Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs

References to a dependence on "Almighty God" in the law that created the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security are akin to establishing a religion, Franklin Circuit [Ky.] Judge Thomas Wingate ruled Wednesday.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

diablo

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

What the fuck about separation of church and state is so hard to understand? It's not rocket science, even a Kentucky judge understands!

What the f*ck about censorship of thought is so hard to understand? Having "In God We Trust" on a coin violates no part of the Constitution as the sentiments in this law violate no law.

As an atheist I would like it for one day for coins not to say that we trust in an imaginary being in the sky.

The courts long ago decided the statement on currency and coins is constitutional. I bet the Kentucky censorship decision gets overturned if appealed.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

As far as I know, Congress hasn't made a law establishing a religion, but the ACLU and the courts have surely prohibited the "free exercise thereof" in many cases.

#4, From 1897 to 1954 the courts told us that segregated schools were constitutional, but it doesn't mean they were, the court was wrong and reversed it self. Courts should only be bound by constitutonal precedents.

The courts long ago decided the statement on currency and coins is constitutional. I bet the Kentucky censorship decision gets overturned if appealed.

Keep on dreaming... idiot.

"From 1897 to 1954 the courts told us that segregated schools were constitutional, but it doesn't mean they were, the court was wrong and reversed it self. Courts should only be bound by constitutonal precedents."

Hoo-haw. From 1897 to 1954 segregated schools were constitutional. Then, in 1954, they became unconstitutional. The court's reversed itself not infreqently. It's called "changing with the times." That's what's happened to the Constitution, too; today's document is quite different from anything the Founders -- genuflect, touch head to ground, whisper "Amen" -- envisioned. It's a malleable document, and therein lies what its probably its greatest strength; problems arise with unmalleable folk brush up against that malleable Constitution.

Doc, you are wrong. The Constitution is not a living document. The fact that it was misinterpreted in the past to fit the political climate of the time doesn't mean that "changes with the times." What is means is that the courts realize that previous decisions were legally incorect and set aside precedents regardless of what the masses think. I don't think too many people favored desegregation in 1954. I don't think the decision was made to comply with the "changing times."

The fact that it was misinterpreted in the past to fit the political climate of the time doesn't mean that "changes with the times."

The document's wording may not change (outside of amendments) but as society changes with time the Constitution is going to be applied to an increasing number of situations that the framers could not forsee. It is impossible not to view it as a "living document". It is possible to disagree on how to interpret it.

As far as I know, Congress hasn't made a law establishing a religion

Read the excerpt you posted. The law respected an establishment of religion by suggesting that the safety of Kentucky depended primarily on the whims of the Christian god.

The supreme court found that unconstitutional... nothing was censored by an atheist.

That we disagree does not mean I'm "wrong." I see the Constitution as a living document; you don't. That you're able to actually get your head around the idea that there's one way and one way only to interpret (because that's what gets done, interpretation) the Constitution --- and that there's some gold standard for this business of interpreting (which, I'll bet, conveniently dovetails with your personal opinons) --- is something I know exists but, frankly, find simply ridiculous.

And if you don't believe that the 1954 Brown decision was rooted at least in part in the fact that the US was having a problem reconciling the Cold War rhetoric about freedom, justice and equality that it pitched to people in emerging nations ---in, say, Africa --- with the odious practice of racial segregation within its own borders...well, you really should consider spending more time engaged in some serious research.

Why get offended if "In God We Trust" is on the coinage in the United States? I wouldn't be offended if it were off of the coins. In fact I would be happier.

To place "In God We Trust" on Money seems ridiculous. It would seem to indicate that the more money you have, the more you trust in God. That does not line up with any aspect of Christianity for sure.

I say take it off. It is unecessary, however if it remains on there, stop complaining, it doesn't mean anything if you don't believe it. Don't be offended at such stupid stuff.

If it is true that there is a God, then you disagreeing does not mean anything and getting offended is a waste of time.

If it is not true that there is a God, then why be offended if you know that? Just don't worry about it. Close your mind and live you life.

"I don't think the decision [to end segregation] was made to comply with the "changing times.""

That has to be one of the most idiotic and/or ignorant assertions ever made on the Drudge.

The ultimate irony, of course, is the same folks crying censorship would be screaming from the rafters if someone suggested making a reference to Allah.

I wouldn't. Why should it bother me? Like I said, to put "Trust in Allah" on a coin means nothing. God put on the coin is a general ascertation for a supreme being. Our word for that is God. In the event that Allah were put on a coin, it would be an ascertation to the God of Islam in specific, even though the word for God in Arabic is Allah.

But why should we care? If it is not true, why does it bother us? I don't take it to mean that all American's trust in God just because each one carries around money or coins that say they do.

I think we need to stop being offended at the most ridiculous things. Maybe then we can do something worth while in this country again.

That has to be one of the most idiotic and/or ignorant assertions ever made on the Drudge.


#14 | Posted by Angrydad


In 1954 people were not ready to desegrate the schools, but the courts made a decision in keeping with the Constitution. Even so, many people resisted and Eisenhower (that evil republican that hated blacks) had to send the national guard to make people comply. The point again is that Constitution is not changed by courts to reflect contemporary societal values.

In many states the courts are striking down gay marriage bans even though gay marriage bans enjoy overwhelmening support. Why? Because the courts don't change the Constitution, they just rule as to whether a law or precedent is constitutional or not.

"The Supreme Court found that unconstitutional, nothing was censored by an atheist...."

Disingenuous. If not for the atheist, no court case.


Disingenuous. If not for the atheist, no court case.
#18 | Posted by Zed

YEAH!

Eeeeeevil atheists! How dare they stand up for their rights!

Does anyone else find this funny?


"The statute pronounces very plainly that current citizens of the Commonwealth cannot be safe, neither now, nor in the future, without the aid of Almighty God. Even assuming that most of this nation's citizens have historically depended upon God, by choice, for their protection, this does not give the General Assembly the right to force citizens to do so now."


I mean, to legislate dependence on G-d I would think would first require undeniable proof of said god. Right now, the court basically ruled that the state cannot force you to hinge your security to an imaginary character from a popular book.

"How dare they satnd up for their rights...."

There was a time I'd have shrugged it off like that. Having interacted with the newer incarnation of atheist a lot recently, I now tend to expect spite is in back of things like this.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Freedon of religion does not mean freedom from religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion.

"Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion."

Nor does it allow my tax dollars to promote your deity.

But it does mean freedom from any law that would force any aspect of religion. It means that religion is a "no law zone" either way. If you have a law that puts the word "G-d" anywhere, you have made a law respecting an establishment of religion.

"Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion."

You want to practice your relgion, go ahead. But don't expect the state to endorse, support, enable, or provide you with facilities for doing so.

"Freedon of religion does not mean freedom from religion."

What a load of crap!

Are you suggesting that atheist are outside the law, that they have to chose a religion, any religion? How would you enforce your view of the world?

"How would you enforce your wqorldview....?"

How are atheists enforcing theirs?

It would be nice if the courts decided some of these trivialities on the basis of non minibus curit lex.

How could God allow this to happen?

Maybe he isn't so powerful after all.

You can't have freedom of religion without freedom from religion.

Here we go with the atheists running amok again.

The atheists are becoming more organized and delusionally self-righteous the most radical of religious groups.

Ironically, atheism has now become a "religion" all its own.

Yeah that's why Atheist areDdemanding we print:


"THERE IS NO GOD" on our money.

Go soak whatever hurts Chris. You're fucking stupid.

The "Almighty God" should shoot a thunderbolt smack into Judge Thomas Wingate's fanny.

Let the Judge know who's Boss.

Go soak whatever hurts Chris. You're fucking stupid.


If I'm fucking stupid then I guess you're telling me to go soak my brain, ya little punk?

I'm gonna to tell Gaawwwwd on you. Then you'll really be sorry. LOL



I think we should print on our money

"I don't know and you don't either"

gonna to tell = gonna tell

Think how wonderful the world would be if everyone kept their religion to themselves.

Yeah, I know I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one..........

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

I think you mean to say: "How wonderful the world would be if everyone kept to themselves".

As a wise man once said: "Hell is other people".

If people did keep religion to themselves, where does leave the atheists? Hard to be the Great White Hunter when the lions are away.

I heard a Blues Tune the other day:

"Don't talk to me about religion woman. You've givin me all the Hell I can stand."

"Ironically, atheism has now become a "religion" all its own."

Come on chris, where is there an atheist network channel, dedicting to proving god wrong 24/7. Where are the mega-churches for all the atheist followers to be indoctrinated by who??? They do have an annual convention but so do doctors, lawyers, energy marketrs....

We don't have one organized leader in atheism, but isn't funny how as a group without the urging of anyone, we all come to the same concusion.....hmmmmm......

LM

"Hard to be the Great White Hunter when the lions are away."

Thanks crusader!

LM

To all of the theists, what if the bill had been written by an atheist legislator to say something like this,

"The safety and security of the Commonwealth can only be achieved with the denial of Almighty God from the with the state."

Just sayin.

#39 | Posted by richardspirit

This reminds me of this episode of the Simpsons in which they were playin the National Anthem and granpa Simpson yells: "Shut that hippy crap up!"

LOL!

How about this:

"The safety of the Commonwealth can not be fully garanteed as we live in a universe full of random unpredictable occurrences. We shall do our best given circumstances to protect the people of the Commonwealth as well as we can."

Come on chris, where is there an atheist network channel, dedicting to proving god wrong 24/7. Where are the mega-churches for all the atheist followers to be indoctrinated by who???...

Give it a little more time, LiberalMongrel, a little more time!

"Where is there an atheist channel, proving God wrong 24/7....?"

As soon as someone thinks there's a buck in it, there will be one.

The Sky Fairy believers are upset.

TFB

LOL

If there ever are atheist "churches" I won't set foot in them. I don't need some asshole taking my money to tell me how right I am to believe what I believe.

"We don't have one organized leader in atheism...."

You do have superstars whose every word I hear repeated back to me ad nauseum as soon as it leaves the lips of the genius.

The One Leader will come with the appearance of an atheist organization large enough to support one.

#50 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-08-27 04:44 PM | Reply | Flag: Posts videos about smokestacks on the moon.

"AS a group (atheists) without the urging of anyone...."

This statement is just so wrong in so many ways.

"The safety and security of the Commonwealth can only be achieved with the denial of Almighty God from the with the state."

Just as wrong.

How can you fail to see that?

How could an Almighty God allow this to happen?

Anyone care to answer that one?

#56 | Posted by Manypaths

I've been exposed to enough religion to know how people might answer such a question, but I'll leave it to them.

I do see it as being just as wrong. I was only attempting to give all the religious folks on the blog the atheist perspective on the issue. Or at least my perspective on the issue.

"Where is there an atheist channel, proving God wrong 24/7....?"

As soon as someone thinks there's a buck in it, there will be one.

#49 | Posted by Zed at 2009-08-27 04:44 PM


Oh how true -- and sad -- those words are. Any chance to make a buck....

God, in all of your fruitful glory, strike this judge with a crippling disease, just like you did Ted Kennedy!
In Your name we pray.
In spirito sancto, amen.

Chair.....lol.......'
crippling'........too funny!

#60 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-08-27 05:02 PM | Reply | Flag

Sky Fairy in all your glory, give 101 hemorrhoids as big as grapefruits. Show your power to the wicked unbeliever.

I'll tell the God-fearing morons the same thing I told the stupid satanist...tell your idol meet me outside and we can settle this...funny how they never show up except in some indirect manner that later proves to be scientific not religious in nature.


How could an Almighty God allow this to happen?


Anyone care to answer that one?

#56 | Posted by Manypaths

Its called free choice. Each person chooses how to behave and what to do.
-------


"Where is there an atheist channel, proving God wrong 24/7....?"

As soon as someone thinks there's a buck in it, there will be one.

#49 | Posted by Zed at 2009-08-27 04:44 PM

I dunno, CBS, NBC etc seem to be doing a pretty good job of it.

How could an Almighty God allow this to happen?


Anyone care to answer that one?


#56 | Posted by Manypaths


Its called free choice. Each person chooses how to behave and what to do.


Wrong!

The correct answer is that God is not Almighty and God doesn't care about you.

Watch.

"God, please make Marty smart?"

See? It didn't fucking work.

#63

He will..in His time. Not yours.


#50 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-08-27 04:44 PM | Reply | Flag: Posts videos about smokestacks on the moon.

#53 | Posted by member2586 at 2009-08-27 04:48 PM | Reply | Flag


Why yes--yes I do. There is more evidence for smokestacks on the moon than there is for Sky Fairies. I don't think it is an actual smokestack billowing smoke--but it ejects something, and it shouldn't be there. If it is natural, we have to change our science of the moon--if it isn't natural....

But I think it is Great that a Super Genius like yourself has seen fit to mock the smokestack---it must mean one of two things. Either you subscribe to the magical appearing and disappearing moving smudge on a still picture, or you will give us your version of the Super Genius dumbass dance as you try to explain exactly wtf is up there. Come on member2586---do you do more than dance? Are you hot blooded?

www.youtube.com

Put up or shut up.

;-)

you will be a believer when we have sharia law.


you will be a believer when we have sharia law.

#69 | Posted by semtex111

There goes one of them right now. Quick, take a picture.

See I told you fucksticks are real.

Lisa,

How convenient...did he tell you that? Oh no man taught you that...right?

He seemed to be everywhere in the Old Testament...so where is he now? Has he lost his power? Or does he no longer care?

Until you can empirically answer those questions your comments are stupid retorts from people too afraid to accept reality.

Until you can empirically answer those questions your comments are stupid retorts from people too afraid to accept reality.

Sorry, but this is true.

Its called free choice. Each person chooses how to behave and what to do.

#64 | Posted by Marty at 2009-08-27 05:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

What is the difference between Free Choice and regular Choice? Why is the word FREE used?

Richard:

God speaks all the time. One just needs to pay attention and listen.: )

God is all powerful.things happen on His time, according to His will...not ours.

He is present...all day, every day. I'm not sure what your comparison to the OT is suppose to mean.

God will never lose His power. You need to explain why you believe He did.

God cares very much. He loves us. Why would you think he doesn't??

God is my reality Many.

If He is not yours, that is your choice.

You need to explain why you believe He did.

#74 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-08-27 05:38 PM | Reply | Flag

I believe he already explained. In the bible, God is everywhere for the most trivial reason. Somebody wants to build a tower to heaven? God is there. Lost in the desert--god shows up for 40 years straight. Somebody has a BBQ with a fatted calf? God shows up with salsa.

His point was--where has he been lately? They could have used him at the gas chambers in the 40's. That would have made more believers than that Tower thingy.

are there any muslim atheist ?

Reality is my God Lisa.

Big fucking difference.

The differnece involves a fairy tale.


are there any muslim atheist ?

#77 | Posted by semtex111

Yeah they sit in the back with all the "Christain Atheists"

Good fucking God the stupidity is THICK in here.

I can not explain to you why God allowed the gas chambers. Only He knows the reason.

However, God is always here through difficult times.

There are reasons for our trials in life.

One is, they reveal what we really love. What is most important in our lives.

They help us build enduring strength.

They help us to value what we have in our lives.

They help us draw closer to God.

They test our faith.

They ween us off of wordly things.

They humble us.

Going through trials enables us to help others.

All kinds of miracles have been done Bob....yet, there are still unbelievers.

can not explain to you why God allowed the gas chambers.

I can. He hates jews.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in God but that is the end of the fucking story.

ANYONE who claims to know more than that is FULL OF SHIT!!!!

Why can't God create a kid that doesn't cry in the movie theater?

That would be a fucking Miracle.

And Many?? Have you died yet to test your theory?

No.

Therefore, to claim with all certainty ther is no God, is what is laughable to me.

However, I certainly don't call you names because of what you believe.

But thank you....you help to prove His Word.

Mat 5:11

The Jews were the choosen people. God does not hate them.

#82

Lol

Yes it would, Many! With that we agree!

The Jews were the choosen people.

Chosed for the gas chamber. I hope god doesn't choose my people.

Out from the Jews, came Jesus.

All kinds of miracles have been done Bob....yet, there are still unbelievers.

#80 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-08-27 05:52 PM | Reply | Flag

There have been various gods since human first walked upright. There have been many religions that have been around much longer than Christianity. The simple fact is ALL RELIGIONS WORK--and they all work the same way. If Apollo didn't grant your wish--you weren't meant to have it. If you survived a horrific battle--Zeus was watching over you. When you die you go to Valhalla or cross the river Styx. Whatever--they all work the same way.

The simple facts are that the bible is edited from older discarded religious texts. The facts are the original stories make far more sense and hold far more logic than their pale biblical counterparts. That fact makes the bible a false book--a comic book version of the original. If the bible stories are false--the god of the bible is false. No other alternative is logically possible.

Even so--no Christian really believes the bible. Every Christian I have ever talked to changes the parts of the bible they don't like--and it is usually most of the bible. For instance--God is not a HE at all. The only reason for being a He or SHE is for reproduction. A Penis makes something a HE. Since there is only ONE god--so Christians say--there can bo no other god to reproduce with--so no penis is necessary. In addition, the penis is used to excrete bodily waste--again, the Christian God would not have such a need. No food required, it is npot possible for God to starve to death. So---no penis--no HE. To give your god a penis would be to lessen its greatness and uniqueness. If the biblical god were real, it would by definition be an IT.

Lisa---God says there are other Gods--do you believe Him? I'll give you the Him part for convenience.

OMGosh....LOL!

Where did all THAT come from?? LOL

I am a Christian Bob...and I believe the Bible wholeheartedly.

Yes Bob. I believe Him.


Out from the Jews, came Jesus.


#87 | Posted by Lisa

And that is why God hates them. "You shall have no other gods before me"

Whoops, that Jesus guy fucked that one up huh?

Hold your next thought Bob....gotta go make dinner.

Why does this happen people ask? I think believers might answer with this:

Matthew 10:29-31.

One of these days I just going to read the Bible, out of academic curiosity. In the mean, I'll just have to throw pasages I pick up here and there.

#94 | Posted by member2586 at 2009-08-27 06:24 PM | Reply | FlagStarts the Super Genius Dumbass Dance

Ah yes---the old stay away awhile and maybe they'll forget about what a fool you are dance. The steps are all too familiar. The point still stands from #68.

Put up or shut up.

;-)

One of these days I just going to read the Bible, out of academic curiosity. In the mean, I'll just have to throw pasages I pick up here and there.

It has it's good and bad.

