I posted this I had a "I don't know" answer. But for my answer, yes. Reality is just to incredible to think otherwise.
*Nod*

This is possibly the most concrete reason for belief in God. The fact that reality is so utterly ridiculous is reason enough to hold a belief that a complete madman is responsible for it.

^^

Originally Posted by The Parkus Empire
OOOH! When I posted this I had a "I don't know" answer. But for my answer, yes. Reality is just to incredible to think otherwise.
*Nod*

This is possibly the most concrete reason for belief in God. The fact that reality is so utterly ridiculous is reason enough to hold a belief that a complete madman is responsible for it.

^^
Hmm, I thought when I read that that it *was* the most appropriate reason for belief in God, precisely because it was not concrete, but interpretive. The wonder implied in the statement is Parkus's and his alone, not some objective thing.

Hmm, I thought when I read that that it *was* the most appropriate reason for belief in God, precisely because it was not concrete, but interpretive. The wonder implied in the statement is Parkus's and his alone, not some objective thing.
I was being totally genuine about my approval. Beliefs in a creator God due to the utter incredulity of existence are the most philosophically appropriate.

Some truths in this world are so totally irrational and contrary to natural order that it often requires an insane mind to perceive them. The presence of these truths and the resulting ridiculousness of reality they reveal seem to provide the most complete rationale for belief (if not actually faith) in the existence of a personal creator that anyone could ever hope for.

Yes, and Corneliu has made it obvious that "literal interpretation" is all that he will accept.

Oh brother.

I was being totally genuine about my approval. Beliefs in a creator God due to the utter incredulity of existence are the most philosophically appropriate.

Some truths in this world are so totally irrational and contrary to natural order that it often requires an insane mind to perceive them. The presence of these truths and the resulting ridiculousness of reality they reveal seem to provide the most complete rationale for belief (if not actually faith) in the existence of a personal creator that anyone could ever hope for.
I want to agree with you, I really do. But irrationality is not contrary to order --it makes sense to the person who produces it. Sense is order, in a sense; things that make sense reflect an order in the mind that is not always brought to full awareness.

For instance, I don't think there is anything insane about what Parkus said. It made sense to me, because it simply attaches meaning ("Incredible") to coincidental events (it is an omen).

he did in the bible. thats all that matters for the purpose of THIS discussion.

did corneliu ever say what denomination he is? im leaning towards jehova's witness but maybe it could be mormon?
Earlier in another thread, he stated that he was a Methodist.

Earlier in another thread, he stated that he was a Methodist.

Canuck! You took me off your sig, why!?

:p

Canuck! You took me off your sig, why!?

:p
Saving it for a rainy day. :D

Do you want me to put it back?

Saving it for a rainy day. :D

Do you want me to put it back?

Yes, I rather enjoyed that spot of popularity.

Like they say, theres no such thing as bad publicity. :p

Plus, it would always make for good arguement whenever you whipped it out on me.;)




heheh...whipped it out on me :D

Faith in God? God does not exist. I have full faith in that. Faith in the fact that there is no god. Is that still faith?

Earlier in another thread, he stated that he was a Methodist.
nooooo cant be
no methodist would have any trouble with the trinity.


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10853597&postcount=1675

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10854828&postcount=1743


the only ones i know deny the trinity are the jehova's witnesses who deny that jesus is the begotten son of god and the mormons who deny that he is the ONLY begotten son of god.

nooooo cant be
no methodist would have any trouble with the trinity.

i dont know how to do that single post link thing so see post 1743 and 1675

the only ones i know deny the trinity are the jehova's witnesses who deny that jesus is the begotten son of god and the mormons who deny that he is the ONLY begotten son of god.
Click on the post number in the right hand corner at the top of the post and that will give you an individual link.

Then right click on URL, copy and paste in your message window.

Saving it for a rainy day. :D

Do you want me to put it back?

I made it onto CanuckHeaven's sig! *dies of shock*

Click on the post number in the right hand corner at the top of the post and that will give you an individual link.

Then right click on URL, copy and paste in your message window.
oh thank you.

we've only been on jolt for 2 years. i wonder what other secrets there are yet to be found.

I made it onto CanuckHeaven's sig! *dies of shock*

Yeah, I was on it forever...with like 7 links to different posts that I have made over the months....but he just, one day decided to take it off.:(

*tears up*

I made it onto CanuckHeaven's sig! *dies of shock*
You did? :D

Faith in God? God does not exist. I have full faith in that. Faith in the fact that there is no god. Is that still faith?

Agreed, but it isn't faith. Faith is the belief in something with no substantial proof.

Agreed, but it isn't faith. Faith is the belief in something with no substantial proof.

...which means that it is faith. If you are absolutely sure that there is no God, you have a belief in something with no substantial proof.

...which means that it is faith. If you are absolutely sure that there is no God, you have a belief in something with no substantial proof.

I can prove there is no God.

We've never seen or heard from him. At very least I haven't.

It's utterly illogical.

The Bible is contradictory.

They don't have proof.

I can prove there is no God.

A laughable claim. Too bad you can't back it up.

We've never seen or heard from him. At very least I haven't.

I've never seen or heard from a platypus. Obviously, this means they don't exist.

It's utterly illogical.

How so? It is no more or less logical than saying that there is no God. When we discuss that which is outside the realm of the natural, we have nothing empirical to go on.

The Bible is contradictory.

The Bible is not God. What is your point?

They don't have proof.

Who?

Yeah, I was on it forever...with like 7 links to different posts that I have made over the months....but he just, one day decided to take it off.:(

*tears up*

Aww, you poor child. *hugs*

Honestly, I thought your posts were a lot more substantial than my...uh...random ranting of amusement. I don't know why Canuck decided to change it...

A laughable claim. Too bad you can't back it up.



I've never seen or heard from a platypus. Obviously, this means they don't exist.



How so? It is no more or less logical than saying that there is no God. When we discuss that which is outside the realm of the natural, we have nothing empirical to go on.



The Bible is not God. What is your point?



Who?


1st: Of course, other humans have.

2nd: Yes, very logical to believe in something WITH NO PROOF AT ALL.

3rd: It's supposed to teach about God, right?

4th: Believers in God.

I've never seen or heard from a platypus. Obviously, this means they don't exist.

not even a picture?

1st: Of course, other humans have.

Other humans have interacted with God. If you haven't, that isn't my problem.

2nd: Yes, very logical to believe in something WITH NO PROOF AT ALL.

Proof is hard to come by. Evidence, less so. Generally, one does not believe something without evidence, but from a personal viewpoint, evidence need not be empirical. Empirical evidence is only needed when one is trying to demonstrate something to another.

I have all the evidence of God I need.

3rd: It's supposed to teach about God, right?

Yes, as are many other Scriptures. The Koran is supposed to teach about God, as is the Torah, as are many religious texts. But all such religious texts are written by human beings. Thus, any flaw in the text cannot disprove God - it simply demonstrates the fallibility of all human beigns.

4th: Believers in God.

No, but they have evidence, albeit personal evidence.

not even a picture?

Not sure. I don't actually remember ever seeing a picture, no.

Not that a picture would prove anything. I've seen pictures of Cthulu, but I don't think Cthulu exists.

Not sure. I don't actually remember ever seeing a picture, no.

well, if you wanted to see one you could go to australia and find it. you cant do that with god...

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.


I assume that is supposed to be John 3:16, no?

Which version did you find that edits the text with the words 'for us'?

My KJV says "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Indeed... the Greek certainly does not foster the edit you suggest.

I would strongly contend that it is the height of arrogance to assert Jesus was here for 'us', believers or not - and a concept that is almost the entire antithesis of the Testament.

Jesus was sent for the benefit of God, not man... that the sins that God could not TOLERATE, might be salved in sacrifice - that he could come closer to man.

Edit: Gosh - I hadn't really this response was going to be so hotly anticipated... :)

Other humans have interacted with God. If you haven't, that isn't my problem.

or so they say. how can we be sure they tell the truth. we can only judge for ourselves, so how can we trust someone else when they say so?


Yes, as are many other Scriptures. The Koran is supposed to teach about God, as is the Torah, as are many religious texts. But all such religious texts are written by human beings. Thus, any flaw in the text cannot disprove God - it simply demonstrates the fallibility of all human beigns.


or their creativity. these books could be just made up stories...

I assume that is supposed to be John 3:16, no?

Which version did you find that edits the text with the words 'for us'?

My KJV says "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Indeed... the Greek certainly does not foster the edit you suggest.

I would strongly contend that it is the height of arrogance to assert Jesus was here for 'us', believers or not - and a concept that is almost the entire antithesis of the Testament.

Jesus was sent for the benefit of God, not man... that the sins that God could not TOLERATE, might be salved in sacrifice - that he could come closer to man.

Edit: Gosh - I hadn't really this response was going to be so hotly anticipated... :)
are you kidding? you know stuff! no matter what it was going to be, it was going to be worth thinking about

ive never even heard that interpretation, grave.

is it common in some tradition? are there verses in the bible that i should be thinking of that show its the correct interpretation?

are you kidding? you know stuff! no matter what it was going to be, it was going to be worth thinking about

ive never even heard that interpretation, grave.

is it common in some tradition? are there verses in the bible that i should be thinking of that show its the correct interpretation?

I have no idea, I'm afraid, whether there are any traditions that teach it as a tennet, although I think they all should.

There is a core of arrogance in much of people's attitudes 'about' man and God... so many profess to know the weakness inherent in the flesh, yet STILL insist that we are a perfect creation 'different' to the beasts... and yet they base this assurance on the concept of humans created 'in God's image', while admitting in the same breath that we 'fell' from grace.

Can I provide some verses to back this 'version'? Well, I think the whole concept of 'salvation through grace' speaks to it... but, I'll see what I can dig up for you - just not now, I'm afraid... because I'm getting ready to go to work.

I'll try not to leave you hanging too long. ;)

I have no idea, I'm afraid, whether there are any traditions that teach it as a tennet, although I think they all should.