Numbers is about as boring a fucking read as you could find.

Basically, there is a big tough guy who doesn't like very much of anything and gets REALLY pissed if you do something he doesn't like. There is Fire and Warts and Snakes and Floods and Magic and if the Big Guy even THINKS someone is fucking him over, HE KILLS THEM.

But he loves you and wants you to be happy, just not wise.

Then about half way through, God realizes he fucked up so he screws a hot virgin who gives birth to a Hippy who goes running around trying to make nice with all the people whose family members He has killed over the last (6,000 - 2009) Oh about 4000 years, give or take.

So this Hippy starts to get all the attention and everyone started calling him God. This REALLY pissed God off and he killed the Hippy by having him nailed to a stick.

Then it's like a Jim Rohn show where you hear the same thing repeated over and over again by 4 different people.

Then, out of nowhere everything goes to shit and the story ends.

Hope I didn't ruin it for you.

Oh, and Locusts. Lots of Locusts. God I hate those things.

Out from the Jews, came Jesus.

#87 | Posted by Lisa

And we all know...Jesus is MAGIC!

God cares very much. He loves us. Why would you think he doesn't??

#74 | Posted by Lisa


He has a funny way of showing it? I would ask the 250,000 dead from the Indonesia Tsunami the same thing but I can't.

THEY ARE ALL DEAD. I bet they all had the "Fear of God" put in them. Not so much the "Love of God".

Not sure I want to hang out with this God dude for enternity. He seems too freaky violent to me. And Christians are a little weird too. It would be awkward hanging out with them for eternity. Kinda like being stuck at your Mother-in-laws for Christmas all the way thru to New Years. (shiver!) I need a drink just thinking about that!

Great...Now look what you made me do Lisa. Now my mother-in-law is gonna sue me!




Hasn't the rev-legislator ever read this part of the bible?
"You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name." Wikipedia

"Every Christian I've ever met changes the part of the Bible he doesn't like..."

Read: Won't accept Bob's interpretation. Nothing wrong with being self-absorbed, BOB---It's just you will never have the same fascination for us as you do for yourself.

I say take it off. It is unecessary, however if it remains on there, stop complaining, it doesn't mean anything if you don't believe it. Don't be offended at such stupid stuff.

If it is true that there is a God, then you disagreeing does not mean anything and getting offended is a waste of time.

If it is not true that there is a God, then why be offended if you know that? Just don't worry about it. Close your mind and live you life.

#13 | Posted by ExpsRedemption




NO THANK YOU.

"No penis, no He...."

No, stop, I can't say it, I won't. It's just that the temptation of doing so is so fantastic.

BOB has always relied on the kindness of strangers.

Good of you to bring up mircales, LISA. Yes, they happen all the time. Let's both hope what's chewed on these people goes away long enough for them to open their eyes.

#103 | Posted by Zed at 2009-08-27 07:46 PM | Reply | Flag Empty Head

No penis--No He.

Didn't your daddy have "the talk" with you?

#99

Donner;

We all die. Some by car accident, some by illness, some by disaster, some by natural causes. We all die. I don't mean to sound insensitive, but it's a fact of life.

Some deaths are horrible, such as the catastrophy you mentioned. Again...I can't explain why
God allows these natural disasters that cause thousands their lives all at once. Only God know his reason.

But I will say this....He is always there in the aftermath.

Have you ever noticed how people rally around others after something like that? People....strangers, offer a helping hand to feed, house the survivors. People from all over the world go to help care for the injured, help clean up, rebuild. People send money to help. Some of those people give their last dime to help others.

Even here on Drudge, look at how we tend to forget our petty differences when something horrible happens anywhere in the world. We seem to all get along....even for a brief moment.

I mentioned in a previous post the lessons we learn during trials and hardships. What you witness after such a catastrophy are people around the world realizing just what they truly value in this world....each other!

Love has a habit of taking over.

Perhaps if this feeling of love, compassion, helpfulness to others was displayed every day, God wouldn't need to allow those things to happen.

Just a thought.

Zed

God says there are other Gods---is he lying?

"God says there are other Gods---is he lying?"

Well, He was when He claimed there were two lights, so I wouldn't put it past Him.

Then it's like a Jim Rohn show where you hear the same thing repeated over and over again by 4 different people.

Did you ever notice how the stories in the Gospels just don't match up? It's like each one had a different hallucination and saw just what they wanted to see. Or maybe they remember just what they wanted to remember. Or they cheated and looked at each others story then got all mixed up with the details. Anyway they were piss poor witnesses that is for sure.

Anyway back on Topic- If God doesn't like this ruling he can strike down Judge Wingate and his ruling! Haven't seen any good miracles around here lately...though I think that would probably be more like a tragedy than a miracle but I guess it would depend on your perspective or what you wanted to see.

One mans God is another man's Devil.

" Haven't seen any good miracles around here lately"

Good point. God seemed to appear regularly around Biblical times. Now...not so much.

"In God We Trust" was added to US currency in 1957. I'm not gonna argue about this. Google " "In God We Trust" + 1957," and see what pops up.

DONNERBOY, and BOB for that matter---Really don't believe in GOOD or EVIL?

"Haven't seen any good miracles around here lately...."

I've seen a doozy. I'm not alone.

Zed:

Miracles happen every single day.

I was so humbled to be an instrument of God for such a miracle last year.

I see miracles every day. Some more defined than others, but miracles just the same!

Hey...I call Bob and I having very civil discussions lately as a miracle!! : )

Makes me smile!

"I've seen a doozy. I'm not alone."

There's a lot of people who have been abducted by aliens too.

#111

Bob, Oohrah is right.

Man has made gold figures their God to idolize. Some have worshiped other men.

"This statement is just so wrong in so many ways."

Really, how so? Oh yes, the wise and powerful zed said so so just take it on faith. What book advocates atheism, and what groups are out in earnest pushing that agenda? Face it, no one guides peopledown the path of atheism with a pamphlet or a book like organized religion does. Sorry, to burst your believer bubble, but that is real fact.

Also, what "stars are constantly acting like atheist mouthpieces, did you meanPenn and Teller? YOu have.....the pope, jerry falwell, joel olsteen...yeah we have stars constantly out in faces tying to push "our agenda". What a laughable joke.

LM

I find myself sincerely interested in whether any of my worthy adversaries believe in Good or Evil. That seems like a straightforward thing to answer.

I find myself sincerely interested in whether any of my worthy adversaries believe in Good or Evil. That seems like a straightforward thing to answer.

Double post---A miracle.

Dan...He's here.

As much as people try taking :is name off of money, out of schools, out of our national songs...trying to make Him go away....He never leaves us!

"" Haven't seen any good miracles around here lately"


Good point. God seemed to appear regularly around Biblical times. Now...not so much."

Name one "miracle"of the bible that hasn't been shot down as complete rubbish....

LM

"The God Delusion"---By Dr. Dawkins---Have a copy of it on my table---You did ask for a book?

"Name one miracle of the Bible that hasn't been shot down as complete rubbish...."

Why don't you name one, Compadre?

'We all die.'

This is true. And I am still a little pissed about that. But, when we call it an "Act of God" it usually involves a lot of death. I would say 250,000 deaths in one day is VERY unusual and it is not normal. And not very loving (at least for most of that 250,000 and their loved ones anyway)

Have you ever noticed how people rally around others after something like that?

That speaks more to the Spirit of Man than the Spirit of God. But, killing 250,000 mostly innocent lives speaks volumes to me about your God. If He exists then He HAD to either A)allow that to happen or B) he made it happen.

Not sure which scares me most.

LM:

Shot down by whom??

"God Is Not Great"---That would be another book---But I'm sure no atheist would stoop to being guided.

Miracles happen every single day.

yeah it is a miracle I get any work done around here!

"Name one miracle of the Bible that hasn't been shot down as complete rubbish...."

They don't have to be shot down. The burden of proof is on those who claim miracles.

Questions of GOOD and EVIL will apparently languish this night. It's a good thing none of you guys are really serious.

Well Donner...we don't know why God calls the multitude like that home...or elsewhere. But....there is always a reason and whether you admit it or not, love abounds.

"Name one miracle of the Bible that hasn't been shot down...."

Sounded like a challenge. I just asked for one to be named.

#129

LOL

"Questions of GOOD and EVIL will apparently languish this night. It's a good thing none of you guys are really serious."

You ever get the feeling, Zed, that people are treating you like Niceville these days? Most non-theists really don't give a shit about debating true believers, unless they're really bored.

#131

I think that's a good subject.

Not long ago some of us got into a discussion about Satan.

Some said he had no powers. I strongly disagreed.

DONNERBOY, and BOB for that matter---Really don't believe in GOOD or EVIL?

#113 | Posted by Zed


I will answer you with a question of my own(sorry)

Do YOU think the Tsunami that killed 250,000 humans was "evil"?

NULL:

Nicey would flood the main page with spiritual threads he put up himself.

Zed, me and a few other believers just respond to the posts someone else puts up.

Big difference.

We are each God and each Satan. The only thing that matters is who you let drive you.

NULLIFIDIAN---I had no idea until this moment how much you dislike me, or at least my persona here.

Having gotten that out of the way, let me state this---You can't handle a serious question, you don't have a serious point of view.

Sure I'm a True Believer. Interestingly, each time I come here I believe a little bit more.

#139

Yes it was. Evil performed by Satan.

That answers your question, Zed...I think.

If seems like Donner believes all evil comes from God.

Please, correct me if I am wrong.

Ah, DONNERBOY snakes forth---Wants to dodge a question by asking one, but I'll bite.

Natural disasters are tragedies. They are bad, not evil. EVIL is something else.

Earth is one big cluster f*ck... sin, death, etc. So we try to navigate thru it the best we can.

#136 | Posted by OohRah

So we are just F@#ked here on Earth and we can only get to heaven if we die? Hmmm sounds a bit like a Death Cult to me! I have encountered what seems like Heaven right here on Earth. I have also encountered what seems like Hell too.

I differ in opinion, I guess Zed.

I think they are from Satan...and he is pure evil.

Sounded like a challenge. I just asked for one to be named.

What, one miracle? You're the one that believes in that stuff... you tell me.

ZOMBIE---Talk to the guy who wanted to fight.

The walls of Jericho... something makes me doubt that you can prove they fell because of a bunch of Jews prancing around and blowing horns outside.

Talk to the guy who wanted to fight.

Who's that? LM I guess?

"The walls of Jericho."

Too funny. That's the one many religious guides admit was hyperbole. The rubble found around there in no way supports a walled city where all the walls came crashing down at the same time. And Archaeological data shows what destruction there was occurred about 300 years before Joshua's time.

"I had no idea until this moment how much you dislike me, or at least my persona here."

I don't dislike you at all. I admit I liked the old Zed much more, and still do--on foreign policy, economics, etc.--before you started your jihad against non-theists.

"Three hundred years before Joshua's time..."

Then, there was a Joshua. Then perhaps there was also Moses?

we don't know why God calls the multitude like that home...or elsewhere. But....there is always a reason and whether you admit it or not, love abounds.

I find that to be an affirmation of humanity, not god. An incredibly diverse assortment of people from around the world came together aftermath of the tsunami's devastation (you were talking about the tsunami right?).

They didn't need to believe in any specific god or any god at all for that matter. The capacity to feel compassion and act on those feelings is one part of our humanity. The fact that religions encourage compassion is a decent reason for keeping them around so long as there is a way to keep them from being twisted into something destructive.

#153

...And also Jesus!!!

Woo Hoo now we're getting somewhere!! : )

"Jihad against non-theists..."

Sorry it seems that way. Not to be trite, but many of my friends remain atheists, though that seems to be fading in many with age.

We are talking subjects here that mean a lot to folks. People get invested in conversations and debates.

Moreover, some harmful ideas are sometimes advanced that just need to be refuted. The idea of post-hoc illusions as free will qualifies.

Then, there was a Joshua. Then perhaps there was also Moses?

Maybe. Maybe not. Highly unlikely that Moses carried on any conversations with burning bushes.

Natural disasters are tragedies. They are bad, not evil. EVIL is something else.

I bet 250,000 plus their families disagree with you. But, you answered!

Lisa, If God exists then he either A) allows evil or B)he created evil. Is there another possibility? He is evil?


Anyway my answer is this such as it is. There is no evil and there is no good but what exists in the minds of men. So does "evil" exist? Evil does NOT exist outside of the mind of men. WE color everything with our minds eye. Is an exploding star that spews deadly radiation into the Universe evil if it destroys a Planet? What about man's inhumanity to man is that evil or is that also "natural"? Well, I believe it is natural. An illness but natural and there are underlying causes for each action. Having said that I need to qualify that a bit as I do believe in "Karma". I do believe in the balance of Nature in that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. And there is good energy that makes it easy for humans to live and prosper and "pursue happiness" and there is bad energy that does not. Not so sure that there is a God controlling the strings behind it all though.

"Then perhaps there was also Moses?"

There hasn't been a single proof unearthed Moses existed. And a group that large traveling for forty hours will leave a trail, much less forty years.

"Highly unlikely..."

Let me tell you a true story. I turned a corner with my bike one day and there was FRITZ LANG standing not ten feet from me.

He may as well have been a burning bush. What's even more fabulous is that I recognized him instantly.

World is always bigger than you think.

DANFORTH---Some theorize the forty years was not in Sinai but in the endless tracks of Arabia. There's some evidence for this, including a candidate for the actual Mt. Sinai.

Entire cities have been lost in the Arabian desert.

Donner:

Do you not know about the origin of Satan?

God is not evil.

But He does allow it. He allows hardships for several reasons. Scroll up...I've listed them already.

Do I sense that you fear God?

Ah, DONNERBOY snakes forth

Don't think I didn't see that!

You are the one that believes in talking snakes! Not me.

Sorry it seems that way. Not to be trite, but many of my friends remain atheists, though that seems to be fading in many with age.

Steven Weinberg pretty much summed it up when he said "The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless."

A pointless universe is palatable to some, and maddening to others. You, Zed, are one of those who cannot stand the concept any more than a computer can stand being told to divide by zero. Others will always disagree with you, and there's no point in arguing since neither side can bring evidence to the table that the other acknowledges as valid.

Here's the sticking point. There's only one side of that debate whose epistemological approach is the least bit useful in the world we inhabit. And it isn't yours.

World is always bigger than you think.

Indeed it is. And nothing in it remotely supports Christian claims to exclusive truth.

Do I sense that you fear God?

#162 | Posted by Lisa

Not sure about fear of "God" and I may be dense but I am not totally stupid. I "fear" any power that is greater than myself and there are a lot of them in the Universe. I have encountered a few right here on Earth. There are tremendous powers in the Universe and I have no control over what they may do next. I do have some control over my life but I don't even have control over my own death legally. If you don't have a healthy "fear" of that than you just ain't thinkin with yer dipstick Jimmy! But, I am just a human stuck in the human condition with the rest of you. If there is a God I have a few choice words for Him or Her when I see It.

God is not evil.

But He does allow it.

That's pretty fucked up. God sends a child to a crack whore who he knows will flush it down the toilet minutes after being born in a crack house.

WTF kind of god does such an evil thing?

God loves his children? Not the crack whore's baby apparently. If he did, he would not have sent it to earth (or however that works) to live a few miserable minutes before dispatching it to the NYC sewage treatment plant.

"but many of my friends remain atheists, though that seems to be fading in many with age."

It doesn't surprise me that people get more religious with age. Nobody wants life to end. It's funny to hear some people say they would reject technology that could extend their life another century or more. And then they pray for an afterlife. Odd.

Zombie?

With all due respect...it's called faith for a reason!

What worth does faith have if something can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt?

Faith would not exist and we are found righteous by that faith.

A pointless universe is palatable to some, and maddening to others. You, Zed, are one of those who cannot stand the concept any more than a computer can stand being told to divide by zero.

Carl Sagan (may peace be upon Him) said it best (many times over).

I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides. [Carl Sagan, 1996 in his article In the Valley of the Shadow Parade Magazine Also, Billions and Billions p. 215]

#167

Goatman:

You don't get it. Nor do you try.....or want to.

But I still love ya anyway!

Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy. [Carl Sagan]

You don't get it. Nor do you try.....or want to.

I have tried. But I haven't come to a logical conclusion. Maybe you can tell me why god would do such a thing?

Donner:

Do you not know about the origin of Satan?

This sums up what I believe about Satan:


Dr. Elaine Pagels, professor of History of Religion at Princeton University wrote a book titled The Origins of Satan. She explains in an interview with Ellen Kushner on WGBH, Boston Public Radio, what can happen when a society has a 'good vs. evil' world view:

"Every group and tribe has had ways of feeling superior to every other. I mean, every anthropologist knows that, but what's really different here is that you have a moral view - 'we are good, and you are evil.'

And what happens then," Pagels continues, "as was put into the mouth of Jesus in the Gospel of John: whoever kills you will think he's doing service to God. So that if a conflict between us and them turns into a moral conflict, so we're God's people, they are Satan's people, we can do anything we like with them. I think of that when I hear the term "ethnic cleansing." It's like there's dirt there. You know, it's a good thing to get rid of dirt."

That is why I "fear" organized religions spending millions and millions of dollars to try and make America a Theocracy.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

Thomas Jefferson

"Religion is an insult to human dignity."
~Steven Weinberg

"Religion is all bunk."
~Thomas Edison

Richard Feynman on doubt,uncertainty and religion
www.youtube.com

great stuff! Life be happening! gotta run get my son from college... will check back laters...

#174

I'm still trying to process that...LOL.

I will say this much so far.

There are conflicts and a sense of superiority in most aspects of life. Just look at Drudge and the repub/ dem divide. Both sides feel they are superior.

I also know this much...that was not the origin of Satan.

Furthermore do you not agree that there is an opposite for everything?

What worth does faith have if something can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt?

Well, it wouldn't be faith if it were like that.

Where I have problems is when people know beyond a shadow of a doubt that their faith-backed beliefs are better or more correct than another's faith-backed beliefs. Less commonly, people claim that their faith-backed beliefs are more correct than statements backed by empirical evidence. Either way, I have issues.

Faith, on its own, is something quintessentially human. It's a double-edged sword. You will be a miserable person if you don't place a bit of faith in other individuals or aren't capable of having hope. On the other hand, you're opening up a can of worms by accepting any statement without supporting evidence.

More Dick Feynman.

www.youtube.com

Surely you must be joking...

"Religion is an insult to human dignity."
~Steven Weinberg

He's been quoted a few times here on this thread ;)I think there was more to this quote

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

I would add politics to that as well. Good people can do evil things for political gain too.

#180

That's right...it wouldn't be faith then!

We believe our evidence is in the Bible, Zombie. Words given to man by God... The prophets. We believe God's Word that no man or stroke of pen will ever change the meaing of those words. Therefore...it is truth to us who believe and have faith.

What sense would it make if I truly believed in my faith, but thought someone elses is the correct faith? if I thought that, I would have the beliefs of others.

I don't shove it down someone's throat, I don't insult anyone of a different faith. I believe that Jesus atoned for our sins and He is my savior. Everyone is free to believe as they wish. This is what I have faith in.

Let me ask you something, Zombie:

Most, not all but most of the threads that have been put up regarding God have been done so by non believers.

They put them up as an insult or with an "in your face" attitude.

When a believer responds to the thread or to a post someone made, to defend our beliefs...we are called names and thought of as a "religious nut". Is that ok in your book?

You state you don't like when someone thinks that their beliefs are more correct than someone elses...why don't you stand up against those who claim there is no God, with certainty and no evidence to prove it, stating that THEIR NON BELIEF is the correct one?

Lisa says what is true: the anti-religious are the ones with the spiteful and overbearing attitudes.
If they believe God is a myth, then why the pretended offense? Do you object to Snow White on a postage stamp or Ronald MacDonald? Does the ficticious Big Bird get you all bent out of shape because public money used to fund PBS "forces" children to watch?
Gimme a break. Lisa hit it on the head. More is at work with these endless and oppressive lawsuits.

"Some theorize the forty years was not in Sinai but in the endless tracks of Arabia"

Of course they do. If not, Sinai, theorize Arabia. If not Arabia, theorize another barren area. And if that doesn't work, claim Mars. Anything not to admit factual flaws.

I don't shove it down someone's throat, I don't insult anyone of a different faith. I believe that Jesus atoned for our sins and He is my savior. Everyone is free to believe as they wish. This is what I have faith in.

If only more Christians acted according to those principles...

When a believer responds to the thread or to a post someone made, to defend our beliefs...we are called names and thought of as a "religious nut". Is that ok in your book?

Depends on the situation. There are certainly some nutty things that have been posted by religious individuals. Their concept of "defending their faith" is simply being a belligerant dumbass. There are indeed religious nuts out there, and I thoroughly enjoy ridiculing them.

There are also places when nonbelievers overstep their bounds... and that is obviously not OK with me. It's fairly easy to paint with a broad brush in the course of ripping into the nutjobs, and that unfortunately offends perfectly reasonable individuals.

You state you don't like when someone thinks that their beliefs are more correct than someone elses... why don't you stand up against those who claim there is no God, with certainty and no evidence to prove it

I don't like it when people say their beliefs are better than others based on faith. If you can make an argument based on empirical evidence that your beleifs are superior, then I feel that it's a valid point to raise.

It does take a small bit of faith to say conclusively that there are no gods of any sort, anywhere, ever. It also takes a small bit of faith to reject any unfalsifiable claim, regardless of the fact that it's impossible to disprove. Most nonbelieving people here feel that the likelihood of any deity actually existing is low enough that it can be neglected.

It takes a HUGE amount of faith to say something comes from nothing. It takes even more faith to say matter created itself, when that is found no where else in nature.

#39.... Lennon imagined there is no heaven and he is there now ... for eternity.

All the brave souls poking fun at God might one day realized they already have had their fun on earth, but too short (Luke 16:24-25).

"Lennon imagined there is no heaven and he is there now ... for eternity"

Why is it those who claim to be religious don't know enough about the Bible not to blaspheme?

Both sides need each other to strengthen their beliefs. If the world did not have extremists on both sides, there would be no division of good or evil. However the topic of good and evil is more of a philosophic debate. Diablo and Lisa agree that the anti-religious are the spiteful ones, yet it is the religious ones that have God on money, the Pledge of Allegiance, numerous radio stations, etc. The biggest subject in this thread is human rationalization for different events. Take an event with some significant outcome attended by, say 10 people, and you will have 10 different accounts of the event. I am pretty sure given the event, you will have some people who will justify the event as some level of "miracle" just as you would have some justify it with science.

More is at work with these endless and oppressive lawsuits.

Wow, speak of an idiotic religious nutjob and he will come... This is not a christian nation. Never was, never will be. Diablo and his religion are not being oppressed. They are simply being treated like any other religion practiced by any of America's non-christian citizens.

What is it about Diablo that makes him feel entitled to special privaleges because of his preferred beliefs? Is it narcissism, fanatacism, or good old-fashioned hypocrisy?

Zombie:

What kind of empirical proof do you expect? We obviously weren't born yet in the times of the NT when Jesus walked the Earth, so we can not claim to observe that.

I can tell you of a couple of things that - have witnessed that were of God, but you would refute that.

The prophets witnessed miracles, they performed miracles, they witnessed Jesus's life after death. He walked and spoke to them. And it is documented.

But you would refute that as well.

So all I can offer you is, it is by our trust in God, our faith in His word that we base our beliefs on.

Lennon is in hell.... forever....

Joost:

Hang on a second. I have witnessed PLENTY of hateful so called Christians!

I was addressing a specific point with Zombie.

And joost:

Slowly but surely some are trying to eliminate all those things you mentioned about God in our country.

Then these same folks that want all mention of God removed, question where He is in time of need.

Lennon is in hell.... forever....

An eternity (can you even fathom an infinite amount of time) in hell for 40 years of being goofy?

Wow that is one fucked up god you grovel to to mete out a such an extreme sentence for such a paltry "crime"

Then these same folks that want all mention of God removed, question where He is in time of need.


Lisa - please...

It takes a HUGE amount of faith to say something comes from nothing.

There are concepts of the origin of the universe, but no detailed hypotheses because the fundamental forces of the universe are poorly understood. So yes, it takes a huge amount of faith to make any specific claim about the first 10^-43 seconds of the existence of the universe.

"to say something comes from nothing"


Somebody failed quantum mechanics.

Gauss did the math in the 17th century.

LOL

Please what Sitdown??

Please sing? Please dance? Please make me a PBJ?

Lol

Then these same folks that want all mention of God removed, question where He is in time of need.

Who gives a fuck if the word god is printed on money or whatever. As long is he's out of the school's or anywhere there are impressionable young minds, I don't care. I am no more offended by "in god we trust" on my money than if they printed "in tinkerbell we trust".

Get over, folks. Fight the real battle -- keep god out of schools.

Why is it those who claim to be religious don't know enough about the Bible not to blaspheme?

#191 | Posted by Danforth

I dunno I don't claim to believe in any organized religion. Why do those who claim not to believe care?

And a flippant "hypocrisy" doesn't cut it as an answer

Goatman:

I personally don't care if it's on money or not. It's etched in my heart. And I have very little money anyway!! Lol

My son picked out a backpack. It says God is my hero and God rocks.

It takes even more faith to say matter created itself, when that is found no where else in nature.

That's like saying "The universe is found nowhere else in nature". This is true, but does that mean the universe does not exist?

I beg to differ.

If I say Please don't pray for me, Lisa, you probably will, so I'll just say please yourself :)

"And a flippant "hypocrisy" doesn't cut it as an answer"

Okay...dangerous hypocrisy. The kind that wants God taught in public schools, but only one particular one.

And even though that currently dovetails with my basic beliefs, I wouldn't want a different approach taught if the day comes when I'm in the minority.

Fair enough?

#207

Lol

Whether 'God' is printed in the currency or not, whether 'God' is mentioned in the constitution or not, rebellion in the heart prevents one from receiving grace and salvation from 'God'.

Anyone who dies in a state of rebellion will end in hell, and this is where Lennon is....

John 3:16-21. Do not stop at verse 16. Read on and you will find that 'rebels' loved darkness and they hate spiritual light.

(Let's say, you're a charitable/generous person and you have a large beautiful and spotless clean house, and if you invited a smelly homeless person to live with you on condition that he first take a good shower and change clothes, but he refused to shower and change clothes. Would you insist or just let him in and sit on the sofa with him to watch your favorite show (Dancing with the Stars?). Never mind the dirty clothes and stinking odor?).

God is holy, and not accepting His offer to be made holy will render you unfit for heaven.... not necessarily for big crimes according to rational human mind. Lennon died in a state of rebellion in his mind.

"matter created itself"

Matter and anti-matter appear and annihilate all the time.

You really didn't do well in quantum mechanics, did you?

The bible says heaven is the firmament, and there is water below and water above heaven.

Sounds like a real place--not some other dimensional place where dead people go when they die.

True story....

www.tangle.com

I wouldn't worship any God that would allow a hell.

Sorry--evil is evil.

Even Hitler and Stalin don't deserve such a fate.

True story....

krishna.org

Even the bible says God is not perfection..

The biblical God says he is a jealous God---jealousy is a flaw of personality.

Killing the first innocent fisrt born of an entire nation--including the animals--can only be described as evil.

God says there are other Gods--yet Christians deny His Word.

You really didn't do well in quantum mechanics, did you?

I would wager most people haven't taken a class on quantum mechanics or even have the math proficiency to handle it.

Okay...dangerous hypocrisy. The kind that wants God taught in public schools, but only one particular one.

And even though that currently dovetails with my basic beliefs, I wouldn't want a different approach taught if the day comes when I'm in the minority.

Fair enough?

And I don't want the schools teaching that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle choice or that it is the government's responsibility to tax those who can provide for themselves to provide for the poor fair enough?

Then, there was a Joshua. Then perhaps there was also Moses?

#153 | Posted by Zed

Yes! There WAS a Moses...


My stepfather-(his middle name)-although-he didn't lead the Jews out of Egypt-that was a few years before his time.....

"Matter and anti-matter appear and annihilate all the time."

Only in theory. Nice try.

"And I don't want the schools teaching that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle choice"

If it were a choice, you might have a point. That it's a fact a nature you don't want acknowledged merely reveals your narrow view of reality.

"or that it is the government's responsibility to tax those who can provide for themselves to provide for the poor"

I agree, to a point. We both would admit there are those in society we can neither eliminate nor forsake.

Only in theory. Nice try.

Only according to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and evidenced by the Casimir effect. You're dogma is hopelessly outmatched by shit that actually exists.

You seem to be afflicted by the common misconception that a theory is some grab-bag of strange ideas that gets thrown together by guys passing the bong at night. Only in theory... funny how these crazy theories are getting validated all the time. But who in their right mind would waste the time trying to describe the implications of the uncertainty principle or vacuum energy to you?

"Only in theory. Nice try."

Posted by Diablow at 2009-08-27 11:55 PM | Reply:

Used transistors for that.

Used transistors for that.

Not that he would understand the irony of what you posted...

#214.... hell is final separation from God. For eternity.

Some Americans will get what they wish, just like Lennon got what he imagined.

People don't realize how much they wished not to be in jail until they are in jail. Alas, those who ended in hell will not get that second chance. Luke 16:26.

People don't realize how much they wished not to be in jail until they are in jail.

That analogy needs a little polish. See, jails actually exist.

just like Lennon got what he imagined

So your the one that judges,Mighty christian of you

People don't realize how much they wished not to be in jail until they are in jail. Alas, those who ended in hell will not get that second chance

The fear factor again. This bears a repeat of Tommy J:

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

A God that whose basis for worship is fear and terror isn't the kind of God worth worshipping.

Lisa - I wasn't trying to call out certain people, rather I was using #185 & 186 as examples of both sides needing each other to strenghten their beliefs. What one person calls a miracle others may cite scientific theory. It all comes down to human rationalization and perception.

zombiedunce wrote:
"Only according to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and evidenced by the Casimir effect. You're dogma is hopelessly outmatched by shit that actually exists."

How can "uncertainty" exist as a postulate or even theorum? Check the following from the wikipedia article on the Heisenberg Uncertainty Fraud.

"In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that certain pairs of physical properties, like position and momentum, cannot both be known to arbitrary precision. That is, the more precisely one property is known, the less precisely the other can be known. It is impossible to measure simultaneously both position and velocity of a microscopic particle with any degree of accuracy or certainty. This is not only a statement about the limitations of a researcher's ability to measure particular quantities of a system, but once the wave-nature of matter is accepted, the general properties of waves cause the uncertainty principle to be a statement about the nature of the system itself."

So note the number of negatives upon which zombidunce relies:('cannot', 'arbitrary', 'impossible' and, of course 'uncertainty'. Isn't the point of science, at least atheistic presumption, to be "CERTAIN?)You claim we can not prove our side, and offer us "uncertainty" as a proof? Get real. PROVE your view and stop being a Greenwich Village street corner preacher.

What one person calls a miracle others may cite scientific theory. It all comes down to human rationalization and perception.

A geniune miracle has credible witnesses, is reproducible, and cannot be explained by current or future scientific knowledge.

Everything else is either a fishin' story (it was this big) or a misunderstood natural phenomenon.

If a miracle is reproducible, is it still a miracle?

#229... BB... you seemed very wise in your own eyes... and yes, you will get your wish to be away from God.

Imagine how arrogant men will become if they knew there is no ultimate judgment for all that they do... and this is how some folks imagine/presume and they are arrogant to the core. God is not in a hurry and God will love you till your last breath on earth --- but God will release you to your eternal wish away from Him if you insist on your arrogance.

Jesus died on the cross to bring redemption for fallen man.... if that is not love, I don't know what is.

(When man face God's judgment in the next life, he will realize his absolute powerlessness and the absolute fairness of God, that when God says I condemn you based on all evidences, the unsaved man will say "I agree" and be sent to hell. He will be angry at God, but he will know that it was only fair as to where he ended up).

Yes, Bob, right now you may rationalise and feel about your own righteousness and rightness, but everything will be weighed before you one day and you will be made to understand where you exactly are.

Be well.

How can "uncertainty" exist as a postulate or even theorum? Check the following from the wikipedia article on the Heisenberg Uncertainty Fraud.

Way to skim an article without having the slightest fucking clue about what it is actually talking about. You have quite a bit of experience with that, don't you Diablo? If you feel it to be a fraud, step right up, disprove it, and collect your Nobel Prize.

Isn't the point of science, at least atheistic presumption, to be "CERTAIN?

No. You can't know anything for certain. You can exhaustively test a hypothesis and amass enough information that you can be pretty damn sure. Certainty... that's the realm of religion.

You claim we can not prove our side, and offer us "uncertainty" as a proof?

The "uncertainty" in the Uncertainty Principle refers to uncertainty in pairs of measurable quantities. To measure something is to disturb it, and with certain quantities, measuring one of them extremely precisely disturbs the system with respect to the other quantity.

The classic example is position and momentum, but time and energy also follow this pattern. If a small but finite uncertainty in the amount of energy can exist over a brief span of time, particles (energy and matter are one and the same) are being created and destroyed over fleeting invervals. Oh, yeah the uncertainty in any measurement is on the order of 3^-34. That is a very small number, Diablo.

#234 | Posted by takitez at 2009-08-28 12:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Translation:

Uggity bugity bugity... believe what I tell you to believe or suffer for all eternity... ugga boogah

the unsaved man will say "I agree" and be sent to hell.

I suppose they ate this up in India

Good for the judge.

I'm tired of retards always thinking that 'God' wants America to be the best. (I really don't think he cares....nor does he care about your championship game).

God is holy, and not accepting His offer to be made holy will render you unfit for heaven.... not necessarily for big crimes according to rational human mind. Lennon died in a state of rebellion in his mind.

#210 | Posted by takitez at 2009-08-27 10:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

The fact that you believe a fairy tale isn't really so strange (your weak and need a crutch....it's ok) but the fact that you try to claim others are in hell as if you truly know is VERY strange to me.

Lennon died in a state of rebellion in his mind.

He was walking to his car.

zombiedunce is the most entertaining idiot at the retort! This pablum deserves a place in the Hall of Sophism:

"The 'uncertainty' in the Uncertainty Principle refers to uncertainty in pairs of measurable quantities. To measure something is to disturb it, and with certain quantities, measuring one of them extremely precisely disturbs the system with respect to the other quantity."

I guess zomboid measures something....but remains uncertain as to it's length. It might disturb the 'other quantity.'
LOLOLOLOLOL!

"He was walking to his car."

No kidding, Bruceaz. I mean...people buy cars as almost a statement of rebellion. The greens buy a Prius, the fascists a Lamboughini and the Naderites a Saturn.
Spooky observation, my friend, but maybe John was rebelling by walking to his car if only cause he bought it.
I have to re-read my "Catcher in the Rye" and get back to you.

Oh, you got Jodie Foster's phone number?

This pablum deserves a place in the Hall of Sophism

Or a physics textbook... but did I not say it would be a waste of time to attempt to educate morons of Diablo's caliber? If a fanatical sack of wasted human flesh prefers to remain ignorant, it's beyond my ability to control. Humanity has never advanced itself by following superstitious pissants who pursue knowledge by regurgitating dogma.

Why waste time to explain experimental evidence that supports the uncertainty principle to a fundamentalist fuckstain who does not want to learn about it? Perhaps it was my vain hope that he would have actually read enough of the article he quoted to understand the basics. That was not the case. Someone this deluded could wake up every morning and know with absolute certainty that the sky is green.

Oh, you got Jodie Foster's phone number?

Like most of your facts,you got that one wrong too.That was Hinckley,the guy that shot Reagan

Oh zomboid! You are a true "rationalist" who "reasons," right? Your words are reprinted below, moron. By the way, do you know the difference between a fundamentalist and Catholic? They are distinct for centuries but you, a "rationalist," are too stupid or lazy to open an encyclopedia:

"If a fanatical sack of wasted human flesh prefers to remain ignorant, it's beyond my ability to control. Humanity has never advanced itself by following superstitious pissants who pursue knowledge by regurgitating dogma.
"Why waste time to explain experimental evidence that supports the uncertainty principle to a fundamentalist fuckstain who does not want to learn about it? Perhaps it was my vain hope that he would have actually read enough of the article he quoted to understand the basics. That was not the case. Someone this deluded could wake up every morning and know with absolute certainty that the sky is green."

Yeah. Or wake up every morning believing in global warming. Or wake up believing an abortion is not homicide.

"Like most of your facts,you got that one wrong too.That was Hinckley,the guy that shot Reagan"

Umm, yeah, bruce. I knew that.
I keep trying to be friendly to you....sorry. I will stop.

Umm, yeah, bruce. I knew that.

Then why did you say it?

Revisionist history?