There is a core of arrogance in much of people's attitudes 'about' man and God... so many profess to know the weakness inherent in the flesh, yet STILL insist that we are a perfect creation 'different' to the beasts... and yet they base this assurance on the concept of humans created 'in God's image', while admitting in the same breath that we 'fell' from grace.

Can I provide some verses to back this 'version'? Well, I think the whole concept of 'salvation through grace' speaks to it... but, I'll see what I can dig up for you - just not now, I'm afraid... because I'm getting ready to go to work.

I'll try not to leave you hanging too long. ;)

nah you dont have to dig up verses if they arent part of your analysis.

its just that it indicates a weakness on god's part that isnt consistant with my understanding of the god of the new testament (such a different guy from that bastard in the old testament). that GOD needs something to cleanse sin away. that the fault is in HIM that he cant take those nasty sinful human souls anywhere near him without a good hard scrubbing. like someone with OCD not being able to shake hands without using antibacterial wipes first.

not that i understand why any sacrifice should be necessary. whatever god wants fixed he can fix.

now im gonna have to think about this whole thing again. its sitting in my head as a "meet in the middle" thing because jesus is wholly god and wholly human at the same time so both "sides" make a sacrfice.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZT ut oh my brain shorted out. ill think about it over night and see what i come up with by the morning.

Just a couple of 'quickies' off the top of my head:

Proverbs 8:13 "The fear of the LORD [is] to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate."

Isaiah 59:1-2 "Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid [his] face from you, that he will not hear."


Psalms 24:3-5 "Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place? He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation."

James 4:8 "Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse [your] hands, [ye] sinners; and purify [your] hearts, [ye] double minded..."

Matthew 5:8 "Blessed [are] the pure in heart: for they shall see God."

Habakkuk 1:13 "[Thou art] of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, [and] holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth [the man that is] more righteous than he.."

Romans 3:23-5 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;"

Second Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Matthew 1:21-3 "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."


Just some thoughts to meditate over... :)

nah you dont have to dig up verses if they arent part of your analysis.

its just that it indicates a weakness on god's part that isnt consistant with my understanding of the god of the new testament (such a different guy from that bastard in the old testament). that GOD needs something to cleanse sin away. that the fault is in HIM that he cant take those nasty sinful human souls anywhere near him without a good hard scrubbing. like someone with OCD not being able to shake hands without using antibacterial wipes first.

not that i understand why any sacrifice should be necessary. whatever god wants fixed he can fix.

now im gonna have to think about this whole thing again. its sitting in my head as a "meet in the middle" thing because jesus is wholly god and wholly human at the same time so both "sides" make a sacrfice.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZT ut oh my brain shorted out. ill think about it over night and see what i come up with by the morning.


I'm always the first to suggest that one should follow that approach... the best way to find your 'truth' is to "think about it over night and see what i come up with by the morning". :)

I dug you up a couple of quick verses - my conjecture is based on an overview - so I had to think of what 'ind' of verses might specifically reinforce such an idea, on the 'small' scale.

I don't pretend to understand the NEED for sacrifice. I understand how the process might evolve in a religion... but not in any 'real interaction with god' way. I'm just assuming it as one of the 'machanisms' built into a relationship with this Judeo-Christian god.

That'll be a miracle of biblical proportions :D
Argh, that was actually a good terrible joke. *bows*

You are indeed correct and I do however I will not tolerate persecution of my faith and that is precisely what is happening on this board.
WTF?
Corneliu, the very act of you posting your opinion is in-and-of-the-same of risk. You're gonna have to deal with "persecution", or at least a complex which you seem to endorse strongly. That's the whole nature of this place. If the MODS see it as an issue of toleration or moderation, then that's when they take their step(s).
I have to tolerate people prosletyzing about things they don't actually really know in every respect here. The difference is i tangle more about some of it, since some of it is actually provable. If i were to get on here and start spouting unquantified opinion about *whatevah* you better believe i'd expect someone to take me on about it. Think of it as another form of trolling, ESPECIALLY when you insult them about how they "aren't" getting something.

Could have posted something from Nine Inch Nails "Heresy"...
Creepy. That was the third song i thought of.
I didn't go with it due an earlier mention of Nietsche. Just a matter of forum form, i guess!

If the Bible is God's word, then you have questioned it - in fact denied its truthfulness, in this very thread.
Corneliu has a "way" with truthiness. :D

im going to post a few "notes" so i can be sure to remember them tomorrow

1) if god created humans to have someone to worship him, it was a miserable failure. before jesus' sacrifice, heaven was empty of humans, the grave had everyone. good reason for god to NEED to fix it (why werent angels enough?)

2) the god of the old testament was a miserable failure when it came to making people. the garden of eden didnt work out, he had to wipe out virtually all of humanity in the flood, he destroyed sodom and gomorrah because he couldnt find 10 righteous men....he needed a way to get a better result. (didnt lot live in sodom? what did gomorrah have to do with the story?)

3) it seems kinda "hindu" with god needing a sacrifice so he pretends to not be himself but becomes fully human and lives a human life which results in a perfect human sacrifice but that sacrifice is GOD himself. god is his own sacrifice.

4) god is the one who made all the mistakes. god is the only one who can fix it. its way beyond human capabilities

Then you obviously believe that Jesus is both God and God's son, since it is clearly stated in John 1:



Let's see, the Word is God. The Word became flesh in Jesus Christ, God's son. God has been made known through "God the only Son".

In other words, Jesus is both God's son and God. It is clearly stated.
Be fair ... it's a big, LOOOOOOOOONG-winded, baffling, self-contradictory, often boring and yet occasionally quite insightful, horrific book. He might've glazed over a few verses. I know i did.

Creepy. That was the third song i thought of.
I didn't go with it due an earlier mention of Nietsche. Just a matter of forum form, i guess!

Yes - I saw the quote, the 'inspiration' for Reznor's chorus structure in that song. :)

Could have quoted from Pigface "Suck":

There is no god, up in the sky, tonight.
No sign of heaven, anywhere in sight...

Oh brother.
Amish, then? You say that a lot.

Yes - I saw the quote, the 'inspiration' for Reznor's chorus structure in that song. :)

Could have quoted from Pigface "Suck":

There is no god, up in the sky, tonight.
No sign of heaven, anywhere in sight...
...like Jesus Christ on ecstasy? ;)

So the Pigface or the Broken version?
BTW, i play "Suck" on my radio show occasionally.

Corneliu has a "way" with truthiness. :D

Respect.

I've noticed that... that fondness for truthiness...

...like Jesus Christ on ecstasy? ;)

So the Pigface or the Broken version?
BTW, i play "Suck" on my radio show occasionally.

Yay!

Why don't I listen to your radio show?

Me, I'm going for the Pigface version... mainly because I'm a purist, and that's where I heard it first.

And due to contractual obligations, there is NO WAY that is Trent singing. No way at all. Nope. They wouldn't lie about a thing like that.

Respect.

I've noticed that... that fondness for truthiness...
As much as he clearly likes to argue in stances that are largely oppositional to mine, i still respect the idea that he truly intends to be a better person, even if it is in such an irrational fashion.
Of course, i haven't fully scrutinized what he means when he says things like being a better person, but, meh.
You've been on a while, so you might know this, indulge me if you would....
How do you get some stars/rating on a thread? I've seen a few i'd like to commend. Not necessarily mine. Almost none of them, actually.

Yay!

Why don't I listen to your radio show?

Me, I'm going for the Pigface version... mainly because I'm a purist, and that's where I heard it first.

And due to contractual obligations, there is NO WAY that is Trent singing. No way at all. Nope. They wouldn't lie about a thing like that.
Isn't that other one an Adam Ant song, on there?

Argh, IRL.
I'll be back in a few. Gotta fuel up/get mail.

I am not overly religious. My bout at Catholic school sort of wiped that out, but every now and then when I get philisophical I wonder about the higher being question. I don't necessarily put a definition to "God", but I do believe there is some higher force that affects us.

When I am having a catholic school flashback and leaning heavily towards the idea of God exisisting I do ponder the seemingly needless deaths of good people. The answer I have given myself is this:

When a good person dies, I like to think that a particularly troublesome child is about to be born and is in need of a superior guardian angel. I may be far from right, but it's a comforting thought.

or so they say. how can we be sure they tell the truth. we can only judge for ourselves, so how can we trust someone else when they say so?

Trust is something the individual decides on. But, in the end, you can only know that God exists from your own experience. Hearing the experiences of others can only do one of two things - (a) inspire you to look for your own or (b) somehow back up your own. If it does neither, then it makes perfect sense that it means nothing to you.

or their creativity. these books could be just made up stories...

Could be. Some probably are - in much the same way that Aesop's fables are made up. They are stories meant to demonstrate a point - a life-lesson, if you will. But even being made-up, as such, does not discount the possibility of divine inspiration.

*snip*

Here's one to add:

The Abelardian view of salvation is that the sacrifice of Christ was not a blood sacrifice like that of animals - not a cleansing of human beings through death. Instead, it was an act meant to turn human beings to God in love, rather than fear. Christ said (don't have the exact quote out right now, but this is the basic gist of it) that a man has no greater love than that he would lay down his life for his friends. The death of Christ was, perhaps, meant to be a "wake-up" call to humanity - that we should not follow God out of some carrot-stick mentality, but instead out of love. And that, in loving God, we would truly be able to follow God's guidance.

((Ok, I'm tired, but if you can find the writings of Abelard on this, they're much clearer))


Be fair ... it's a big, LOOOOOOOOONG-winded, baffling, self-contradictory, often boring and yet occasionally quite insightful, horrific book. He might've glazed over a few verses. I know i did.

But those particular verses have been stated more than once in this thread - and each time he denied their veracity.

But those particular verses have been stated more than once in this thread - and each time he denied their veracity.
Oh, you're right. Sorry. I should've thought as much, especially with the John 3:16 thing that Grave_n_idle was attempting to explain.

Aww, you poor child. *hugs*

Honestly, I thought your posts were a lot more substantial than my...uh...random ranting of amusement. I don't know why Canuck decided to change it...
To be truly honest, your "random ranting of amusement" has been quite enjoyable and the nick is well deserved. :)

Yes, since otherwise WHERE THE HECK DID THE UNIVERSE COME FROM?

Earlier in another thread, he stated that he was a Methodist.

And Methodists aren't Christian?

nooooo cant be
no methodist would have any trouble with the trinity.


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10853597&postcount=1675

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10854828&postcount=1743


the only ones i know deny the trinity are the jehova's witnesses who deny that jesus is the begotten son of god and the mormons who deny that he is the ONLY begotten son of god.

I do not have trouble with the Trinity. I do not deny that Jesus is the Son of God. I know he is the begotten Son of God.

I can prove there is no God.

We've never seen or heard from him. At very least I haven't.

What about those of us who have?

It's utterly illogical.

To you maybe.

The Bible is contradictory.

They don't have proof.

You are sure of this? I know that God exists for I have felt him and he has talked to me.

1st: Of course, other humans have.

Wrong. No one can disprove the existence of God.

2nd: Yes, very logical to believe in something WITH NO PROOF AT ALL.

In that case, have you seen a million dollars?

3rd: It's supposed to teach about God, right?

And it does.

4th: Believers in God.

We have all the proof we need. "He who has ears to hear let him hear"

*snip*

All I can do is :rolleyes: God gave his Son to die for our sins so that we can see His Kingdom.

Argh, that was actually a good terrible joke. *bows*

I know but it would be a truth though would it not?

Amish, then? You say that a lot.

No not Amish. I like my electricity :D

I don't believe in any ridiculous imaginative beings - this crap is only for the weak of mind :rolleyes:

I do not have trouble with the Trinity. I do not deny that Jesus is the Son of God. I know he is the begotten Son of God.

The doctrine of the Trinity is not based in the idea that Jesus is the Son of God. That could be true without any idea of the Trinity.

The doctrine of the Trinity is that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all fully God, while also being somewhat separate. They are homousious (might be spelled wrong). Jesus is both fully God and fully man.

The doctrine of the Trinity is not based in the idea that Jesus is the Son of God. That could be true without any idea of the Trinity.

The doctrine of the Trinity is that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all fully God, while also being somewhat separate. They are homousious (might be spelled wrong). Jesus is both fully God and fully man.

Or holy spirit depending on Denomination.

Or holy spirit depending on Denomination.

Exactly.

So, why exactly did you ask me earlier how Jesus could be both God and God's son, if you have no problem with the Trinity? Why did you point-blank state that Jesus is not God, if you have no problem with the Trinity? Why did you state that there was a time before Jesus, if you have no problem with the Trinity?

Exactly.

So, why exactly did you ask me earlier how Jesus could be both God and God's son, if you have no problem with the Trinity? Why did you point-blank state that Jesus is not God, if you have no problem with the Trinity? Why did you state that there was a time before Jesus, if you have no problem with the Trinity?

I like to argue :D

In that case, have you seen a million dollars?

that argument is faulty. because i HAVE seen a 1 dollar bill, also a 5, 10, 50, and 100 dollar bill. all i have to do is get enough together and i KNOW they will make one million. how does that even compare to god?

I do not have trouble with the Trinity. I do not deny that Jesus is the Son of God. I know he is the begotten Son of God.

then either you dont know what the trinity IS or you have different beliefs on different parts of the day.


post 1675
Corneliu:
How can Jesus be God when he is God's Son?

commie catholics:
Why not? He's God. It's entirely possible for him to be one entity existing as three separate entities. If he can create the universe then surely he can do that.

post 1743 (in reply)

corneliu:
It is quite possible however it is not correct.


you just denied the trinity

if you dont understand that, you need to talk to your minister, he will have no problem explaining it to you.

Yes, since otherwise WHERE THE HECK DID THE UNIVERSE COME FROM?

who said it has to come from anything? perhaps it was just...here...

I like to argue :D
thats no arguing, thats trolling

its perfectly possible to argue against the trinity. people have done that for millennia. you didnt do that, you lied about your beliefs in order to get a response.

To whom ever said that the belief in god is for the weak of mind, I concur.

If there is no God, then there are no Gods! Death is part of life, it happens everyday. I lost my Grandmother a year and a half ago and before she died she said that there were angles comming to get her. You can believe what you want to believe, but don't you want to think of your loved ones going to meet God, than just a hole in the ground. I can sleep better knowing that she is with God, and not just in some dark hole. If there is no God, there are no Gods of the Devil.

I'm always the first to suggest that one should follow that approach... the best way to find your 'truth' is to "think about it over night and see what i come up with by the morning". :)

ok its morning and i have it all thought out

now i remember why i dont do theology. how did st thomas aquinas stand it?

yeah it covers the existance of evil, how god is benevolent and omniwhatever, why he is different in different testaments, why he made his own sacrifice and why he needed to for his own sake. (perhaps youll go "duh" and wonder what made me think it was new.)

all in what may well be less than 200 words, certainly less than a thousand.

so let me know if you want me to post it. it makes me very cranky to spend that much time working on an idea and have no one comment on it.

I'd advise reading God's Debris by Scott Adams (Author of the Dilbert comic strip for those of you who know it). Amusing, clever and more logical than any religion I have encountered. Below is a link to the e-book of it, courtesy of Scott himself;

http://www.andrewsmcmeel.com/godsdebris/

I'd advise reading God's Debris by Scott Adams (Author of the Dilbert comic strip for those of you who know it). Amusing, clever and more logical than any religion I have encountered. Below is a link to the e-book of it, courtesy of Scott himself;

http://www.andrewsmcmeel.com/godsdebris/

I bought that. It was quite good.

Wrong. No one can disprove the existence of God.

Or Thor, for that matter. Just saying.

Isn't that other one an Adam Ant song, on there?

Argh, IRL.
I'll be back in a few. Gotta fuel up/get mail.

Adam Ant? That'd be "Physical (You're So)", yes?

Ah Broken, SUCH a highpoint in the NIN back-catalogue. :)

Yes, since otherwise WHERE THE HECK DID THE UNIVERSE COME FROM?

Goblins made it?

(There's just as much evidence, no? That's the problem with the 'god of holes' platform.)

All I can do is :rolleyes: God gave his Son to die for our sins so that we can see His Kingdom.

What is the point of snipping out the ENTIRE post you are 'replying' to?

Is it just so I can't hand it back to you that you aren't answering the questions?

You can SAY "God gave his Son to die for our sins so that we can see His Kingdom"... you can say that all you like, it won't make it true, and it won't necessarily be touching on the REASON for that.

WHY do we need to see His Kingdom? WHY does 'he' want us to? What is the point of the action.

For someone who claims to be a follower in the footsteps of 'god', you are peculiarly anthrocentric.

ok its morning and i have it all thought out

now i remember why i dont do theology. how did st thomas aquinas stand it?

yeah it covers the existance of evil, how god is benevolent and omniwhatever, why he is different in different testaments, why he made his own sacrifice and why he needed to for his own sake. (perhaps youll go "duh" and wonder what made me think it was new.)

all in what may well be less than 200 words, certainly less than a thousand.

so let me know if you want me to post it. it makes me very cranky to spend that much time working on an idea and have no one comment on it.

I most certainly want to see what you have... it's the 'little revelations' that are the reason I 'do this'. :)

I'd advise reading God's Debris by Scott Adams (Author of the Dilbert comic strip for those of you who know it). Amusing, clever and more logical than any religion I have encountered. Below is a link to the e-book of it, courtesy of Scott himself;

http://www.andrewsmcmeel.com/godsdebris/

Just so you know a lot of the science in that book is seriously deficient, especially his understanding of evolution.

I've read the book, for the most part it's convincing because Adams is a very skilled writer, not because of the quality of its arguments.

after i finish screaming over how hitting the down arrow 2times took me to the nationstates homepage and erased my 90% done post, ill start rewriting it.

after i finish screaming over how hitting the down arrow 2times took me to the nationstates homepage and erased my 90% done post, ill start rewriting it.

Ah man, THAT sucks! I've accidentally 'backspaced' a post before... I've not managed a terminal 'down arrow' event. :(

Something which is deterministic can be determined, or predicted, if the underlying rules and input conditions are all known.

EDIT: Sorry, everybody, this is a late reply from something many pages back. I just had to spend some time tracking down some people to get some information.

As of this morning, I've spoken with practicing scientists from multiple disciplines, some of whom had religious beliefs and some of whom didn't.
(We agree, I would think, that science and religion don't need to be opposed, in general).

Every single one is of the opinion that your determinism is not an axiom of science that they recognize (although the physicist indicated that in classical newtonian mechanics with few enough particles, it can be; he pointed out that in quantum context, it is not).

Bear in mind, your opinion is equally valid as theirs, and I'm not saying that you are categorically wrong. I'm just showing that many working scientists do not agree with your axioms of science.

The method of induction can be used to examine those principals that shape the probability fields in which indeterminable events can be more reasonably guessed at.

Ok. Lets start again. Im doing this one in word so at least it will be spelled correctly.

First, lets start with the assumptions:

God is omniwhatever. He is benevolent. He created humanity with the express desire to have people living with him in heaven for eternity.

I also include the notion that I put into other posts that god is eternal. He lives outside the bounds of time and space. I think that is pretty standard belief.

People are imperfect. We cannot possibly understand the mind of god. We get glimpses of the divine but we can never grasp the whole thing. Its beyond human understanding.

Ok with that?

Now let’s take a quick look at the story we are told:

God sucks at this creation business. The garden of eden is a miserable failure. Not many generations down the line (down the line from being created directly by the hand of god) he is so disgusted with his creation that he decides to destroy it and leave only a handful of people and animals to rebuild. He destroys Sodom and Gomorrah because he can’t find even 10 righteous men there. That’s bad.

He puts his money on Abraham. He makes sure Abraham is serious by making him kill his son. All is good. In a couple generations his guys are in Egypt as slaves (creation is seeming like a bad Jurassic park knockoff—chaos theory gone awry). He fixes that with Moses. Then he decides to give his people THE RULES. (Whats up with that? Why didn’t he give them some training after the whole garden fiasco?)