No, bruce, to be humorous. You did not take time out of your busy suspicious schedule to admit that possibility.
F-off.

Sorry,humor usually has a bit of truth in it,That's what makes it funny.And there has to be a connection

lennon shot down in the street=funny
reagan shot down in the street=?

"And I don't want the schools teaching that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle choice"

#218 | POSTED BY GIMME_A_SCOTCH AT 2009-08-27 11:39 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Gimme - That's because you're a secret homosexual. You conflate respect and acceptance with encouragement because you struggle every day to not to give in to your sexual desires for other members of your gender. You fear that, in a permissive atmosphere, you would engage in sex with another man. Heterosexual people (and homosexual people who accept who they are) do not have the same terrifying daily experience that you do. They love who they love and they leave it at that.

Wow! Hey, Gimme: isn't it amazing these idiots know more about you than you do? It is almost as if they project their disorders on you.
I prefer bourbon, lest they make associative accusations.

"Sorry,humor usually has a bit of truth in it,That's what makes it funny.And there has to be a connection"

Uh-huh. You also have to grow a brain. Were you raised in a family that carped over dinner rather than refined the art of conversation, bruce?

isn't it amazing these idiots know more about you than you do?

And you speculate how I was raised?you are funny,I guess I was wrong.

#254 | POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2009-08-28 02:37 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Ha! I hit a soft spot with Diablo.

Diablo- Please do some more reading on the goal of science before debating with someone who clearly knows what he is talking about (Zombiehunter). Science is the construction of functional models that explain observed behavior. When a better model is found (one that better explains observed behavior), the old one is discarded. Science is not afraid of uncertainty. Every discovery breeds more questions for scientists to study. Fear of uncertainty is your domain, fanatic. That's why you are most likely incapable of solving complex problems.

Diablo - It's ok to be gay. God won't punish you. Kiss your boyfriend.

Thx for all the comments. The death and resurrection of Christ disproves all fantasies of fairy tales when it comes to hell.

The credibility of Jesus versus yours: I would go with Jesus in a heartbeat.

Be well.

Jono: read your own words.
Science is a system of thought, not a philosophy.
Science deals with testing, measuring and most importantly verification in the form of that same testing and measuring being reproduced.
Science is not "theory," although theory is considered the frontier or direction for further experiments.
Theory and "functional models" are probably the same in a lame mind. I'll concede that to you.
I am not a fanatic. I do not believe science is theology. That would be true fanatacism.
I have no fear of uncertainty. Jono, where do you get such weird ideas from?????

Sorry, jono! I did not read your gay swipe before posting the above.
I understand. You are a queer fanatic. No reason to try to have rationl discussion with a demented person who assumes anonymous sex in a peep show via a glory hole is somehow on a par with marriage.
Don't mind us normal people, jono. Just go on being a freak.

Don't mind us normal people, jono. Just go on being a freak.

You sure sound like a christian to me.

'Isn't the point of science, at least atheistic presumption, to be "CERTAIN?"'

Diablo - you asked the question, I provided an answer. No. Scientists (unlike religious people) are not afraid of being uncertain because they understand that scientific models will always be 'best fit' and limited by their very nature. The point of science is to approach certainty, as closely as the laws of the universe and powers of observation will allow.

"Science is a system of thought, not a philosophy."

What do you think is the difference between a system of thought and a philosophy?

'Science is not "theory," although theory is considered the frontier or direction for further experiments.'

I don't follow. The whole is not the same as it's individual parts. What is your point?

'I have no fear of uncertainty. Jono, where do you get such weird ideas from?????'

I'm guessing, based on your apparent adherence to the tenets of Christianity and your weak attempts at engaging in debate about the merits of currently predominant scientific models of the universe.

#261 | POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2009-08-28 03:04 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Heh!

The infinite universe consists of three things:

The Known, the Unknown, and the Unknowable.

Science attempts to define the Known, and look into the Unknown. However, 'Science' is a supercilious twit in attempting to say that they Know the Unknowable ...

Man is a finite being and literally cannot ever know the unknowable ... suck it up atheists ...

Jono wrote:
"No. Scientists (unlike religious people) are not afraid of being uncertain because they understand that scientific models will always be 'best fit' and limited by their very nature. The point of science is to approach certainty, as closely as the laws of the universe and powers of observation will allow"

So religious faith, being uncertain, is hounded and rejected. But scientific uncertainty is "reason."
Jono, please explain how something (i.e. matter) came from nothing. That is the uncertainty of science. Don't duck, hide and evade. Explain it. Religion does that. Science still can not.

Oh, and Jono? I am Catholic. We have ALWAYS stood against the "predominant" theories of the day.

I am Catholic. We have ALWAYS stood against the "predominant" theories of the day.

Sun orbits the earth

So religious faith, being uncertain, is hounded and rejected. But scientific uncertainty is "reason."

Religious faith becomes uncertain because ultimately the topic cannot be explained-hence the reason for having faith.

Scientific uncertainty is due to a lack of or contradiction of data. Continued collection of data generally resolves the problem.


Jono, please explain how something (i.e. matter) came from nothing. That is the uncertainty of science. Don't duck, hide and evade. Explain it. Religion does that. Science still can not.

Religion doesn't explain anything. It makes a bunch of frantic hand waving and authoritatively explains something based on a book that is the word of God because it says God inspired it blah blah blah.

Religion explains the origins of the universe no better than science does.

Never a doctrine of the Catholic Church, Brucie.

'So religious faith, being uncertain, is hounded and rejected. But scientific uncertainty is "reason."'

I have to say, Diablo, I really think you have it backwards here, no?

Religiously faithful people say "This is the way it is. I know because I have faith." Yes?

A real scientist says, on the question of the existence of god, "We can't measure that yet."

That's my view, anyway.

Galileo,might not agree

'We have ALWAYS stood against the "predominant" theories of the day.'

I went to a Catholic university and was delighted to see that the brothers taught and accepted evolution as a 'bet fit' model for an explanation of the origin of species. So I think you're wrong there as well.

JPW says, "Religion explains the origins of the universe no better than science does."

It doesn't have to, and since it ultimately trusts in an original cause, purposefully made.

Science attempts to invent 'stuff' no less mystical than 'Angels'; e.g., Dark Matter, and its ad hoc additions each time it fails to answer observation(s).

Missing neutrinos are manipulated mathematically to dissolve half-way from sun to Earth, and thereby remain *undetected* but with a new set of invisible clothing to dress failure of theory up in ...

... and you know it, but remain as intransigent 'scientifically' as any Deist does 'religiously'!

'bet fit' = 'best fit'

"Religion explains the origins of the universe no better than science does."

Finally jpw posts something I agree with!! High-five, my man!

But jpw, religion deals with apriori reasoning while science deals with inanimate matter aposteriori. Both approaches have merit.
For some reason the atheists, agnostics and virus mongerers have decided pure reason is to be rejected.
Only dead matter experiments can solve the riddle of life? Nope. Chemistry and physics pale before the Ontological Argument of St. Anselm.

Gosh, in a very vague way, I find myself agreeing with Tadowe. This is certainly a first time thing for me. Despite his contempt for science (maybe I'm just interpreting his responses incorrectly) he has a strong grasp of its limitations.

Mr. Anselm
The argument examines the concept of God and argues that if we can conceive of God he must exist.

Guess that settles that,now which god?

"I went to a Catholic university and was delighted to see that the brothers taught and accepted evolution as a 'bet fit' model for an explanation of the origin of species. So I think you're wrong there as well."

Jono, the Catholic teaching was never fundamentalist. We have always been free to believe whatever creation theory. We have never been biblical literalists (i.e. bound to creationism).
So you were 'delighted' by our teaching? Try reading Pope Paul VI's "On Human Life." You will be even more delighted. That is the single most influential encyclical that made me Catholic.

"Guess that settles that,now which god?"

bruce: the argument Anselm puts forth does not deal with the nature of God. He makes a remarkable point, however.
Although Anselm did not put it this way, the argument has irritated every Western Philosopher from Aquinas, to Kant, to Voltaire and Buber.
The basic problem is this: the concept of perfection implies its very existence. A being transcendent is the logical necessity for dependent being.
It can be stated mathematically: One does not equal zero.

Treu,but what is perfection?

'Jono, please explain how something (i.e. matter) came from nothing. That is the uncertainty of science. Don't duck, hide and evade. Explain it. Religion does that. Science still can not.'

To tie up loose ends here: I acknowledge that science has not, and likely will not be able to answer the question. However, I disagree that religion provides a convincing answer to the question because religion does not use observation to make its case. That's my problem with religion. Most of us can agree that the universe works through a system of laws and not by magic (we have to breathe via our respiratory system to stay alive, positively charged particles attract negatively charged particles, etc). And yet, folks get all bent out of shape when the irreligious discount their crazy assertions that magic is afoot in the universe. We say 'You have no evidence'. We don't discount that the system of laws could have been put in place by something like a 'god'. All we're saying is that rational observation repeatedly demonstrates that the u-verse isn't magic. That's it.

I tried to wade thru all the posts, but I may have missed this. If my comment is a dup of someone else's post, I apologize in advance.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".... read that slowly... start with the first word. Congress. This is the US Congress. The Feds. Remember when this document was written, that we had settlements that were very religious, but not the same religion. They didn't want a repeat of the Church of England. They wanted to be able to force compliance of THEIR religion in THEIR area... and let the heathens in the next town or state worship how they want.

So, if the "Congress shall make no law..." deals with the federal gov't, and they designed a system of weak federal powers ON PURPOSE, then this ammendment doesn't apply to the state of Kentucky, or any other state. Kentucky can demand that all citizens pay 10% tithes to the southern baptist and is should be legal. Don't like it, MOVE!

NY could make it a crime to worship ANY god, and that would also be legal. Don't like it, GET OUT.

Oh, and while we are on the subject of reading and interpreting English... the prohibition against "cruel and unusual" is a compound condition. Cruel is OK, if it is applied evenly. Like, all smokers will be burnt with lit cigs would be legal. Unusual punishment would be OK, like forcing a parent to wear a sign saying "I could have killed my kids" if they were driving drunk or something... as long as the punishment wasn't cruel.

#1 | POSTED BY MEMBER2586
"even a Kentucky judge understands!"

Mm-hmm.

Meaning what, exactly?

Well, oorah, I don't buy into the whole 'original sin' thing. I can remember questioning that when I was 6 YO. All it got was a good rap across the knuckles with a ruler from the nun! LOL But this is another example of an irrational act -- why would got punish me for something that Adam and Eve did?

Then the myth becomes more insensible. God then sends his son to die a torturous death so that we can be forgiven of sins. WTF? Can't god forgive us without sending his son to die horribly? And how does that brutal slaying 2000 years ago absolve me of a sin commited by Adam and Eve? Very odd stuff indeed to someone who tries to make sense of everything he sees.

If the loss of 250,000 brings some to know Christ

Then that's the irony, isn't it? The senseless loss of children (and humanity in general) through evil, disease, starvation, etc. doesn't make it more like that I would know Christ, but less likely as it points out to me how cruel god can be.

On a related note, if you're a parent... do you ever punish your child for misbehaving? Our kids have free will to obey or not... and offer will suffer consequences for negative actions... and sometimes even if they do what we'd told them.

Yes, of course I did. But I'm not going to punish my grandchildren for what he did. Nor would I expect his bloody death so that his descendants would be forgiven.

OK, oorah. If I don't see it, tag me whereever I am.

from the article itself:

"Judge Thomas Wingate said in Wednesday's decision that references to a dependence on "Almighty God" in the law that created the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security is akin to establishing a religion, which the government is prohibited from doing in the U.S."

Separation of Church and State...(now & forever)

the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security would be an official function of the STATE of Kentucky, hence, part of the STATE that the CHURCH should stay the Heck (I'm being polite) OUT OF...

Here, here for the Judge who stood up to what was obviously another spurious and devious attempt by fundy zealots to Churchify and Jesufy a branch of the Government which should ideally remain free of such religious favoritism and Hoohaa...

Fundy Christians, lately, espec with Obama (Black man in the White House) sure seem to want to christianize and militarize all the military and paramilitary units that they can---both within our own government and from without...

scary times...they actually want--some of them anyways--armed insurrection it seems...

I say we give them an ultimatum. Give it up, get out of the country, or we get ready to give it to them if they want it that badly...you know, that early Rapture they've always been craving...

certainly don't want to fight them--rather buy them a beer--but they CANNOT be allowed to corrupt our Democracy into a Theocracy...

JONO---Every Christian I know understands the universe works according to laws; and no Christian I know believes in magic. We believe in Christ regardless.

You're trying to force God to fit your personal paradigm of perception and understanding. It just won't go.

No offense intended, but you're the dog that has only seen black and white questioning the sanity of seeing colours.

People on both sides of the faith question fall into this trap, or confusing paradigm of reality with reality, so you get off easy. It would be nice if everyone saw with better eyes.

"Religion does not use observation to make it's case...."

Despite all those people who have told you what they've seen? You make a mistake using your own paradigm here. The fault you are attempting to identify is different and has a different name.

Despite all those people who have told you what they've seen?

The very premise of the scientific method to prove something does not depend on observation alone. It depends on verifiable and repeatale observation.

One may see hundreds of white sheep and never a black one and come to the erroneous conclusion that all sheep are white.

To prove that prayer is effective, every prayer must be answered. If a single prayer is not answered, that proves that prayer, as a cause, is not responsible for the effect.

The reported observations very probably have a very real non-divine explanation that is not understood by the observer. If you took a Bic lighter to Judea 2000 years ago, the predominant religion of the Western world today woud probably be Bicstanity and you'd be a Bicstan.

#292

"To prove that prayer is effective, every prayer must be answered"

There are various reasons why prayer may not be answered at the time of the requests...if at all.

Perhaps the one in prayer did not go to God in prayer with a pure, clean heart.

Perhaps God needs us to learn a particular life lesson prior to answering that prayer.

Perhaps the timing of what is being requested in prayer is not yet perfect for the person praying.

And sometimes, "no" IS an answer!

Numerous times in my life I have prayed for something and it appeared unanswered.

Sometimes it was answered down the road and I realized that had my prayer been answered at the time I was in prayer about it, things wouldn't have ended up so well.

Sometimes what I prayed for was ultimately not good for me. There are times an event occured that was extremely beneficial for my life, that wouldn't have happened if God had granted my original prayers.

God knows what is in our hearts. He knows what lies ahead. He knows what is best for us.

Sometimes those "unanswered prayers" are our biggest Blessings.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"


Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion.

#23 | Posted by KBM at 2009-08-27 02:13 PM


Actually, that is exactly what it means.


God is my reality Many.


If He is not yours, that is your choice.


#75 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-08-27 05:39 PM


Reality is a choice?!?

#295

My point is Gargoyle, was that. God is my reality because of my beliefs.

We are all free to choose what our beliefs are.

People who come to realize they are atheists sometimes are not articulate enough to discuss their lack of belief with others. There aren't any catechism classes for atheists, unless you count math and science courses.

A few atheists are not only well-spoken, but also offer summaries of their lacks of belief in books. I have read books by both well-known religious and atheist thinkers. In my opinion, there's a better rational basis for a lack of faith than faith.

When I see a flower, I can run the movie of its change from a seed to the finished product in my mind's eye. When I see a mountain, I can appreciate the folds, stratification, and uplifts that must have happened over a very long time. I don't call these processes miracles; I call them what's happening in front of me.

My point is; your or my beliefs cannot in any way be construed as a reality.

When I was a child, I believed in Santa Claus. I don't think that made him a reality.

#81

Many:

You stated you believed in God.

I was curious as to a couple of things.

Do you believe IN God or believe this IS a God?

If you believe IN God, what is your opinion of his purpose? His power? What is His goal?

#292 - You sure it wouldn't be Biccanism? Bicianity? Biccu? The Flying Bicogetti Monster?

Bicman. Bicmeister. The Bicster. Bi-i-i-i-i-i-ic. Makin' the copies...

And you being an atheist is a religion as well. Why should I be forced to move my government, which was established as one nation under God, in the direction of your stupid religion???
Last I checked . . . you're the one who is in the wrong country! Separation of church and state did not imply separation of state and God. Believing in God does not imply organized religion.

You have all gotten so screwed up and out of whack.

Continue to take God out of this country and keep watching it fall. And it will fall

#302 | Posted by opticalpig at 2009-08-28 10:17 AM | Reply | Flag: moron

Nice response to that. Idiot?

You prove your lack of self worth with every word you type.

God is good...

God is dead...

Let us feast on his blood and flesh...

Are Christians cannibals too?

I know they are leading the pack in child molesters, serial killers and wife beaters.

"which was established as one nation under God"

WTF are you talking about? That phrase was added to the Pledge in 1954.

But you were close:

Why should I be forced to move my government ... in the direction of your stupid religion???

#305

Oh Richard....are you serious??

The Last Supper where Jesus instructed us to "eat, this is my body..." "Drink, this is my blood..." Is done as rememberance of the sacrifice Jesus made for us.

We do not go around killing people and eat them.

Please provide a link to support the rest of your post. Or is it just your opinion, which just further exemplifies your hatred for Christians?

Lord, Our Saviour and our Light. May You hear our calls, may You act on our calls. Take the non-believers, round them up in some liberal cess-pool, and smite them in all of Your Glory. Leave their rotting carcasses for satans buzzards, or the niggers, whichever one gets there first. It will probably be the buzzards because the niggers are too lazy, but I digress.
Either way Lord, we pray, and we wait for you to show the non-believers how powerful you are. This, among other atrocities upon the liberal heathens, we pray.
Amen.

You continue to reflect disrespect for those who established the very freedom that allows you to insult them.

Sort of a hypocrate I'd say.

And no . . . it was not made to be altered to the changing times. In fact the exact opposite of what you said. Its strength lies in the fact that no matter what time period it sets a presidence for governing, its precepts, if not tampered with, will always present equal and fair existence for all.

Simply because the 'mention' of a God exists in its wording it does not disallow the God-less to dwell within that nations borders.

But as those who do not believe in a God (and they represent a tiny minority in this country . . . less than 4%)force their beliefs on the majority by twisting the words of the constitution,its strength is weakened and it will fail.

Lord, Our Saviour and our Light. May You hear our calls, may You act on our calls. Take the non-believers, round them up in some liberal cess-pool, and smite them in all of Your Glory. Leave their rotting carcasses for satans buzzards, or the niggers, whichever one gets there first. It will probably be the buzzards because the niggers are too lazy, but I digress.
Either way Lord, we pray, and we wait for you to show the non-believers how powerful you are. This, among other atrocities upon the liberal heathens, we pray.
Amen.

O.K. You have serious problems and you are certainly not a Christian.

I like what some have said on this threat here about the transcendent nature of God. If there is a perfect being which was the initiator of all of this before our eyes, that being would have to be greater than ourselves to a an indescribably high degree.

In this case, we would not be able to comprehend why or how he does some things, and therefore would have a false perspective of the actions taken by the transcendant being.

Therefore, there are two perspectives in the world for why things happen. When something bad happens, we can only see the immediate, which is the human perspective. With a being who transcends time and space, all of time would be seen, past present and future. Thus that being's understanding and purpose for the events would be far greater than we could conceive in the present.

Due to this, sometimes we take things to be "bad" when in fact they are what is best. We may n ot understand how it is best for us in the immediate, but at some point we will see why in fact it was.

I believe this is how what followers of Christ call God works. Remember the being is trancendant, anything purposed by that being would not be seen or realized in our immediate perspective and therefore we would have a skewed view of reality and truth, because we count on ourselves to fully understand that which cannot be fully understood.

If you would like to hear about some of these things in greater detail from a more scientific perspective (albiet still philosophical as well) go and look up Hugh Ross and listen to some of his Lectures on space and time.

There are new discoveries going on that have pretty much verified that the universe is not infinite. Even Stephen Hawking has come to the conclusion that the universe has had a beginning, that time and space did not always exist, and therefore must have been initiated. Stephen Hawking is no Christian but he does recognize that this process was started by something greater than ourselves. The universe is finite, as are we. Only an infinite transcendant being can understand all the purposes of a finite creation bound by time.

Look up Hugh Ross. It might be helpful, you might hate it, but it is coming from an Astrophysics and Scientific perspective.

-Look up Hugh Ross.

Or Andrew Flew

Richard,
One thing to keep in mind. There is room for metaphor in the scriptures in order to show examples.

Lets look at this scenario.

Jesus was with the disciples physically.
He took real physical bread and handed it to them.
He said "Take and eat, this is my body given for you."
They took the pieces of BREAD and ate them as a symbol that only by the sacrifice of Christ are they sustained, just as physical bread sustains the physical body.

At this point, Jesus was still a whole, physical person, no one ate part of his body.

Still Alive, Jesus says,
"Take this wine, for it is my blood, shed for you"
Jesus did not cut himself and pout blood, it was physical WINE. They took the WINE and drank it to represent that they were cleansed by the blood sacrifice of Christ. Just as wine was the clean drink at the time, so Christ is representing cleanliness and sustainance with his blood, just as physical wine is for the physical body.

You can take it out of context if you wish, but we must always remember, it is a symbol.

Jesus was alive
There was physical bread eaten
Physical drink that they drank
Jesus was not eaten or drunk.
Therefore he did not mean his physical body or physical blood. It was a spiritual symbol.

Only simpletons and imbiciles would misinterpret that. Use some logic please.

Good old Tony. Which side is he on now?

I know he was an Athiest for the longest time. Came over to Christianity skitishly, went back, and supposedly came back to Christ again. I have not looked into him any further from this point.

One looking up Flew must keep in perspective that his views have been changing and have changed since his start.

Then you need to move KBM.

This was and is a nation established under ONE GOD. Would you move to Iran and start telling their government to stop supporting Islam?

Good luck.

Same here. Unfortunately though . . . lately in this country we adjust the beliefs, government status, reimbursements, tax expenditures and the very laws of the land to meet the whining of the minority rather than keeping it what the majority prefer.

Too bad. That will eventually bring about our demise.

""The God Delusion"---By Dr. Dawkins---Have a copy of it on my table---You did ask for a book?"

So who is out preaching and passing out copies in hotels for guests, and holding sermons over it, and saying his word is all that should be believed...oh no one!!

bible miracles that are debunked......gee where to start...

First there has been no global flood. This has been proven geologically. No where in teh history of geology is there a time period that shows the entire earth surface covered by water, in fact science has calcualted that the earth doesn't contain enough water to do this.

The ark was impossible, there are many creatures that require very special conditions in which to live and there is no way to do this in teh ark that was proposed.

Red sea has not ever parted and no soldiers or their metal equipment are found at the bottom of it.

the list goes on, but once you get down to the nit-picky ones like....how do three guys survive a fire....tehre is no evidence for or against so teh debate becomes moot.

LM

There are actually no other governments that have been established or are functioning without sometype of 'belief basis' underlying the development of its laws.

You would then have to tell me why under your God-less government (which if we achieve it will be the first of its kind), I could not shoot you? It is the ten commandments (which still adorn the walls of the Supreme Court) upon which our current don't steal, don't kill, don't lie, etc was established.

Without it we would begin to digress (and we are thanks to the God-less goverment movement) toward a lawless society.

Continuation in our current direction will ultimately result in havoc and panic and destruction of life in this country as we know it.


Famous former-atheist Flew only ever accepted God as a creative singularity predicted by analysis of the chemical building blocks of life.

He said that he could only follow the science, which led him to see design and structure in those building blocks.

He never accepted after-life, or Christianity, as he could not find the chemical bonds he felt necessary to hold together intellect after death.

Science limiting the apparently multi-dimensional universe to what humans can discern, and all.

LM,
The scripture clearly does not advocate a global flood, but rather a universal flood, in that all mankind besides a few died inthe flood. It does not have to be the whole world.

Secondly, based of of that localized, universal flood, there does not need to be every species in the boat in order the species to survive.

NOr does the scripture advocate that no animals died before Adams sin. Animals have been dying since the inception of the world.
Death is understood from our perspective as "bad", but is not necessarily bad.

You cannot verify that those things did not happen. YOu have to understand that our world is a world of physical curiosities. Things happen that we don't understand sometimes.

I mean technically due to the structure of atoms and particles, and the fact that most matter is air, when I tap on a desk over and over, and there is that one time that I miss. I take it that I simply moved my hand back too far, however who is to say that my hand did not pass through the desk? It could have. Things like that can and do happen, just not very often.

Continue to take God out of this country and keep watching it fall. And it will fall

#302 | Posted by opticalpig at 2009-08-28 10:17 AM | Reply | Flag


This country has progressed from its early days of slavery and sweat shops. The laws passed since or first days as a country have spread human freedom and been an example to the world. This country is not "falling" in anyway except for people like you who wish us back to the old days of ignorance and hate. Your religion is one of hate and blood. Your religion was foundewd on those principles. From your God demanding blood sacrificers and even human sacrifices--and the followers were to obey blindly. You still follow those principles. If you were convinced God wanted you to kill someone--you would kill them. You wouldn't be the first to kill for such a belief.

Facts are your God has been proven false, since the bible is based on stories stolen from older religions--stories that make much more sense than their biblical countreparts. That makes the bible false, and that makes the god described in the bible false. Why7 is it so hard for you to face reality? Ypour beliefs denigrate humanity, and humanity is rapidly outgrowing such childish beliefs, and facing the reality that humans determine their own future, and not relying on a book of PROVEN falsehoods.

Can you address the facts or will you recoil into a cocoon of falsehoods that wouldn't fool a child? A child can understand that a book about Superman is false---why can't you do the same?

Many things must be considered. I have no opposition to reading more of Flew, or Dawkins, or Hitchens, or Ross.

You need to look at the whole picture to get the whole story.

If you are searching for truth, you must search everywhere, even if you think it is ridiculous. I think many Christians and Athiests would do well to remember this.

We have a limited perspective of how things work. Knowing this, we should prevent ourselves by being bound to it.

Continue to take God out of this country and keep watching it fall. And it will fall.

Dire prophecies made based on no evidence whatsoever by a person who has no idea what he's talking about. Seems to be a recurring theme around here. If references to god are removed from government, the only thing that will fall is the pathetic notion of a Christian theocracy in this country. Perhaps next you'll tell me swine flu is punishment for our sinfulness.

Buffalo,
That is an extremely emotional response, and I think you know that as well.

You have taken some points in that response for granted. No children sacrifices. Anyone following Christ would not listen to the request to murder someone else. Not part of the deal.

I expect more from you.

We have a limited perspective of how things work. Knowing this, we should prevent ourselves by being bound to it.

That is impossible. Sure, our "limited perspective" is constantly being refined as we learn more about the nature of the universe. That doesn't change the fact that humans are not omniscient. Every act of our lives is carried out in some form of ignorance.

Science, Science, Science.

Although hard for you to believe, LM, your remarks sound as ridiculous to those who believe as you think the events you degrade are.

You are truly a person who believes in the religion of Science. Each day the Today Show comes on the air and 'preaches' to you what Science has discovered and you, without seeing it with your own two eyes . . . believe it.

It is as absurd and ridiculous as you consider the Bible to be. Your arrogance reflects your lack of belief and that is what fuels the fire for contention.

Not all that claim to be Christians . . . are. In fact very few are. Read what Jesus Christ taught. Believe or not . . . it promotes peace and a true love for both your friends and your enemies.

What is wrong with that?

Whose instruction book of life do you follow?

I don't know why believers and unbelievers alike can't comprehend that fact that if there is a God, he does not want to be recognized by your government, he want's to be recognized by you, personally.

Do not count on the government to legislate the morality that you are to hold to. It would make your life a whole lot easier, I know, but Christ said it was going to be difficult to hold to these standards. You are going to face opposition. That is fine.

The governement should not be mentioning God in general.

1. It does not represent God very effectively.
2. It is an authority put there by God, whether following him or not (Think Babylon, Assyria etc).
3. I don't think God wants "In God We Trust" on the money. I think he wants you to say it verbally and show it with your lifestyle.
4. Whether it is stated in the pledge or not it does not matter. If God exists, we are one nation under God, but so is every other nation.

I say, take God off the money, I am sure he does not want his name on it, and I say take him out of the pledge, I say get rid of the pledge in general. It is pompous. We are people, we happen to live in America, be grateful but don't let patriotism cause you to look down on others.

Get a grip. Everyone.


We have a limited perspective of how things work. Knowing this, we should prevent ourselves by being bound to it.


That is impossible. Sure, our "limited perspective" is constantly being refined as we learn more about the nature of the universe. That doesn't change the fact that humans are not omniscient. Every act of our lives is carried out in some form of ignorance.

#324 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-08-28 10:58 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


You can be aware of the limitations of your perspective in terms of reading certain things on certain subjects only and then deciding to broaden it and not let yourself simply remain in what you know.

That is what I am talking about. We can push the limits. But most refuse to look at the other side of the arguement, because they are bound by their perspective.

I was not talking transcendance of our lack of omniscience.

That is what I am talking about. We can push the limits. But most refuse to look at the other side of the arguement, because they are bound by their perspective.

What argument? I think I'm butting in on a conversation that has been going for awhile.

Buffalo Bob,
Don't throw out lies as facts. No one has proven the Bible 'false'.
Where and when and by who?

Proof not just words.

And you Zombiehunter have no idea what each individual who lives their religion to its fullest has received in blessings, miracles, personal revelations and pure knowledge of truth.

You don't know and, in your current frame of mind, can't know and can not convince those who do by simply blurting out insults. Seems to me that those who believe can live and let live while you have to live and force others to live like you.

What argument? I think I'm butting in on a conversation that has been going for awhile.

#328 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-08-28 11:08 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


I am simply talking about any agruement. People need to look past their perspective and truly look into the other persons perspective. In the current time everyone seems to be talking about belief or unbelief in God, due to the origination of the article on the constitutionality of "In God We Trust" on Money and things such as that.

I say to both sides, "All things may be good (in that they are allowed), but all things are not beneficial." It is a biblical verse to keep in mind.

Even if "In God We Trust" is allowed by the constitution, I see no reason why it has to be there. Same with the pledge.

Jesus did not cut himself and pout blood, it was physical WINE. They took the WINE and drank it to represent that they were cleansed by the blood sacrifice of Christ. Just as wine was the clean drink at the time, so Christ is representing cleanliness and sustainance with his blood, just as physical wine is for the physical body.



symbolic cannabils then.

to commune with your god eat the lamb.

paganism, nothing more,nothing less.

Buffalo Bob wrote
Your religion is one of hate and blood. Your religion was foundewd on those principles. From your God demanding blood sacrificers and even human sacrifices--and the followers were to obey blindly. You still follow those principles. If you were convinced God wanted you to kill someone--you would kill them. You wouldn't be the first to kill for such a belief.


Founded on 'hate and blood'?

Those who have fought in the name of God or Christ are not necessarily representative of any particular religion. And there have been as many people kill someone becaused they obeyed a God-less leader as have by religious leaders.

Not 'founded' on hate and blood. Misled and confused individuals misinturpreting scripture and using it as an excuse to kill . . . maybe. But not founded.

The scripture clearly does not advocate a global flood, but rather a universal flood, in that all mankind besides a few died inthe flood. It does not have to be the whole world.

Yes--it does have to be the whole world. You seem to think "universal" is a smaller flood than a global flood. Is the Universe bigger or smaller than the Earth? A universal flood means that the entire globe was covered. The word you seek is "localized"--not "univesal". In addition, the Flood story cvomes from a much older story that makes far more sense than its biblical counterpart. The biblical story is for children. The original story makes the biblical version seem like a comic book.

Secondly, based of of that localized, universal flood, there does not need to be every species in the boat in order the species to survive.

Can't be localized and universal--contradiction of terms. It would be the same as saying a localized national election. Not every species needed to be on the boat--just the ones who breath. In the original story--the only animals on the boat were the ones taken aboard for food. In the original story only the essence of the all the animals was taken aboard. I would bet that confuses you.

NOr does the scripture advocate that no animals died before Adams sin. Animals have been dying since the inception of the world.
Death is understood from our perspective as "bad", but is not necessarily bad.

Death is not necessary at all. If God made the universe, he could have made a plain of fertile land that stretched from here to a billion light years of more away--enough land for all, and nothing would ever have to die. Poor planning---and a death wish for the creatures it created---not much of a god at all really. Everything it makes--dies.

You cannot verify that those things did not happen. YOu have to understand that our world is a world of physical curiosities. Things happen that we don't understand sometimes.

You can not verify that they did happen

I mean technically due to the structure of atoms and particles, and the fact that most matter is air, when I tap on a desk over and over, and there is that one time that I miss. I take it that I simply moved my hand back too far, however who is to say that my hand did not pass through the desk? It could have. Things like that can and do happen, just not very often.

No--things like that don't happen. Do it in a lab, and you will have a point. Deal with the fact that the bible is edited from older stories from discarded religions, and you are on the path to reality.

#319 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2009-08-28 10:52 AM | Reply | Flag


"Where is there an atheist channel, proving God wrong 24/7....?"


As soon as someone thinks there's a buck in it, there will be one.

#49 | Posted by Zed at


glad to see that zed has acknowledged the basis for most modern religons.


Its called free choice. Each person chooses how to behave and what to do.


#64 | Posted by Marty at 2009-08-27 05:19 PM | Reply | Flag:


I choose not to be born so I dont have the possibility of spending eternity in hell

ooops

I find an irony that permeates through the liberal mind.

You are constantly remarking that government can not 'legislate' what people believe. And yet you claim progress from slavery and sweat shops through legislation.

Do you really believe you can change a man from being a racist simply by 'legislation'. That's quite an ego.

You have more 'faith' in the system than I do in God. My God only brings about change in people as they come unto Him.

Your "God" (The Government) 'legislates' change in people. I doubt it.

In all your effort to dethrone God as a leader. He has withstood the trials of 1000's of years of Human history. No government has. They do all fall.

My prediction that this country will fall has a far greater chance, based on historical evidence, of being fulfilled (and I'm not a 'prophet') than your movement of eliminating God has.

And if Science can predict things (and they are wrong ALOT) then I can too!

There!

"The scripture clearly does not advocate a global flood, but rather a universal flood, in that all mankind besides a few died inthe flood. It does not have to be the whole world."

The scripture clearly states that the tops of mountains including Ararat where teh supposed ark was parked, but never found, became visible on teh 10th day......Mt. Ararat is over 16,000' tall. One cannot have a local flood that covers ararat without it be a global event. Anyway, ararat has not been covered in water, no where in it's geological record does it show submergence after it geological rose to form a mountain chain.

The ark should be easy to find parked on teh top of ararat like that, except it's not there. And that's just one of the so-called arks they can't seem to find.

Yes, science sucks. It forces people with their head in the sand to continue to evade the truths that face them everyday.

LM


Good of you to bring up mircales, LISA. Yes, they happen all the time. Let's both hope what's chewed on these people goes away long enough for them to open their eyes.

#104 | Posted by Zed at


name one

"Read what Jesus Christ taught. Believe or not . . . it promotes peace and a true love for both your friends and your enemies."

I have, personally my fav lines that show his love of man are as follows:


"I have wiped out many nations, devastating their fortress walls and towers. Their cities are now deserted; their streets are in silent ruin. There are no survivors to even tell what happened. I thought, 'Surely they will have reverence for me now! Surely they will listen to my warnings, so I won't need to strike again.' But no; however much I punish them, they continue their evil practices from dawn till dusk and dusk till dawn." So now the LORD says: "Be patient; the time is coming soon when I will stand up and accuse these evil nations. For it is my decision to gather together the kingdoms of the earth and pour out my fiercest anger and fury on them. All the earth will be devoured by the fire of my jealousy. "On that day I will purify the lips of all people, so that everyone will be able to worship the LORD together. My scattered people who live beyond the rivers of Ethiopia will come to present their offerings. (Zephaniah 3:6-10 NLT)

Such Love!!!

LM


Zed:


Miracles happen every single day.


I was so humbled to be an instrument of God for such a miracle last year.


I see miracles every day. Some more defined than others, but miracles just the same!


Hey...I call Bob and I having very civil discussions lately as a miracle!! : )


Makes me smile!

#115 | Posted by Lisa


name one

"I will sweep away everything in all your land," says the LORD. "I will sweep away both people and animals alike. Even the birds of the air and the fish in the sea will die. I will reduce the wicked to heaps of rubble, along with the rest of humanity," says the LORD. "I will crush Judah and Jerusalem with my fist and destroy every last trace of their Baal worship. I will put an end to all the idolatrous priests, so that even the memory of them will disappear. For they go up to their roofs and bow to the sun, moon, and stars. They claim to follow the LORD, but then they worship Molech, too. So now I will destroy them! And I will destroy those who used to worship me but now no longer do. They no longer ask for the LORD's guidance or seek my blessings." (Zephaniah 1:2-6 NLT)

Compassion, love, mercy, integrity.....how could you not derive this from this loving message??