(The bible stories are just for show. It works just as well with evolution, 6 billion years of the earths existing, 2milllion years of human prototypes.)

Adventures ensue

Well OK its been 4000 (or is it 6000?) years since the beginning and no one is in heaven. Pretty incompetent. If god were not the boss, he would have been fired long ago. This must be fixed

So he does the Jesus thing. Jesus gives out new rules. Better rules. We have to be nice, love god, love others, turn the other cheek, be generous, don’t concern ourselves with material goods, etc. if we follow these simple guidelines we’ll get into heaven. He seals the deal by dying on the cross. Hallelujah. Adventures ensue.

The trouble is, life still sucks. It sucks big time. Death sucks most of all. We just get to know someone well and they are ripped away from us never to be seen again in this life. People get very bad deals in life. Babies die after one day of living, a nice woman dies of cancer just as she gets her life together and starts to enjoy it, hundreds of thousands die in a tsunami, a mother gets crushed to death by a runaway crane as she is giving her babies a bath.

Lets stop for a minute and consider your point. That jesus died so that god could get closer to people rather than that he died so that people could get closer to god.

What boggled my mind yesterday is the notion—theologically correct—that god was his own sacrifice. God sent his son to be born of a virgin but the son IS god so god sent an aspect of himself. He was born fully human. He lived a fully human life. He had a human mind that was limited by being inside the bounds of time. He preached what he could understand and what could be expressed by a human being. We willingly died on the cross as a fully human being. GOD became human, told us what we needed to know and died a gruesome and humiliating death. God was his own sacrifice. God did what he needed to do in order for people to get to heaven. Which is what he wanted from the beginning. He fixed what was wrong himself. So that he could get the result he wanted. People in heaven.

Hmmm ok. Have I dug myself a deep enough hole? An allpowerful god purposely makes a crappy creation; millions are doomed to hell by being born before jesus; life sucks even after the big fix. Have I left anything out? How am I gonna ‘splain this one?

The explanation (the trick) lies in the eternal nature of god. God lives outside of time and space. He isn’t limited to seeing only what we did yesterday and what we are doing today. He sees our whole lives. He sees everyone’s whole lives. He sees the whole of creation at once. We are limited by time. We experience life one moment at a time and never again.

It’s a matter of perspective

God, for reasons I cannot possibly imagine, decided he wanted people with him in heaven. So he made some. The process of creation takes “time” but god is beyond time. Maybe it took 6 days to get to people, maybe it took 6 billion years, its all the same to god, he is beyond time. Things get done at their proper “time”. For example the whole jesus thing was necessary but it had to be done at the right “time” early enough so that people can start getting into heaven, late enough that it will be written down and not forgotten. As soon as it was done, jesus went to “hell” (a place where there is serious doubt as to whether or not people ever actually went) and grabbed all the righteous people of the ages and took them to heaven. His sacrifice fixed the problem FOR ALL ETERNITY. He’s god. He’s not limited by time. As soon as it was done, everyone everywhere for all time were permitted into heaven (if they pass whatever test god really has for us)


This is my revelation:

WE ARE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF CREATION. God isn’t done yet. (well ya he IS done but that’s because he is eternal. We are stuck in the middle of “time” which is the creation process) when god is DONE, we will be in heaven. When he is done, we will no longer just have glimpses of the eternal, we will be able to fully understand and be able to live in the presence of god. The part where that perfection of humanity will occur sometime in the distant future (we have developed very quickly over the past 40,000 years so maybe in another 40,000 years? Maybe in another 6 billion years, it doesn’t matter with god) is irrelevant. When that “time” comes, we will be as perfect as we need to be to get into heaven. Whatever comes up in the future after we are long dead will be as relevant to us as the death of jesus was to those who came before him. That process will bring you and I to heaven just as the death of jesus took moses to heaven. (one might guess that we are already in heaven if one could see beyond the bounds of time)

Gee I wonder if that makes any sense.

Life sucks because we are still in the process of creation. God isn’t done yet.

Damn im over 1000 words, I must be done.

*snip*

So, basically to sum it all up:

"God works in mysterious ways"

Excellent

Life sucks because we are still in the process of creation. God isn’t done yet.
A neat and logically sound stance based on the premises (which are, of course, up for questioning, but I'm assuming you're looking at the response to Christian ideas rather than the response to life itself in this regard). The one problem with it in the wider sense is the approach to righteousness it takes.

There are two ways of looking at it. The one you look at treats a righteous person as one who has been directly treated by divine means. This is notable in lack of value it places in conscience and the moral guidelines of Jesus himself. If God's plan for people alive today was similar to how he treated people of the past, and people could be fixed "retrospectively", as it was, then what would be the need to have them consciously regulate their behaviour?

In fact, in this approach, how does what we think or even believe affect our fate at all? You could go forth and rape, loot and pillage confident in the knowledge that at the end of it all God's going to wipe not just the slate but your own sinfulness clean. You could choose to renounce God in every way possible and still wind up one of his devoted servants after a little brain "rectification".

I ask you; what would be the purpose in doing this stage of creation in this way? Humanity is reduced to little more than a soul farm. Nothing done in this reality matters with the exception of raw, unrestricted breeding. And let me tell you; if God's plan for me is simply to exist and reproduce then I am hurt deeply by this objectification.

The other way of looking at it is by stating that there is a defined separation between those who are righteous and those who are not. And this once again leaves us with the religious questions that have always existed; What is it that God Wants, and how do we find out about it? Is this decision almost entirely based on the culture and education in arbitrary knowledge of a given individual?

Thoughts?

I believe that there is heaven and hell, but that these concepts will be so profoundly different from anything we have experienced in life (except for those lucky few that find and embrace heaven in this life, or those miserable people who embrace hell before death) that it cannot be explained. It simply gives us the dichotomy that misery can be either a part of joy, or joy a part of misery. There is no middle alternative. It reminds me of the opening stanza of a Christian song I heard growing up.

Life is a song we must sing with our days
a poem with meaning more than words can say
a painting with colors no rainbow can tell
A lyric that rhymes either heaven or hell.

But I think the message is not religious in nature. It isn't about religion; it's about happiness and contentment.

So, basically to sum it all up:

"God works in mysterious ways"

Excellent
Yes, yes He does!! :)

Yes, yes He does!! :)

Not always. It's no mystery that God likes Porn. :)

A neat and logically sound stance based on the premises (which are, of course, up for questioning, but I'm assuming you're looking at the response to Christian ideas rather than the response to life itself in this regard). The one problem with it in the wider sense is the approach to righteousness it takes.

There are two ways of looking at it. The one you look at treats a righteous person as one who has been directly treated by divine means. This is notable in lack of value it places in conscience and the moral guidelines of Jesus himself. If God's plan for people alive today was similar to how he treated people of the past, and people could be fixed "retrospectively", as it was, then what would be the need to have them consciously regulate their behaviour?

In fact, in this approach, how does what we think or even believe affect our fate at all? You could go forth and rape, loot and pillage confident in the knowledge that at the end of it all God's going to wipe not just the slate but your own sinfulness clean. You could choose to renounce God in every way possible and still wind up one of his devoted servants after a little brain "rectification".

I ask you; what would be the purpose in doing this stage of creation in this way? Humanity is reduced to little more than a soul farm. Nothing done in this reality matters with the exception of raw, unrestricted breeding. And let me tell you; if God's plan for me is simply to exist and reproduce then I am hurt deeply by this objectification.

The other way of looking at it is by stating that there is a defined separation between those who are righteous and those who are not. And this once again leaves us with the religious questions that have always existed; What is it that God Wants, and how do we find out about it? Is this decision almost entirely based on the culture and education in arbitrary knowledge of a given individual?

Thoughts?

i dont understand god's purpose for us at all. but "god so loved the world etc"

he wants us to be in heaven with him.

he didnt bother to bring jesus IN until 6000 years into it (or is it 4000?). that god would make 300ish generations of people who never had a chance at heaven, who are doomed to eternal torment, for whom good behavior makes no difference, is a concept that is completely incompatible with a benevolent god. (or if you subscribe to evolution, 40,000 years of human life doomed to hell)

if behavior wasnt important, why would jesus have spent so much time talking about it? he told us the best way to go about pleasing god. he has some pretty specific things that you better be doing if you are serious about wanting to get into heaven. is it the ONLY way? we dont know. i would suggest that if god loved the world, it cant possibly be the only way. it dooms too many people to hell for no fault of their own. not benevolent.

now IF the next "fix" involves us being absolved of sin no matter what we do, i have no idea. i dont expect to be alive then. maybe, as the hindus believe, those who dont reach perfection in one life, are reincarnated until they get it right. (sorry to butcher hindu belief) maybe there IS a purgatory, ill find out when i get there. maybe god only takes a tiny fraction of those who ever lived and leaves the rest in the grave (thats harder to accept since how could one be happy in heaven if you arent reunited with your loved ones?) thats for god to work out.

we are stuck in the middle of the act of creation. the purpose of creation is for god to have people with him in heaven. he creates people who have had a life. we are in the middle of that life eh? the mystery is that while he creates that life and in eternity it is done, we make that life through our own acts of free will (and the acts of free will done around us) things that we have not done yet, decision that we will make freely in the future. we make life better or worse for ourselves and for those who live near us. its not meaningless. (or it doesnt need to be)

yes this is from a christian perspective. but i dont think it has to limit itself to only christians, its just that other religions that have an afterlife built in would tell the story differently. when everyone reaches nirvana what happens?

we all have little glimpses of eternity. some people on this forum have said they have had personal experiences with god/jesus. its like we KNOW there is something more but we dont know exactly what it is and how to get there. figuring that out can take up the rest of your life eh?

No not Amish. I like my electricity :D
Kinda like that fella on "Demon Knight"? :D
You are *SOOOOOOO* earning your second nick.

You cant say prove it, remember what happened with the Babelfish
What happened again? Wrong orifice?

















*wigglewiggle*

I know but it would be a truth though would it not?
Wading into truthiness again, it would seem .... ;)

I like to argue :D
RAmen to that, y'all!!!!!

I bought that. It was quite good.
Seconded in every point.

So, who is Avatar for NS General?
I can think of a few contenders.

Adam Ant? That'd be "Physical (You're So)", yes?
Yep! That was it! What about "Ten Miles High"?

Ah Broken, SUCH a highpoint in the NIN back-catalogue. :)It's the one that turned me. I was retro a little with PHM. I was full on with Downward (shudder - of course it got to me too ... i'd walk down the street singing "Eraser" at the top of my lungs - got the cops called on me three times for it)
Further Down the Spiral was about the end of my main Trent coasting (whoa to Aphex Twin!!) I was half/half with Fragile, but i like it better now than i did when i started (Somewhat Damaged, La Mer/The Great Below, Complication, The Mark Has Been Made, Into the Void, The Big Comedown). I'm working, of course, on Teeth (Sunspots, Everything Where It Belongs, Only)

http://www.evilbible.com/Impossible.htm

http://www.evilbible.com/Impossible.htm
And with one internet link you "reveal" your truths?

all the faith in the world........Our Savior........

As of this morning, I've spoken with practicing scientists from multiple disciplines, some of whom had religious beliefs and some of whom didn't.
(We agree, I would think, that science and religion don't need to be opposed, in general).

Every single one is of the opinion that your determinism is not an axiom of science that they recognize (although the physicist indicated that in classical newtonian mechanics with few enough particles, it can be; he pointed out that in quantum context, it is not).

They don't have to recognize it. It is inherent in the process. If there were true randomness, we could find no patterns - as there would be none. Even quantum mechanics wouldn't work.

Bear in mind, your opinion is equally valid as theirs, and I'm not saying that you are categorically wrong. I'm just showing that many working scientists do not agree with your axioms of science.

Like I said, it is possible to follow the process without actually understanding it. It doesn't change the fact that the very basis of science is inductive logic, and inductive logic can only be used in a deterministic system.

The method of induction can be used to examine those principals that shape the probability fields in which indeterminable events can be more reasonably guessed at.

There would be no probability fields in a non-deterministic system. There would be *no* pattern unless there were rules underlying it. We might create a pattern, but it would be of our own making, not of the actual system itself.


*snip*
Thoughts?

I tend to think of it as a situation in which humanity is "growing up", as it were. I don't claim to know why God chose to create the universe, or humanity, but I do think that we are progressing. Much like a child growing up must be treated differently at different times, and understands things differently at different times, humanity must. Much like a young child, humanity obeyed God out of fear at first, not out of any understanding. This led to misunderstandings. As humanity progressed, God sent Christ to make the point that we should not follow out of fear or hope of reward, but instead out of love - and out of an understanding that what is right actually is right.

Do you think there is a God?

EDIT: And why do you feel that way?
No, quite the contrary. I believe there are no gods. Faith in God is either an excuse to find an explanation for one's own faults, or a lack of ability to take credit for one's own successes. Either way, it constitutes a character flaw.

of course there is a God...God is the source of existence. God gives us will to live on when there is nothing left, no hope...

Living life without believing in God is soo depressing...death is so much worse when your paradime says "thats it, thats the end". life is incredibly better when you know it will never end.

No, quite the contrary. I believe there are no gods. Faith in God is either an excuse to find an explanation for one's own faults, or a lack of ability to take credit for one's own successes. Either way, it constitutes a character flaw.

I do not blame my faults on God, nor do I fail to take credit for the things I do. Much like crediting my mother for her role in any of my successes - as I cannot separate her influence from who and what I am, I also credit God.

Is it a character flaw when I acknowledge my mother's influence?

They don't have to recognize it. It is inherent in the process. If there were true randomness, we could find no patterns - as there would be none. Even quantum mechanics wouldn't work.


You are entitled to your view and could certainly be correct. However, the professors, physicists, and mathematicians I spoke with on the subject seem to feel that quantum mechanics does work in a non-deterministic system, and to some extent requires it. I understand you may also be a globally recognized expert in this field, and even if you aren't, you could still be right and they could still be wrong. However, at this time, I find their position to be more compelling (although that may be because they've had the opportunity to present their position on quantum mechanics in more detail, and we are limited by space here).


Like I said, it is possible to follow the process without actually understanding it. It doesn't change the fact that the very basis of science is inductive logic, and inductive logic can only be used in a deterministic system.

There would be no probability fields in a non-deterministic system. There would be *no* pattern unless there were rules underlying it. We might create a pattern, but it would be of our own making, not of the actual system itself.


Imagine a set algorithm where the first branch is chosen non-deterministically, drawing from an interval of subsets, and the second stage draws deterministicly EDIT: from the subset. You now have a dynamic that shows pattern but is non-deterministic.

Off topic, what is your view of chaos theory?

of course there is a God...God is the source of existence. God gives us will to live on when there is nothing left, no hope...

Living life without believing in God is soo depressing...death is so much worse when your paradime says "thats it, thats the end". life is incredibly better when you know it will never end.
even if that life with no end is one of eternal torment in hell?

maybe "poof" is better than that.

of course there is a God...God is the source of existence. God gives us will to live on when there is nothing left, no hope...

Living life without believing in God is soo depressing...death is so much worse when your paradime says "thats it, thats the end". life is incredibly better when you know it will never end.

Amen.

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.
You mean Heaven has no Jews or Moslems or Hindus or Sikhs or Confucians or Shintoists or Mayans or anybody but Christians? What about all the poor Greeks and Egyptians and others who lived and died before good ol' JC came along and started hanging out with the lepers and whores? Really, I rarely get uptight about Jesus-freaks, you're entitled to your opinions, but to say that only those who kneel before the Cross get into Heaven is pretty disgustingly arrogant. Where is the line drawn? Are Baptists OK? Catholics? Pentecostals? Lutherans? Even an ardent, strong atheist like myself recognizes that your vision of Heaven is ridiculously elitist, and nowhere near being in line with the teachings of Jesus himself, as we are aware of them today. Perhaps if you looked at what you were saying, you would realize why the very thought of religion turns so many stomachs.

Perhaps if you looked at what you were saying, you would realize why the very thought of religion turns so many stomachs.

I'm also repelled by much of what Corneliu (and Theorb, and Sons of Tarsonis, and The Keyi, etc) says, but I've noticed a number of religious people on NS aren't as bad.

Dempublicents, Jocabia, and Keruvalia seem to present a less nauseating idea of religion.

of course there is a God...God is the source of existence. God gives us will to live on when there is nothing left, no hope...

Living life without believing in God is soo depressing...death is so much worse when your paradime says "thats it, thats the end". life is incredibly better when you know it will never end.
This is precisely the sort of character failing I find in so many religious people. The inability to face what appears to be reality. Life without God is "sooo sad" well boohooo. How about you look inside yourself and find a reason to live for today, to live for yourself and for those you love, and take satisfaction in the time you have instead of worrying about whether there is more later.

You mean Heaven has no Jews or Moslems or Hindus or Sikhs or Confucians or Shintoists or Mayans or anybody but Christians? What about all the poor Greeks and Egyptians and others who lived and died before good ol' JC came along and started hanging out with the lepers and whores?

When Jesus died on the cross, even during his ministry in fact, the rules of salvation changed.

Really, I rarely get uptight about Jesus-freaks, you're entitled to your opinions, but to say that only those who kneel before the Cross get into Heaven is pretty disgustingly arrogant.

Its a tad more than kneeling before Jesus actually.

Where is the line drawn? Are Baptists OK? Catholics? Pentecostals? Lutherans? Even an ardent, strong atheist like myself recognizes that your vision of Heaven is ridiculously elitist, and nowhere near being in line with the teachings of Jesus himself, as we are aware of them today. Perhaps if you looked at what you were saying, you would realize why the very thought of religion turns so many stomachs.

I will proclaim God's good news far and wide. Any and all, and no denomination required, who accepts Jesus and follows him and keeps his words will see the Kingdom of Heaven.

of course there is a God...God is the source of existence. God gives us will to live on when there is nothing left, no hope...

Living life without believing in God is soo depressing...death is so much worse when your paradime says "thats it, thats the end". life is incredibly better when you know it will never end.

Personally, I would propose that existence is the source of God. When one goes out in the world and marvels at the order and complexity of nature, one cannot help but think that some entity must have designed it all. It's all just a bunch of stuff. The entity that gives it meaning is noneother than yourself.

Sorry to seagull in on this one, but real life calls.

. Any and all, and no denomination required, who accepts Jesus and follows him and keeps his words will see the Kingdom of Heaven.

"Think and believe as I want you to believe, and you will rewarded and allowed 'in'.

Think and believe differently, you wil receive death and torture".

Loving, just and holy, there.

Sounds familiar.

I'm also repelled by much of what Corneliu (and Theorb, and Sons of Tarsonis, and The Keyi, etc) says, but I've noticed a number of religious people on NS aren't as bad.

Dempublicents, Jocabia, and Keruvalia seem to present a less nauseating idea of religion.
100% agreed. The problem with many Bible-thumpers is the refusal to accept any viewpoint but their own. How can they have no trouble telling me I can't go to Heaven cause I won't bow down to their Invisible Man, and still claim to be tolerant? It's such a load of crap to try and force your view of right and wrong. We should be able to put forth reasonable points of view, sensible, respectful arguments, without resorting to "I'm going to Heaven and you're not, na-na-na-boo-boo". And for the record, I don't believe in Heaven, bt I don't tell you you can't go cause it doesn't exist. If I believed in it, I think I would include all of you. Even the most obnoxious thumpers.

"Think and believe as I want you to believe, and you will rewarded and allowed 'in'.

Think and believe differently, you wil receive death and torture".

Loving, just and holy, there.

Sounds familiar.

And how does this refute what you quoted? It doesn't.

Sorry to seagull in on this one, but real life calls.

Well, I don't think anybody is going to read all the way through this one and then stay in to the end...

Is there a God?

I'll wait until I die, and then I'll see if there is a god or not.

I will proclaim God's good news far and wide. Any and all, and no denomination required, who accepts Jesus and follows him and keeps his words will see the Kingdom of Heaven.
So Moslems, because they see Jesus only as a prophet, and not as the Messiah, don't get in?
And how can the rules of something as elementary as salvation simply change? Did God goof it up the first time?