LM


Questions of GOOD and EVIL will apparently languish this night. It's a good thing none of you guys are really serious.

#131 | Posted by Zed


there is no good or evil, only the consequences of our actions.

i166.photobucket.com


Donner:


Do you not know about the origin of Satan?


God is not evil.


But He does allow it. He allows hardships for several reasons. Scroll up...I've listed them already.


Do I sense that you fear God?

#162 | Posted by Lisa


so god didnt create everything


Buffalo Bob,

Don't throw out lies as facts. No one has proven the Bible 'false'.
Where and when and by who?

Proof not just words.

#329 | Posted by opticalpig at 2009-08-28 11:10 AM | Reply | Flag


I thought uyou would never ask. The proof is easy enough to show---you can buy the ORIGINAL stories at amazon.com.

The first book is the first bible of huamnity called the "Enuma Elish"--Which translates "When in the Heights". It was written by the Sumerians who first gave us writing--kingship--the first schools--and many other firsts---theirs was the only religion that said their gods were among them, and not some imaginary beings. They said Enuma Elish was told to them by the gods in person. The Sumjerians knew of all the planets including the asteroid belt, and the length of time precession takes to make a complete circuit accurately. Something we didn't know until the 2oth centuyry. Enuma Elish is currently under study by scholars investigating the origins of the solar system since it has been shown to be accurate in its descriptions. Enuma Elish is the source of Genesis. In it you find Adam (Adammu) and the Garden of Eden (E. din--House in the far away). Enuma Elish was found on 7 tablets--relating to the 7 days of creation. It also has the Tower of Babel---but it makes much more sense than the biblical version.

www.amazon.com

Next is the Epic of Gilgamesh. This is the origin of the Flood story--complete with the ark and the animals--but much more logical. There are others, but this is enough to prove the biblical stories are based on older discarded religions. If the stories of the bible are stolen stories from false religions--the bible stories are false.

www.amazon.com

it goes back to the Garden of Eden. Sin (a synonym for "death" - or being apart from God) first entered the human race when Adam & Eve sinned. They wanted to be like God... to have His wisdom, etc.


As a result God punished mankind (his "children") in any number of ways... pain in childbirth, work like a dog... dust to dust, etc.



so god punished me for something I didnt do. yet I have choice.

What kind of empirical proof do you expect? We obviously weren't born yet in the times of the NT when Jesus walked the Earth, so we can not claim to observe that.



science should work with all its efforts to build a time machine, go back to 30AD capture Jesus, lets DNA and test the shit out of him.


Lennon is in hell.... forever....

#195 | Posted by takitez


judge not, lest ye be judged

takitez will burn in hell forever.

The biblical God says he is a jealous God---jealousy is a flaw of personality



isnt envy one of the 7 deadly sins

(yet stupidity isnt-go figure)


"The scripture clearly does not advocate a global flood, but rather a universal flood, in that all mankind besides a few died inthe flood. It does not have to be the whole world."


The scripture clearly states that the tops of mountains including Ararat where teh supposed ark was parked, but never found, became visible on teh 10th day......Mt. Ararat is over 16,000' tall. One cannot have a local flood that covers ararat without it be a global event. Anyway, ararat has not been covered in water, no where in it's geological record does it show submergence after it geological rose to form a mountain chain.


The ark should be easy to find parked on teh top of ararat like that, except it's not there. And that's just one of the so-called arks they can't seem to find.


Yes, science sucks. It forces people with their head in the sand to continue to evade the truths that face them everyday.


LM


#337 | Posted by Liberal_Mongrel

First of all. It does not have to cover the mountains of Ararat. You are looking at it in the English translation. The word used for Mountains in the Hebrew is also the word used for hills.

The Bible states that the ark came to rest in the mountains of Ararat, not on Mount Ararat. The mountains of Ararat are a big area. It could mean the hills of Ararat as well. However, nowehere does it state that it came to land on top of the highest mountain of Ararat.

It also states that land was already uncovered befofore the ark came to rest. However the dove could not find a place to land.

It came back with an olive branch. Olive "trees" can only grow up to a certain altitude.

I think you are failing to look at the cultural perspective of the information.

Also Buffalo,
I am using universal in terms of mankind. Which is how the words are often used in the Hebrew and Greek. Kosmos in the Greek can meen the universe, or it can mean Mankind in general. I am speaking of the Universality of Mankind being destroyed in a localized flood.

Again, I expect more from you. Look into what you are saying before you state it please. Don't just go on the interpretation you have in front of you, or the cultural context you have in front of you.

NO wonder so many get so much about the scriputure wrong. It was not written in English in America, it was written in Hebrew and Greek in their respective areas.

Don't forget that.

Also, Truthhurts,
You are correct. If there is a God, then he would decide what is Good and what is Evil. Therefore, from our perspective we see good and evil, from his perspective he will see the consequences of our actions. Everything can be set up for the good of those in question, however they may see it as evil because it appears not to benefit them at the current time.

Many people here like to play games as if they are stupid when in truth they know what they are saying is false, yet propogate it just to fool the ignorant.

If you want to discuss the flood or anything else biblically that you question, and you want to do it rationally and without this emotional response, get serious e-mail me

mm814@eagle.pbu.edu

I'll talk about it in more detail there.
Thanks.

#345

lmao... Boob has new meat for his Sitchin silliness.

www.sitchiniswrong.com


The biblical God says he is a jealous God---jealousy is a flaw of personality




isnt envy one of the 7 deadly sins


(yet stupidity isnt-go figure)

#349 | Posted by truthhurts

I think you are missing the point here. If there is a transendant being, that being would be the standard for truth, what is good and acceptable. That being having done everything and being above everything has reason to be jealous.

However, mankind, seeing as no man is intrinsically better than any other man in terms of being finite, has no reason to be jealous of each other. I think that is the perspective you are lacking. Remember there is a perspective outside of ourselves. if you look at it, you can see it.

I may be angry at something justly and control my anger appropriately. Is it bad that I was angry? No.

You might get angry at something unjustly and not control your anger appropriately. Is it bad that you were angry? Yes.

PERSPECTIVE.

The thing about the religious is that though they are intelligent logical beings...well some of them anyway...they are so willing to throw out standard logic so easily in the realm of religion.

You cannot argue with someone who either does not understand or ignores the rules of logic...but they can be extremely entertaining.


Never a doctrine of the Catholic Church, Brucie.

#270 | Posted by Diablo


no but cannibalism is

Corky

I see Jesus advocates name calling to start a conversation. How about you point out something Sitchin says is wrong instead of shotgunning a link. Deal with one point at a time---like I do.

What would you say is the biggest flaws in Sitchins books? Make a point on your own if you can.

You seem to ignore the fact that Sitchin had nothing to do with Enuma Elish, which is the origins of Genesis--Adam and the Garden of Eden---and the Tower of Babel. Can you deal with those facts? After all Sitchin had nothing to do with their writing, discovery, or interpretation.

Same with the Epic of Gilgamesh. Sitchin had nothing to do with interpreting it. Try dealing with reality--Sitchin wasn't involved with my point of the bible being stolen stories from older religions. You can call names if you like--It let's me know I'm talking to a Christian about the bible.

from above...

"And you being an atheist is a religion as well..."


Ah, that would constitute an EPIC FAIL...
wrongo...

Atheists:

A). do not attend a place of worship.
B). do not believe all the answers are contained
within a single text, holy or otherwise.
C). do not bow down or worship anyone, even on
Sundays--unless it's football season of course.
D). do not assemble or meet with the sole purpose
of conforming to an agreed upon "one right way
to live" theme or motto, as religified peoples do.

atheists, and agnostics for that matter, simply meet, when they do meet, to discuss what it is that they think--and believe me, that ranges a wide gamut of differing beliefs...and that, we believe,
is a very, very good thing...

atheism/agnosticism is the antithesis to fascist thought...unlike some fundamentalist religions I could mention...

atheism believe first and foremost in Freedom of expression, and freedom of thought and ideas. We don't attack (generally) other "religious" groups unless they throw down the gauntlet first by insisting on making public institutions, (i.e. schools, governments, courthouses) theocratical seats of power from which to proselytize their beliefs...

Public domain is for all groups, all walks of life, yes--even religious groups, but No One religion or religious group can claim it as their domain from which to beat the "bully pulpit", because not everyone in America shares their views...

you want to beat the "bully pulpit", do it at church, where such behavior belongs...

we don't try to take that away from you...

EXPSREDEMPTION,

Really? Are you an idiot...just or unjust the one who cannot control him/herself is clearly wrong...interesting how you twist the end which really provides no comparison...

a just anger uncontrolled is as bad as unjust anger uncontrolled.

any anger controlled is not bad as it is natural and normal to feel human emotions even if irrational.

We are all free to choose what our beliefs are.

#296 | Posted by Lisa


how so

I did not choose to be born

I did not choose my dna

I did not choose the environment I was raised in.

Could you state that these things do not impact your choices?

#340

Not that I think it will change the way you thin nor do I think you will believe this because you don't believe anything else, , but fine...here goes:

Last year about this time, I was taking care of a friend who was dying of leukemia. Chemo wasn't working. Her doctor told her to get her affairs in order.

We spent countless hours discussing her wishes, preparing her 4 children and she made out her living will.

She developed pnemonia which is usually what ends up happening to cancer patients and their immune system is so weak they can't fight it and they pass away.

Her doctor prepared us.

Another friend of mine of great faith, instructed me to pray over her. I did.

I prayed that it was God's will that my friend be healed, to wrap His loving, healing hands around her and release her of this illness. I prayed for many things regarding my friend and her children, while I held on to her hands.

Later that night, she started to feel better and within another day, her pnemonia was gone.

Her doctor was in total amazement, he told her that she shouldn't have recovered given all her medical testings, her blood counts, etc.

Not only did she recover from pnemonia, she was Blessed to have been placed on a study using experimental chemo.

When she first applied to participate on that study, she was warned not to get her hopes up. That her condition was so very bad, taking into consideration of her age and the shortness of her life expectancy, she most likely would not be accepted to that study.

She called every week to check on the progress of the selection for that study. Every week that went by, another person was selected...and it wasn't her.

She got the call she was accepted with only two spots remaining to receive this experimental chemo.

It wasn't working after the first few treatments. No change.

We kept praying and one day my friend said she knows this chemo is going to make a last minute attack and start to work.

The study was for 8 treatments. If there was no sign of improvement, that was it...she was done with the study...and her life was near the end.

The second to last treatment, there was a slight improvement.

They continued the treatments and today she is in full remission.

Continued......

They continued the treatments and today she is in full remission.


Continued......

#359 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-08-28 12:01 PM | Reply | Flag

Many religious people feel that such treatment is against the Will of God. Only God gives life according to most Christians--therefore only God gives life to cancer cells.


We are all free to choose what our beliefs are.

#296 | Posted by Lisa

Go to a muslim country and say that. Make sure you are wearing a burka.

Continuing....

Now, some may argue that it was the drug, the experimental chemo that saved her life. And in part you would be correct.

But keep in mind that the pnemonia should have killed her!

She was gray, she had a strange odor, she was dying.

The power of prayer, God responding to that prayer, healing the pnemonia, is what enabled her to participate in the study to begin with.

Believe it or not, but I wholeheartedly believe that this was indeed a miracle.

So does she, so does her children, and so do her doctors.

I think you are missing the point here. If there is a transendant being, that being would be the standard for truth, what is good and acceptable


so god is the standard of truth and god created evil.

so god create rules on what is acceptable to him and what is not acceptable to him and you can choose between them. though he created the conditions, he created both sides of the choice, he knows all things and the impact of every little thing one way or the other, we have choice.

god knows all things, past present and future.

yet we have choice.

can we choose to not do what he knows as the future?

yet we have choice

we do not choose to be born but we have choice.

religon is the belief in cognitive dissonance.

lisa you are confusing cause and effect. There was a biological/pharmacalogical reason why your friend got better. The pneumosis virus (bacterium?) died in her lungs from some combination of drugs, antibodies, chemical enzymes, etc. Nothing more nothing less. The drugs or her antibodies worked against the leukemia, nothing more nothing less.

Bob:

Most Christians, at least those who actually apply it to their lives, understand God that it is God's will...not ours, that will play out. We understand that we do not always have the answers to why certain things happen but we do understand that everything is for a reason.

You can choose to believe all things good or bad come from God, that God wills bad things to happen, but those of faith understand differently.

We understand that Satan tries to break our faith, trying to get us to move away from God.

We understand that God allows some things to happen to order to make us stronger, humble us,...all the reasons I have already mentioned in a previous post.

You have no idea how Satan is trying to reek havoc in my life right now to get me to fall away from God. But my faith is strong and I won't buckle.

Again....believe or not. You have that will to decide for yourself.

It has always amazed me that so many of these people who speak of religion and its power and the devil trying to shake their faith are actually sick twisted fucks who are trying to hide that fact that they are twisted fucks.

LOL

I told you, you wouldn't believe it Truth!!

I guess you know more than her doctors who have the scientific and medical background, who knew how bad her contidition was, who stated that the pnemonia was going to end her life.

Ok. No problem.

You do realize though that in some cases all the meds in the world will not improve someones condition right? That even in valient attempts from the medical field, medicine does not work and people do end up dying, right?? : )

I have long ago come to the conclusion that there are just some non believers who will excuse away any sign of God, so your response does not suprise me.

Again....believe or not. You have that will to decide for yourself.

#365 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-08-28 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag

I have decided. I have educated myself about the bible. The bible is based on older stories stolen from older discarded religions. That facts shows the bible to be false--since the bible is proven false, that means the biblical god is false.

When I use the bible as reference, it is only because others believe--and I show the illogical conclusions they come to. Take Satan---how many people in the bible does Satan kill? Torture?---Now--compare that number to the number the biblical god kills and tortures. If the biblical god were proven real--the biblical god is a murderer of innocents on a scale that puts all despots and dictators combined to shame. Sorry--I couldn't and wouldn't worship such evil even if proven factual. As it is, the opposite is true--the bible is proven false--that means the biblical god is false.

Thank you Richard.

You help prove the prophets correct.

Mat 5;11

sorry lisa, but the virus/bacterium/cancer cells "died" there were natural causes for these "deaths". Because drugs etc work in some cases and not in others is due to a multitude of variables, many which we dont yet understand.

The difference between your belief system and mine is that I would seek out the answers as to why your friend recovered while other do not to find a cause that is reproducible and you just slough it off to god's intervention. one seeks to alleviate suffering from this world and one does not. which side are you on?

I have decided as well, Bob.

And since neither of us has died yet to prove the other wrong...we are just going to have to agree to disagree!

And since neither of us has died yet to prove the other wrong...we are just going to have to agree to disagree!

#371 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-08-28 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:


You don't have to die to realize that the bible is based on stolen stories from older religions. That makes the bible false. That makes the god described by a false bible a false god.


Thank you Richard.


You help prove the prophets correct.


Mat 5;11

#369 | Posted by Lisa


you dont consider it sick to not seek alleviation for those who suffer from leukemia and pneumonia like your friend? I would consider it a sickness to believe that magic cured your friend and not seek the real answer so that others may be relieved of suffering in a similar manner.

Never discount the placebo effect. It is proven time and time again in research studies that belief in outcome does factor in to outcome.

Truth:

I believe her doctors when they say it was a miracle...there was no scientific, no medical reason why she survived for as far gone as her condition was.

I trust her docotrs to know their field. They have been involved in it much longer and far more extensively than you and I have been! : )

You asked for an example. I gave you one.

Lisa--Richardspirit wasn't actually addressing you, and his point is accurate in many cases of religious people, Case in point is another thread on the DR where a guy passing out religious literature on a campus was found to have kidnapped a little girl 18 years ago when she was 11--raped her and impregnated her twice.

www.sacbee.com

I think that was the type of person he was referring to--not you personally.

#377

*sigh*

Man, woman, and child...lol

Dudes, dudettes, and err uh, unaffiliated...(grin)

I don't care what you believe....believe it...
the point I was making in my post above...is that
Atheism is not the same as religion...and no matter
what you believe, no belief system should be allowed to overtake government and/or public school facilities...that is the road to Fascism...and yes,
Christian Fascism is still a Fascism...

you want church, go to church.
you want public school, go to public school..
you don't like public school because they teach
evolution or something else offensive...then home school your kid if it's so offensive,
or send the child to a religiously affiliated
private school...

there are solutions to these problems without
Armed Insurrection or changing of our beloved
(and not so beloved) institutions...

Thanks Bob.

But I fail to see why he wouldn't post that on the other thread then, when I was here speaking of everything he mentioned.

But I appreciate your effort.

The separation of church and state was a very serious issue for Thomas Jefferson. The founding of the university of Virginia was his proudest moment, because it was the first secular university in the United States. His tombstone makes no mention of his being a president: "AUTHOR OF THE DECLARATION OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE
OF THE STATUTE OF VIRGINIA FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
AND FATHER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA"

Having said that, he was a firm believer that there is a creator.

The acknowledgment of a God has nothing to do with 'respecting a religion' or making a law that would do such a thing. Its not like atheists want to believe-that you can't mention god in any way shape or form in a government hall, that folks can't peacibly assemble to worship within a government facility. To me, when the ACLU goes after stuff like that, it is religuous persecution.


Why is that so difficult for people to get their arms around that?

Judicialism: A new religion created in the United States in August 2009. This religion believes the law is their Bible and that Judges are Supreme Beings.

After the tenets were written by a series of the faithful (lawyers), the religion began to blossom, stealing other flocks.

One of the chief tenets is getting rich through lawsuits. It is a amazing that other churches tenets aren't held as closely as Judicialists.

"Judicialists are the epiphenomenon of the Supreme Court. Our cult, I mean religion, is truth that exists within America," said the High Judiciousness' counsel Weave Skrewsem & Howe.

However, ACLU has taken the issue to court. Every judge in the US has had to recuse themselves from the case, leaving no one left to address the case.

ACLU argues that Judges, based on their new religion, can no longer perform their roles due to the separation of church and state.

Judges are gods in this cult, I mean religion, and therefore, must be removed from public buildings.

Amazing, most people asked about this have no problems with their removal.

Imagine that.