Is there a God?

I'll wait until I die, and then I'll see if there is a god or not.

By then, it will be to late Legendary Rock Stars.

You are entitled to your view and could certainly be correct.

It is the basic logic behind the scientific method. Unless you can demonstrate how inductive logic can work in a non-deterministic system.....

However, the professors, physicists, and mathematicians I spoke with on the subject seem to feel that quantum mechanics does work in a non-deterministic system, and to some extent requires it.

In that case, we cannot study quantum mechanics or *anything* it affects with the scientific method. We have no way of disproving anything, and we cannot state that doing a measurement many times leads to the conclusion that the measurement will be the same later.

I understand you may also be a globally recognized expert in this field, and even if you aren't, you could still be right and they could still be wrong. However, at this time, I find their position to be more compelling (although that may be because they've had the opportunity to present their position on quantum mechanics in more detail, and we are limited by space here).

Quantum mechanics came out of the scientific method, did it not? If so, it is based in determinism.

It is important to understand that the "randomness" in quantum mechanics is not true randomness. We see randomness in that which we cannot explain - that which we do not have all the information for. Quantum mechanics is no different. However, if true randomness existed, we would not even be able to construct the probability curves (at least not with any predictive value) that we have. There would be no pattern.

Imagine a set algorithm where the first branch is chosen non-deterministically, drawing from an interval of subsets, and the second stage draws deterministicly EDIT: from the subset. You now have a dynamic that shows pattern but is non-deterministic.

You cannot form an algorithm which truly chooses non-deterministically. And if it draws from any subsets, it is already bound, and thus not truly random.

Off topic, what is your view of chaos theory?

I'm not overly familiar with it. As I understand it, it states that order can and does come out of chaos. This is not at all contradictory to what I am saying - as what we view as chaos is still from our perception.

So Moslems, because they see Jesus only as a prophet, and not as the Messiah, don't get in?
And how can the rules of something as elementary as salvation simply change? Did God goof it up the first time?

No he didn't.

And how does this refute what you quoted? It doesn't.

Everyone can decide whether it addresses your statement or not. I can imagine you wouldn't be inclined to observe the clear parallel.

Everyone can decide whether it addresses your statement or not. I can imagine you wouldn't be inclined to observe the clear parallel.

God does not care what denomination you are provided you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior and keep to his words.

And how does this refute what you quoted? It doesn't.
Yes it does. What you said was basically that it's ok as to be different, just as long as you are exactly the same as us Christians.

No he didn't.
If he never goofed it up, why did he have to change it?

By then, it will be to late Legendary Rock Stars.

Hardly. By that time, I'll have seen enough of life and have done enough to not try to fool myself in thinking that there is a guaranteed existence after this life.

The only thing you can do is live your life to the fullest, and if you happen to die, and that is the definite end, then it wasn't a wasted life.

God does not care what denomination you are provided you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior and keep to his words.
he doesn't care what religion you are, as long as you are Christian? And Hitler didn't care what religion you were just as long as you were Jewish. Is there a difference?

Yes it does. What you said was basically that it's ok as to be different, just as long as you are exactly the same as us Christians.

I suggest you go back and re-read the comment he made. He quoted "Any and all, and no denomination required, who accepts Jesus and follows him and keeps his words will see the Kingdom of Heaven."

Then he stated:

Think and believe as I want you to believe, and you will rewarded and allowed 'in'.

Think and believe differently, you wil receive death and torture".

Loving, just and holy, there.

Sounds familiar.

It doesn't refute anything I've said. He who believes in the Lord Jesus and keeps his words will see the Kingdom of Heaven. He just re-iterated what I said.

There is some value in the concept of "Faith" I suppose. Although "trust" serves just as well for most.

But "Religion" is, at best, ludicrious. Unfortunately for the world at large, it rarely attains such giddy heights and is more commonly depraved. Religion is most often simply a tool for creating slaves. Monotheisms especially.

If he never goofed it up, why did he have to change it?

It was always His plan.

"Any and all, and no denomination required, who accepts Jesus and follows him and keeps his words will see the Kingdom of Heaven."


[i]Think and believe as I want you to believe, and you will rewarded and allowed 'in'.

Can you not see the similarity?

he doesn't care what religion you are, as long as you are Christian? And Hitler didn't care what religion you were just as long as you were Jewish. Is there a difference?

Actually... yes there is a difference if you actually know the history of the Hitler regime.

It was always His plan.
Wow, talk about grasping at straws. It was his plan to make so it would need to be changed? Why? Sounds to me like a desperate attempt at justification.

Actually... yes there is a difference if you actually know the history of the Hitler regime.
Tell me the difference, O Great Enlightened One

Wow, talk about grasping at straws. It was his plan to make so it would need to be changed? Why? Sounds to me like a desperate attempt at justification.

I am not grasping at straws at all. It is part of God's overall plans. I do not even know his plans for He has not revealed them to me. He does give me glimpses of my future but He has never revealed to me my complete future.

Tell me the difference, O Great Enlightened One

Hitler killed them because he hated them. God loves everyone and wants them to be with Him in His Kingdom. That is why he sent Jesus to die for us. He wants us to be closer to Him.

I am not grasping at straws at all. It is part of God's overall plans. I do not even know his plans for He has not revealed them to me. He does give me glimpses of my future but He has never revealed to me my complete future.

I've seen glimpses of my future in dreams, but I usually just call that a dormant power or an unexplainable event. I wouldn't credit it to a being that I have no knowledge of, or any proof as to its existence.

I am not grasping at straws at all. It is part of God's overall plans. I do not even know his plans for He has not revealed them to me. He does give me glimpses of my future but He has never revealed to me my complete future.
A simple justification for everything, isn't it? Because god wants it that way, but I don't know why. This is exactly the problem with religiosity. It's all about explaining away, rather than seeking a real explanation. Can't you proceed with logic? Can't you try and give me real explanations as opposed to weak depictions of scriptural ideology?

I've seen glimpses of my future in dreams, but I usually just call that a dormant power or an unexplainable event. I wouldn't credit it to a being that I have no knowledge of, or any proof as to its existence.

Well that is your choice. Frankly, I've seen way to many events in my life happen just the way my own dreams spelled it out to occur. Word for word, action for action.

I know God is working through me and is preparing me for what I have to do. What that is, I do not know yet.

Hitler killed them because he hated them. God loves everyone and wants them to be with Him in His Kingdom. That is why he sent Jesus to die for us. He wants us to be closer to Him.
If godloves everyone, why will he only asve the ones who love Jesus as saviour? What's he got against Sikhs or Buddhists?

It is the basic logic behind the scientific method. Unless you can demonstrate how inductive logic can work in a non-deterministic system.....

What is your view of how electron orbitals are shaped.


In that case, we cannot study quantum mechanics or *anything* it affects with the scientific method. We have no way of disproving anything, and we cannot state that doing a measurement many times leads to the conclusion that the measurement will be the same later.

What if sometimes measurements really give us an interval, small but continuous, and not so perfect a conclusion?


Quantum mechanics came out of the scientific method, did it not? If so, it is based in determinism.

Well, that's an axiom you're committed to, and I am not, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. I will say that many scientists I've spoken to are doing extraordinary work without basing it in determinism. Maybe they just don't understand their work as well as you do, but they might.


It is important to understand that the "randomness" in quantum mechanics is not true randomness. We see randomness in that which we cannot explain - that which we do not have all the information for. Quantum mechanics is no different. However, if true randomness existed, we would not even be able to construct the probability curves (at least not with any predictive value) that we have. There would be no pattern.

Something can be random within a range. You could have the random draw from integers one through six. You can even construct a probability curve for it. You believe probability curves are drawn from non-stochastic processes?


You cannot form an algorithm which truly chooses non-deterministically. And if it draws from any subsets, it is already bound, and thus not truly random.


That it cannot be done is your axiom, so using it to prove itself isn't really meaningful.

So, you're saying that anything that draws from bound choices is not random? That's another axiom that I'm not on board with. I've worked with a number of mathematicians that frequently model radom processes wtih bound sets...a bound set, when continuous, contains infinite discrete points. Even a discontinous set only needs multiple outcomes, just greater than one (and bounded or not) to be able to be chose from randomly.

I admit I'm no expert in mathematics, but many of your axioms seem to be less than unilateral in their acceptance among those who study these things. Well, I don't think either of us can prove which axioms would be governing, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree.



I'm not overly familiar with it. As I understand it, it states that order can and does come out of chaos. This is not at all contradictory to what I am saying - as what we view as chaos is still from our perception.

I see...I'm only suggesting that what we perceive about God (and how we choose our axioms) may have more to do with wanting or needing there to be a God.

I think we've discovered we disagree on a primal level, but I still believe that you would make a better neighbor than most religious people I've met.

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 not believe in God or anything else supernatural, but not for your reasons. It always puzzles me that people will lose their faith after taking something personally. Everybody dies, and usually before they should have, so how come this death changed your view about the creation of the universe? Why would God allow it to happen? free will, thats why. He cant just intervene everytime something bad happens, that would make life utterly pointless.

I dont believe in God because I find the whole concept ridiculous and implausible, the idea of someone losing their faith over an unfortunate incident is almost as bad as me becoming a born again.

A simple justification for everything, isn't it? Because god wants it that way, but I don't know why. This is exactly the problem with religiosity. It's all about explaining away, rather than seeking a real explanation. Can't you proceed with logic? Can't you try and give me real explanations as opposed to weak depictions of scriptural ideology?

Who says we don't seek explainations?

Well that is your choice. Frankly, I've seen way to many events in my life happen just the way my own dreams spelled it out to occur. Word for word, action for action.

I know God is working through me and is preparing me for what I have to do. What that is, I do not know yet.
You ever heard the term delusions of grandeur?

i wish all the christian bashers would get off of THEIR high horses and actually start showing some of this 'open-mindedness' they seem to want the 'bible thumpers' to have. sure... ok disagree with their opinions but dont make out that they're the only intolerant ones! God exists whether you like it or not, in their opinion, and doesnt it make you wonder why it riles some of you so much? i think maybe it's hitting a little close to home. everyone's perfectly happy to live and let live with pretty much every other faith, but christianity is universally hated, and persecuted throughout much of the world... why? because it isnt compromising! maybe the concept of TRUTH is too hard to take for some, and it would be nice if we could all just believe anything and everything, but that's a load of crap, cos they can't all be true, but again can't all be false! for me, the evidence of God echoing throughout creation and expressed through the christian faith in a living God, Father Son and Holy Spirit is the way the truth and the life. if you dont want to believe me, then fair enough, but you can't justifiably tell me my viewpoint is invalid and expect me to respect yours at the same time.
as for the whole 'they wont let me into their heaven' thing... why would you want to go to our heaven anyway... it's described as eternity in a paradise praising God, basking in his love... seing as you don't like/know/believe in my God and i'm guessing you arent in love with him either, then the idea of eternity spent with him isnt that appealing... on the other hand, why should you feel repelled that we say you can't go... jealous? why is that? is it because you're afraid we're right? if we're wrong, which you seem to think we are, whatever we say or do shouldn't affect you...

Well that is your choice. Frankly, I've seen way to many events in my life happen just the way my own dreams spelled it out to occur. Word for word, action for action.

I know God is working through me and is preparing me for what I have to do. What that is, I do not know yet.

I've seen many events unfold exactly as they did in my dreams, but that still doesn't mean that God put it in my dreams for me to see.

I am not grasping at straws at all. It is part of God's overall plans. I do not even know his plans for He has not revealed them to me. He does give me glimpses of my future but He has never revealed to me my complete future.

No corny, what you said was unfalsifiable, and thats why it was grasping at straws.

You see, you're wrong again.

You ever heard the term delusions of grandeur?

Yes I have however, i know I am not having delusions of grandeur.

Who says we don't seek explainations?
You certainly aren't giving any. "Because God wanted it that way" is in no way an explanation of anything, merely evidence of your inability to seek explanations.

God does not care what denomination you are provided you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior and keep to his words.

You should print that on a t-shirt and wear it so people can quickly size you up.


"I don't care what you do as long as it is what I want you to do".

Your mindset is like a biohazard warning on religion, unfairly marking those who might see God as less dogmatic than that...

i wish all the christian bashers would get off of THEIR high horses and actually start showing some of this 'open-mindedness' they seem to want the 'bible thumpers' to have. sure... ok disagree with their opinions but dont make out that they're the only intolerant ones! God exists whether you like it or not, in their opinion, and doesnt it make you wonder why it riles some of you so much? i think maybe it's hitting a little close to home. everyone's perfectly happy to live and let live with pretty much every other faith, but christianity is universally hated, and persecuted throughout much of the world... why? because it isnt compromising! maybe the concept of TRUTH is too hard to take for some, and it would be nice if we could all just believe anything and everything, but that's a load of crap, cos they can't all be true, but again can't all be false! for me, the evidence of God echoing throughout creation and expressed through the christian faith in a living God, Father Son and Holy Spirit is the way the truth and the life. if you dont want to believe me, then fair enough, but you can't justifiably tell me my viewpoint is invalid and expect me to respect yours at the same time.
as for the whole 'they wont let me into their heaven' thing... why would you want to go to our heaven anyway... it's described as eternity in a paradise praising God, basking in his love... seing as you don't like/know/believe in my God and i'm guessing you arent in love with him either, then the idea of eternity spent with him isnt that appealing... on the other hand, why should you feel repelled that we say you can't go... jealous? why is that? is it because you're afraid we're right? if we're wrong, which you seem to think we are, whatever we say or do shouldn't affect you...

I couldn't have said this any better. Of course, I never tried but thanks for the wonderful post :)

I've seen many events unfold exactly as they did in my dreams, but that still doesn't mean that God put it in my dreams for me to see.

You can continue to believe as you wish. Me though will believe that God gave me glimpses of my future for me to see. Minor things mostly.

Hitler killed them because he hated them. God loves everyone and wants them to be with Him in His Kingdom. That is why he sent Jesus to die for us. He wants us to be closer to Him.

There are some who think Love may not be best expressed with killing people and torturing those who don't love you the way you want.

They even suspect that perfect master plans don't involve so much blood to be washed in...

No corny, what you said was unfalsifiable, and thats why it was grasping at straws.

You see, you're wrong again.

Actually, no I am not. If it is unfalsifible how can I be wrong? un=not. By what you just said, what I uttered was the truth for you stated that it cannot be false.

You certainly aren't giving any. "Because God wanted it that way" is in no way an explanation of anything, merely evidence of your inability to seek explanations.

I seek explainations everyday.

You can continue to believe as you wish. Me though will believe that God gave me glimpses of my future for me to see. Minor things mostly.

Personally, I think this is a battle that will never be won. God's existence cannot be proven by faith alone, yet its existence cannot be disproven by modern science.

You can continue to believe as you wish. Me though will believe that God gave me glimpses of my future for me to see. Minor things mostly.
given that deja vu and intense religious experiences can be triggered in a lab, you still believe in the infallibility of your dreams?

i wish all the christian bashers would get off of THEIR high horses and actually start showing some of this 'open-mindedness' they seem to want the 'bible thumpers' to have. sure... ok disagree with their opinions but dont make out that they're the only intolerant ones! God exists whether you like it or not, in their opinion, and doesnt it make you wonder why it riles some of you so much? i think maybe it's hitting a little close to home. everyone's perfectly happy to live and let live with pretty much every other faith, but christianity is universally hated, and persecuted throughout much of the world... why? because it isnt compromising! maybe the concept of TRUTH is too hard to take for some, and it would be nice if we could all just believe anything and everything, but that's a load of crap, cos they can't all be true, but again can't all be false! for me, the evidence of God echoing throughout creation and expressed through the christian faith in a living God, Father Son and Holy Spirit is the way the truth and the life. if you dont want to believe me, then fair enough, but you can't justifiably tell me my viewpoint is invalid and expect me to respect yours at the same time.
as for the whole 'they wont let me into their heaven' thing... why would you want to go to our heaven anyway... it's described as eternity in a paradise praising God, basking in his love... seing as you don't like/know/believe in my God and i'm guessing you arent in love with him either, then the idea of eternity spent with him isnt that appealing... on the other hand, why should you feel repelled that we say you can't go... jealous? why is that? is it because you're afraid we're right? if we're wrong, which you seem to think we are, whatever we say or do shouldn't affect you...
Yes, I do think you are wrong. Based on your total lack of punctuation skills, I also believe you are the same as dark dragon (at least I think that was the name) And I am not intolerant of your faith. What I cannot tolerate is the inability to express in any reasoned terminology the reason for your faith. What I cannot tolerate is statements such as "Everyone can get in, as long as they are Christian" What I cannot tolerate is the holier-than-thou refusal to listen to or accept any other points of view, or to take responsibility to be able to give reasons for the way you feel. You say we have to see it your way or be wrong, but your arguments only make sense if we already see it your way. And as to TRUTH, see the forum on Is Evil Real to see how I view truth. You ought to love it.

Personally, I think this is a battle that will never be won. God's existence cannot be proven by faith alone, yet its existence cannot be disproven by modern science.

I will agree to disagree with you for you have been most gracious and not condescending.

Hitler killed them because he hated them. God loves everyone and wants them to be with Him in His Kingdom. That is why he sent Jesus to die for us. He wants us to be closer to Him.If killing his son is his way of showing affection, then I'd rather not have any.
Incidentially, I am fully capable of murdering whomever I want. I've simply chosen to refuse to do so, because it goes against my personal values. I will never accept people, gods, pink elephants or coppers, trying to blame their murderous behaviour on me. Your god is responsible for its own actions, just as I am for mine.

Hitler killed Jews because he hated them? Well, Hitler invented various excuses for hating them. As such, your god is apparently no different. All we know is that your god wants to torture the majority of all generations of mankind indefinetly. Your god's excuse? We're sinners.

Sounds no different from your average Jew hating neo-Nazi bonehead to me.

Actually, no I am not. If it is unfalsifible how can I be wrong? un=not. By what you just said, what I uttered was the truth for you stated that it cannot be false.
falsifiable refers to the fact that it cannot be proven or disproven, because it creates no predictions that are testable.

you're welcome...
it's nice to see you're trying your hardest... but you might as well not bother, because no cunning argument will win over people who are set against accepting the truth. what you can do... is PRAY for them, that usually pisses them off :) pray that the Spirit will move among them and reveal God to them and that these words of truth planted even in the rocky soil and path may grow up and not be snatched away! Jesus is ALIVE and at work in us, even in the crazy world of nationstates!

Actually, no I am not. If it is unfalsifiable how can I be wrong? un=not. By what you just said, what I uttered was the truth for you stated that it cannot be false.

Unfalsifiable doesn't mean unfalse, it means the question is of such a nature that it cannot be proven false (or true).

Whether my dog is under my chair in a conventional sense is falsifiable, but not false.

I can check, and if she isn't there, its false, if she is, its true. Thus, the question itself is falsifiable, but the outcome can be true or false.

Its a term used a great deal in science and some philosophy.

given that deja vu and intense religious experiences can be triggered in a lab, you still believe in the infallibility of your dreams?

Yes.

123 pages is a little much for me to read but anyway for any one on here even if we are wroing about god we will have gone thro live living the best we could bet if we are right the price you pay is way to much god loves eery one and he made it easy to get into heaven all you have to do is exept his son and obey his commandments and those things are so easy to do then if there is a heaven your in.

Actually, no I am not. If it is unfalsifible how can I be wrong? un=not. By what you just said, what I uttered was the truth for you stated that it cannot be false.
Falsifiability does not refer to accuracy, but rather to the ability of a thesis to be tested and proven eithere right or wrong. Saying it is unfalsifiable is not admitting its truth, it is pointing out its weakness as a starting point for discussion.

Actually, no I am not. If it is unfalsifible how can I be wrong? un=not. By what you just said, what I uttered was the truth for you stated that it cannot be false.