Tomorrow's Story: The Evolutionists Church - another legal battle where evolution, the Bible of this other religion, is considered another violation of church and state - to be removed from public schools.

so god is the standard of truth and god created evil.


so god create rules on what is acceptable to him and what is not acceptable to him and you can choose between them. though he created the conditions, he created both sides of the choice, he knows all things and the impact of every little thing one way or the other, we have choice.


god knows all things, past present and future.


yet we have choice.


can we choose to not do what he knows as the future?


yet we have choice


we do not choose to be born but we have choice.


religon is the belief in cognitive dissonance.

#363 | Posted by truthhurts


I think you are still missing the point. You said that good and evil do not exist, that it is only the consequences of our actions. Therefore, if God created man with choice he would have created consequence. He would know what the consequence of your actions was. It would not mean that he created evil, but rather consequence and therefore your logic loses value.

You need to decide in your mind if good and evil exist or if they don't exist. You say they don't, and then create an arguement with the case that they do to refute something I said.

I don't think that adds up either.

That fact of the matter is, no one can tell you what God being all knowing is like. How that impacts choice we do not know. You are taking a definites stance on an indefinite issue, even the scripture informs you that no one knows how it works (which makes sense because the being is transendant of our understanding).

I do not see your arguement from logic. I see your hypothetical arguement, but all you did was prove something that you don't believe, because you don't think there is good and evil.

You are not looking at the subject matter from a perspective of understanding, but rather a preconceived notion and understanding of what you think people say the Bible says in regard to predestination, election, free-will etc.

I don't have all the time necessary to expound on this issue right now. I am at work and posting only during free minutes.

I think part of the problem is that those opposing an arguement refuse to stay on one subject in order to cause distraction from the true point. Please be aware of whether you are doing this or not. It will be helpful for both of us.

Lisa

You are ignoring facts. The facts show that the bible is based on stories stolen from older religions--making the bible false--making the biblical god false.

"Making the Biblical God false..."

Where does Jesus fall into your theory, BOB?


Jesus made smokestacks on the moon out of used car antennas.

You are ignoring facts. The facts show that the bible is based on stories stolen from older religions--making the bible false--making the biblical god false.

#383 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob


Bob, let me ask you a question. Have you ever played telephone? You know how sometimes you have one true source of information at the beginning, and then at the end it is different, and if you don't ask everyone what they got, they each go away with a different understanding of the same basic truth.

Do you think this could happen from an Adam and Eve perspective?

In this case, Adam and Eve would have children. They would teach their children what they heard from their creator. Cain kills his Brother. Cain is saved by the creator, even getting a mark that makes sure that no one else kills him. Cain would then think that he is something special, therefore understanding the creators intentions differently. Cain's proginy lead to Lamech. Lamech furthers this thought that he is more important than others when he says after killing someone, "If Cain is avenged 7 times then Lamech 77 times." Therefore that group would tend to think it is about them.

This would continue up until the point that someone is taken aside from everything (Abraham) and is being chosen to represent the truth again. While Abraham was on his way to where his creator had called him, he meets a man named Malchizadec. Now Malchizadek was the High Priest of the Almighty God. He was following the true path. This represents that there were others outside of Israel that still had the truth of God that they were following.

Abraham follows that God as well, has a son, Isaac, who has a son named Jacob who is then called Israel. The nation of Israel is set up and God chooses that specific group that is following him for a specific purpose.

There are others following, we know this because of Malchizadek the King of Salem. So now there are multiple groups, as well as other goups who have the changed information that they hold to due to the "telephone effect" and their own desires.

Thus the scripture is not said to start with Israel. Israel is simply the nation chosen to represent and format the information from the beginning.

Do you say this is not plausible to happen?

I don't know why you think the Jews having information from other "religions" makes it false.

They were not the first people, everyone knows this.

Am fascinated, not that it matters one whit to the person holding this belief, that a "non-reprodiceable" outcome is also a non-significant one.

Put another way, what this person seems to want is to strangle the hell of a non-reproceable outcome until it changes itis minds.

Wishy-washy paradigms such as this are thought to be the realm of religionists. Well, what do you know?

"Religion is belief in cognitive dissonace..."

You either have dissoance, or you don't. It's nothing you believe in, it's something you're afflicted with.

I like playing the contradictions game. But if you take contradictions seriously, many who are atheists ought not be. That is, if they want to be honest or consistent.

"Adam and Eve would have children. They would teach their children what they heard from their creator. Cain kills his Brother. Cain is saved by the creator, even getting a mark that makes sure that no one else kills him. Cain would then think that he is something special, therefore understanding the creators intentions differently. Cain's proginy lead to Lamech."

So all of mankind is descendant from a man who killed his brother and had children with his sister?!?

Well, DANFORTH, from a purely evolutionistic point of view, with whom do you think the first example of Homo sapiens likely did mate with?

This is interesting, DANFORTH---What makes you think you aren't descended from someone who killed his brother?


"Adam and Eve would have children. They would teach their children what they heard from their creator. Cain kills his Brother. Cain is saved by the creator, even getting a mark that makes sure that no one else kills him. Cain would then think that he is something special, therefore understanding the creators intentions differently. Cain's proginy lead to Lamech."


So all of mankind is descendant from a man who killed his brother and had children with his sister?!?


I am not going to spoonfeed you information. If you have to intellectual integrity to search out information, you can wallow in your own ignorance.

And even if that is the case there is a problem with that? What do you think happened in the event of Evolution Danforth?
I don't have issue with that.

Although, no, all men did not come down from Cain.

Think more, post less Danforth.

So all of mankind is descendant from a man who killed his brother and had children with his sister?!?

#389 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-08-28 01:41 PM | Reply


Look, the only facts we have in regards to that night are that Ted Kennedy had a concussion and was in shock. Everything else you're making up.
-Corky

"I am not going to spoonfeed you information..."

You really don't know who you are dealing with, do you?

I am aware who I am dealing with. Someone on this board would say, "I have dealt with his ilk before."

393 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-08-28 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag: Truer words were never belched

"from a purely evolutionistic point of view, with whom do you think the first example of Homo sapiens likely did mate with?"

Other evolved creatures.

"What makes you think you aren't descended from someone who killed his brother?"

I don't know one way or the other. But if I'm understanding correctly, you believe all mankind is descendant from a man who killed his brother and had children with his sister...right?

Incorrect.

"Although, no, all men did not come down from Cain.

#392 | Posted by ExpsRedemption"


Only whitey, right?

...let me ask you a question. Have you ever played telephone? You know how sometimes you have one true source of information at the beginning, and then at the end it is different, and if you don't ask everyone what they got, they each go away with a different understanding of the same basic truth. osted by EXPSREDEMPTION

Ah Yes, the Moron's fatal Flaw. Assuming that the one 'TRUE' source at the beginning is 'TRUE'.

Hey Moron, isn't there a dick out there you could be MaChizzling, instead of bothering the world with your God-Complex.

Every year that goes by, the religious become more and more idiotic.

101Chairborne:

VERY FUNNY DUDE!


...let me ask you a question. Have you ever played telephone? You know how sometimes you have one true source of information at the beginning, and then at the end it is different, and if you don't ask everyone what they got, they each go away with a different understanding of the same basic truth. osted by EXPSREDEMPTION


Ah Yes, the Moron's fatal Flaw. Assuming that the one 'TRUE' source at the beginning is 'TRUE'.


Hey Moron, isn't there a dick out there you could be MaChizzling, instead of bothering the world with your God-Complex.


Every year that goes by, the religious become more and more idiotic.


101Chairborne:


VERY FUNNY DUDE!

#400 | Posted by DUMPLING1


Well first of all... I am talking to Bob upon his assertation. Second of all, I asked if it was plausible presuming that there was a transcendant being. It is for the sake of arguement

Learn how to read and discern a discussion.

Pffffbtbtbtbt.

You made the statement using the Telephone Metaphor game, A Priori, that the original statement was 'TRUE'

I called you on that.

And you Deflect?

AssHat.

The only God complex here is you Dumpling. As you are the one who is taking the stance of knowing all things, or so it would appear from your demeanor.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. [Carl Sagan]


Such reports persist and proliferate because they sell. And they sell, I think, because there are so many of us who want so badly to be jolted out of our humdrum lives, to rekindle that sense of wonder we remember from childhood, and also, for a few of the stories, to be able, really and truly, to believe--in Someone older, smarter, and wiser who is looking out for us. Faith is clearly not enough for many people. They crave hard evidence, scientific proof. They long for the scientific seal of approval, but are unwilling to put up with the rigorous standards of evidence that impart credibility to that seal. [Carl Sagan]

D-o y-o-u u-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d t-h-e c-o-n-t-e-x-t o-f t-h-e- s-t-a-t-e--m-e-n-t? I said it nice and slow for you.

He is talking about the Bible being false. I asked if it were P-l-a-u-s-i-b-l-e in the event that there were a creator.

The arguement of there being a creator is something completely different. He was not arguing that at the present moment.

Blah-blah-blah...

Deflect deflect deflect.

BWAHAHAHAHA

What a moron.

Donner, don't get into rigorous standards of evidence unless you are going to take everything under that unbrella. If you stick everything to all the rigorous standards of evidence, half of the history we take as fact would be and could justifiably be considered fairy tale.

You can call it a deflect if you please. You have the right to intellectual ignorance. Congratulations on your celebrating of your rights.

The only celebrating going on here is the passing of the Moron Crown from Grendel, Lisa and Takeitez to you.

They were not the first people, everyone knows this.

#386 | Posted by ExpsRedemption


And neither was there a man named Adam or a woman named Eve nor a talking snake named Beelzebub in a Garden called Eden. Men did not live to be 500 years old at any time in our history. We all evolved from lower life forms and if there was only two actual "first" humans then the were dirty damn apes and they could not talk. Much less talk with a snake.

So don't you think this story was a "metaphor" or a parable for "human evolution" not an actual event?

Tell me how did you come to believe that this could possibly be a "true" story?

D-o y-o-u u-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d t-h-e c-o-n-t-e-x-t o-f t-h-e- s-t-a-t-e--m-e-n-t?

I'll write it nice and slow for you:

You claimed that the provenance of the Bible is true, because it could be like the TELEPHONE GAME...

"...You know how sometimes you have one true source of information at the beginning, and then at the end it is different"

And I'll write this NICE AND SLOW for you.

YOU ARE A MORON FOR ASSUMING THAT THE ORIGINAL 'TELEPHONE MESSAGE IS TRUE'

Get it?

No?

Moron!

...the(y) were "dirty damn apes" but not actual apes, of course, as we did not descend from apes (I was using poetic license like your bible does)....

half of the history we take as fact would be and could justifiably be considered fairy tale.


Half of history is "fairy tales"... but which half? History is written by the winners, of course. Getting to the heart of the matter is more difficult than reading the "winners" history books... you have to read the losers account also then you have to interpolate the truth and even then you will only be approximately correct in many instances...kinda like an uncertainty principle for history!

For example...Did the conquistadors discover America?

Whatever you wish to say. I cannot change a cemented mind.

I appreciate you slowing it down.

I did not claim it was true. It was a question of consideration. I asked if it could be true that the information was acquired similarly to that method, thus making it that the Bible account being similar to other accounts would not necessarily render it false.

I was approaching a different aspect than you seem to desire to understand. I as not proving it true, only proving that those conditions do not make it definitively false.

From the Fine Art of Baloney Detection (gotta love that title!)

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. it is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. (So the old bamboozles tend to persist as the new bamboozles rise.) [Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection]

You want US History fairy tales?


Washington and the cherry tree

Honest Abe

Vietnam was a tie

We live in a Democracy

One man, one vote

I am glad you read so much Carl Sagan. He had some very good things to say. Do you take everything from him as fact?

Kanrei, I would say this is true. I think that in most occasions, America is not better than Germany when Germany decided not to put the Holocaust in their teaching curriculum for quite a few years.

We tend to wipe out what we don't like. I would rather study American history taken from a European viewpoint than a Patriotic American viewpoint.

Whether you believe it or not...GOD is very much alive! Choose your words carefully because you will have to defend them someday.

Riner said he was not willing to consider rewording the phrases to make them pass muster.

"This is no small matter, the understanding that God is real," he said. "There are real benefits to acknowledging Him. There was not a single founder or framer of the Constitution who didn't believe that."


Wow, this guy really is a nut job. And it suprises me how many and who on this thread are supporting him. Is it really that hard to understand why we wouldn't want that type of language in government, especially homeland security?

I would rather study American history taken from a European viewpoint than a Patriotic American viewpoint.


There is a problem with that too. Remember the old saying: there are three sides to every story; your side, my side, and what really happened. A European viewpoint would be as wrong as a Patriotic viewpoint would be. The best idea I think is to gather as much information as possible and try to figure out what really happened, but realize you will never really KNOW and therefore cannot dismiss other theories you don't like.

Whether you believe it or not...GOD is very much alive!

And I'm sure you have some real, credible evidence that actually backs that up... heh... heh...

Choose your words carefully because you will have to defend them someday.

More fearmongering from the religious. Believe what I believe or suffer. Pathetic.

Choose your words carefully because you will have to defend them someday.

I must choose nothing because if you are right, and G-d made me, and knows all, and controls all, then I am simply fullfilling HIS plan by questioning him. Maybe the image of Him I was created from is the "Self-doubting paranoid" part of G-d. Ever think of that? Ever think that, by breaking his commandments, I am serving his plan of making you feel better about following them?


I would rather study American history taken from a European viewpoint than a Patriotic American viewpoint.


There is a problem with that too. Remember the old saying: there are three sides to every story; your side, my side, and what really happened. A European viewpoint would be as wrong as a Patriotic viewpoint would be. The best idea I think is to gather as much information as possible and try to figure out what really happened, but realize you will never really KNOW and therefore cannot dismiss other theories you don't like.


YEs this is true, but I have learned the American Side of it, so I would like to study it from the European side, so that I can find what really happened more effectively and correctly.

The best idea I think is to gather as much information as possible and try to figure out what really happened, but realize you will never really KNOW and therefore cannot dismiss other theories you don't like.

Posted by kanrei

not even in Akashhic Records land?


www.themystica.com

"Whether you believe it or not...GOD is very much alive! Choose your words carefully because you will have to defend them someday."

Ah, Sanjaya has spoken, that settles. I guess I wish I had never committed the unforgiveable sin. If only I would have just been a pedophile, a rapist, a murderer, then I could repent and party like it's 1999, instead I'm just gonna have to party like it's 2009!!


LM

Bani,
I have read about "universal knowledge" before, but I never really bought into that concept. I am not saying it is not true, but I don't believe we are hive-like by nature.

#416 | Posted by kanrei

Thank you Kanrei there are tons more examples of the Fairy Tales of American History but you made the point very well.

As for Carl Sagan...


RE: #417 | Posted by ExpsRedemption

The question was: "Do I take everything from him as fact?"

I don't take "everything" as fact but Carl was wise beyond his years. I try and learn from and emulate smart people. Do you take everything you read in the Bible as FACT?


I really love this quote too....a great example of the resistance of Religion to rational thought. Notice the response of organized religion to a failed "prophecy". All your arguments seem like they were designed and construed responses cleverly crafted to obscure and confuse the truth rather than to uncover and understand it. Religious text have been cleverly developed over thousands of years with ALL the answers to any question designed to NOT answer anything and to perpetuate the BAMBOOZLE. This is why it is fruitless to discuss these things with a "true-believer".

One prominent American religion confidently predicted that the world would end in 1914. Well, 1914 has come and gone, and - whole the events of that year were certainly of some importance - the world did not, at least so far as I can see, seem to have ended. There are at least three responses that an organized religion can make in the face of such a failed and fundamental prophecy. They could have said, Oh, did we say '1914'? So sorry, we meant '2014'. A slight error in calculation. Hope you weren't inconvenienced in any way. But they did not. They could have said, Well, the world would have ended, except we prayed very hard and interceded with God so He spared the Earth. But they did not. Instead, the did something much more ingenious. They announced that the world had in fact ended in 1914, and if the rest of us hadn't noticed, that was our lookout. It is astonishing in the fact of such transparent evasions that this religion has any adherents at all. But religions are tough. Either they make no contentions which are subject to disproof or they quickly redesign doctrine after disproof. The fact that religions can be so shamelessly dishonest, so contemptuous of the intelligence of their adherents, and still flourish does not speak very well for the tough- mindedness of the believers. But it does indicate, if a demonstration was needed, that near the core of the religious experience is something remarkably resistant to rational inquiry. [Carl Sagan, Broca's Brain]

Donner,
The scary part is that there are adults today who will act like a five year old you just told Santa didn't exist if you explained that concept to them.

Choose your words carefully because you will have to defend them someday.


I look forward to the opportunity to speak my mind and to get an actual response from a God. Then I am going to find "Hell" and look for John Lennon.

DONNERBOY, be honest, if God spoke to you this instant you wouldn't interpret it or report it that way.

Whoa--Just caught this---The first Homo sapien would have mated with OTHER EVOLVED CREATURES?

Newts, perhaps? Why are you being silly?

DONNERBOY, be honest, if God spoke to you this instant you wouldn't interpret it or report it that way.

Posted by Zed

G-d doesn't know English ~ remember?:>)


Perhaps Kepler had it right all along?

Kepler's Music of the Spheres

Big Idea:
Johannes Kepler's concept of planetary harmony was hard to experience and recent advances in digital music have made these revolutionary ideas much more accessible. Take the two minute tour and be treated to the music of the spheres as heard from around the solar system, comparing those sounds to the speakers placed in the room around you.

thetechvirtual.org

DONNERBOY, be honest, if God spoke to you this instant you wouldn't interpret it or report it that way.

#431 | Posted by Zed

I am sure I would be very impressed...I should be so lucky, huh? Too bad I am not "worthy" enough to be spoken to by a God when I am alive. He apparently is saving that for the "life after death" time only. But, here I am alive and aware yet no God will speak to me in our time. He apparently only "speaks" to ancient peoples or dead peoples.

If some good evidence for life after death were announced, I'd be eager to examine it; but it would have to be real scientific data, not mere anecdote. As with the face on Mars and alien abductions, better the hard truth, I say, than the comforting fantasy.[Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World, p. 204 quoted in 2000 Years of Disbelief, Famous People with the Courage to Doubt, by James A. Haught, Prometheus Books, 1996]

Oh and btw how would I know it was a God? Does he still use thunder and lightening and a big booming voice or does he only "speak" now through the flowers and trees or in a baby's smile?

Carl apparently didn't understand culture or people very well at all. Then again, he never had a job that demanded that.

"How would I know it was God..."

I'd imagine He'd introduce himself. Of course, He'd already know who you are.

"Here I am alive and no God will speak to me in my time...."