No, corneliu, you're wrong agian.

When a claim (or "hypothesis" in clear english) cannot by proven false - ie, no evidence could contradict it - it is "unfalsifiable."

Something unfalsifiable isnt true, its trivial.

The classic bit of religious nonsense "its all part of god's plan" is unfalsifiable - no piece of evidence could be produced that couldnt be written off as "part of god's plan too."

For this reason, it is trivial and it is grasping at straws.

You need to learn about intellectual integrity corny.

you're welcome...
it's nice to see you're trying your hardest... but you might as well not bother, because no cunning argument will win over people who are set against accepting the truth. what you can do... is PRAY for them, that usually pisses them off :) pray that the Spirit will move among them and reveal God to them and that these words of truth planted even in the rocky soil and path may grow up and not be snatched away! Jesus is ALIVE and at work in us, even in the crazy world of nationstates!

I have been praying my friend. As for giving up, I will not do so. I love spreading the Word of God and will continue to do so despite the persecution of non-believers just like those of the early church who were persecuted but yet continued to teach the good news of Jesus.

Personally, I think this is a battle that will never be won. God's existence cannot be proven by faith alone, yet its existence cannot be disproven by modern science.

Well, its not impossible that it may be decided when some God or Gods show up in some kind of end-time scenario, or metaphysics progresses to some point where it can present more information.

you're welcome...
it's nice to see you're trying your hardest... but you might as well not bother, because no cunning argument will win over people who are set against accepting the truth. what you can do... is PRAY for them, that usually pisses them off :) pray that the Spirit will move among them and reveal God to them and that these words of truth planted even in the rocky soil and path may grow up and not be snatched away! Jesus is ALIVE and at work in us, even in the crazy world of nationstates!
Actually, I would appreciate it if you prayed for me. No god exists to hear it, and you certainly appear utterly incapable of demonstrating otherwise. However, if you pray for me and you really mean it, I have no problem with you wishing well upon me. If you pray for me and you don't mean it, it's just evidence of the fact that your faith is falsely placed, because if you had true faith in a true god you would not use prayer as a weapon to cause distress.

*snip*

Continue to say I am wrong for I know I am right. When the day of judgement comes I will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with my Lord and Savior.

123 pages is a little much for me to read but anyway for any one on here even if we are wroing about god we will have gone thro live living the best we could bet if we are right the price you pay is way to much god loves eery one and he made it easy to get into heaven all you have to do is exept his son and obey his commandments and those things are so easy to do then if there is a heaven your in.
i would believe in God if posters without punctuation were smitten on an at least irregular basis.

Actually, I would appreciate it if you prayed for me. No god exists to hear it, and you certainly appear utterly incapable of demonstrating otherwise. However, if you pray for me and you really mean it, I have no problem with you wishing well upon me. If you pray for me and you don't mean it, it's just evidence of the fact that your faith is falsely placed, because if you had true faith in a true god you would not use prayer as a weapon to cause distress.

God works in mysterious ways. Give Him a chance and He will change your life for the better.

Continue to say I am wrong for I know I am right. When the day of judgement comes I will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with my Lord and Savior.

You'd make an interesting case study on the effects of repetitive reinforcement in neuroplasticity.

Continue to say I am wrong for I know I am right. When the day of judgement comes I will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with my Lord and Savior.
Blah blahda-dee-blah.

THIS IS NOT ARGUMENT!!!!!!!!!!!

Continue to say I am wrong for I know I am right. When the day of judgement comes I will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with my Lord and Savior.

My mom says I'll be in limbo. Can someone tell me what that is, exactly?

God works in mysterious ways. Give Him a chance and He will change your life for the better.
Maybe this is the chance, Corn. Maybe right here and right now you are supposed to find a wzay to convince me that God may indeed exist, and you are blowing it. How does it feel to be a holy failure because you cannot express an original thought or a reasonable argument?

i would believe in God if posters without punctuation were smitten on an at least irregular basis.

Heh...reminds me of Principal/Agency laws in some states.

If you're a business owner, and one of your employees is giving wrong information, you're required to stop them and present accurate information as a matter of honesty and due diligence.

Even if one of the religions is The One, their God(s) don't seem to mind a lot of knock-offs...

My mom says I'll be in limbo. Can someone tell me what that is, exactly?
It's that Island game where you try to walk under a stick

God works in mysterious ways. Give Him a chance and He will change your life for the better.

==

"Just believe and think as I want you to, pleeeeaaaaaasseeee...

That way, my own clinging devotion will be somehow ratified...."

It's that Island game where you try to walk under a stick

My poor back... bending for all eternity.

Maybe this is the chance, Corn. Maybe right here and right now you are supposed to find a wzay to convince me that God may indeed exist, and you are blowing it. How does it feel to be a holy failure because you cannot express an original thought or a reasonable argument?

Because your ears are closed you do not hear. With your eyes shut, you do not see. I cannot force it upon people. All I can do is to spread the Word of God.

If you do not accept Christ, I will grieve but I know that I have done my best to show you that God loves you.

Yep! That was it! What about "Ten Miles High"?

It's the one that turned me. I was retro a little with PHM. I was full on with Downward (shudder - of course it got to me too ... i'd walk down the street singing "Eraser" at the top of my lungs - got the cops called on me three times for it)
Further Down the Spiral was about the end of my main Trent coasting (whoa to Aphex Twin!!) I was half/half with Fragile, but i like it better now than i did when i started (Somewhat Damaged, La Mer/The Great Below, Complication, The Mark Has Been Made, Into the Void, The Big Comedown). I'm working, of course, on Teeth (Sunspots, Everything Where It Belongs, Only)

I still don't get why everyone dished on "Ten Miles High"... I liked it.

Everything up to (two versions of) Further Down the Spiral was fantastic, and fragile was a little weak. Luckily, we SEEM to be seeing a bit of a return to form now ("Only"... is kind of like the 'new' Down In It, I think.)

The Aphex Twin contribution was just unbelieveably fantastic though, you are right. "At the Heart of It All" is well up there on my list of favourite tracks.

It's that Island game where you try to walk under a stick

HAHA!! Not precisely what he ment But I'll give you kudos for this wonderful answer. I should sig this. Its funny :D

My poor back... bending for all eternity.

The bending isn't so bad...its the steel drums...

Continue to say I am wrong for I know I am right. When the day of judgement comes I will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with my Lord and Savior.
Don't know about you, but I hold the Kingdom of God in my hand right now. Your desires for greater than that will prove your undoing, I fear.

Living life without believing in God is soo depressing...death is so much worse when your paradime says "thats it, thats the end". life is incredibly better when you know it will never end.

Life without believinf in God isn't depressing, actually.

But - it's good that you have an opinion on something you obviously know nothing about...

HAHA!! Not precisely what he ment But I'll give you kudos for this wonderful answer. I should sig this. Its funny :D

It is funny. :) But I still don't know what limbo is, in the sense of religion and spirituality.

Because your ears are closed you do not hear. With your eyes shut, you do not see. I cannot force it upon people. All I can do is to spread the Word of God.

If you do not accept Christ, I will grieve but I know that I have done my best to show you that God loves you.

It appears that Egrev has addressed your position more than you've really examined his. Just my opinion.

I sometimes wonder if your kind of religion isn't a lot like telemarketing...you just fling it out there, waiting to find somebody lonely and needy enough to just want to talk to somebody. Its a numbers game, throw enough around, it will stick to somebody...and when you find that percentage with the mentality to buy, you close the deal.

It is funny. :) But I still don't know what limbo is, in the sense of religion and spirituality.

She is referring to Purgatory. The place between Heaven and hell. Frankly, I do not know if this actually exists or not but I do know that some denominations believe in purgatory.

Because your ears are closed you do not hear. With your eyes shut, you do not see. I cannot force it upon people. All I can do is to spread the Word of God.

If you do not accept Christ, I will grieve but I know that I have done my best to show you that God loves you.
Then your best is nothing, and you are an utter failure, fir nothing is exactly what you have done. You have given no evidence, no reason or intellectual enticement. All you have done is say "I am right because I know I am right." Well, I am right because you have not shown me to be wrong. My position is falsifiable, but you will not seek to prove it wrong. Your position is not falsifiable, yet you refuse to modify it and engage in an intelligent conversation. You are neither a philosopher nor a thinker, only a puppet with the arm of the church up your ass wiggling your lips.

Personally, I think this is a battle that will never be won. God's existence cannot be proven by faith alone, yet its existence cannot be disproven by modern science.


Bravo! which is exactly why it is called faith.....(this coming from a christian and a scientist)


i wish all the christian bashers would get off of THEIR high horses and actually start showing some of this 'open-mindedness' they seem to want the 'bible thumpers' to have. sure... ok disagree with their opinions but dont make out that they're the only intolerant ones! God exists whether you like it or not, in their opinion, and doesnt it make you wonder why it riles some of you so much? i think maybe it's hitting a little close to home. everyone's perfectly happy to live and let live with pretty much every other faith, but christianity is universally hated, and persecuted throughout much of the world... why?

you know, i hate to say this, but it has been in my experience that those who are hard-core "bible-thumpers" generally are more condenscending than the "christian-bashers." if we show them tangible proof, rather than the faith, feelings, and inspirations we get/feel from the bible, then maybe they would be more inclined to beleive in Christ and God, to be more open minded. You have faith in God, they have faith that there is not one.

I hate to say this, I have faith because it was instilled in me since I was a child. I have faith in God because of many other reasons, most too personal to put here on NS. Had it not been for the fact that faith and God was instilled in me since birth, and, because if that, I looked for God in my daily life, I would probably be on the side of hose saying show mw hardocre, tangible proof.

It was always His plan.

Because God never changes his mind?

(Yes - this is a trap... of course it is.)

Continue to say I am wrong for I know I am right. When the day of judgement comes I will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with my Lord and Savior.


Corny, read what I posted and then write a reply to it.

Mohammad Atta thought this exact same thing, maybe you two can share a room up there.

Is anybody but me becoming convinced that Corn-Dog is actually an atheist who enjoys trying to antagonize people in search of intelligent debate?