Why don't you sincerely ask for dialogue?

"Better the hard truth..."

The only truth Sagan speaks of is he doesn't have what he considers data. This is an example of where he begins to go off the rails.

"The comforting fantasy...."

Or, of course, the possibly equally comforting denial. Nah, Carl had no biases.

"If some good evidence for life after death were announced, I'd be eager to examine it; but it would have to be real scientific data, not mere anecdote"

Donnerpass

I doubt it...Plato's cave was good enough for me in my late teens (& LSD a few times before 22)

This is the best evidence I've see in 'mainstream' hypnotherapy, though...

"For hidden within are memories of your life as a soul, between incarnations, your life with soul friends and family, planning your future lives on earth"

www.spiritualregression.org

Carl Sagan was so used to thinking in one particular way he lost the ability to credit some other way is possible. This is interesting, given the "hard data" people do so was available to him while he lived.

#435

Let Me put it this way.... if you were rolling around on the ground on fire, and I really, really needed to take a piss.... I'd hold it.

Donner,
I only mentioned that fact aspect of Sagan because you keep putting down what was said by him as though it were the unquestionable truth. And we both know that is not the most probable scenario.

Let's examine Carl a bit further---He did seem to notice not everyone had his views on things---But it's obvious he viewed them as being stupid and perverse for doing so.

Carl never asked the question any real scientist ought to ask: "What are those people seeing?" I suppose not because that would permit the possibility they see something.

The first Homo sapien would have mated with OTHER EVOLVED CREATURES?

Newts, perhaps? Why are you being silly?

#432 | Posted by Zed


Hmmm you actually bring up a good point? Creatures can normally only successfully reproduce with creatures of their own species but sometimes due to drought or stress Species can mate with other species but USUALLY nothing fertile will result (the mule is an example). But sometimes something does result!
notexactlyrocketscience.wordpr
ess.com

Just think of Carl as a young boy---Wistfully staring into space at the stars---Misunderstood because others wouldn't try to see what he saw---I wonder why he never learned the lesson of that?


BLESS Thee Judge.

-Misunderstood because others wouldn't try to see what he saw---I wonder why he never learned the lesson of that?

#448 | Posted by Zed

hmmm your reality seems to be a bit different than mine. They did not see what he saw mostly because they were not looking. Carl Sagan was a brilliant scientist who was very forward thinking. You don't become brilliant and learn new things about the Universe by taking everything on face value and believing without question what others say. They were apparently wrong and he was right.

An example of Sagan's forward thinking:

Sagan says future exploration of space should focus on ways to protect Earth and to extend human habitation beyond it. The book was published the year after the comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 crashed into Jupiter, an event Sagan uses to highlight the danger Earth faces from the occasional asteroid or comet large enough to cause substantial damage if it were to hit Earth. He says we need the political will to track large extraterrestrial objects, or we risk losing everything. Sagan argues that in order to save the human race, space colonization and terraforming should be utilized.

And that takes us back the the TOPIC!!!!

You cannot depend on God the Almighty to protect the human race. WE need to do that ourselves or we will surely go the way of the dinosaur. I would say that Carl Sagan was a modern day prophet

For example...Did the conquistadors discover America?

#413 | Posted by donnerboy at


define discover. how do you discover something that was occupied by others. that has always troubled me.

There is a problem with that too. Remember the old saying: there are three sides to every story; your side, my side, and what really happened. A European viewpoint would be as wrong as a Patriotic viewpoint would be. The best idea I think is to gather as much information as possible and try to figure out what really happened, but realize you will never really KNOW and therefore cannot dismiss other theories you don't like.

#421 | Posted by kanrei

What you fail to take into consideration is that both sides can be correct. For every perception their is a unique reality. There are very few objective facts.


Truths are like assholes; everyone has one.

"They did not see what he saw mostly because they weren't looking...."

You're getting close, DONNER. I'm getting goose-bumps.

"Truths are like assholes, everyone has one...."

Precisely Pilate's argument.

The only truth Sagan speaks of is he doesn't have what he considers data. This is an example of where he begins to go off the rails.

#439 | Posted by Zed


Could you provide us with an example of this data that you believe Sagan ignored?

It's not that he ignored data, I assume as a scientists pursuing his own work he did not.

What he failed to try to realize is that not all understanding is data-driven, and that not all data is the province of science.

NO wonder so many get so much about the scriputure wrong. It was not written in English in America, it was written in Hebrew and Greek in their respective areas.
Don't forget that.
#350 | POSTED BY EXPSREDEMPTION AT 2009-08-28 11:47 AM

Did you ever notice how the stories in the Gospels just don't match up?
#109 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2009-08-27 07:59 PM

The bible is based on older stories stolen from older discarded religions.
#368 | POSTED BY BUFFALO_BOB AT 2009-08-28 12:31 PM

All three have raised a common theme, yet continue to debate who is right and who is wrong about a book with more than 50 different translations. Not to mention that scripture from the OT doesn't necessarily apply to the NT. I can understand why theists and atheists have disagreements

from above...

"Carl Sagan was a modern day prophet"

good to see at least one rationale mind on this
thread...wtg Donnerboy!

you want to read about exactly how the Christian Right and the Fundys think about the world, and why
its absolutely and positively without merit or logical reasoning...

Read "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" by Carl Sagan...

the man was a bloody f'in Einstein level genius...
too bad he's gone. Own almost every one of his books...and have read all of them but Comet...

o.k. now let all the religious fundaMENTAL extremists scream, and cast out demons, and fornicate with illicit prostitutes and little children and rant, rave, and froth at the mouth...

"read all of them but Comet"

It's good.

My favorite is "Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors".

Where does Jesus fall into your theory, BOB?

#384 | Posted by Zed at 2009-08-28 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag


Jesus is not god or the son of god--unless you completely change the meaning of the words "son" and "begotten". Jesus has none of Gods DNA, and no DNA means--no son.

The NT is based on th eOT god--if the OT is proven false--which it has---then the NT is false also.

As an atheist I would like it for one day for coins not to say that we trust in an imaginary being in the sky.

#3 | Posted by member2586

We can dream but too many stupid fucks have this delusion of imaginary beings and clouds in their collective distorted minds.

fucking Constantine and his desire to unite the entire roam world under one god and emperor.

#386 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2009-08-28 01:30 PM | Reply | Flag

The OT has been proven false. That makes the biblical god false. End of story.

"...fucking Constantine and his desire to unite the entire roam world under one god and emperor."

Just the syntax alone lets everyone know the intellectual "superiority" of atheism! ROTFLMAO!

Those who have no logic, laugh at those who do.

Goatman --

I doubt you'll even see this post as this thread is almost done, but I wanted to say it anyway.

You wrote --

...To prove that prayer is effective, every prayer must be answered. If a single prayer is not answered, that proves that prayer, as a cause, is not responsible for the effect....

Posted by goatman at 2009-08-28 07:56 AM


Not every prayer goes unanswered. Sometimes not having your prayer answered is God's way of answering it.

I'm not good at quoting all the verses and phrases from the Bible like so many on here can do, nor can I debate with you the finer details of religious dogma. But I'll try and get across to you what I'm trying to say about prayer by quoting below a song by Garth Brooks.

In the lyrics Brooks tells about a prayer he so wanted God to answer. Years before, he prayed to to God for him to be able to marry a girl he just knew was "the right one" for him. But his prayer for her to be his wife went unanswered and they eventually parted ways.

Years later one night they happen to run each other again. It was then he realized God actually did answer his prayer those many years ago -- by not answering it. He was happy with the life he had now, a life he had made without the girl he prayed would be his wife those many years ago. And he knew he would never have been as happy and satisfied with her as he was with the woman he did end up marrying. So by God not answering his prayer, God enabled him to meet and marry the woman he really loved. Something which would not have happened had his initial prayer been answered in the way he had wanted. Here are the lyrics to Garth Brooks' song:

"Unanswered Prayers"

Just the other night at a hometown football game
My wife and I ran into my old high school flame
And as I introduced them the past came back to me
And I couldn't help but think of the way things used to be

She was the one that I'd wanted for all times
And each night I'd spend prayin' that God would make her mine
And if He'd only grant me this wish I wished back then
I'd never ask for anything again

Sometimes I thank God for unanswered prayers
Remember when you're talkin' to the man upstairs
That just because He doesn't answer, doesn't mean He don't care
Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers

She wasn't quite the angel that I remembered in my dreams
And I could tell that time had changed me
In her eyes too, it seemed
We tried to talk about the old days
There wasn't much we could recall
I guess the Lord knows what He's doin' after all

And as she walked away and I looked at my wife
And then and there I thanked the good Lord
For the gifts in my life

Sometimes I thank God for unanswered prayers
Remember when you're talkin' to the man upstairs
That just because He may not answer doesn't mean He don't care
Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers

Some of God's greatest gifts are all too often unanswered...
Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers.

-- By Garth Brooks


I know you can't get youtube on the rig, but if you've never heard this song as it was sung by Garth Brooks, you should really give it a listen. The words set to music are even more meaningful.

Here's the song - "Unanswered Prayers" - Garth Brooks

Good night.

Not every prayer goes unanswered. Sometimes not having your prayer answered is God's way of answering it.

Ahhh, religion's greatest strength; when it doesn't make sense it's because YOU just don't understand.

"Those who have no logic, laugh at those who do."

What Buffalochip means by that is something coming from nothing is "logical."

"When it doesn't make sense, it's when YOU don't understand...."

Uh, so everything makes sense to you? And, er, you understand everything?

Great strenghts indeed. Too bad the whites of your eyes have turned brown.

"Unless you completely change the meaning of the words 'son' or 'begotten'...."

Or if there was no clear understanding of the words in the first place. That would be you.

"Something coming from nothing..."

This qualifies as the atheist Leap of Faith. You can only really be an atheist if your momma never taught you irony.

"To prove any prayer is effective, every prayer must be answered...."

Not logic. Let's say you play the Lotto but don't win that night. It's not proof there is no prize or a State of Texas providing it.

The difference between prayer and Lotto: The State of Texas doesn't care about or listen to you, it just looks at your ticket.

"Something coming from nothing..."

The strawman of the superstitious, ignorant and stupid.

Fail quantum cosmology again?

"Ignorant and stupid...."

I'll have to take your word for that, ZAT. I haven't seen you even to attempt to explain anything in three years. But continue to brag about some college course you took.

What Buffalochip means by that is something coming from nothing is "logical."


#468 | Posted by Diablo at 2009-08-29 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag


You mean like God? Where did God come from? God always was? Yeah that's "logical". But the name calling proves your point--that's "logical" too.

I'm logical. You're logical. We're all logical.

Believing in a book that has been proven false is not logical. Worshipping a god from a book that has been proven false is delusional.

If you like irony---the books the bible is edited from has many gods--and all three major religions who base their religion on those stories worship the evil god. Christians, Muslims, and Jews worship the god that tried to kill mankind with the flood--not the god that saved mankind by having them build an ark.

Fail quantum cosmology again?

Quantum cosmology? I'm assuming you're talking about the influence of quantum mechanical effects early after the BB on the evolution of large-scale structures in the universe. It would be a cool class, but honestly the math background required to understand it puts all but the basic concepts beyond the reach of most everybody. Hardly grounds to burn somebody for being ignorant on something that specialized.

Zed's fault is not ignorance alone. His fault is advancing his own hairbrained cosmology without a basic familiarity with the forces that govern the universe. You don't need to know jack about the FLRW metric to buy groceries, but if you are going to dismiss cosmological models and advance some bullshit of your own, you need to be able to show why current models are wrong. He wants to challenge extensively-validated models without knowing the first thing about them. That is a problem.

The sticking point seems to be origins more than what follows. Two specific origins are problematic for the superstitious - the origin of life and the origin of the universe. Arguments based on misunderstandings of basic science or simple dogmaticism are impotent... they cannot be used to "disprove" anything since they don't have a leg to stand on. People who feel that the big bang is "something coming from nothing" and assert this is a leap of faith are looking at the big bang in terms of the conditions present almost 14 billion years after it happened. They make their argument based on an aesthetic issue - they want the universe to have some sort of supernatural significance that can't arise from completely natural process.

Aesthetics are irrelevant. It's nice when the mathematics are "pretty," but "pretty" equations are worthless if they don't describe reality. A "pretty" worldview that is incompatible with observations is equally devoid of worth.

"Hardly grounds to burn somebody for being ignorant on something so specialized...."

Also easy to pretend it's so specialized you never can speak of it to anyone.

"They make an argument based on an aesthetic issue..."

You can only say something like this if you having been paying attention, don't really give a damn, or are not quite so smart as you think you are.



"Arguments based on misunderstandings of basic science..."

I'm sure someone somewhere has misunderstood. In fact, as has been pointed out, that's occasionally you.

"A pretty worldview that is incompatible with observations...."

Is just a silly way to sum up a complex, ongoing debate. This is what you tell your science class buddies when you're all getting drunk together. A

"People who feel the Big Bang is something coming from nothing...."

I don't know anyone who comes here that believes that, as one example. It's a form of insult created to make a false point.

The question is: can something EVER come from nothing, from absolute vaccum? ZAT claims he knows the answer, but he's keeping it cleverly hidden, of course.

can something EVER come from nothing, from absolute vaccum?

For those who believe in god, apparently he did.

Also easy to pretend it's so specialized you never can speak of it to anyone.

Sounds a lot like the "god works in mysterious ways" argument, doesn't it?

The question is: can something EVER come from nothing, from absolute vaccum? ZAT claims he knows the answer, but he's keeping it cleverly hidden, of course.

#483 | Posted by Zed at 2009-08-29 02:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

You mean like God? Where did God come from? God always was? Yeah that's "logical". But the name calling proves your point--that's "logical" too.

" from absolute vaccum(sic)? "

Another strawman. Ain't no such thing.

But coming from someone too fucking illiterate to spell vacuum, I'm not surprised.

But coming from someone too fucking illiterate to spell vacuum

It's pathetic when someone's dismissal of a point 90% of the time is the misspelling of a word -- especially when that person can't spell "goatman" without a spellchecker.

i239.photobucket.com

The question is not whether God exists or not, but what is God.

To the believer, what is the God you have faith in.

To the non-believer, what is it that you think does not exist.

Given that this same reliance was the aproach FEMA took during Katrina, maybe the great state of Kentucky would be better off relying on manpower during their next crisis...

To the non-believer, what is it that you think does not exist.

#489 | Posted by truthhurts at 2009-08-29 03:29 PM | Reply | Flag


The god described in the bible.

To the non-believer, what is it that you think does not exist.

Shit. Where do I begin?

Santa claus, the easter bunny, god, the tooth fairy, a perfect marguerita, god, leprechauns, smokestacks on the moon, an honest politician . . .

Sorry. I'll run out of bandwidth

The question is not whether God exists or not, but what is God.


To the believer, what is the God you have faith in.


To the non-believer, what is it that you think does not exist.

Good shit, TH. Good shit indeed.

Man is the measure of all things.--Protagoras


To the non-believer, what is it that you think does not exist.


#489 | Posted by truthhurts at 2009-08-29 03:29 PM | Reply | Flag


The god described in the bible.

#491 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob


So you do not forsake the possibility that there is a God out there. If so what is God?

Santa claus, the easter bunny, god, the tooth fairy, a perfect marguerita, god, leprechauns, smokestacks on the moon, an honest politician . . .

Goatman explains smokestacks on the moon

But you've seen the pictures WHAT ELSE COULD THEY BE! Admit that the SMOKESTACK is REAL or I will BEAT YOU WITH MY CAR ANTENNA before you can get your MEATY FINGER on the trigger of your EVIL GUN. You are ANTICHRIST because you reject the 4-SIDED DAY of the LUNAR TIMECUBE as evidenced by MULTIDIMENSIONAL SMOKE RELEASE from the four points where day night night day intersect with the thoughts of a meth-addict hurtling through 4-DIMENSIONS OF 4DIMENSIONAL SPACE that make 16 DIMENSIONS all made out of PLASMA!!!!

"I will BEAT YOU WITH MY CAR ANTENNA "

Just not the Castrol dipstick, please.

www.youtube.com


To the non-believer, what is it that you think does not exist.


Shit. Where do I begin?


Santa claus, the easter bunny, god, the tooth fairy, a perfect marguerita, god, leprechauns, smokestacks on the moon, an honest politician . . .


Sorry. I'll run out of bandwidth

#492 | Posted by goatman

so there is no god. so what was the source of the universe? I wont ask why do we exist because that is a man made construct, but what was the source of all that exists?

what was the source of all that exists?

#498 | Posted by truthhurts

That's known as a leading question because nothing can exist before existence. If you posit a god before existence, that's tantamount to saying god doesn't exist. Second, the logic of a creator god posits an infinite regression of creator gods.

That's also a reason why the Big Bang Theory is a lot of hocus pocus.

That's known as a leading question because nothing can exist before existence. If you posit a god before existence, that's tantamount to saying god doesn't exist. Second, the logic of a creator god posits an infinite regression of creator gods.

That's also a reason why the Big Bang Theory is a lot of hocus pocus.

Therefore, we do not exist?

Therefore, we do not exist?

I think I was clear. I don't get the question.

Therefore, we do not exist?

I think I was clear. I don't get the question.

I think I was clear.

Not really -- at least not to me.

I don't get the question.

OK, I'll put it another way: In your model, how did it all start? What was the beginning of everyting? For you it's not god or the big bang, so what is your theory?

A short, to the point article. Good summation in the "Conclusion" section at the end of the article.

Link is from "www.godandscience.org"


"If God Created Everything, Who Created God?"


"If God Created Everything, Who Created God?"

Super God!

That question assumes there was a beginning. For there to be a beginning, there had to be a previous end - existence. Like a light switch is either on or off. There is either existence or there is no-existence, nothing.

Language has a heiracharical structure. For example, the word "child" has no meaning without "parent." Similarly, a thing can exist within existence, but it cannot exist outside of existence.

Up to the early twentieth century, science was firmly rooted on the notion that existence was absolute and all-encompassing. Or said another way, the universe was infinite in time and space. Then with Einstein, cosmologists drifted into abstract mathematics. When the mathematics lead to the conclusion that the universe had a beginning, that should have falsified the mathematics. Instead they ignored the Law of the Conservation of Energy. Something cannot come from nothing, except, of course, in our imagination. There was no magical tranformation that created the universe.

I hope I was more clear.

Read Comments 1 - 500 | 501 - 530

Post a comment
Comments are closed for this entry.
Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable