Post by: lordvader129 on October 21, 2005, 10:54:00 AM
in order to understand the basis of modern organized religion (particualrly christianity) we have to look all the way back to the pagan religion of ancient rome
in rome, a temple was built to honor a god, in that temple the priest lived and worked, it was the priest and the priest alone who could communicate the thoughts and wishes of the people to the god, so it was important to keep the priest happy, people would bring offerings to the god (err, priest) in the hopes that their prayers would be heard (err, passed on to the god) if the priest didnt like you you were pretty much SOL because it meant the god didnt like you either
when theodosius converted the roman empire to christianity he had to appease the people who feared change and feared angering thier old gods, so, in a sense, christianity was merged with the pagan religions (via doctrines written up by constantine half a century earlier) the temples still stood, there was still a priest in power, even statues of the divine remained, they were simply "rededicated" as it were to the christian god
sidenote: in the vatican i know there is at least one statue where a pope (cant remember which one right now) is portrayed as jupiter, the roman high god, and it is customary for visiters to kiss the statues big toe, as ancient romans would kiss the big toe of a statue of jupiter
i feel that christianity as a whole has been corrupted, it is as much about pagan traditions as it is about christian ones
the bible defines a "priest" as one who has direct access to god, he can communicate with god, the rest of the people cant and have to communicate through him
the bible also defines christianity as "a nation of priests" menaing we ALL are priests, it then follows that we all have direct access and can cummunicate with god, hence there is no need for a specific "priest" (or father or minister or reverend or bishop or cardinal or pope or anything)
in the bible, a church or "congration" is shown to more closely resemble what people would call a bible study these days, a group of people gathering at someones home to sit and discuss openly the teaching of bible, the idea of church as a building and as a service attended to hear a sermon was a purely roman invention
we all know the cliche "preaching to the choir" shouldnt "preaching to the congregation" fall into the same catagory?
ill fill this out with more quotes and examples form the bible when i get home, ill probably patch up on roman history to show the transitions better as well
Post by: puckSR on October 21, 2005, 11:55:00 AM
Christianity is heavily based on "pagan" traditions. I understand how upset you are with the entire situation, but please understand that if you tried to get to the original roots of any religion you would find yourself in quite a quagmire.
A few "pagan" inheritences in Christianity
Satan
Christmas
Easter
Philosophy
morality
The flood story
St. Paul-he was roman(and his influence can be seen)
Divinity of Jesus-Decided by Constantine, a freshly converted pagan
Of course, this would be expected if you thought of religion as an evolutionary progress.
(*not biological evolution, dont even bring up the Theory of Evolution*)
This of course would imply that religion was more solidly based on man than on a God, which offends most people. It must be remembered however, that all of our knowledge of God and Jesus is based on the writings of man. The people of other beliefs frequently had equal or greater proof for the existence of their god or gods.
Your realization does however strike a chord with many, as did Martin Luther. The problem that Martin Luther discovered relatively quickly, is that if you abandon all things of alien origin in a religion, you often wind up with no real solid religion at all.
Take, for example, the Protestant Christians. They have over 100 different beliefs between them, and a relatively small number of open minded wise men in their religious circles. A perfect example of this is the rise of fundamentalism, especially the fundamentalist interpretation of Revelations. The book of the Apocalypse barely made the modern bible. Early Christian councils were worried about including it because, "it may later be intreperted literally, instead of metaphorically".(to paraphrase many documents of the council). The Catholics, for example, who have an excellent sense of history are well aware of the situation, but many of the fundamentalist are not. Many fundamentalists are not even aware of how the books and letters of the New Testament were selected. Besides, do you know how ludicrous it is to take literally and completely out of context the words of translation of a translation of a translation?
Generally, the Catholic church has some quirks, such as the Pope, and the heirarchy, and some strange traditions that they maintain; however, they are normally much more knowledgeble than protestant minister. Did you know, for example, that a Catholic priest has to earn at least a bachelor's (normally in Theology or Philosophy) at an accredited University before he may apply for seminarian training. **This is not a rule, but a general guideline.
All in all, religion is normally not as straightforward as one would like, but it engages man in the constant question of the superior being. The problem is that all religions do that, and as Christians are fond of saying "Its all about faith"
I guess they are the only ones who have faith ;)
Post by: bluedeath on October 21, 2005, 11:57:00 AM
Post by: puckSR on October 21, 2005, 12:07:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on October 21, 2005, 01:04:00 PM
QUOTE
Satan
formerly lucifer, most beautiful of all angels, cast down from heaven after inciting a rebellion to overthrow god
origin: judaism
the horned an hoofed modern image of satan is indeed derived from pagan images though, hes shown resembling a centaur of greek mythology, which is a pagan influence that people who call themselves christians shouldnt buy into
QUOTE
Christmas
i can see this one, as it falls awefully close to the winter solstice, however the idea behind the christian holiday is not celebrating the soltice but rather the birth of christ, but this in fact supports my claims that modern christianity is too close to paganism, the brith of jesus was never celebrated during his life, it shouldnt be celebrated after
QUOTE
Easter
same as above, very close to spring equinox, the idea behind it was to link the the hebrew celebration of passover to the christian faith, but the pope has messed that one up by basing the date of easter on a solar calender instead of the same lunar calender passover is scheduled by
QUOTE
Philosophy
so because the first recreational thinkers happened to be pagan all philosophy is pagan?
QUOTE
morality
same as above
QUOTE
The flood story
this is an interesting one, the general explanation is the followers of the pagan religions just happened to witness the same events recorded in the bible (why they werent destroyed by tthe flood that was supposed to destroy all mankind is anyones guess)
QUOTE
St. Paul-he was roman(and his influence can be seen)
roman by birth, hebrew by faith (later converting to christianity) the whole point of converting is to abandon your old faith as you no longer see it as right, paul (saul) didnt abandon all of his hebrew traditions as christianity was an evolution of judaism and the two faiths were always meant to be linked (as they were gods 2 'chosen" peoples)
QUOTE
Divinity of Jesus-Decided by Constantine, a freshly converted pagan
constantine didnt "decide" jesus was divine, he just came to realize it upon his conversion, then assembled christian leaders to write out the doctrines of christianity, in which he inserted many of his old pagan traditions (see above) which is the whole thing im ranting about
people view constantines doctrine of christianity as "true" christianity because its one of the oldest and most publicized writings on the subject, but early christians had much different traditions, there isnt much evidence of them however since they were persecuted so much
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 21, 2005, 01:37:00 PM
The funny thing about Christmas, is that Jesus was not born in December. Societies Chistmas makes me sick, as does Organized Christian Christmas. To me I only hold this holiday as a time in which I spend with those closest to me, my family. If you want to celebrate the life or your God, you should not need a set day.
Satan, if someone really thinks he has horns and hoofs, they need help. Although today the normal person would think such a thing. The real funny part is how far off-base anyone who thinks that is. Satan is the master of deception. Would someone who wants to deceive you, look as if they are evil?
Post by: lordvader129 on October 21, 2005, 02:00:00 PM
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Oct 21 2005, 02:41 PM)
Would someone who wants to deceive you, look as if they are evil?
it can be argued that the prevalence of this imagery is satans own doing,people expect him to look like this
(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/nl/1/1d/Satan.jpg)
so when he appears to them looking more like this
(IMG:http://www.chipy.net/povezave/Lamai/Angel_Gabriel_.jpg)
they think it must be from god, but it isnt
This post has been edited by lordvader129: Oct 21 2005, 09:03 PM
Post by: puckSR on October 21, 2005, 02:23:00 PM
Christians trace satan back to judaism, but his roots go further back then that. The modern concept of Satan mostly comes from Islam. The horns and stuff, that is the incorporation of many different popular beliefs. Almost all forms of mythology have a mischevious figure. i.e. Puck, Loki.... the list goes on
The term hell is actually directly from the Norse word for the afterlife. The concept of Satan as the ruler of Heaven and Hell is taken from Greek/Roman mythology. The bible isnt the end all however. Even in the bible, the term Hades is used to refer to the afterlife. This isnt a typo, but the actual correct translation of the text
********Christmas***************
The birth of Jesus was most definately not in december
The entire holiday was created to combat winter solistice in pagan cultures.
There are many who would propose that this entire early portion of the bible was already a myth. Often the origins of important figures in history are clouded with myths about their childhood. Washington chopped down a cherry tree, Lincoln walked 20 miles to return a book(and only to return a book).
******Philosophy***************
If early Christians had engaged in a completely different form of philosophy than the greeks or romans. They did not do this, and instead continued the traditions of their forefathers. Arguments were made in the same style, and logical reasoning was used.
Early Christian philosophers such as St Thomas Aquinas were strong followers of the classical greek thinkers.
***********The Flood********************
The bible was not written in the time of Noah, if it had been, Noah would have had to have written, either him or one of his children. Floods have always been devastating natural phenomenom. The strike quickly, and can be rather deadly. Most cultures have some story about the destructive nature of floods, and most of these stories highlight the small survival rate. The similarities end at this point, and all of the stories change. An interesting note, if it rained for 40 days and 40 nights, and lets assume to flood the earth to some degree you would need at least 2500 ft raise in the sea level, then they would have gotten 62.5 ft of rain a day or over 2.5 ft per hour. This is assuming that not everything was flooded, only low lying areas near the water. Besides the fact that sheets of water and not rain would have to come down, there are older flood myths or stories than Noah's
*******Paul***********
Paul was important to the early church because he made Christianity accesible to gentiles. He was well aware of the cultural differences and that may be why he is responsible for many of the abandoment of traditional Jewish practices.
We may work on Sunday
We may eat pork and other unclean meats
etc
This post has been edited by puckSR: Oct 21 2005, 09:25 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on October 21, 2005, 03:41:00 PM
QUOTE
RE: Satan
in proper christian beliefs satan isnt the ruler of "hell" (in quotes because i dont use the term in a religious sense, i dont believe the bible ever uses it either, to me the correct term is "lake of fire") he isnt even there yet, he rules on earth right now, he will be cast into the lake of fire upon the return of christ
the term hades is literal translation, in fact possibly not a translation at all, as the gospels were written in greek, and since jesus spoke arameic (sp?) its automatically flawed, since not everything will translate properly
personally i feel all new testament writing are flawed as they are subject to the fallacy of man, i believe that when jesus ascended to heaven after the resurrection neither he nor god exert any influence on this world, therefore, to me, the argument that "god wouldnt let the bible get corrupted" is inacurate, we are compeltely under the control of satan until the second coming, this is why people who practice magic (white and black) have more power than christians, in essence, christianity is more of a "faith" than more people realize
as for satan coming from islam, islam came from judaism as well (ironic considering the turmoil in the middle east, the two faiths are "borhters" in a way) the angel gabriel appeared to muhamed and dictated the quran to him...of course that probably causes hebrews to see muslims as heretics
QUOTE
RE: christmas
i know jesus wasnt born in december, but again, as i said earlier, his birth was not celebrated during his life, and should be celebrated after his death, christmas is a "modern" invention, which, as you say, was to combat celebrations of the winter solstice and ease the transition to christianity, for people raised christian it should serve no purpose
QUOTE
RE: philosophy
personally ive always held philosophy and theology at arms length apart, but most christian philosophers came about long after what i percieve to be the corruption of the faith, even your "early" christian St Thomas Aquinas lived almost 1000 years after constantine bastardized the doctrines
QUOTE
RE: flood
yeah, i pretty much conceded this one in my last post, but then again its place int he christian faith is a throwback to the hebrew faith, whcih also had countless ties to paganism probably for the same reasons christianity does now, to ease a transition
QUOTE
RE: paul
not sure where i stand on this one, never researched it much
QUOTE
sidenote:
the sabbath that you dont work on is saturday (7th day, day of rest, hebrew sabbath) sunday is the christian sabbath (resurrection) and it doesnt say you cant work, again, a throwback to older religions to ease a transition
QUOTE
RE: my beliefs
i have some crazy convoluted beliefs that i have never referred to as christianity, although i share many tenets with christianity, notably he most basic (and most cliched) tenet in john 3:16 i have been told by many i am going to lake of fire for my beliefs and they are probably right, i just think its funny because most of them will be there for the same reasons
PS i wonder how long this debate can stay intellectual before someone starts hurling personal insults, lol
Post by: pug_ster on October 21, 2005, 04:05:00 PM
On the other hand, Organized Religion is bad is when it is used for exploiting other people, are told that they are better than non-believers, or used an excuse to kill other innocent people.
You have Christians who used the bible to justify slavery, Muslims justifying jihad to kill innocent people, Radical Jews justify killing Palestians is right, and you have George Bush telling other people to vote for him because he is a 'devot' Christian. Don't forget those splinter religion like Church of Seventh Day Adventists that justify their leader David Koresh as god himself.
This post has been edited by pug_ster: Oct 21 2005, 11:06 PM
Post by: ClintiePoo on October 21, 2005, 04:16:00 PM
Hebrews 10:25 says that we should not forsake assembling together. Therefore the bible encourages organized religion.
The bible also encourages us to follow it. If these religions deviate from the bible, they are wrong and therefore not of God. Organized bastardization of the bible is bad.
Post by: RLLMoFP on October 21, 2005, 04:23:00 PM
God (what ever God is) does not speak to us, does not command us to perform or conform, does not whisper in our ears as we write 'his words to paper'. No book ever written was either dictated by or addressed by God. It is the philosophical opinions of men, and to suggest that Gods influence drove anyone to do anything is simply grandiose blustering.
Religions set people apart. People should not create additional barriers between themselves, when there are far to many barriers dividing us already.
If God created us, then it created us over a period of billions of years. All the while seemingly not caring if we worshiped it or not. God does not command the deer to bow to it every morning and night, does not command the fish to build great temples in it's honor, does not chide the wolf for it's choice of dinner.
If God exists (and it is possible, it is a vast and overwhelming universe) then so be it. Until God makes an appearance on national news and tells the entire world how it wants things done, I am content to live my life behaving as a rational and considerate human being without fear of repercussion. As stated by Allan W Janssen in his book: The Plain Truth About God-101, its time for the human race to grow up and start treating each other with dignity, regardless of the social, geographical or racial differences.
Using God as an excuse for your behavior is wrong and religions fuel that behavior, whether deliberate or not.
Post by: puckSR on October 21, 2005, 04:35:00 PM
The common question of the Deist is that if God chooses to intervene in our lives, what is stopping him from coming down and making his voice heard?
The common christian response is that God only intervenes in our lives indirectly. This is challenged by many of the actions of God in the old Testament.
The second common response of Christians is that God wants us to believe in him without direct proof. The idea being that if you can do this then you really have faith. The flaw with this reasoning is that either God has never directly intervened, and therefore we honestly dont know who he is, or that God is the God of the Bible, in which case he did intervene directly, and therefore he should have no problem showing up in Colorado.
Referring back to the sabbath, Christians keep neither day holy(at least in the Jewish sense of the word), and Christians do not follow traditional Christian laws.
Post by: lordvader129 on October 21, 2005, 05:19:00 PM
QUOTE(ClintiePoo @ Oct 21 2005, 05:20 PM)
Hebrews 10:25 says that we should not forsake assembling together. Therefore the bible encourages organized religion.
i think thats a loose argument at best, assembling together doesnt necessarily entail everything in organized religion, like in my first post imake the point that the bible promotes a society of euqals who convene to openly discuss the bible and different points of veiw this is certainly assembling together but is in no way my definiton of "organized religion"
just for grins next time your pastor is up giving a sermon raise your hand and disagree with him on some point, see what happens, lol
to god intervening or not, god intervened in the lives of the hebrews, not the christians, the coming of the messiah and the advent of christianity brought about a change is the order of the universe THIS is when people were given complete free will in their own lives (before god would destroy those who didnt follow) and salvation came by grace not by race, ANYONE, not just those of hebrew descent, could join the kingdom of god, this also the time when dominion over the earth was given to satan, thats why god doesnt intervene anymore, satan is in control, and the christian faith is that when god has had enough he'll come back and smack satan around a bit
Post by: puckSR on October 21, 2005, 05:54:00 PM
OR i guess your saying that before Jesus God didnt give a flying fuck about anyone else. If this is the case, why did he suddenly decide after thousands of years and many "lost" souls to allow everyone who was good into heaven? Why also did God allow the rift between the Hebrews and the Samaritans?
Post by: lordvader129 on October 21, 2005, 06:09:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 21 2005, 06:58 PM)
If God intervened so much before the coming of Jesus, why didnt he attack people of alternate beliefs?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 21, 2005, 08:29:00 PM
-
Everyone from Ethiopia to about Afghanistan are essentially cousins. And Islam is closer to christianity than Judaism.
Pucksr Judaism is a lot older than islam, considering as I had mentioned before that Ishamel the father of the Arabs was of Hebrew(father) and Nubian(mother).
I see the bible as the only consistent and concise predictor of the human lust for evil.
1) When Lucifer or the beast was expelled from paradise he was banished to earth
where he he caused evil to flourish. Could this be the caveman period or the
beast he created be what we call dinosaurs.
2) Why is the land of Israel a source of contention.
3) Is the fall of Irad a sign of the end times when the whore of babylon
(modern Iraq) would be destroyed.
4) Why did Cain slay Able his brother, the first murder. Why do ethnic brothers
fight the most fierce battles. Over and over Africans vs Africans, Europeans vs
Europeans Asians vs Asians.
The funny thing is when god and the angels walked amongst men and women, they still turned to evil. Because GOD wasnt in their hearts. The hand of god split the sea and the 12 tribes left africa and fled into S Arabia, and god let the water of the sea drown the pursuing africans. And yet the 12 tribes still worshipped idols after god saved them. And god made them lost for a generation before sending north to Israel.
Salvation is only achieved through Jesus. You can argue everyone is of Hebrew descent if you believe, since we are all descendants of NOAH. And since GOD dispersed the 12 tribes amongst the nations of the earth.
The question should be why did god cause a rift between Judah and Israel.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: brutalsun on October 21, 2005, 09:32:00 PM
-
My.02 on organized religion
It is a tool to command the weak of mind. What does God need with a 3 million dollar church, and rich clergy. Weren't priests supposed to give up worldy posessions? They roll like rock stars. And todays christianity has nothing to do with the religion the bible was written for, therefore the religion is WRONG.
I also hate how the bible is used in 2 manners. It is interpreted as a story but in the same breath it is used to define law to the letter.... HOW??
Call me blasphemous I don't care. I speak with God on my terms and he shines upon me. My family is healthy and my life is good, and this is not from attending a church and listening to some blowhard tell me I'm living life wrong.
Religion SUCKS. Sprituality is what I believe in. I follow how I see fit, and it works for me
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on October 22, 2005, 02:46:00 PM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 21, 2005, 08:29:00 PM
QUOTE
as for satan coming from islam, islam came from judaism as well (ironic considering the turmoil in the middle east, the two faiths are "borhters" in a way) the angel gabriel appeared to muhamed and dictated the quran to him...of course that probably causes hebrews to see muslims as heretics
Everyone from Ethiopia to about Afghanistan are essentially cousins. And Islam is closer to christianity than Judaism.
Pucksr Judaism is a lot older than islam, considering as I had mentioned before that Ishamel the father of the Arabs was of Hebrew(father) and Nubian(mother).
QUOTE
Until God makes an appearance on national news and tells the entire world how it wants things done, I am content to live my life behaving as a rational and considerate human being without fear of repercussion. As stated by Allan W Janssen in his book: The Plain Truth About God-101, its time for the human race to grow up and start treating each other with dignity, regardless of the social, geographical or racial differences.
I see the bible as the only consistent and concise predictor of the human lust for evil.
1) When Lucifer or the beast was expelled from paradise he was banished to earth
where he he caused evil to flourish. Could this be the caveman period or the
beast he created be what we call dinosaurs.
2) Why is the land of Israel a source of contention.
3) Is the fall of Irad a sign of the end times when the whore of babylon
(modern Iraq) would be destroyed.
4) Why did Cain slay Able his brother, the first murder. Why do ethnic brothers
fight the most fierce battles. Over and over Africans vs Africans, Europeans vs
Europeans Asians vs Asians.
QUOTE
Until God makes an appearance on national news and tells the entire world how it wants things done, I am content to live my life behaving as a rational and considerate human being without fear of repercussion
The funny thing is when god and the angels walked amongst men and women, they still turned to evil. Because GOD wasnt in their hearts. The hand of god split the sea and the 12 tribes left africa and fled into S Arabia, and god let the water of the sea drown the pursuing africans. And yet the 12 tribes still worshipped idols after god saved them. And god made them lost for a generation before sending north to Israel.
QUOTE
salvation came by grace not by race, ANYONE, not just those of hebrew descent, could join the kingdom of god, this also the time when dominion over the earth was given to satan
Salvation is only achieved through Jesus. You can argue everyone is of Hebrew descent if you believe, since we are all descendants of NOAH. And since GOD dispersed the 12 tribes amongst the nations of the earth.
QUOTE
Why also did God allow the rift between the Hebrews and the Samaritans?
The question should be why did god cause a rift between Judah and Israel.
Post by: brutalsun on October 21, 2005, 09:32:00 PM
It is a tool to command the weak of mind. What does God need with a 3 million dollar church, and rich clergy. Weren't priests supposed to give up worldy posessions? They roll like rock stars. And todays christianity has nothing to do with the religion the bible was written for, therefore the religion is WRONG.
I also hate how the bible is used in 2 manners. It is interpreted as a story but in the same breath it is used to define law to the letter.... HOW??
Call me blasphemous I don't care. I speak with God on my terms and he shines upon me. My family is healthy and my life is good, and this is not from attending a church and listening to some blowhard tell me I'm living life wrong.
Religion SUCKS. Sprituality is what I believe in. I follow how I see fit, and it works for me
Post by: lordvader129 on October 22, 2005, 02:46:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 22 2005, 03:50 PM)
*******Satan***************
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on October 22, 2005, 05:20:00 PM
-
It's foolish to argue with the bible as a reference. If you believe in the bible then you believe that satan exists and is at odds with us etc. If this is the case then wouldn't he have slowly tainted the bible as a reference through mistranslation, misprint and by tempting man to do so through the ages. How can anyone trust any version of the bible unless it is proved to be translated correctly. How can it be proved?
In a different direction...
There is some basic inherent logic at hand so simple that it is constantly overlooked.
God if you believe in him would be perfection and perfection is above all consistent.
If god is consistent then he would have only one organization that would serve as his means of divinely communicating with the people. He would essentially have one gospel and not a bunch of deviations. Deviations lead to misinterpretation which is a tool skillfully used by Satan.
I think the mistake our society has made is that that we believe that we are too intelligent to need god or in many cases so arrogant that we rationalize deviations in our basic fundamental beliefs to the point of obscurity. This is not something new. This system of thought has occurred before and has always lead to destruction.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 22, 2005, 08:31:00 PM
-
Post by: bluedeath on October 22, 2005, 05:20:00 PM
In a different direction...
There is some basic inherent logic at hand so simple that it is constantly overlooked.
God if you believe in him would be perfection and perfection is above all consistent.
If god is consistent then he would have only one organization that would serve as his means of divinely communicating with the people. He would essentially have one gospel and not a bunch of deviations. Deviations lead to misinterpretation which is a tool skillfully used by Satan.
I think the mistake our society has made is that that we believe that we are too intelligent to need god or in many cases so arrogant that we rationalize deviations in our basic fundamental beliefs to the point of obscurity. This is not something new. This system of thought has occurred before and has always lead to destruction.
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 22, 2005, 08:31:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 22 2005, 10:50 PM)
*******Satan***************
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 23, 2005, 07:34:00 AM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 23, 2005, 07:34:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 23 2005, 09:25 AM)
Unlike the example of God, you dont know that a seatbelt will save your life. Besides, a seatbelt has the side effect of not always being necessary. Let me give you a better analogy to your God reference earlier
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on October 23, 2005, 12:33:00 PM
-
Post by: bluedeath on October 23, 2005, 12:33:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 23 2005, 01:25 AM)
Name another time that "hubiristic atheism" has condemned a society, sparring of course the examples of the bible.(either the bible is false, or God wouldnt bother to list stories of times that society had succeded without him)
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: T.bag on October 23, 2005, 07:46:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 23, 2005, 10:23:00 PM
-
Post by: T.bag on October 23, 2005, 07:46:00 PM
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 23, 2005, 10:23:00 PM
QUOTE(bluedeath @ Oct 23 2005, 08:44 PM)
What is hubiristic atheism? Do you mean huberistic or heuristic? Not trying to be an ass just both mean something different.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 24, 2005, 08:01:00 AM
-
If a man has sex with an infected female his "risk" of contracting HIV is a lot less than vise versa.
Source
Lets see Ethiopia refered to as Nubia in the Christian Bible is the oldest christian country in the WORLD.
Actually Jesus christ probably grew up in Ethiopia or N. Africa after the attempt on his life by the greeks.
Subsaharan africans have the longest DNA chromosne sequence of any other people on the face of the earth.
Interpretation this means that thier race is the oldest.
Source
Funny since the bible also says this. Sorry to injure your "WHITE PRIDE" pugster and master race bolgna
Since you dont believe this you cant possibly blieve in evolution, how did mankind populate the earth.
Oh, let me guess a large spaceship that sits atop pyramids transports humans from africa to north america, or the Titanic took people to Australia.
No, Thanks you are a moron.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on October 24, 2005, 08:24:00 AM
-
you just contradicted yourself xmedia, saying th eold human remains were found in south africa, then posting an article stating the oldest were found in ethiopia, i think yo uneed to read a map, then a book
believing all humans are descened from noah is just are crazy as you claim evolution to be, if we all came from one family we'd all he be inbred as hell
hebrews didnt build pyramids, archeological evidence shows that the builders of the pyramids were well cared for, respected and when they died they were even buried in shadow of the pyramid, certainly an honor not given to mere slaves
this is not to say hebrews were never slaves in africa, they just didnt build the pyramids (the bible even says they were building mud huts, not pyramids)
and i think those catholic "passes" were to bypass purgatory and go straight to heaven, right?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 24, 2005, 09:10:00 AM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 24, 2005, 08:01:00 AM
QUOTE
Wow, so if two straight people are having sex, and one has AIDS, it is hard to transmit? Didnt know that
If a man has sex with an infected female his "risk" of contracting HIV is a lot less than vise versa.
Source
QUOTE
(AP) Bones discovered nearly 40 years ago in Ethiopia now appear to be the oldest known fossils of modern-looking humans, says an analysis that suggests they come from around the dawn of the species.
Researchers determined that the specimens are around 195,000 years old. Previously, the oldest known fossils of Homo sapiens were Ethiopian skulls dated to about 160,000 years ago.
Researchers determined that the specimens are around 195,000 years old. Previously, the oldest known fossils of Homo sapiens were Ethiopian skulls dated to about 160,000 years ago.
Lets see Ethiopia refered to as Nubia in the Christian Bible is the oldest christian country in the WORLD.
Actually Jesus christ probably grew up in Ethiopia or N. Africa after the attempt on his life by the greeks.
QUOTE
The oldest human remains were found in South Africa? How old were they? And how did South Africa get up to the Middle East. You would have to cross some pretty rough terrain? Well if it took them a couple of centuries, sure, but if it took them a week, then this seems somewhat suspect.
Subsaharan africans have the longest DNA chromosne sequence of any other people on the face of the earth.
Interpretation this means that thier race is the oldest.
QUOTE
For many years, evolutionists have said that humans evolved in Africa. Studies of the Y-chromosomes of living men (only males have a Y) were used to support this theory. African males have more differences among their Y DNA than on other continents. So, researchers assumed that this meant that humans have been there longer than anyplace else.
Source
Funny since the bible also says this. Sorry to injure your "WHITE PRIDE" pugster and master race bolgna
QUOTE
You would have to cross some pretty rough terrain? Well if it took them a couple of centuries, sure, but if it took them a week, then this seems somewhat suspect.
Since you dont believe this you cant possibly blieve in evolution, how did mankind populate the earth.
Oh, let me guess a large spaceship that sits atop pyramids transports humans from africa to north america, or the Titanic took people to Australia.
QUOTE
Trust me, or go read a book.
No, Thanks you are a moron.
Post by: lordvader129 on October 24, 2005, 08:24:00 AM
believing all humans are descened from noah is just are crazy as you claim evolution to be, if we all came from one family we'd all he be inbred as hell
hebrews didnt build pyramids, archeological evidence shows that the builders of the pyramids were well cared for, respected and when they died they were even buried in shadow of the pyramid, certainly an honor not given to mere slaves
this is not to say hebrews were never slaves in africa, they just didnt build the pyramids (the bible even says they were building mud huts, not pyramids)
and i think those catholic "passes" were to bypass purgatory and go straight to heaven, right?
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 24, 2005, 09:10:00 AM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Oct 24 2005, 04:35 PM)
you just contradicted yourself xmedia, saying th eold human remains were found in south africa, then posting an article stating the oldest were found in ethiopia, i think yo uneed to read a map, then a book
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 24, 2005, 09:59:00 AM
-
Obviously you don't understand the real freedom of choice.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on October 24, 2005, 10:30:00 AM
-
theres no archiological or historical evidence to show pyramids were ever built of mud blocks in egypt, the first pyramid is the (stone) step pyramid of pharoah djoser
before that the pharoahs tombs were stone mustabas, like this one
in fact even djosers pyramid started as a mastaba, shown in this cross-section
older mastabas may have been built of mud, but they certainly werent pyramids
besides, the pyramids had to built of very exacting specification or else the pharoah couldnt ascend to to the heavens and take his place among the stars, something as important as the pharoahs afterlife wouldnt be trusted to slaves, especially ones who didnt like him very much, it would have been far too easy for them to sabotage it
and grafitti found in the great pyramid at giza showed the work gangs honored and respected the pharoah
biblical fact eh? problem is not everyone takes the bible as hard fact, makes debate very difficult, we'll probably just have to let this issue drop
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: damam on October 24, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
-
The only difference lies in how we interpret highly improbable events. Most of the "miracles" in the bible can be explained as rare natural events with impecable timing. Back then, when something very rare occured that went in there favour they would thank g-d for it. Now days, we simply say, "Wow, what a random natural event that happened to go in our favour" and really dont seek anything spiritual out of it.
Not that i am rushing out and testing these studies personally, but aids in america is pretty hard to transmit. Aids is especialy hard to transmit from the person being penatrated to the penetrator as long as no other std's are in the picture. There are multiple studies that demonstrate this.
Heres one article summerizing a study
I found this particularly suprising:
summerizing article
penatrator to penatraty: 1:120
penatraty to penatrator: 1:1666
penatrator to penatraty(vaginal): 1:1000-2000 (depending on study)
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 24, 2005, 02:21:00 PM
-
Edit: deleted because its not worth wasting my time
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 25, 2005, 11:42:00 AM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 24, 2005, 09:59:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 22 2005, 04:50 PM)
I have heard many arguments against God directly intervening, but obviously if you knew that God existed(knowing is different than believing), you would have no choice but to worship him.
Obviously you don't understand the real freedom of choice.
Post by: lordvader129 on October 24, 2005, 10:30:00 AM
QUOTE
The first pyramids were "baked mud blocks" evolving into cut stone in Giza and Mexico.
theres no archiological or historical evidence to show pyramids were ever built of mud blocks in egypt, the first pyramid is the (stone) step pyramid of pharoah djoser
before that the pharoahs tombs were stone mustabas, like this one
in fact even djosers pyramid started as a mastaba, shown in this cross-section
older mastabas may have been built of mud, but they certainly werent pyramids
besides, the pyramids had to built of very exacting specification or else the pharoah couldnt ascend to to the heavens and take his place among the stars, something as important as the pharoahs afterlife wouldnt be trusted to slaves, especially ones who didnt like him very much, it would have been far too easy for them to sabotage it
and grafitti found in the great pyramid at giza showed the work gangs honored and respected the pharoah
QUOTE
In the biblical context we are all descendants of noah, wether you believe or not that is your perogative just stating a biblical fact.
biblical fact eh? problem is not everyone takes the bible as hard fact, makes debate very difficult, we'll probably just have to let this issue drop
Post by: damam on October 24, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 24 2005, 07:26 AM)
OOh, i understand the concept that God doesnt come down and say "Hi" so that we have the freedom to choose. The problem is that if you read the bible, he was frequently performing massive miracles(parting of the red sea, manna, destruction of sodom and gomorrah...etc) this is very different than today, where he has apparently taken a laissez faire attitude towards humanity. Why the change? Why not the occasional supermiracle?
The only difference lies in how we interpret highly improbable events. Most of the "miracles" in the bible can be explained as rare natural events with impecable timing. Back then, when something very rare occured that went in there favour they would thank g-d for it. Now days, we simply say, "Wow, what a random natural event that happened to go in our favour" and really dont seek anything spiritual out of it.
QUOTE
Wow, so if two straight people are having sex, and one has AIDS, it is hard to transmit? Didnt know that
Not that i am rushing out and testing these studies personally, but aids in america is pretty hard to transmit. Aids is especialy hard to transmit from the person being penatrated to the penetrator as long as no other std's are in the picture. There are multiple studies that demonstrate this.
Heres one article summerizing a study
I found this particularly suprising:
QUOTE
Each time an uninfected man engages in unprotected receptive anal intercourse with an HIV-positive partner, for example, chances are 1 in 120 that he will become infected with the AIDS virus.
summerizing article
penatrator to penatraty: 1:120
penatraty to penatrator: 1:1666
penatrator to penatraty(vaginal): 1:1000-2000 (depending on study)
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 24, 2005, 02:21:00 PM
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 25, 2005, 11:42:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 24 2005, 04:46 PM)
awww, thats sweet,
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 25, 2005, 07:53:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: thewickedjester on October 25, 2005, 07:53:00 PM
-
Hipocrasy, all religon is full of it and is pretty much the only reason I dont accept any religon.
God I wish I had you for my Uncle, he keeps telling me I'm going to hell if I dont accept Jesus Christ as my lord and savior... Doesnt sugarcoat it or anything, just flat out "your going to hell"
The huge tidal wave in Indonesia (and surrounding courntires): huge flood sent to purge the land of non-followers, or just a freak wave? Depending on the time frame, it could be either one to you.
Organized religon is good, as long as its followers accept that there are others that dont follow what they do. We have wars in the name of religon, I'm sorry, thats just stupid...
You know, its not god I have a problem with, its his fan clubs I cant stand...
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on October 25, 2005, 09:19:00 PM
-
Actually, that is not what we do. Nowadays, we explore possible understandings of the unknown. We know that God didnt cause the tsunami, that an earthquake caused the tsunami. We also know that the earthquake was caused by pressures in the tectonic plates beneath the earth. The occasional earthquake occurs because of this pressure. This also explains why earth quakes occur only in areas where tectonic plates meet.
Back before the naturalistic method, and before stronger communications, one might think that certain areas were cursed, or hated by God(i.e. Sodom). Now we know that isnt true, so we can abandon the attached mythology.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on October 25, 2005, 09:51:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 25, 2005, 07:53:00 PM
Post by: thewickedjester on October 25, 2005, 07:53:00 PM
QUOTE
wow deftone, isnt one of the primary tenets of Christian faith that you care about your fellow man.
Hipocrasy, all religon is full of it and is pretty much the only reason I dont accept any religon.
QUOTE
Freedom of Choice.
God I wish I had you for my Uncle, he keeps telling me I'm going to hell if I dont accept Jesus Christ as my lord and savior... Doesnt sugarcoat it or anything, just flat out "your going to hell"
QUOTE
The only difference lies in how we interpret highly improbable events
The huge tidal wave in Indonesia (and surrounding courntires): huge flood sent to purge the land of non-followers, or just a freak wave? Depending on the time frame, it could be either one to you.
Organized religon is good, as long as its followers accept that there are others that dont follow what they do. We have wars in the name of religon, I'm sorry, thats just stupid...
You know, its not god I have a problem with, its his fan clubs I cant stand...
Post by: puckSR on October 25, 2005, 09:19:00 PM
QUOTE
The only difference lies in how we interpret highly improbable events. Most of the "miracles" in the bible can be explained as rare natural events with impecable timing. Back then, when something very rare occured that went in there favour they would thank g-d for it. Now days, we simply say, "Wow, what a random natural event that happened to go in our favour" and really dont seek anything spiritual out of it.
Actually, that is not what we do. Nowadays, we explore possible understandings of the unknown. We know that God didnt cause the tsunami, that an earthquake caused the tsunami. We also know that the earthquake was caused by pressures in the tectonic plates beneath the earth. The occasional earthquake occurs because of this pressure. This also explains why earth quakes occur only in areas where tectonic plates meet.
Back before the naturalistic method, and before stronger communications, one might think that certain areas were cursed, or hated by God(i.e. Sodom). Now we know that isnt true, so we can abandon the attached mythology.
Post by: bluedeath on October 25, 2005, 09:51:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 25 2005, 09:30 PM)
wait, deftone, so the one "typical" christian belief you dont accept is compassion for your fellow man? Excuse my "arrogance"; but didnt the "founder" of your religion(JESUS) teach that the most important thing was compassion for your fellow man?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: TheLovingSoundsofStatic on October 25, 2005, 10:31:00 PM
-
You are quite the romantic aren't you?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on October 26, 2005, 01:02:00 AM
-
I just get sick and tired of this crap
Oh, you dont believe what i believe
You must be a liberal, smartass, atheist, sinner, materialist........
Maybe, just maybe, i dont agree with you bluedeath?
Maybe im just as religious as you, maybe i am even a better christian(hypothetically) than you? It doesnt matter.
You insult me(unchristian).
You judge me(unchristian)
You doubt the works of God(unchristian)
You believe the works of man over the works of God(blasphemy)
You worship the bible(idolatrous)
You listen to a false prophet, Dwight L. Moody(unchristian)
You are a hypocrite(unchristian)
You try and teach by words, and not by example(unchristian)
Finally, why is it that the atheists seem to be better at helping out their fellow man than Christians? They dont get bogged down in the message, they just help.
I dont know if all of this describes any one person on this forum, but in general, Christians suffer from all of the above issues.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 26, 2005, 07:44:00 AM
-
Post by: TheLovingSoundsofStatic on October 25, 2005, 10:31:00 PM
You are quite the romantic aren't you?
Post by: puckSR on October 26, 2005, 01:02:00 AM
Oh, you dont believe what i believe
You must be a liberal, smartass, atheist, sinner, materialist........
Maybe, just maybe, i dont agree with you bluedeath?
Maybe im just as religious as you, maybe i am even a better christian(hypothetically) than you? It doesnt matter.
You insult me(unchristian).
You judge me(unchristian)
You doubt the works of God(unchristian)
You believe the works of man over the works of God(blasphemy)
You worship the bible(idolatrous)
You listen to a false prophet, Dwight L. Moody(unchristian)
You are a hypocrite(unchristian)
You try and teach by words, and not by example(unchristian)
Finally, why is it that the atheists seem to be better at helping out their fellow man than Christians? They dont get bogged down in the message, they just help.
I dont know if all of this describes any one person on this forum, but in general, Christians suffer from all of the above issues.
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 26, 2005, 07:44:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 26 2005, 09:13 AM)
I just get sick and tired of this crap
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 26, 2005, 10:44:00 AM
-
You contradict yourself so much it isnt funny. You do know that science are the works of another man. You also always use science to prove something of god wrong. I don't know what is going through your head, but that is studying the works of man.
Science - The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
Now I will break it down. To say something has been observed, a man must observe it. To identify something, a man must identify it. To have a description of something, a man has to descibe it. For experimental investigation, a man must perform an experiment and investigate it. Last but not least, man is the only one who can create a theory. This would mean man gave his theoretical explanation of a phenomena.
As if no person has ever been insulted by you. Eye for an Eye, you should expect the same treatment that you dish out.
A Judge, judges people everyday, does that make them unchristian? Jesus died for our sins. To judge someone is a sin. Even if someone sins, that doesnt make them unchristian. Every person on the earth commits sin, even christians.
Would that not be you?
A stupid opinionated point if I have ever seen one. To you, the main points of the Bible are not the works of God, but that does not hold true for everyone.
You always assume things, jump to conclusions and worship yourself.
Who the hell is this guy? Aside from that, the same can be said about any religion/belief/faith but your own.
Where does it say you are unchristian if you are a hypocrite? I hate to tell you the late breaking news, but you are a hypocrite also.
I don't see anyone here trying to teach anything, but only people displaying their opinions. You seem to be the only one here who is "preaching"
Moving to your idiotic response about compashion for the fellow man. Having compashion for the fellow man does not mean subject yourself to their torture for their good fortune. If you don't believe what I say thats not my problem, and I will not force them upon you. I do have compashion for my fellow man, but I can't change their views. If I tried, you would be the opposite of your response and call me a fundamentalist that is trying to convert you. You are the hypocrite. Everything always has to fit your agenda. You are the one who always wants to label someone. Don't believe me, just let me know and I will quote every instance where you have done such in this thread alone.
I await your next highly contradictive response.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 26, 2005, 11:48:00 AM
-
Another assumption from you. Quit assuming things and jumping to conclusions. You also have no clue what my belief structure really is.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 26, 2005, 10:45:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on October 26, 2005, 11:53:00 PM
-
....jesus was an anarchist
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on October 27, 2005, 01:37:00 AM
-
Well puck you certainly have a great deal of time on your hands to preach so much in here. You should setup a tent by the river and gather your flock. You really are dellusional. You spend all kinds of time typing amongst the rabble. Do you think you are some kind of savior to us? I know shutin programmers who start to act all dellusional after they spend weeks on end coding never leaving the house. They act exactly like you do. If you really are so special then why cast your pearls before swine. It's quite confusing to me.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 27, 2005, 10:14:00 AM
-
No, and that is not even a good excuse. You found maybe 10-15 people who believe in Jesus on a forum with thousands. Yes people who only believe in Jesus(and that is all you knew about them), but you label them as Christian Fundamentalists. You sir are Mr. Label Everyone. You think because you have some knowledge in Mathematics and Science that you are above all and can label people. Then you criticise anyone who makes any label and talk about how that is what is wrong with society. When it all boils down to you being one of those people that you say you have disgust for. You say you hate Christians that act as if they are "fundies", but look in a mirror from time to time, you are just a Science Fundie. You are just on the oppsite side of the fence. You act just as they act, only with a different view. Then you proceed to act as if your view is superior...........................
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on October 27, 2005, 10:41:00 AM
-
Im the first to admit that I am an outright jerk and could definately be a better person. Certainly a better example of a christian can be found. Here is my backwoods perhaps even tainted view of the whole mess. Most of the supposed christian organizations in the U.S. are nothing more than glorified businesses. If you are paid to be at church then I don't believe that you are serving christianity. It's really that simple to me. The people that follow these businesses are misguided and seem to be happy with their state of affairs. As long as they are told what they want to hear then they keep going.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: moisty_ on October 27, 2005, 03:40:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 26, 2005, 10:44:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 26 2005, 12:38 AM)
I am smart enough to study God's true works, and not the works of man.
You contradict yourself so much it isnt funny. You do know that science are the works of another man. You also always use science to prove something of god wrong. I don't know what is going through your head, but that is studying the works of man.Science - The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
Now I will break it down. To say something has been observed, a man must observe it. To identify something, a man must identify it. To have a description of something, a man has to descibe it. For experimental investigation, a man must perform an experiment and investigate it. Last but not least, man is the only one who can create a theory. This would mean man gave his theoretical explanation of a phenomena.
QUOTE
You insult me(unchristian).
As if no person has ever been insulted by you. Eye for an Eye, you should expect the same treatment that you dish out.
QUOTE
You judge me(unchristian)
A Judge, judges people everyday, does that make them unchristian?
Jesus died for our sins. To judge someone is a sin. Even if someone sins, that doesnt make them unchristian. Every person on the earth commits sin, even christians.QUOTE
You doubt the works of God(unchristian)
Would that not be you?
QUOTE
You believe the works of man over the works of God(blasphemy)
A stupid opinionated point if I have ever seen one. To you, the main points of the Bible are not the works of God, but that does not hold true for everyone.
QUOTE
You worship the bible(idolatrous)
You always assume things, jump to conclusions and worship yourself.
QUOTE
You listen to a false prophet, Dwight L. Moody(unchristian)
Who the hell is this guy? Aside from that, the same can be said about any religion/belief/faith but your own.
QUOTE
You are a hypocrite(unchristian)
Where does it say you are unchristian if you are a hypocrite? I hate to tell you the late breaking news, but you are a hypocrite also.
QUOTE
You try and teach by words, and not by example(unchristian)
I don't see anyone here trying to teach anything, but only people displaying their opinions. You seem to be the only one here who is "preaching"
Moving to your idiotic response about compashion for the fellow man. Having compashion for the fellow man does not mean subject yourself to their torture for their good fortune. If you don't believe what I say thats not my problem, and I will not force them upon you. I do have compashion for my fellow man, but I can't change their views. If I tried, you would be the opposite of your response and call me a fundamentalist that is trying to convert you. You are the hypocrite. Everything always has to fit your agenda. You are the one who always wants to label someone. Don't believe me, just let me know and I will quote every instance where you have done such in this thread alone.
I await your next highly contradictive response.
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 26, 2005, 11:48:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 26 2005, 01:29 PM)
I know that you fear that invalidating any part of the bible would invalidate your entire belief structure, but think of it this way.
Another assumption from you. Quit assuming things and jumping to conclusions. You also have no clue what my belief structure really is.
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 26, 2005, 10:45:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on October 26, 2005, 11:53:00 PM
Post by: bluedeath on October 27, 2005, 01:37:00 AM
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 27, 2005, 10:14:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 27 2005, 11:35 AM)
Why do i post here? I originally got onto this forum because i love modding the xbox. Then while in this section i discovered what i felt was a disproportionately high number of "highly religious" people. This normally translates to Christian fundamentalists.
No, and that is not even a good excuse. You found maybe 10-15 people who believe in Jesus on a forum with thousands. Yes people who only believe in Jesus(and that is all you knew about them), but you label them as Christian Fundamentalists. You sir are Mr. Label Everyone. You think because you have some knowledge in Mathematics and Science that you are above all and can label people. Then you criticise anyone who makes any label and talk about how that is what is wrong with society. When it all boils down to you being one of those people that you say you have disgust for. You say you hate Christians that act as if they are "fundies", but look in a mirror from time to time, you are just a Science Fundie. You are just on the oppsite side of the fence. You act just as they act, only with a different view. Then you proceed to act as if your view is superior...........................
Post by: bluedeath on October 27, 2005, 10:41:00 AM
Post by: moisty_ on October 27, 2005, 03:40:00 PM
QUOTE(TheLovingSoundsofStatic @ Oct 27 2005, 06:22 PM)
Gota love the haughty pricks at the bottom of the food chain. 
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on October 27, 2005, 06:58:00 PM
-
Im sorry your going to have to explain this term. A fundamentalist is normally someone who believes ina the literal translation of a document. Ex. The bible
I am a Constitutional Fundie. I believe in the Constitution of the United States in all of its glory. I believe that its delegation of authority, and limits on authority of government should be considered absolute. I believe in civil liberties.
Science, however, is based on observation. If you are implying that I believe absolutely in observation, then i would agree. I believe that observation is the absolute best way to gather information. In other words, i dont believe in fairies, the Loch Ness monster, or UFOs. Why? because while people claim to see them, and many people believe in them, they are not observable. You cannot tell me to go look up in the sky on Friday at 6 and tell me that i will see a UFO.
I can tell you to go dig in the ground in certain areas and tell you that you will find fossils. I can tell you that the genetic structure of organisms evolves, and then you can go do an experiment and prove it.
This is very different then telling me that you believe in a book. You can say you only believe in Jesus, but unless you have a 2000 year old friend, the only way you "know" jesus is through your readings of a book about him.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 27, 2005, 11:43:00 PM
-
You dont really mean that do you.
None of the above applies to the native peoples thats for darn sure.
The constitution seems to be a document of convience, thats not much worth more than the paper its printed on. Looking at the excepts from the preamble only further reinforce that conclusion. American government is seriously flawed and off track.
You dont watch cops to often do you. This is the most disregarded sentence in american legislation.
There is always civil court.
(of peers) thats a new one. Peers equal late to middle aged, cacasian and republican
Like firing squad or public hangings
This one is the kicker. States rights to be assholes
P.S.
Do you "know" George Washington let me guess you read a book about him or you have a 200 year old friend.
But I guess that makes too much sense, since you cant prove the existance of someone that you have no firsthand knowledge of.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 28, 2005, 06:51:00 AM
-
Are you serious? You ask how you have labeled somone and then the very next line is you trying to label me. You do understand that you have called people who believe in Jesus, fundies. Every person that makes a post that you don't like that believes in Jesus, you label them as a fundamentalist. Is that not labeling? I'm being serious, I will dig trough every post you have made and show you all of your labels of people if you want me to.
FUNDAMENTALISM - A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
Not one mention of believing the literal translation of a book. I am going to ask where you came up with that one. I called you a Science fundie for one simple reason that is in the definition, "and often by intolerance of other views". This describes you, if it doesnt follow your Science ways, you have no tolerance for it. History update genius, Science even proves itself wrong at times. Now if you want to appear smart and not stupid, call me a Christian Fundamentalist for that same reason or another reason within the definition.
The Jesus example is exactly what I expect to hear from a lost soul. Jesus is Gods son, he is also God. When a person says they know Jesus, they know him in the spiritual form, not the literal form...................
As for me being a Christian, it is only a word. It is also the only word that is close to describing my belief structure. I don't believe every line in the bible is 100% correct. I understand the book has been translated many of times.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 28, 2005, 07:26:00 AM
-
Post by: puckSR on October 27, 2005, 06:58:00 PM
QUOTE
you are just a Science Fundie
Im sorry your going to have to explain this term. A fundamentalist is normally someone who believes ina the literal translation of a document. Ex. The bible
I am a Constitutional Fundie. I believe in the Constitution of the United States in all of its glory. I believe that its delegation of authority, and limits on authority of government should be considered absolute. I believe in civil liberties.
Science, however, is based on observation. If you are implying that I believe absolutely in observation, then i would agree. I believe that observation is the absolute best way to gather information. In other words, i dont believe in fairies, the Loch Ness monster, or UFOs. Why? because while people claim to see them, and many people believe in them, they are not observable. You cannot tell me to go look up in the sky on Friday at 6 and tell me that i will see a UFO.
I can tell you to go dig in the ground in certain areas and tell you that you will find fossils. I can tell you that the genetic structure of organisms evolves, and then you can go do an experiment and prove it.
This is very different then telling me that you believe in a book. You can say you only believe in Jesus, but unless you have a 2000 year old friend, the only way you "know" jesus is through your readings of a book about him.
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 27, 2005, 11:43:00 PM
QUOTE
I am a Constitutional Fundie. I believe in the Constitution of the United States in all of its glory. I believe that its delegation of authority, and limits on authority of government should be considered absolute. I believe in civil liberties.
You dont really mean that do you.
QUOTE
The Preamble lists five purposes for the Constitution:
1) Providing for better cooperation among the states
2) Ensuring justice and peace
3) Providing for defense against invasion
4) Promote the general well being of the population
5) Securing liberties now and in the future
1) Providing for better cooperation among the states
2) Ensuring justice and peace
3) Providing for defense against invasion
4) Promote the general well being of the population
5) Securing liberties now and in the future
None of the above applies to the native peoples thats for darn sure.
The constitution seems to be a document of convience, thats not much worth more than the paper its printed on. Looking at the excepts from the preamble only further reinforce that conclusion. American government is seriously flawed and off track.
QUOTE
The fourth amendment guards against unreasonable searches, arrests, and seizures of property.
You dont watch cops to often do you. This is the most disregarded sentence in american legislation.
QUOTE
The fifth forbids trial for a major crime except after indictment by a grand jury; prohibits repeated trials for the same offense after an acquittal (except in certain very limited circumstances); forbids punishment without due process of law; and provides that an accused person may not be compelled to testify against himself.
There is always civil court.
QUOTE
The sixth guarantees a speedy public trial for criminal offenses. It requires trial by a jury (of peers), guarantees the right to legal counsel for the accused, and guarantees that the accused may require witnesses to attend the trial and testify in the presence of the accused.
(of peers) thats a new one. Peers equal late to middle aged, cacasian and republican
QUOTE
The eighth forbids excessive bail or fines, and cruel and unusual punishment.
Like firing squad or public hangings
QUOTE
The tenth provides that powers the Constitution does not delegate to the United States and does not prohibit the states from having are "reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This one is the kicker. States rights to be assholes
P.S.
QUOTE
You can say you only believe in Jesus, but unless you have a 2000 year old friend, the only way you "know" jesus is through your readings of a book about him.
Do you "know" George Washington let me guess you read a book about him or you have a 200 year old friend.
But I guess that makes too much sense, since you cant prove the existance of someone that you have no firsthand knowledge of.
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 28, 2005, 06:51:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR)
How have i labeled anyone defton?
Stop me if i am wrong, but are you or are you not a christian fundamentalist? Let me simplify this, do you believe in the "literal" translation of the bible?
Stop me if i am wrong, but are you or are you not a christian fundamentalist? Let me simplify this, do you believe in the "literal" translation of the bible?
Are you serious? You ask how you have labeled somone and then the very next line is you trying to label me. You do understand that you have called people who believe in Jesus, fundies. Every person that makes a post that you don't like that believes in Jesus, you label them as a fundamentalist. Is that not labeling? I'm being serious, I will dig trough every post you have made and show you all of your labels of people if you want me to.
FUNDAMENTALISM - A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
Not one mention of believing the literal translation of a book. I am going to ask where you came up with that one. I called you a Science fundie for one simple reason that is in the definition, "and often by intolerance of other views". This describes you, if it doesnt follow your Science ways, you have no tolerance for it. History update genius, Science even proves itself wrong at times. Now if you want to appear smart and not stupid, call me a Christian Fundamentalist for that same reason or another reason within the definition.
The Jesus example is exactly what I expect to hear from a lost soul. Jesus is Gods son, he is also God. When a person says they know Jesus, they know him in the spiritual form, not the literal form...................
As for me being a Christian, it is only a word. It is also the only word that is close to describing my belief structure. I don't believe every line in the bible is 100% correct. I understand the book has been translated many of times.
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 28, 2005, 07:26:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 28 2005, 08:25 AM)
***********Constitution****************
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 28, 2005, 11:23:00 AM
-
I did not need to as you asked how I could call you a Science Fundamentalist......................
Those were your exact words. Now you are backtracking..................pathetic.
You become more stupid with every post. If that is your reason, I can accuse you for being a fundamentalist because you don't believe in creation. Actually, anyone can accuse anyone of being a fundie if thats all it takes because everyone doesnt believe the same things.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 28, 2005, 11:56:00 AM
-
How about we drop this? You believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to believe and we will not label each other.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 28, 2005, 03:54:00 PM
-
I still claim adaptation not evolution.
"chimps are closely related to humans" no they arent.
Chimps are related closer to humans than other animals is factual not above.
The moon is closer to the earth than uranus, but this is still a signifcant gap. And we havent observed evolution in the context that you imply.
I am still waiting for a chimp to evolve to a human and open the zoo door.
Provide me with proof that George Washington existed? It probably will resemble the proof that Jesus existed. Considering he is the most written about figure in the history of mankind, its pretty arrogant of you to dismiss totality of oral & written history.
Does Israel exist?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on October 28, 2005, 04:11:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 28, 2005, 11:23:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 28 2005, 12:11 PM)
but you did not bother to look up the definition in its specific use in Christianity, Judaism, or Islam
I did not need to as you asked how I could call you a Science Fundamentalist......................
QUOTE(puckSR)
Im sorry your going to have to explain this term. A fundamentalist is normally someone who believes ina the literal translation of a document. Ex. The bible
Those were your exact words. Now you are backtracking..................pathetic.
QUOTE
The reason that i accused you of being a fundamentalist is the fact that you do not believe in evolution.
You become more stupid with every post. If that is your reason, I can accuse you for being a fundamentalist because you don't believe in creation.
Actually, anyone can accuse anyone of being a fundie if thats all it takes because everyone doesnt believe the same things.
Post by: deftonesmx17 on October 28, 2005, 11:56:00 AM
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 28, 2005, 03:54:00 PM
QUOTE
Evolution is based on massive piles of evidence. These range from similiar species with change through the fossil record, to genetic drift among populations. We have seen evolution occur, and we have forced animals to change. Science has made predictions using evolution...chimps are closely related to humans, and then future scientific study..genetics... found out that they are remarkably similiar compared to other animals.
I still claim adaptation not evolution.
"chimps are closely related to humans" no they arent.
Chimps are related closer to humans than other animals is factual not above.
The moon is closer to the earth than uranus, but this is still a signifcant gap. And we havent observed evolution in the context that you imply.
QUOTE
We actually have stronger support for evolution...it has "happened before our eyes"
I am still waiting for a chimp to evolve to a human and open the zoo door.
QUOTE
So Jesus is not a theory? Unless you can provide me with some direct proof that he exists, then Jesus is a theory
Provide me with proof that George Washington existed? It probably will resemble the proof that Jesus existed. Considering he is the most written about figure in the history of mankind, its pretty arrogant of you to dismiss totality of oral & written history.
Does Israel exist?
Post by: lordvader129 on October 28, 2005, 04:11:00 PM
QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Oct 28 2005, 05:05 PM)
Provide me with proof that George Washington existed? It probably will resemble the proof that Jesus existed.-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 28, 2005, 05:33:00 PM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on October 28, 2005, 05:33:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 29 2005, 01:15 AM)
If that is how you think of evolution, then your understanding is so seriously flawed that any argument with you is useless.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 09, 2005, 01:13:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 09, 2005, 01:25:00 PM
-
People are perfectly entitled to their religious beliefs, but religious beliefs are far from being science. Actually they are the exact opposite of science, and partly the reason that the modern scientific method was designed.
So the main difference in physical characteristics between a chimp and a human is that a book you read once said that God created us in his image, but not chimps.
Really, God must look really funny, since there are so many variations of human kind. If you are correct, and we are made in the image of God, then God
ranges from 22" to 10' tall
He comes with spots, without them, in black, white, and shades of tan inbetween.
has both male and female genitalia
has breasts
can weight up to 1000lbs or as little as 40
is hateful,loving, cruel,kind, gay and straight
loves bondage, cannabalism, and walks on the beach
can be completely covered in course hair, or have no pigment over his entire body
can be very muscular, or incredibly weak
can be missing various parts of his body
Your God is one awkward looking fellow, and he closely resembles a chimp
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 09, 2005, 02:59:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: pug_ster on November 09, 2005, 04:14:00 PM
-
Post by: nsfdheo on November 09, 2005, 01:13:00 PM
Post by: puckSR on November 09, 2005, 01:25:00 PM
So the main difference in physical characteristics between a chimp and a human is that a book you read once said that God created us in his image, but not chimps.
Really, God must look really funny, since there are so many variations of human kind. If you are correct, and we are made in the image of God, then God
ranges from 22" to 10' tall
He comes with spots, without them, in black, white, and shades of tan inbetween.
has both male and female genitalia
has breasts
can weight up to 1000lbs or as little as 40
is hateful,loving, cruel,kind, gay and straight
loves bondage, cannabalism, and walks on the beach
can be completely covered in course hair, or have no pigment over his entire body
can be very muscular, or incredibly weak
can be missing various parts of his body
Your God is one awkward looking fellow, and he closely resembles a chimp
Post by: nsfdheo on November 09, 2005, 02:59:00 PM
Post by: pug_ster on November 09, 2005, 04:14:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 9 2005, 11:06 PM)
Some of the things people call science are really outside the realms of science; theyre not observable, testable, repeatable. The areas of conflict are beliefs about the past, not open to experimental testing.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 09, 2005, 04:21:00 PM
-
thast the inherent flaw in arguing science vs religion
for the scientist the is little more than a work of fiction
for the theologian the will of god can supercede all scientific evidence/laws/facts
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 09, 2005, 04:44:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 09, 2005, 04:21:00 PM
for the scientist the is little more than a work of fiction
for the theologian the will of god can supercede all scientific evidence/laws/facts
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 09, 2005, 04:44:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 12:28 AM)
thast the inherent flaw in arguing science vs religion
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 09, 2005, 04:49:00 PM
-
maybe if evidence of creation was found in more places than just a bible (which has been scientifically proven wrong countless times) it would be more plausible and not require more faith than any science
actually at a subatomic level that would be possible, lol
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 09, 2005, 05:34:00 PM
-
Let me explain this xmedia. Humans and Chimps have a common ancestor. Evolution does not believe that dogs turned into cats, or that humans came from chimps. Evolution believes that Chimps and Humans both came from Apes. I mention chimps because they are the closest relative. Plus it is an organism that most people are fairly familiar with.
I know xmedia hates the catholics, but they are really the only good theologians around. Thats why i posted their statements from earlier. Most theologians and philosphers would argue that it is equally likely from a "creator god" perspective that the world was created yesterday. I will not go into this
They believe it is possible, but they(theologians) generally do not assert that just because something is possible that it is true.
This is incredibly flawed.
1. Science views the data, and then makes tries to figure it out
2. Creationists have the answer, then they try to make the data fit, it is not based on any observation.
3. The theory of evolution is frequently observed, repeated, and used to make assumptions as to the outcome of events. All one needs to do is spend a day in the drug/medical field to be made keenly aware of this.
4. If current research being conducted proves that abiogenesis is possible, will you recant? If not, then why bring up abiogenesis at all. Most people are not referring to Kerkut's GTE when the discuss evolution, but his claims are not wholly inaccurate.
5. Evolution can explain both where we come from and where we are going. It is not origin science. IT can be, but it doesnt have to be.
This is not wholly true. First one must consider that all of the constraints you are placing on dogs and people and everything is purely subjective. If you were to show an alien a chihuhua and a great dane, they would probably assume they were different animals. The fact that the continue to be able to reproduce with each other is due to many factors, but speciation has been observed many times(not with dogs). Secondly evolution does not preach, and if it did it certainly wouldnt preach that life is a blurred contiuum. It claims that evolution occurs in spurts to allow organisms to adapt to new enviroments. An example of this is the constantly changing strains of flu or the common cold. The spurts of their evolution are constant because antibodies are always being produced against them. An organism like a fox has pretty much the same enviroment.
This is a boldface lie. First off you cannot have abundant evidence that something doesnt happen. This is proving the negative.
There is plenty of evidence that macro-evolution occurs:
1. Strong genetic similarities between species
2. Having seen it occur
3. Intermediate organisms between two distinctly different organisms
A worldwide flood would not contradict evolution, it would only contradict modern geology. The only people who have claimed a worldwide flood are motivated by religion. Forget the fact that there isnt enough water on Earth to flood all of the land. Forget that even if a flood did occur in 40 days that the water would have been falling faster than physically possible. Forget that the water would have had nowhere to go afterwards. Forget all of that, and there is still no credible evidence that a worldwide flood occured.
Evolution is supported by the majority of scientific observations. The theory of evolution suggested DNA long before it was discovered. It didnt suggest just heredity, it suggested that some form of tracking heredity existed that also allowed for occasional mutation...DNA
XMEDIA what in the theory of evolution is junk science?
What about it is illogical?
Maybe if the only science you ever encountered was in a HS remedial studies room then Evolution doesnt make logical sense, but to anyone in the field it is inherently obvious.
I know you wont be able to answer this, but please try.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 09, 2005, 05:36:00 PM
-
Hey Pascal, i think this way of thinking has been proven incorrect a multiple number of times. Plus you are rejecting the possibility of another God besides the one you believe in. LOL
KIDS and their philosophy
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 09, 2005, 05:56:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 09, 2005, 04:49:00 PM
QUOTE
Maybe if evolution wasnt so filled with contradictions and junk science it could be plausible.
Evolution defies common scientific logic. Just that simple.
It is nothing more than scientific conjecture, handwaiving with more faith required than religion.
Evolution defies common scientific logic. Just that simple.
It is nothing more than scientific conjecture, handwaiving with more faith required than religion.
maybe if evidence of creation was found in more places than just a bible (which has been scientifically proven wrong countless times) it would be more plausible and not require more faith than any science
QUOTE
Like turning lead to GOLD, wonderful theory, but just not factual.
actually at a subatomic level that would be possible, lol
Post by: puckSR on November 09, 2005, 05:34:00 PM
QUOTE
BTW, evolution does not claim that humans came from Chimps
Let me explain this xmedia. Humans and Chimps have a common ancestor. Evolution does not believe that dogs turned into cats, or that humans came from chimps. Evolution believes that Chimps and Humans both came from Apes. I mention chimps because they are the closest relative. Plus it is an organism that most people are fairly familiar with.
QUOTE
for the theologian the will of god can supercede all scientific evidence/laws/facts
I know xmedia hates the catholics, but they are really the only good theologians around. Thats why i posted their statements from earlier. Most theologians and philosphers would argue that it is equally likely from a "creator god" perspective that the world was created yesterday. I will not go into this
They believe it is possible, but they(theologians) generally do not assert that just because something is possible that it is true.
QUOTE
Both evolution and creation fall into the category of origins science. Both are driven by philosophical considerations. The same data (observations in the present) are available to everyone, but different interpretations are devised to explain what happened in the past.
Let us not confuse science with the ‘General Theory of Evolution’ (GTE), which was defined by the evolutionist Kerkut as ‘the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form.
Let us not confuse science with the ‘General Theory of Evolution’ (GTE), which was defined by the evolutionist Kerkut as ‘the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form.
This is incredibly flawed.
1. Science views the data, and then makes tries to figure it out
2. Creationists have the answer, then they try to make the data fit, it is not based on any observation.
3. The theory of evolution is frequently observed, repeated, and used to make assumptions as to the outcome of events. All one needs to do is spend a day in the drug/medical field to be made keenly aware of this.
4. If current research being conducted proves that abiogenesis is possible, will you recant? If not, then why bring up abiogenesis at all. Most people are not referring to Kerkut's GTE when the discuss evolution, but his claims are not wholly inaccurate.
5. Evolution can explain both where we come from and where we are going. It is not origin science. IT can be, but it doesnt have to be.
QUOTE
The bible states repeatedly that life produces only after its own kind. This is certainly true as we observe the biological world around us. Dogs stay dogs, people stay people. Yet evolution preaches that all life is a blurred continuum.
This is not wholly true. First one must consider that all of the constraints you are placing on dogs and people and everything is purely subjective. If you were to show an alien a chihuhua and a great dane, they would probably assume they were different animals. The fact that the continue to be able to reproduce with each other is due to many factors, but speciation has been observed many times(not with dogs). Secondly evolution does not preach, and if it did it certainly wouldnt preach that life is a blurred contiuum. It claims that evolution occurs in spurts to allow organisms to adapt to new enviroments. An example of this is the constantly changing strains of flu or the common cold. The spurts of their evolution are constant because antibodies are always being produced against them. An organism like a fox has pretty much the same enviroment.
QUOTE
There is abundant scientific evidence that macro-evolution has never taken place. The fossil record shows no credible links between major groups of plants and animals; the chemical structure of DNA contains useful information which could not have developed by natural process; and there is abundant evidence for a worldwide flood which contradicts evolution. Evolution is a philosophy unsupported by the majority of scientific observations. Micro-evolution on the other hand gives us the reasons that spieces all have minor physical characteristics that make us different from one another
This is a boldface lie. First off you cannot have abundant evidence that something doesnt happen. This is proving the negative.
There is plenty of evidence that macro-evolution occurs:
1. Strong genetic similarities between species
2. Having seen it occur
3. Intermediate organisms between two distinctly different organisms
A worldwide flood would not contradict evolution, it would only contradict modern geology. The only people who have claimed a worldwide flood are motivated by religion. Forget the fact that there isnt enough water on Earth to flood all of the land. Forget that even if a flood did occur in 40 days that the water would have been falling faster than physically possible. Forget that the water would have had nowhere to go afterwards. Forget all of that, and there is still no credible evidence that a worldwide flood occured.
Evolution is supported by the majority of scientific observations. The theory of evolution suggested DNA long before it was discovered. It didnt suggest just heredity, it suggested that some form of tracking heredity existed that also allowed for occasional mutation...DNA
XMEDIA what in the theory of evolution is junk science?
What about it is illogical?
Maybe if the only science you ever encountered was in a HS remedial studies room then Evolution doesnt make logical sense, but to anyone in the field it is inherently obvious.
I know you wont be able to answer this, but please try.
Post by: puckSR on November 09, 2005, 05:36:00 PM
QUOTE
If as the bible says "all scriptures inspired by God" then believing in Him and His word I have lost nothing and look forward to eternity.
If I am wrong about the bible I have lost nothing by believing in it. Thats not to say what happens to unbelievers thou.
If I am wrong about the bible I have lost nothing by believing in it. Thats not to say what happens to unbelievers thou.
Hey Pascal, i think this way of thinking has been proven incorrect a multiple number of times. Plus you are rejecting the possibility of another God besides the one you believe in. LOL
KIDS and their philosophy
Post by: lordvader129 on November 09, 2005, 05:56:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 9 2005, 05:39 PM)
Can you please give us some of these "PROVEN" countless times?? Because I feel I have done my homework and have yet to see anything scientifically the proved the bible inaccurate. looking forward to seeing these, thanks
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: damam on November 09, 2005, 06:23:00 PM
-
How has this line of thinking been proven incorrect.
If i believe in G-d and it is true -> infinite reward
If i believe in G-d and it is false -> nada
If i believe in G-d and she is the wrong one -> I get less
If i believe in G-d and it is the wrong one but she doesnt care -> i get what everyone else gets
If i dont believe in G-d and it is true -> i get less
If i dont believe in G-d and it is false -> nada
If i dont believe in G-d and she does exist but she doesnt care -> i get what everyone else gets
generally speaking, there is nothing loss by believing in g-d, but there is the possibility of gain in a possible afterlife. Expanding on that a bit, studies have shown over and over that religious US citizens (people regularly attending services) live longer healthier happier lives as well regardless of their faith. So even while they are here on earth, they are generally getting rewarded for their beliefs.
I am not saying that religious lifestyles cant be mimicked by secular circles, or that secular individuals cant be happy, only that it comes more naturally with the religious circles.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 01:45:00 AM
-
Post by: damam on November 09, 2005, 06:23:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 9 2005, 01:43 PM)
Hey Pascal, i think this way of thinking has been proven incorrect a multiple number of times. Plus you are rejecting the possibility of another God besides the one you believe in. LOL
KIDS and their philosophy
KIDS and their philosophy
How has this line of thinking been proven incorrect.
If i believe in G-d and it is true -> infinite reward
If i believe in G-d and it is false -> nada
If i believe in G-d and she is the wrong one -> I get less
If i believe in G-d and it is the wrong one but she doesnt care -> i get what everyone else gets
If i dont believe in G-d and it is true -> i get less
If i dont believe in G-d and it is false -> nada
If i dont believe in G-d and she does exist but she doesnt care -> i get what everyone else gets
generally speaking, there is nothing loss by believing in g-d, but there is the possibility of gain in a possible afterlife. Expanding on that a bit, studies have shown over and over that religious US citizens (people regularly attending services) live longer healthier happier lives as well regardless of their faith. So even while they are here on earth, they are generally getting rewarded for their beliefs.
I am not saying that religious lifestyles cant be mimicked by secular circles, or that secular individuals cant be happy, only that it comes more naturally with the religious circles.
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 01:45:00 AM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 12:56 AM)
actually at a subatomic level that would be possible, lol
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 10, 2005, 07:51:00 AM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: pug_ster on November 10, 2005, 09:56:00 AM
-
Post by: nsfdheo on November 10, 2005, 07:51:00 AM
Post by: pug_ster on November 10, 2005, 09:56:00 AM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 10 2005, 03:58 PM)
The world-renowned crusader for Darwinism and atheism, Prof. Richard Dawkins, states:
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 10:24:00 AM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 10:24:00 AM
QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Nov 10 2005, 01:52 AM)
My point exactly, on paper, or rather in theory I can make a donkey fly, but the real world is a lot less forgiving.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 10, 2005, 10:59:00 AM
-
I think Organized Religion is a conundrum. Can you really have a religion if it wasn't organized? I think it is a bad idea however. Having morals is good on a personal level, but I have seen far too many times being a part of organized religion and having morals do not go hand in hand.
On a side note, many scientific advances were made by people that were not too ethical. After the fact helped society in many ways.
How many monkeys should we kill to find the cure for AIDS?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 11:14:00 AM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 10, 2005, 10:59:00 AM
On a side note, many scientific advances were made by people that were not too ethical. After the fact helped society in many ways.
How many monkeys should we kill to find the cure for AIDS?
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 11:14:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 10 2005, 10:21 AM)
xmedia, you really dont understand anything about this
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 11:31:00 AM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 11:31:00 AM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 06:31 PM)
so basically your point is with more technological advances it will be a simple matter to prove evolution, right? because thats what the whole lead into gold thing is saying to me
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 11:39:00 AM
-
A question for the village IDIOT, did they physically transmutate lead into gold at a subatomic level?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 12:08:00 PM
-
i have to give you credit for the slightly more intelligent adaptation of "if we came from monkees and apes why are there still monkees and apes?"
however the reasoning is flawed, a similar argument can be posed "if i ate dinner last night, why is there still food in my fridge?" and the answer is obvious, i didnt eat all food in my fridge, and its also possible i went and bought more food today
please ignore the obvious evolutionary flaws int eh following statement, its for the benefit of people who know nothing of evolution
not all monkeed and apes evolved into humans, and while the ones who did evolved into humans, lower species were evolving into monkees and apes
and why some species exist much longer without major evolutionary changes can also be explained by the food in my fridge, why does the broccoli sit in the fridge so much longer than the apples? and why does the cereal in my closet take longer to spoil than th emilk in my firdge? not everything operates at the same speed, and from a standpoint of natural selection, not everything is as inclined to evolve and adapt, some are survive great just the way they are
stagnant evolution is not a failure of the process, but rather a success, creatures so well attuned to their environment nothing more needs to change or can be changed to make them better
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 12:10:00 PM
-
Controlled Environment vs The Real World
When something is observed in Science, 10 to 1 it is in a controlled evironment. A controlled enviroment is also know as a form of playing God. In a controlled environment, you have control over everything and they also lack very important factors such as chaos and randomness. In many controlled environments, the real world is replicated, but again there are certain things that can not be replicated such as chaos and randomness. Thus, the observation holds true in the controlled environment, but is nothing more than theory/fiction in the real world.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 12:16:00 PM
-
the very difinition of chaos is that it cant be controlled, even under laborotry circumstances, even experiments conducted in a lab are subject to chaos and randomness
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 12:28:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 12:45:00 PM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 11:39:00 AM
QUOTE
While it may never be commonplace to transmute lead into gold, it is practical to obtain gold from lead ores. The minerals galena (lead sulfide, PbS), cerussite (lead carbonate, PbCO3), and anglesite (lead sulfate, PbSO4) often contain zinc, gold, silver, and other metals. Once the ore has been pulverized, chemical techniques are sufficient to separate the gold from the lead. The result is almost alchemy...almost.
A question for the village IDIOT, did they physically transmutate lead into gold at a subatomic level?
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 12:08:00 PM
QUOTE
If we evolved from lower life form why have lower life forms not evloved into a human like form, if theses species are millions of years old.
i have to give you credit for the slightly more intelligent adaptation of "if we came from monkees and apes why are there still monkees and apes?"
however the reasoning is flawed, a similar argument can be posed "if i ate dinner last night, why is there still food in my fridge?" and the answer is obvious, i didnt eat all food in my fridge, and its also possible i went and bought more food today
please ignore the obvious evolutionary flaws int eh following statement, its for the benefit of people who know nothing of evolution
not all monkeed and apes evolved into humans, and while the ones who did evolved into humans, lower species were evolving into monkees and apes
and why some species exist much longer without major evolutionary changes can also be explained by the food in my fridge, why does the broccoli sit in the fridge so much longer than the apples? and why does the cereal in my closet take longer to spoil than th emilk in my firdge? not everything operates at the same speed, and from a standpoint of natural selection, not everything is as inclined to evolve and adapt, some are survive great just the way they are
stagnant evolution is not a failure of the process, but rather a success, creatures so well attuned to their environment nothing more needs to change or can be changed to make them better
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 12:10:00 PM
When something is observed in Science, 10 to 1 it is in a controlled evironment. A controlled enviroment is also know as a form of playing God. In a controlled environment, you have control over everything and they also lack very important factors such as chaos and randomness. In many controlled environments, the real world is replicated, but again there are certain things that can not be replicated such as chaos and randomness. Thus, the observation holds true in the controlled environment, but is nothing more than theory/fiction in the real world.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 12:16:00 PM
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 12:28:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 12:45:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 10 2005, 12:13 PM)
Sure I would agree that the world as we know it now was alot different before the flood in Noahs time. Lots of Species all wiped out at once.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 10, 2005, 12:51:00 PM
-
They did, they evolved into US. Your question is similiar to the question...if we came from Apes, why are there still apes?
The answer is simple. Evolution occurs to fill a particular need. Organisms need to survive in a different enviroment. They evolve to live in that enviroment. If the old enviroment still exists, then the older lifeform will continue to survive in the old enviroment. The older lifeform may still evolve, but not as drastically as the lifeform that had to adapt to the new enviroment. i.e. apes still exist because there are still jungles. We exist because there were larger open areas(or something else that facilitated our existence)
What is your definition of adaptation?
What is your definition of evolution?
Lead into Gold
http://chemistry.abo...a/aa050601a.htm
As far as the silk purse from a sow's ear, that one is damn difficult to find, so let me repeal it. Perhaps choosing an example where it is an incredibly common saying was not a good idea.
No, but that called learning. Adaptation would say that if you and several of your offspring constantly kept burning yourselves, you would develop incredibly callous hands that could withstand being burned more
Really? Where did you get this idea?
If it proves it, then you obviously have done the DNA research yourself and can post it, or your pulling this information from a reputable source, and can post the source.
I never said it has stopped, evolution does not stop. I said that we have not had an incident of rapid evolution in recorded history. We have also not witnessed an ice age, or a "global flood"(the flood in the bible was never written about by the witnesses), or a massive meteor strike, or any catastrophic event to the enviroment.
We have witnessed evolution occur with isolated populations in particular areas. We have witnessed this repeated times.
Islands, Darwin's experience being one of the first cases of this, are incredibly strong examples of this. Due to their isolated nature, difficult living conditions, and somewhat strange enviroments, we frequently see animals adapt in new and strange ways.
This is both misleading and false statement. Uranus is not a nearly infinite distance
Voyager visited Uranus in 1986, it was launched in August 1977.
Is 8.5 years infinite?
I would expect an infinite distance to take at least a decade to travel there
I guess your right, chimps are very different from humans
they dont use tools
they dont form societies
they dont teach their young
they dont have similiar anatomy
they dont have similiar internal structures
they dont exhibit emotion
they dont have a concept of language
Wow, you know a lot about chimps xmedia
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 10, 2005, 01:06:00 PM
-
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 10 2005, 12:13 PM)
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 01:59:00 PM
-
but isnt that it right there? 2 of every animal? or are you just saying 2 brought 2 brids on board, and from those 2 birds all the difererent birds we have no came from? wouldnt that be evolution right there?
the second quote is simply further instructions for the "clean" animals, someone who has studied the bible would know the significance of that, i wont bother explaining sicne you clearly know more than me
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: pug_ster on November 10, 2005, 01:59:00 PM
-
The story about Noah's Arc is just as creative as Santa Claus going to every good boy's and Girl's homes and put presents under the Christmas Tree.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 10, 2005, 02:32:00 PM
-
There is no proof of a worldwide flooding. Only basis is most religions speak of a huge flood. There is nothing to say that the flood each religion talks about happened at the same time and was worldwide. To those people everything they could see was worldwide.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 03:15:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 10, 2005, 12:51:00 PM
QUOTE
If we evolved from lower life form why have lower life forms not evloved into a human like form, if theses species are millions of years old.
They did, they evolved into US. Your question is similiar to the question...if we came from Apes, why are there still apes?
The answer is simple. Evolution occurs to fill a particular need. Organisms need to survive in a different enviroment. They evolve to live in that enviroment. If the old enviroment still exists, then the older lifeform will continue to survive in the old enviroment. The older lifeform may still evolve, but not as drastically as the lifeform that had to adapt to the new enviroment. i.e. apes still exist because there are still jungles. We exist because there were larger open areas(or something else that facilitated our existence)
What is your definition of adaptation?
What is your definition of evolution?
Lead into Gold
http://chemistry.abo...a/aa050601a.htm
As far as the silk purse from a sow's ear, that one is damn difficult to find, so let me repeal it. Perhaps choosing an example where it is an incredibly common saying was not a good idea.
QUOTE
If you burn your hand on the stove and remember later not to touch the stove is that EVOLUTION, or adaptation.
No, but that called learning. Adaptation would say that if you and several of your offspring constantly kept burning yourselves, you would develop incredibly callous hands that could withstand being burned more
QUOTE
DNA
sequencing proves that humans are not as old as evolutionist suggest necessary for valid evolution.
sequencing proves that humans are not as old as evolutionist suggest necessary for valid evolution.
Really? Where did you get this idea?
If it proves it, then you obviously have done the DNA research yourself and can post it, or your pulling this information from a reputable source, and can post the source.
QUOTE
According to the village idiot Pucksr evolution has conviently stopped, to lend credence to this bs theory that we can not observe in the era of written history.
I never said it has stopped, evolution does not stop. I said that we have not had an incident of rapid evolution in recorded history. We have also not witnessed an ice age, or a "global flood"(the flood in the bible was never written about by the witnesses), or a massive meteor strike, or any catastrophic event to the enviroment.
We have witnessed evolution occur with isolated populations in particular areas. We have witnessed this repeated times.
Islands, Darwin's experience being one of the first cases of this, are incredibly strong examples of this. Due to their isolated nature, difficult living conditions, and somewhat strange enviroments, we frequently see animals adapt in new and strange ways.
QUOTE
Uranus is a RELATIVLY small distance to earth when considering known space, the diffrernce between ape and man is on the same order, it is farely close
with all things considered, but it is essentially a nearly infinite distance in practical
terms.
with all things considered, but it is essentially a nearly infinite distance in practical
terms.
This is both misleading and false statement. Uranus is not a nearly infinite distance
Voyager visited Uranus in 1986, it was launched in August 1977.
Is 8.5 years infinite?
I would expect an infinite distance to take at least a decade to travel there
I guess your right, chimps are very different from humans
they dont use tools
they dont form societies
they dont teach their young
they dont have similiar anatomy
they dont have similiar internal structures
they dont exhibit emotion
they dont have a concept of language
Wow, you know a lot about chimps xmedia
Post by: nsfdheo on November 10, 2005, 01:06:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 01:59:00 PM
QUOTE
And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee
but isnt that it right there? 2 of every animal? or are you just saying 2 brought 2 brids on board, and from those 2 birds all the difererent birds we have no came from? wouldnt that be evolution right there?
the second quote is simply further instructions for the "clean" animals, someone who has studied the bible would know the significance of that, i wont bother explaining sicne you clearly know more than me
Post by: pug_ster on November 10, 2005, 01:59:00 PM
Post by: throwingks on November 10, 2005, 02:32:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 03:15:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 10 2005, 02:39 PM)
There is no proof of a worldwide flooding. Only basis is most religions speak of a huge flood. There is nothing to say that the flood each religion talks about happened at the same time and was worldwide. To those people everything they could see was worldwide.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 03:19:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 03:19:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 05:22 PM)
correct, science shows a worldwide flood would cause weather patterns to deteriorate, water vapor in the air would increase the temperature to a point of being uninhabitable (ark or not) also there would be so much water vapor in the air youd drown just by breathing
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 03:25:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 03:25:00 PM
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Nov 10 2005, 03:26 PM)
And I'm pretty sure the creator of this Earth can control things that are out of the realm of Science
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 03:27:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 03:27:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 05:32 PM)
the same circular logic all your arguments will eventually fall to, using evidence of the bible to support the claims of the bible
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 03:34:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 03:34:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 10 2005, 05:31 PM)
by your same reasoning defton, then maybe life was created yesterday, and the bible is a lie.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 03:41:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 03:41:00 PM
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Nov 10 2005, 03:34 PM)
Has Science observerd a worldwide flood to draw this conclusion? No...........................
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 04:25:00 PM
-
Thats all fine and dandy but............you said "science shows" and we are talking about Science. Yes math can be applied to Science, but for something to be scientifically proven, it must be tested observed and repeated
Why would you even ask such a silly question?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 10, 2005, 05:38:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 06:06:00 PM
-
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 10, 2005, 04:25:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 05:48 PM)
it can be mathematically proven even if it hasnt been observed firsthand
Thats all fine and dandy but............you said "science shows" and we are talking about Science. Yes math can be applied to Science, but for something to be scientifically proven, it must be tested observed and repeated
QUOTE
now, to you, did you witness god destroying the earth in a flood? how about the creation? have you seen god at all?
Why would you even ask such a silly question?
Post by: nsfdheo on November 10, 2005, 05:38:00 PM
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 06:06:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 11 2005, 01:15 AM)
deftonemx
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 06:11:00 PM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 10, 2005, 06:11:00 PM
QUOTE(pug_ster @ Nov 10 2005, 10:06 PM)
The story about Noah's Arc is just as creative as Santa Claus going to every good boy's and Girl's homes and put presents under the Christmas Tree.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 08:02:00 PM
-
[/quote]
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 06:18:00 AM
-
quote=puckSR,Nov 10 2005, 10:27 PM]
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 11, 2005, 07:22:00 AM
-
Well, like normal when someone thinks they are smart and makes demeaning comments to someone else, it is more often than not, in ignorance.
You were speaking of the rain (which is a function of weather, which is part of the environment) and how it related to Humans.
You are correct, mathematics is a science, but the above is not mathematics (even though they can be applied to help in supporting a theory).
Ecology
1. The branch of science that is concerned with the relationships between organisms and their environments.
2. The relationship between organisms and their environments.
3. The study of the detrimental effects of modern civilization on the environment, with a view toward their prevention or reversal through conservation.
Mathematics
The study of the measurement, properties, and relationships of quantities and sets, using numbers and symbols.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: damam on November 11, 2005, 10:19:00 AM
-
Actually, the bible does address the g-dless (aka deist/theist/agnostic/other) and they are not given a loophole of sort you described. My suspicion is that Islam is the same way when it comes to non judeo based religions since they share common roots.
I took your suggestion of googling pascals wager and here is what i have found:
the idea of ignoring the wager as you suggested really is not that old (Duff 1986 and Hájek 2003) and it is the only theory that suggests that the wager is invalid. The matrix of possibilities is probably endless, but ignoring the wager would still get a couple of finite outcomes (either it matters or it does not matter). While I do grant that there are possibilities for everyone to get infinite reward as i suggested in my matrix. There are some that dont and hajeks equation fails to recognize those.
I would still argue that people of faith win more often when the outcome is that their is no after life simply due to the fact that statistically (atleast here in the US) they live healthier, longer, happier lives than secular individuals.
I can think of about a billion things i would rather read up on before reading up on pascal.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 11:29:00 AM
-
http://www.genesispa...giant/giant.htm
http://www.returnoft...iscoveries.html
http://www.masonwinf.....etons Q&A.htm
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 11:37:00 AM
-
Edit: I lied I have heard of 10' even 15' nephilim but every fossil I have heard of has been shown to be fake.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 11:48:00 AM
-
Ever heard of stonehedge or the pyramids. Much bigger stones. No Nephilim stories there.
Edit: I am sorry I did not realize you were talking about the clothes he was wearing when I 1st read. Where is a link to show that.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 12:10:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: damam on November 11, 2005, 12:53:00 PM
-
I am with you in saying that theist/deist can be spiritual. However, in the matrix proposed it should be clearly segmented out since the bible (and most of the major religions) make an arguement that believing in a general higher power or g-d is not enough. Its clear that conventions do matter to them. Religious conventions may or may not make difference so the matrix must address both possibilities. That is why your loop hole does not work for all possible outcomes nor make it more likely for infinite reward and finally does not negate the wager.
i believe that pascals wager in its simplist sense, would lump anyone spiritual in the second quadrant since he never makes an arguement for only one religion or convention. Only to seek spirituality. so a deist/theist would be just as likely to get infinite reward as a christian/muslim. Not more likely. The only one that truly stands the chance of losing is the atheist.
Im fairly sure i can bring nothing new But it was interesting to read about it. I had never heard of pascals wager before this.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 11, 2005, 01:04:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 10, 2005, 08:02:00 PM
[/quote]Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 06:18:00 AM
Post by: deftonesmx17 on November 11, 2005, 07:22:00 AM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 10 2005, 10:09 PM)
someone neds to go back to school, mathematics IS a science
Well, like normal when someone thinks they are smart and makes demeaning comments to someone else, it is more often than not, in ignorance.
You were speaking of the rain (which is a function of weather, which is part of the environment) and how it related to Humans.
You are correct, mathematics is a science, but the above is not mathematics (even though they can be applied to help in supporting a theory).
Ecology
1. The branch of science that is concerned with the relationships between organisms and their environments.
2. The relationship between organisms and their environments.
3. The study of the detrimental effects of modern civilization on the environment, with a view toward their prevention or reversal through conservation.
Mathematics
The study of the measurement, properties, and relationships of quantities and sets, using numbers and symbols.
Post by: damam on November 11, 2005, 10:19:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 9 2005, 02:42 PM)
This is a very old concept that is flawed.
As i stated earlier, one of the biggest flaws with this line of reasoning is that many religions mandate that you believe in their faith or you are doomed. Agnosticism has always been a bit of a gray area, but false gods is always awful. Take Judaism/Christianity for example
The Commandments say....Have no other Gods before me
They dont explicitly mention someone who is just a Theist/Deist or Agnostic.
Therefore Agnosticism/Atheism/Deism/Theism are all probably more likely to go to Heaven/Nirvana/Wherever than Christian/Muslims/Hindus
As i stated earlier, one of the biggest flaws with this line of reasoning is that many religions mandate that you believe in their faith or you are doomed. Agnosticism has always been a bit of a gray area, but false gods is always awful. Take Judaism/Christianity for example
The Commandments say....Have no other Gods before me
They dont explicitly mention someone who is just a Theist/Deist or Agnostic.
Therefore Agnosticism/Atheism/Deism/Theism are all probably more likely to go to Heaven/Nirvana/Wherever than Christian/Muslims/Hindus
Actually, the bible does address the g-dless (aka deist/theist/agnostic/other) and they are not given a loophole of sort you described. My suspicion is that Islam is the same way when it comes to non judeo based religions since they share common roots.
I took your suggestion of googling pascals wager and here is what i have found:
the idea of ignoring the wager as you suggested really is not that old (Duff 1986 and Hájek 2003) and it is the only theory that suggests that the wager is invalid. The matrix of possibilities is probably endless, but ignoring the wager would still get a couple of finite outcomes (either it matters or it does not matter). While I do grant that there are possibilities for everyone to get infinite reward as i suggested in my matrix. There are some that dont and hajeks equation fails to recognize those.
I would still argue that people of faith win more often when the outcome is that their is no after life simply due to the fact that statistically (atleast here in the US) they live healthier, longer, happier lives than secular individuals.
QUOTE
Plus read up on Pascal.
I can think of about a billion things i would rather read up on before reading up on pascal.
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 11:29:00 AM
http://www.genesispa...giant/giant.htm
http://www.returnoft...iscoveries.html
http://www.masonwinf.....etons Q&A.htm
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 11:37:00 AM
QUOTE(nsfdheo)
On the question about the ark not being large enough? Have you not read Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days. If Noah was as big as say Goliath was then the calculations of a cubit used would be way short. Some remains of people over 10 tall. We only assume that he was as tall as us today, but the bible never says that. If you want to recalculate those measurements have at it. I think you could easily see that there would be enough room.
I have never heard of 10' tall people. I have heard of giants but they weren't even 6' tall. But, to people of that time they were giants because the average human height was so short. That is what makes pygmies so interesting. They are humans that have not evolved in height.Edit: I lied I have heard of 10' even 15' nephilim but every fossil I have heard of has been shown to be fake.
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 11:48:00 AM
Edit: I am sorry I did not realize you were talking about the clothes he was wearing when I 1st read. Where is a link to show that.
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 12:10:00 PM
Post by: damam on November 11, 2005, 12:53:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 11 2005, 06:35 AM)
These are not the G-dless, these people all believe in G-d. They simply ignore religious convention.
Atheists are Godless
Atheists are Godless
I am with you in saying that theist/deist can be spiritual. However, in the matrix proposed it should be clearly segmented out since the bible (and most of the major religions) make an arguement that believing in a general higher power or g-d is not enough. Its clear that conventions do matter to them. Religious conventions may or may not make difference so the matrix must address both possibilities. That is why your loop hole does not work for all possible outcomes nor make it more likely for infinite reward and finally does not negate the wager.
i believe that pascals wager in its simplist sense, would lump anyone spiritual in the second quadrant since he never makes an arguement for only one religion or convention. Only to seek spirituality. so a deist/theist would be just as likely to get infinite reward as a christian/muslim. Not more likely. The only one that truly stands the chance of losing is the atheist.
QUOTE
Well at least you learned about Pascal's wager. Its an interesting topic of debate.Most philosophical viewpoints have already been heavily analyzed. Im not saying you cannot bring anything new to the argument, but Im saying that it would probably help both sides out if we started where others have left off.
Im fairly sure i can bring nothing new
But it was interesting to read about it. I had never heard of pascals wager before this.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 11, 2005, 01:04:00 PM
QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Nov 11 2005, 07:29 AM)
Well, like normal when someone thinks they are smart and makes demeaning comments to someone else, it is more often than not, in ignorance.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: pug_ster on November 11, 2005, 01:20:00 PM
-
How Noah solved the problem of having no food.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 02:24:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 02:36:00 PM
-
Earth revolves around the sun, therfore it is not the center of the universe. Galileo found that out for us. That is just one quick example.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 02:57:00 PM
-
I find the bible wrong on a number of counts.
They only way you can justify the bible is calling into doubt everything that is observable.
You are a skeptic, yet you believe the bible without any skepticism.
Please answer my original question
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 03:00:00 PM
-
The Book of Genesis states that our planet was created three days before the sun, moon, and stars.
So, if God built the universe around the Earth, while not being the physical center of the universe, wouldn't it have to at least be more prominent than the third planet around a star?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 03:05:00 PM
-
http://www.skepticsa...ra/by_name.html
a good list
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 11, 2005, 04:20:00 PM
-
Post by: pug_ster on November 11, 2005, 01:20:00 PM
How Noah solved the problem of having no food.
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 02:24:00 PM
Quote from: throwingks,Nov 11 2005, 02:17 PM
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 02:36:00 PM
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 02:57:00 PM
They only way you can justify the bible is calling into doubt everything that is observable.
You are a skeptic, yet you believe the bible without any skepticism.
Please answer my original question
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 03:00:00 PM
So, if God built the universe around the Earth, while not being the physical center of the universe, wouldn't it have to at least be more prominent than the third planet around a star?
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 03:05:00 PM
QUOTE
There are clear historical inaccuracies in the New Testament. One such example is that of Acts 5, where Luke writes of the Pharisee Gamaliel's speech (vv. 34-39). This speech would have taken place around AD 35-40, yet it refers to Theudas' revolt of AD 46-47 as a past event. Furthermore, Gamaliel is made to say that "Judas the Galilean" raised a revolt which followed that of Theudas - but Judas' revolt was in AD 6 or 7! We know these dates from Josephus, most notably, as well as from other records.
QUOTE
In Numbers 3:22-39 the numbers 7500, 8600, and 6200 don't add up to 22000. They must add up to 2200 in order to make sense of 3:40-51.
http://www.skepticsa...ra/by_name.html
a good list
Post by: lordvader129 on November 11, 2005, 04:20:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 11 2005, 02:31 PM)
could you please show me where you found the Bible incorrect????
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 05:26:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 05:28:00 PM
-
No problem
Hey, if i turn you into a regular non-fundamentalist Christian...its all worth it
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 05:31:00 PM
-
http://www.abovetops...hread182155/pg1
Since we were talking about giants earlier I thought this forum was interesting. There is also a little post about how tall Goliath really was according to a cubit conversion. Kind of a small workd that 2 different forums I read were talking about giants at the same time.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 08:05:00 PM
-
I am also curious what you believe about May Magdalene and Jesus having kids or even Adam and Sarah before Adam and Eve?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 08:32:00 PM
-
Post by: nsfdheo on November 11, 2005, 05:26:00 PM
Post by: puckSR on November 11, 2005, 05:28:00 PM
Hey, if i turn you into a regular non-fundamentalist Christian...its all worth it
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 05:31:00 PM
Since we were talking about giants earlier I thought this forum was interesting. There is also a little post about how tall Goliath really was according to a cubit conversion. Kind of a small workd that 2 different forums I read were talking about giants at the same time.
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 08:05:00 PM
Post by: throwingks on November 11, 2005, 08:32:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 11 2005, 07:35 PM)
So, even if they found the bones of goliath, that doesnt mean that the bible is true. It just means that the bible is based upon some facts. Something that we have known for a long time.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 12, 2005, 03:58:00 PM
-
I just read that David didn't kill Goliath. James and Shakespeare put it in their version but the original didn't say that.
http://www.jesus-is-...om/goliath2.htm
Interesting how things are lost in translation.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 12, 2005, 04:11:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 12, 2005, 03:58:00 PM
http://www.jesus-is-...om/goliath2.htm
Interesting how things are lost in translation.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 12, 2005, 04:11:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 12 2005, 04:05 PM)
I just read that David didn't kill Goliath. James and Shakespeare put it in their version but the original didn't say that.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 12, 2005, 04:20:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 12, 2005, 04:20:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 12 2005, 03:18 PM)
umm, in the link the guy who wrote that is criticizing the NIV translation that david didnt kill goliath, but says the KJB (closest to "original" that most people come) say he did, and is the correct version
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 12, 2005, 04:38:00 PM
-
KJB believers do read in the original language. KJB is the original to them. They are not educated enough because they taught to blindly believe from the get-go. If you did not believe in it when it was written you were beheaded.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 12, 2005, 04:43:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 12, 2005, 04:38:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on November 12, 2005, 04:43:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 12 2005, 04:45 PM)
KJB believers do read in the original language. KJB is the original to them. They are not educated enough because they taught to blindly believe from the get-go. If you did not believe in it when it was written you were beheaded.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 12, 2005, 05:36:00 PM
-
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 12, 2005, 05:36:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Oct 21 2005, 06:54 PM)
#include <rant.h>
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 09:16:00 PM
-
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 09:16:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 15 2005, 10:51 PM)
Paul was kinda a prick
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 15, 2005, 09:19:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 15, 2005, 09:19:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 15 2005, 09:23 PM)
Sorry but Paul was a Jew
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 15, 2005, 09:20:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 15, 2005, 09:20:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 15 2005, 08:23 PM)
Sorry but Paul was a Jew
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 09:30:00 PM
-
Yeah....Paul was really proud of his heritage
He loved the Jews, and did not blame them for Jesus's death(sarcasm)
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 09:32:00 PM
-
Jesus only liked Jews like Paul...who converted
Jewish Jews? They were evil according to Paul
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 09:45:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 09:53:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 09:30:00 PM
QUOTE
For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16
Yeah....Paul was really proud of his heritage
He loved the Jews, and did not blame them for Jesus's death(sarcasm)
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 09:32:00 PM
Jewish Jews? They were evil according to Paul
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 09:45:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 15 2005, 11:37 PM)
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 09:53:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 15 2005, 10:51 PM)
Paul was kinda a prick
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 09:54:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:01:00 PM
-
Romans 9
Doesnt Paul go on to explain how many will suffer under God?
He is not preaching his tolerance of the Jewish faith, but blabbering and eventually misquoting Isiah
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:02:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 09:54:00 PM
QUOTE
Corinthians 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:01:00 PM
Doesnt Paul go on to explain how many will suffer under God?
He is not preaching his tolerance of the Jewish faith, but blabbering and eventually misquoting Isiah
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:02:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 12:01 AM)
Really, would you like a long list of accusations by Paul against the Jews?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:06:00 PM
-
Exactly...Paul only liked you as a convert or a potential convert
If you strongly held to your Jewish faith...well then be Anathema(damned)
Unless your suggesting that common conversation was to curse the nonbelievers
in which case....Paul wasnt the only asshole
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:14:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:06:00 PM
If you strongly held to your Jewish faith...well then be Anathema(damned)
Unless your suggesting that common conversation was to curse the nonbelievers
in which case....Paul wasnt the only asshole
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:14:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 12:08 AM)
Romans 9
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:18:00 PM
-
Hmmm, and who should be destroyed?
Besides, they were having faith in God, they were following God's instructions.
If God commanded you to follow the law, even if it was odd, then only the faithful would be following the law
Are you suggesting that God was mad at them for following the law that God made, and not simply believing in him?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:23:00 PM
-
Your really missing the point
Who is the enemy of the Church that Paul keeps talking about?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 15, 2005, 10:27:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:18:00 PM
QUOTE
God wanted to show his anger and reveal his power against everyone who deserved to be destroyed. But instead, he patiently put up with them.
Hmmm, and who should be destroyed?
Besides, they were having faith in God, they were following God's instructions.
If God commanded you to follow the law, even if it was odd, then only the faithful would be following the law
Are you suggesting that God was mad at them for following the law that God made, and not simply believing in him?
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:23:00 PM
Who is the enemy of the Church that Paul keeps talking about?
Post by: throwingks on November 15, 2005, 10:27:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 15 2005, 09:28 PM)
14Show love in everything you do
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:36:00 PM
-
Hmm....so could we say Jews are disbelievers in Christ?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:41:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 15, 2005, 10:36:00 PM
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:41:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 12:43 AM)
Hmm....so could we say Jews are disbelievers in Christ?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:42:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 15, 2005, 10:59:00 PM
-
Post by: nsfdheo on November 15, 2005, 10:42:00 PM
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 15, 2005, 10:59:00 PM
QUOTE(nsfdheo @ Nov 16 2005, 06:48 AM)
Eternal life does not come from our merit; it is an unmerited gift. We find that gift solely in Jesus Christ. Eternal life comes exclusively through Him. The Christian receives eternal life as a present possession at the moment of salvation. We receive eternal life at the moment we receive Jesus Christ as Savior.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 12:21:00 AM
-
Ok...have fun with the game kids
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 08:04:00 AM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 12:21:00 AM
Ok...have fun with the game kids
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 08:04:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 02:28 AM)
This is somewhat circular
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 08:59:00 AM
-
Hmmm when we refer to people who are christian by name only, and not by deeds, we tend to think of hypocrits.
Let us try another way
A Psycho
believes in Jesus very much
kills people because of their non-belief
feels that he is simply saving the rest of the world from the lies of the non-believer
therefore his Good outweights the Evil or murder
Does this man believe in Jesus? Yes
Does this man try to act for Jesus? Yes
Does he get to go to heaven? No
Or how about one for beliefs
A man follows the teachings of Jesus(philosophically). He is a good man of Jewish faith. He loves everyone, but he does not accept that Jesus is divine, he considers Jesus more like Muslims consider Mohammed.
Does this man act in the way Jesus described? Yes
Does this man have faith in God? Yes
Does this man get to go to heaven? According to you NO
Do you concur, or do either of those two men get to enter into the kingdom of heaven?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 11:31:00 AM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 08:59:00 AM
Let us try another way
A Psycho
believes in Jesus very much
kills people because of their non-belief
feels that he is simply saving the rest of the world from the lies of the non-believer
therefore his Good outweights the Evil or murder
Does this man believe in Jesus? Yes
Does this man try to act for Jesus? Yes
Does he get to go to heaven? No
Or how about one for beliefs
A man follows the teachings of Jesus(philosophically). He is a good man of Jewish faith. He loves everyone, but he does not accept that Jesus is divine, he considers Jesus more like Muslims consider Mohammed.
Does this man act in the way Jesus described? Yes
Does this man have faith in God? Yes
Does this man get to go to heaven? According to you NO
Do you concur, or do either of those two men get to enter into the kingdom of heaven?
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 11:31:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 11:06 AM)
Hmmm when we refer to people who are christian by name only, and not by deeds, we tend to think of hypocrits.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 12:22:00 PM
-
Isn't man #1 simply taking this bit of scripture to the extreme?
Man #2
Now we have real problems.
Man #2 resembles many of the early members of the Christian Church...in fact...he resembles a fairly strong representation in the early Christian Church. Were they all wrong and did they all go to hell? This is the same collective of people that wrote the Bible. This attitude only changed after Paul, and fully after Constantine.
Remember this quote
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: Rustmonkey on November 16, 2005, 12:42:00 PM
-
Ok, guys this is rediculous. No self procalaiming christian that really follows Jesus's word would even state "I'm going to heaven, you're not." This is a blatant judgement about something we could never possibly understand. If you truly believe in an ALL POWERFUL being (which, yes I do) then how can you TRULY believe and then turn around and assume that you KNOW who this All Powerful One will choose to be praised or torrmented in the afterlife? Because a book that was written by men like you and me says so? Wrong, you can't. My opinion is no matter what religion you follow, we're all following the same entity. So get over it.
But, thats just MY opinion.
Good luck.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:10:00 PM
-
wait before you get to man #2
where did Jesus command that you could not kill non-believers?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:11:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 12:22:00 PM
QUOTE
Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
Isn't man #1 simply taking this bit of scripture to the extreme?
Man #2
Now we have real problems.
Man #2 resembles many of the early members of the Christian Church...in fact...he resembles a fairly strong representation in the early Christian Church. Were they all wrong and did they all go to hell? This is the same collective of people that wrote the Bible. This attitude only changed after Paul, and fully after Constantine.
Remember this quote
QUOTE
He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. -- Lk.10:26
Post by: Rustmonkey on November 16, 2005, 12:42:00 PM
But, thats just MY opinion.
Good luck.
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:10:00 PM
where did Jesus command that you could not kill non-believers?
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:11:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 02:29 PM)
Man #2
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
-
I told you that the man believes Jesus to be a prophet and not divine. He believes in his teachings, but not in his divine nature. This would include the belief that "Jesus died for our sins"
All of your quotes could be read in the following way
Jesus was telling you what God really thought.
Jesus had good philosophy on life
Live life as Jesus told you to.
It never says anything about dying on a cross
BTW, why do you reference John so much. I would prefer it if you referred to a Gospel writer that we actually know the identity of.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
I told you that the man believes Jesus to be a prophet and not divine. He believes in his teachings, but not in his divine nature. This would include the belief that "Jesus died for our sins"
All of your quotes could be read in the following way
Jesus was telling you what God really thought.
Jesus had good philosophy on life
Live life as Jesus told you to.
It never says anything about dying on a cross
BTW, why do you reference John so much. I would prefer it if you referred to a Gospel writer that we actually know the identity of.
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 03:17 PM)
wait before you get to man #2
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:29:00 PM
-
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:29:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 03:30 PM)
God's words? God wrote the New Testament now?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:31:00 PM
-
Now, i am the first to claim that Jesus was a pacifist. However, he never expressly forbid the murder of non-believers.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:40:00 PM
-
Besides...your missing the point
I am simply demonstrating how a man who has very strong faith, and is not just a casual Christian is still not going to heaven.
:::::Faith is not getting you into heaven:::::
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:52:00 PM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 02:03:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:31:00 PM
QUOTE
Mt. 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
QUOTE
Exodus 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
Now, i am the first to claim that Jesus was a pacifist. However, he never expressly forbid the murder of non-believers.
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 01:40:00 PM
I am simply demonstrating how a man who has very strong faith, and is not just a casual Christian is still not going to heaven.
:::::Faith is not getting you into heaven:::::
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 01:52:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 03:30 PM)
Post by: nsfdheo on November 16, 2005, 02:03:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 16 2005, 03:38 PM)
No...you showed me where Jesus forgives
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 02:33:00 PM
-
Wait....you do realize that John the Apostle and John the author were two totally different people?
John the Apostle was most likely illiterate(he was a fisherman), and everyone knows that John the Apostle did not write any of the books of the bible.
I am pointing out that your two key sources for most of your beliefs are:
an unknown author
Paul
You have referenced Matthew, Mark, and Luke far less frequently, despite the fact that they were all older and more reliable testaments to the life of Jesus Christ
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: damam on November 16, 2005, 06:07:00 PM
-
if your going to go that route you should also cross reference witht the Gospel of Thomas. really we know so little of jesus . . .
so as a deist - what is your belief in the here after?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 16, 2005, 09:50:00 PM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 16, 2005, 02:33:00 PM
QUOTE
And what is wrong with John, He was one of Christ closer disciples. He also wrote 5 books in the bible that come to mind.
Wait....you do realize that John the Apostle and John the author were two totally different people?
John the Apostle was most likely illiterate(he was a fisherman), and everyone knows that John the Apostle did not write any of the books of the bible.
I am pointing out that your two key sources for most of your beliefs are:
an unknown author
Paul
You have referenced Matthew, Mark, and Luke far less frequently, despite the fact that they were all older and more reliable testaments to the life of Jesus Christ
Post by: damam on November 16, 2005, 06:07:00 PM
so as a deist - what is your belief in the here after?
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 16, 2005, 09:50:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 17 2005, 03:14 AM)
my belief.....
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 17, 2005, 07:04:00 PM
-
Damn...thats funny
I just heard a Muslim, a Buddist, and a Hindu all say the same thing about you
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 17, 2005, 07:45:00 PM
-
http://wiki.ehow.com...se-an-Open-Mind
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 18, 2005, 08:33:00 AM
-
Post by: puckSR on November 17, 2005, 07:04:00 PM
I just heard a Muslim, a Buddist, and a Hindu all say the same thing about you
Post by: throwingks on November 17, 2005, 07:45:00 PM
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 18, 2005, 08:33:00 AM
QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Nov 17 2005, 06:57 AM)
Your in for a rude awakening....
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 11:04:00 AM
-
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 18, 2005, 12:40:00 PM
-
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 11:04:00 AM
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 18, 2005, 12:40:00 PM
QUOTE(DARKSHADOW666 @ Nov 18 2005, 04:40 PM)
your still so blind and only you want to beleive that you will go to a perfect place after death but it will not happen.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 18, 2005, 01:21:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 18, 2005, 01:21:00 PM
QUOTE(bluedeath @ Nov 18 2005, 11:11 AM)
you sitting in nothingness staring at nothing doing nothing for eternity
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 18, 2005, 03:09:00 PM
-
hmm, i was always under the impression purgatory was a sort of nothingness, not heaven, not hell, not anything (hence my curiosity as to whether you would be conscious of it) and it was basically for people who werent "good" (catholic) enough to go to heaven, but didnt deserve hell either (unbaptised babies, the proverbial "good smaritans") and it was also a sort of 'waiting room" for good catholics on their way to heaven (they wait in purgatory until the second coming when all would be granted access to heaven at the same time
maybe im completely wrong on that, or thats not the specific catholic concept of purgatory
kindof odd, for the all theological research ive done i never looked much into purgatory
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 18, 2005, 04:28:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 18, 2005, 03:09:00 PM
maybe im completely wrong on that, or thats not the specific catholic concept of purgatory
kindof odd, for the all theological research ive done i never looked much into purgatory
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 18, 2005, 04:28:00 PM
QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Nov 18 2005, 09:47 PM)
Say hi to the dungeon master for me... 
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 05:10:00 PM
-
Can anyone really take Catholicism seriously. It seems like a church that serves a satanic purpose. Of course this sounds like many of the supposed christian organizations. If Satan does exist wouldn't his top priority be to corrupt and control religious organizations while slowly whittling away at organized Christianity from within. The fact that priests are not allowed to marry seems satanic to me. How could a true christian religious organization allow sex predators to infiltrate it's local leadership positions so completely. Isn't this the same organization that has in the past allowed all manner of torture and deceit in order to force itself on the people.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 07:45:00 PM
-
So allowing priests to molest children is OK then. I can't believe anyone takes that satanic enterprise seriously. Such a tell you what you want to hear religion shrouded with mysticism to keep the people occupied. You say they have been through their period of corruption? What about the thousands of priests who are guilty of molesting children right now. I guess marriage wouldn't have worked for them anyways. And your Nazi Pope. How fitting.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 11:48:00 PM
-
This is exactly why you just can't deal with child molesters being executed. Many of them would be catholic priests. Actions speak much louder than words. The Catholic church covered up many thousands of cases where young boys and girls were molested by priests. God knows how many unreported cases occur in Latin America where the welfare of children is not a priority. By these actions they did in fact condone pedophilia. The Catholic church has committed heinous acts since its conception to control the people.
I have said it before. If your pope was truly worthy to hold such a lofty position then he would in fact be dead. He would have died as he refused to put on the uniform of genocide. I don't care what age he was. Comparing him to some of the early popes does make him look like a Disney character. The early popes were so horrible that they made Hitler look like a wonderful person.
What a great Religious Organization. Founded and built upon human suffering. Sounds like Satan's Church to me.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 10:04:00 AM
-
let me ask you a question, were you or anyone you know ever in boy scouts?
well so was the pope, he just happened to live in another country when he was a kid
one of the most basic tenets of christian church is that salvation can be granted at any time, it doesnt matter whether the pope was in the hitler junge, it wouldnt even matter if he was in the schutzstaffeln, hes christian now and thats what matters
when you accept christ all sins are washed away 100%, meaing someone who became christian yesterday is no less "worthy" and no worse than someone who was raised christian
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 10:39:00 AM
-
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 05:10:00 PM
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 07:45:00 PM
Post by: bluedeath on November 18, 2005, 11:48:00 PM
I have said it before. If your pope was truly worthy to hold such a lofty position then he would in fact be dead. He would have died as he refused to put on the uniform of genocide. I don't care what age he was. Comparing him to some of the early popes does make him look like a Disney character. The early popes were so horrible that they made Hitler look like a wonderful person.
What a great Religious Organization. Founded and built upon human suffering. Sounds like Satan's Church to me.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 10:04:00 AM
well so was the pope, he just happened to live in another country when he was a kid
one of the most basic tenets of christian church is that salvation can be granted at any time, it doesnt matter whether the pope was in the hitler junge, it wouldnt even matter if he was in the schutzstaffeln, hes christian now and thats what matters
when you accept christ all sins are washed away 100%, meaing someone who became christian yesterday is no less "worthy" and no worse than someone who was raised christian
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 10:39:00 AM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 19 2005, 09:11 AM)
when you accept christ all sins are washed away 100%, meaing someone who became christian yesterday is no less "worthy" and no worse than someone who was raised christian
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 11:39:00 AM
-
if berkowitz has truly and sincerely repented his sins and accepted chrsit then he will go to heaven, much liek the theif that was crucified beside jesus
as for the dali lama, hes more interested in nirvana than heaven, personally i think all the worlds religions are pretty much just different ways of worshipping the same power
but then to some christian fundementalists all non-christian religions are headed by satan or his demons
based on what puck has told me about the catholic purgatory is seems thats where the dali lama will go until he decides to accept christ
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 11:45:00 AM
-
I respect your beliefs, and I will never tell you, you are wrong. I, however, disagree with them.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 12:31:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 11:39:00 AM
as for the dali lama, hes more interested in nirvana than heaven, personally i think all the worlds religions are pretty much just different ways of worshipping the same power
but then to some christian fundementalists all non-christian religions are headed by satan or his demons
based on what puck has told me about the catholic purgatory is seems thats where the dali lama will go until he decides to accept christ
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 11:45:00 AM
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 12:31:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 19 2005, 11:52 AM)
I respect your beliefs, and I will never tell you, you are wrong. I, however, disagree with them.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 12:56:00 PM
-
I lost myself. What stand point are you taking?
I believe in the Heaven on Earth philosophy. I don't claim to know where Ghandi, the Lama, or Berkowitz go when they die. I do know how each should be remembered here on Earth.
I believe how the world remembers you is as important as your life when you lived it. When I say the world I do not necessarily mean your spoken story or written history. I mean every facet.
If you destroyed an entire coral reef. It might not ever be known to man. However the world would know it. I do not believe in a halfway point after you die. I don't believe saying "I am sorry" fixes anything at all. A true man doesn't make that mistake in the first place. A man that is truely sorry for his sins is just that. Sorry. It doesn't fix anything. You can be sorry you drove drunk and killed a little boy. It doesn't bring him back. A serial killer that claims to be saved does not leave a better memory than Ghandi.
On a side note, I have a question about purgatory. Is that what ghosts are? If they are, where do the ghosts go after the world is no longer here? I am not trying to debate purgatory at all I am interested in the thought process as much as I am in Greek and Roman mythology.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
-
my standpoint on son of sam is that if he has truly accepted christ in his heart he will go to heaven, if he hasnt then god will see though his lies and give him the eternal analog of HSD's ban-hammer
its not my place to judge someones sincerity, its a personal thing between a man and god, i feel that in the grand scheme of things killing someone is meaningless, that persons soul is eternal and thats what matters, same with destroying a coral reef, god created it, he can do it again easily
i believe god is all powerful and all forgiving, you can do whatever you do in life but if you repent (which is much more than just "sorry") all is forgiven
of coruse its not a simple as black and white (much like the faith vs works arguments) its easy to outwardly repent your sins then turn around and kill someone else, true acceptance of christ doesnt necessarily imply good deeds, you can help all the old ladies across the street you want and it wont get you into heaven, but then you can sit on your sofa all day watching tv and be saved, its a tough call to make, which is why it isnt in our hands
kinda makes this whole discussion similar to to debating the pros and cons of why bill gates should drink pepsi or coke, interesting to hear everyones veiws, opinions and take on the situation, but in the end is not our decision and whatever choice is made doesnt even effect us
as to the dali lama, i believe he is worshipping the same god i am, but hes doing it the way he knows how, and im going how i know
a little reasoning here:
buddhists seek a oneness with nature
christians seek a oneness with god
god created nature, and his spirit permeates all aspects of it
buddhists, by proxy, seek a oneness with god
i know, the only way into heaven is though jesus, but to me "jesus" is 5 letters on a peice of paper, i used to work in a window factory with jesus, he drove and orange lowrider pinto with velour shag interior
i see god and jesus and all that as being above names and titles, more of a concept, an idea or a feeling, just because buddhists have a different name for the feeling doesnt mean its not the same
but once again, its not for us to decide, but still interesting to discuss, lol
ghosts, hmmm, interesting one, id like to hear pucks take on that one and a possible relation to purgatory
a catholic may very well say they arent human souls but just demons (since they do "officially" believe in demonic possession)
i believe (along with most people probably) that they are souls trapped between worlds, who either dont know to move on, or are afraid to (perhaps at this point they realize that they should have accepted christ) i feel they can either be told or convinced to move on, or theyll hang around til the end when god sorts them out, lol
i guess that would be very similar to the concept of purgatory
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 02:01:00 PM
-
Love and Respect Yourself and Others.
We came to the same conclusions and we both sleep soundly at night. We are both moral people. Our memory left on the world should be a good one. What that means for us in the future, I don't know. But, I am content for now. I also believe that a person soul is eternal and it remembers from its past and it is aware of its future. I do not believe in fate, that is where the true "I am sorry" comes in. When that time comes it will start leaving positive scars on our world. It can never make up for the bad deeds, but it can start making good ones. So, I can see your point if Son of Sam does repent before he dies, his souls journey will continue on that path and will leave positive memories. Even if Berkowitz leaves bad ones.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: red.bull.x on November 19, 2005, 02:10:00 PM
-
hahaha Nice!!!
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 04:12:00 PM
-
ah, i get it now, sorry for misreading you, lol
so whats your take on the dali lama?
i undertsand the distinction, im saying many religious folk, particularly more fundemental folk, would say ghosts (by that definition) do not exist, but are rather demons pretending to be the spirits of people and decieving us
i knew a guy in high school who believes UFOs are demons, lol
a good buddhist wouldnt worship buddha, i would say the ones that do are confused, lol, but then again im sure buddhism has a few denominations that disagree on the finer points of things too
divinity of buddha? well he would be considered one with nature, omnipresent, probably omniscient, but not omnipotent, divine in a way, but not a god
a "true" buddhist should be an athiest, not believing in any power above nature
yep, strange religion that, although id probably call it more of a philosophy than religion
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 04:19:00 PM
-
As a totally different argument. I have heard the word Elohiym is plural. Meaning God(s). I don't want to go off on a tangent yet. I just thought I would bring up something interesting. Although it does link a little to UFOs.
http://www.google.co... plural&spell=1
Raelism is based on this.
http://www.rael.org
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 06:36:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 12:56:00 PM
I believe in the Heaven on Earth philosophy. I don't claim to know where Ghandi, the Lama, or Berkowitz go when they die. I do know how each should be remembered here on Earth.
I believe how the world remembers you is as important as your life when you lived it. When I say the world I do not necessarily mean your spoken story or written history. I mean every facet.
If you destroyed an entire coral reef. It might not ever be known to man. However the world would know it. I do not believe in a halfway point after you die. I don't believe saying "I am sorry" fixes anything at all. A true man doesn't make that mistake in the first place. A man that is truely sorry for his sins is just that. Sorry. It doesn't fix anything. You can be sorry you drove drunk and killed a little boy. It doesn't bring him back. A serial killer that claims to be saved does not leave a better memory than Ghandi.
On a side note, I have a question about purgatory. Is that what ghosts are? If they are, where do the ghosts go after the world is no longer here? I am not trying to debate purgatory at all I am interested in the thought process as much as I am in Greek and Roman mythology.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 01:23:00 PM
its not my place to judge someones sincerity, its a personal thing between a man and god, i feel that in the grand scheme of things killing someone is meaningless, that persons soul is eternal and thats what matters, same with destroying a coral reef, god created it, he can do it again easily
i believe god is all powerful and all forgiving, you can do whatever you do in life but if you repent (which is much more than just "sorry") all is forgiven
of coruse its not a simple as black and white (much like the faith vs works arguments) its easy to outwardly repent your sins then turn around and kill someone else, true acceptance of christ doesnt necessarily imply good deeds, you can help all the old ladies across the street you want and it wont get you into heaven, but then you can sit on your sofa all day watching tv and be saved, its a tough call to make, which is why it isnt in our hands
kinda makes this whole discussion similar to to debating the pros and cons of why bill gates should drink pepsi or coke, interesting to hear everyones veiws, opinions and take on the situation, but in the end is not our decision and whatever choice is made doesnt even effect us
as to the dali lama, i believe he is worshipping the same god i am, but hes doing it the way he knows how, and im going how i know
a little reasoning here:
buddhists seek a oneness with nature
christians seek a oneness with god
god created nature, and his spirit permeates all aspects of it
buddhists, by proxy, seek a oneness with god
i know, the only way into heaven is though jesus, but to me "jesus" is 5 letters on a peice of paper, i used to work in a window factory with jesus, he drove and orange lowrider pinto with velour shag interior
i see god and jesus and all that as being above names and titles, more of a concept, an idea or a feeling, just because buddhists have a different name for the feeling doesnt mean its not the same
but once again, its not for us to decide, but still interesting to discuss, lol
ghosts, hmmm, interesting one, id like to hear pucks take on that one and a possible relation to purgatory
a catholic may very well say they arent human souls but just demons (since they do "officially" believe in demonic possession)
i believe (along with most people probably) that they are souls trapped between worlds, who either dont know to move on, or are afraid to (perhaps at this point they realize that they should have accepted christ) i feel they can either be told or convinced to move on, or theyll hang around til the end when god sorts them out, lol
i guess that would be very similar to the concept of purgatory
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 02:01:00 PM
QUOTE
buddhists seek a oneness with nature
christians seek a oneness with god
god created nature, and his spirit permeates all aspects of it
buddhists, by proxy, seek a oneness with god
That simple equation strengthens my belief in my quote in my sig.christians seek a oneness with god
god created nature, and his spirit permeates all aspects of it
buddhists, by proxy, seek a oneness with god
Love and Respect Yourself and Others.
We came to the same conclusions and we both sleep soundly at night. We are both moral people. Our memory left on the world should be a good one. What that means for us in the future, I don't know. But, I am content for now. I also believe that a person soul is eternal and it remembers from its past and it is aware of its future. I do not believe in fate, that is where the true "I am sorry" comes in. When that time comes it will start leaving positive scars on our world. It can never make up for the bad deeds, but it can start making good ones. So, I can see your point if Son of Sam does repent before he dies, his souls journey will continue on that path and will leave positive memories. Even if Berkowitz leaves bad ones.
Post by: red.bull.x on November 19, 2005, 02:10:00 PM
QUOTE
Right. So, Son of Sam is going to heaven and Ghandi is going to hell. blink.gif I just find it hard to believe something like that. That is not in ThrowingKsism.
hahaha Nice!!!
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 04:12:00 PM
QUOTE
******Catholic Purgatory*************
ah, i get it now, sorry for misreading you, lol
so whats your take on the dali lama?
QUOTE
*******Demons vs Ghosts****************
i undertsand the distinction, im saying many religious folk, particularly more fundemental folk, would say ghosts (by that definition) do not exist, but are rather demons pretending to be the spirits of people and decieving us
i knew a guy in high school who believes UFOs are demons, lol
QUOTE
*******Buddhism******
a good buddhist wouldnt worship buddha, i would say the ones that do are confused, lol, but then again im sure buddhism has a few denominations that disagree on the finer points of things too
divinity of buddha? well he would be considered one with nature, omnipresent, probably omniscient, but not omnipotent, divine in a way, but not a god
a "true" buddhist should be an athiest, not believing in any power above nature
yep, strange religion that, although id probably call it more of a philosophy than religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 04:19:00 PM
QUOTE
That which is enclosed in iron and letter in a fish, Out will go one who will then make war, He will have his fleet well rowed by sea, Appearing near Latin land.
Some people believe that this quatrain seems to indicate that Nostradamus knew there would be submarines and metal warships in the future.
http://www.amuseyour...l-analysis.htmlSome people believe that this quatrain seems to indicate that Nostradamus knew there would be submarines and metal warships in the future.
As a totally different argument. I have heard the word Elohiym is plural. Meaning God(s). I don't want to go off on a tangent yet. I just thought I would bring up something interesting. Although it does link a little to UFOs.
http://www.google.co... plural&spell=1
Raelism is based on this.
http://www.rael.org
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 06:36:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 19 2005, 05:38 PM)
****Nostradamus*****
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 07:27:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 07:27:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 19 2005, 06:43 PM)
And, he was vague because CATHOLICS would have chopped his head off if they understood what he was saying. Do more research.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 07:37:00 PM
-
I agree he was vague, who cares. I was making the point that in his language submarine wasn't a word. So he said iron fish. Ezekial said fiery chariot not UFO.
Just a quick history lesson. Nostradamus was born Jewish. In England anything not Catholic was banned. You would be beheaded by order of the king if you were not Catholic. His mystical reading was deemed non-Catholic so he changed his writing style to use many different languages and word patterns within the same paragraph. So that noone would understand. As with the Bible stuff gets lost in translation. Even if his prophecies have been scrutinized it doesn't change the fact that while he was alive he was a doctor that cured many people during the plague with modern medicinal practices. Ok, enough about Nostradamus.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 08:58:00 PM
-
http://en.wikipedia....iki/Nostradamus
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 09:41:00 PM
-
from Wiki link
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 10:08:00 PM
-
after all this time who knows what the facts were anymore, lol
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 10:31:00 PM
-
After all of this, all I wanted was puck to admit there could be such a thing as UFOs.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 11:44:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 07:37:00 PM
Just a quick history lesson. Nostradamus was born Jewish. In England anything not Catholic was banned. You would be beheaded by order of the king if you were not Catholic. His mystical reading was deemed non-Catholic so he changed his writing style to use many different languages and word patterns within the same paragraph. So that noone would understand. As with the Bible stuff gets lost in translation. Even if his prophecies have been scrutinized it doesn't change the fact that while he was alive he was a doctor that cured many people during the plague with modern medicinal practices. Ok, enough about Nostradamus.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 08:58:00 PM
QUOTE
Born in Saint-Rémy-de-Provence in the south of France in December 1503, he was the son of a grain dealer who was also a prosperous home-grown notary. His family was originally Jewish, but had converted to Catholicism during the previous century.
QUOTE
The quatrains, written in a book titled "Les Propheties", received a mixed reaction when they were published. Some people thought Nostradamus was a servant of evil, a fake, or insane, while many of the elite thought his quatrains were spiritually inspired prophecies. Soon nobility came from all over to receive horoscopes and advice from him
QUOTE
Some biographical accounts of Nostradamus' life state that he was afraid of being persecuted for heresy by the Inquisition, but neither prophecy nor astrology fell under this bracket, and he would have been in danger only if he had practised magic to support them. In fact, his relations with the Church as a prophet and healer were always excellent.
http://en.wikipedia....iki/Nostradamus
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 09:41:00 PM
QUOTE
4. Didn't he write in code?
A. No, but he did leave the 'Centuries' in scrambled order, as well as
using deliberately obscure language in them to protect himself from
his more vociferous religious critics (most of them Protestants). This
involved using not only the various linguistic contortions normal in
sixteenth-century verse, but also a sprinkling of homonyms (i.e.
re-spellings) and a large number of imported Greek and Latin words -
to say nothing of Provençal. All this, too, was highly fashionable at
the time: Nostradamus merely pushed it to extremes.
A. No, but he did leave the 'Centuries' in scrambled order, as well as
using deliberately obscure language in them to protect himself from
his more vociferous religious critics (most of them Protestants). This
involved using not only the various linguistic contortions normal in
sixteenth-century verse, but also a sprinkling of homonyms (i.e.
re-spellings) and a large number of imported Greek and Latin words -
to say nothing of Provençal. All this, too, was highly fashionable at
the time: Nostradamus merely pushed it to extremes.
QUOTE
7. What did Nostradamus's contemporaries think of him?
A. The local Catholic peasantry viewed him with suspicion and (in an
age of almost apocalyptic religious warfare) thought he might be some
kind of Protestant. The Church was interested, though sometimes a
little suspicious. His books were avidly devoured by the reading
public (around 90% of whom could reportedly read at the time). The
Court, under Queen Catherine de Médicis, quickly became besotted with
him (especially - according to his son César some 55 years later ,at
least - after his apparently successful prediction at I.35 of her
husband the King's death in 1559), to the point where foreign
ambassadors were reporting home that it had become overcome by a kind
of Nostradamania and implying that this precluded all sensible
dialogue for the duration.
A. The local Catholic peasantry viewed him with suspicion and (in an
age of almost apocalyptic religious warfare) thought he might be some
kind of Protestant. The Church was interested, though sometimes a
little suspicious. His books were avidly devoured by the reading
public (around 90% of whom could reportedly read at the time). The
Court, under Queen Catherine de Médicis, quickly became besotted with
him (especially - according to his son César some 55 years later ,at
least - after his apparently successful prediction at I.35 of her
husband the King's death in 1559), to the point where foreign
ambassadors were reporting home that it had become overcome by a kind
of Nostradamania and implying that this precluded all sensible
dialogue for the duration.
from Wiki link
QUOTE
Feeling vulnerable to religious fanatics, however, he devised a method of obscuring his meaning by using word games and a mixture of languages such as Provençal, Greek, Latin and Italian.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 10:08:00 PM
Post by: throwingks on November 19, 2005, 10:31:00 PM
After all of this, all I wanted was puck to admit there could be such a thing as UFOs.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 19, 2005, 11:44:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 19 2005, 10:38 PM)
ha After all of this, all I wanted was puck to admit there could be such a thing as UFOs.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 20, 2005, 10:15:00 PM
-
After all of this, all I wanted was puck to admit there could be such a thing as UFOs.Post by: xmedia2004 on November 20, 2005, 10:15:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 20 2005, 08:34 PM)
******UFOs***************
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 20, 2005, 10:50:00 PM
-
Puck you don't read very well. My point about Nostradamus has nothing to do with his "fortune telling" it has to do with the language he used to do it. Related in the sense that "Fiery Chariot in the Sky" refers to UFOs. Same as Nostradamus's "Metal Fish" relates to submarines. I am saying, you believe in the Bible but not UFOs, that is contradictory. Ezekial described UFOs to a "T".
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 20, 2005, 11:41:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 20, 2005, 10:50:00 PM
Post by: lordvader129 on November 20, 2005, 11:41:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 20 2005, 10:57 PM)
Puck you don't read very well. My point about Nostradamus has nothing to do with his "fortune telling" it has to do with the language he used to do it. Related in the sense that "Fiery Chariot in the Sky" refers to UFOs. Same as Nostradamus's "Metal Fish" relates to submarines. I am saying, you believe in the Bible but not UFOs, that is contradictory. Ezekial described UFOs to a "T".
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 08:12:00 AM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 08:12:00 AM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 20 2005, 10:48 PM)
puck already admitted there are UFOs, and says he saw one, but im assuming by UFO you mean alien spacecraft, in which case anything (and everything) is debatable
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: damam on November 21, 2005, 09:39:00 AM
-
*************************
Buddhism
*************************
there are well over 2000 sects of buddhism and they run the entire gammit. To try and sum up the religion as this or that is impossible. Take my two friends for example: Both born and raised buddhist, both were foreign students who came to the states to study. One was Chinese, one was Japanese.
The first friend practiced a form of buddhism that was a lot like islam or christianilty where buddha was a drop in replacement for christ. He prayed to buddha 5 times a day, and referred to him as his g-d. His church had also gone through the trouble of trying to prove they were the oldest, and therefore the truest religion like so many fundamentalist christians try to do.
The other one was an adamant believer that the only thing special about buddha. The only thing that made him remotely interesting was that he happened to be the one that came up with all this stuff. And then he was quick to say that any one could have done this, he just happened to be the one. He was definitely along the line that this is a philosophy for living.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 21, 2005, 10:06:00 AM
-
Post by: damam on November 21, 2005, 09:39:00 AM
Buddhism
*************************
there are well over 2000 sects of buddhism and they run the entire gammit. To try and sum up the religion as this or that is impossible. Take my two friends for example: Both born and raised buddhist, both were foreign students who came to the states to study. One was Chinese, one was Japanese.
The first friend practiced a form of buddhism that was a lot like islam or christianilty where buddha was a drop in replacement for christ. He prayed to buddha 5 times a day, and referred to him as his g-d. His church had also gone through the trouble of trying to prove they were the oldest, and therefore the truest religion like so many fundamentalist christians try to do.
The other one was an adamant believer that the only thing special about buddha. The only thing that made him remotely interesting was that he happened to be the one that came up with all this stuff. And then he was quick to say that any one could have done this, he just happened to be the one. He was definitely along the line that this is a philosophy for living.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 21, 2005, 10:06:00 AM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 21 2005, 08:19 AM)
Well Ezekial didnt see government aircraft 3000 years ago. What he saw was not a meteor.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 10:49:00 AM
-
^^^
Thats fair.
But, why do people claim to take the Bible so literally, then only believe what they want? Either you believe in it or you don't. Devout Christians I have talked to say the Bible is meant to be interpreted literally, all of it. There is no symbolism. I have never seen an Immaculate conseption yet that is more easy to believe than Ezekials story? Come on. You can't pick and choose.
The most literal view of the Bible I have found is Raelism. But, most Christians brush that religion off as a sham.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 21, 2005, 02:10:00 PM
-
the bible cntradicts itself too many times ot be taken literally, and any translated version is no longer literal either
but people just like to ignore those things
and if you ask a literalist what ezekial saw theyll tell you he saw god, becuase thats what ezekial interpretted the sight as
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 02:54:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 10:49:00 AM
Thats fair.
But, why do people claim to take the Bible so literally, then only believe what they want? Either you believe in it or you don't. Devout Christians I have talked to say the Bible is meant to be interpreted literally, all of it. There is no symbolism. I have never seen an Immaculate conseption yet that is more easy to believe than Ezekials story? Come on. You can't pick and choose.
The most literal view of the Bible I have found is Raelism. But, most Christians brush that religion off as a sham.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 21, 2005, 02:10:00 PM
but people just like to ignore those things
and if you ask a literalist what ezekial saw theyll tell you he saw god, becuase thats what ezekial interpretted the sight as
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 02:54:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 21 2005, 01:17 PM)
and if you ask a literalist what ezekial saw theyll tell you he saw god, becuase thats what ezekial interpretted the sight as
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 21, 2005, 03:38:00 PM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 21, 2005, 03:38:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 21 2005, 11:01 PM)
I would think it was a supreme being too. 4 Gods?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 06:46:00 PM
-
Then that throws out their excuse of saying elohim is plural cause it represents the trinity. There is no excure, elohim is plural, and Christians got it wrong.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 21, 2005, 07:33:00 PM
-
4 Gods?Post by: throwingks on November 21, 2005, 06:46:00 PM
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 21, 2005, 07:33:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 22 2005, 02:53 AM)
Then that throws out their excuse of saying elohim is plural cause it represents the trinity. There is no excure, elohim is plural, and Christians got it wrong.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 21, 2005, 10:16:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 21, 2005, 10:16:00 PM
QUOTE(throwingks @ Nov 21 2005, 03:01 PM)
4 Gods?-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: Granulated on November 21, 2005, 10:23:00 PM
-
Post by: Granulated on November 21, 2005, 10:23:00 PM
QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Nov 21 2005, 05:45 PM)
That is not exactly correct the trinity, the 3 are 1. Secondly real Christians worship JC, not GOD or trinity or Mary, period. -
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 22, 2005, 05:42:00 AM
-
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 22, 2005, 05:42:00 AM
QUOTE(Granulated @ Nov 22 2005, 06:30 AM)
You are obviously not Christian. Real christians worship the Trinity: One God, but three persons. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All are equal, but are yet one.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 22, 2005, 08:50:00 PM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 22, 2005, 08:50:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 21 2005, 11:32 PM)
throwingks:
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 22, 2005, 09:28:00 PM
-
Post by: lordvader129 on November 22, 2005, 09:28:00 PM
QUOTE(xmedia2004 @ Nov 21 2005, 03:45 PM)
Secondly real Christians worship JC, not GOD or trinity-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on November 23, 2005, 01:50:00 AM
-
xmedia may be all those things but at least he doesn't enable pedophiles in the name of god.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: bluedeath on November 24, 2005, 01:53:00 AM
-
Post by: bluedeath on November 23, 2005, 01:50:00 AM
Post by: bluedeath on November 24, 2005, 01:53:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 24 2005, 12:17 AM)
ok...seriously bluedeath...do you know anything about catholicism??
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: throwingks on November 24, 2005, 10:09:00 AM
-
Post by: throwingks on November 24, 2005, 10:09:00 AM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 24 2005, 09:05 AM)
Bluedeath....Gay men are not pedophiles
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 24, 2005, 12:10:00 PM
-
The only good priest is a dead priest..
Tell the POPE to say Hi to Hitler for me.........
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 24, 2005, 12:22:00 PM
-
Any main religous leader can be classiffide as evil for they have preached shit that gets people killed.
And killing is evil to all of you christians, am I right ?
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: puckSR on November 28, 2005, 05:24:00 PM
-
Xmedia never did explain
He worships Jesus....but not God?
So he is violating the commandments....does Xmedia not believe in the commandments?
This should be interesting..since i think it was this question that began his whole "i hate catholics" phase.
My guess would be that Xmedia had never thought of this before...this would be a strong support of "organized religion". The average person does not apply himself to religious studies in a very helpful way. Xmedia never considered the problem with worshipping Jesus and not God. He also probably has not considered the problem with worshipping both Jesus and God.
The trinity is a theological construct of the Catholic Church...it explains how modern christians can worship both God and Jesus without violating the 10 commandments.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 28, 2005, 07:30:00 PM
-
well he is not a christian.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: KRAK_JOE on November 29, 2005, 04:25:00 AM
-
Darkshadow,
Love the avatar, it's brilliant.
Also, what's all this about facts...........show me conclusive proof that the bible is anything more than an eloborate story book.
Unbelievable.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 04:39:00 AM
-
Darkshadow,
Love the avatar, it's brilliant.
Also, what's all this about facts...........show me conclusive proof that the bible is anything more than an eloborate story book.
Unbelievable.
Suggestion, read the entire book front to back, that would be a start.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: KRAK_JOE on November 29, 2005, 07:25:00 AM
-
Dickhead, If i read a steven king book from front to back would that make it real ??????
You definately pulled that out of your arse hole.
There isn't any proof, and no amount of reading it will make it spring to life.
THE BIBLE IS NOTHIG MORE THAN AN ELABORATE STORY BOOK
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 09:04:00 AM
-
Dickhead, If i read a steven king book from front to back would that make it real ??????
You definately pulled that out of your arse hole.
There isn't any proof, and no amount of reading it will make it spring to life.
THE BIBLE IS NOTHIG MORE THAN AN ELABORATE STORY BOOK
Most people result to insult or personal assault when faced with the dilemna of the totality of their ignorance
on a subject matter of particular passion is exposed.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: lordvader129 on November 29, 2005, 09:32:00 AM
-
Case In Point
hmm, maybe thats why religions are also referred to as faiths
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 03:53:00 PM
-
Those are insults really I can do better but you boyfriend has done a better job than I ever could do.
The Real PuckSR
P.S. I guess when you tried to insinuate me being in the NAVY means I am gay wasnt an insult either. I didnt take it as such although it was what you meant.
You guys must have met at one of those c*ckholding sessions he mentions.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 04:21:00 PM
-
Awww....now Xmedia is afraid.
Instead of spending time trying to figure out what I do behind closed doors....
why dont you get back to the topic...and explain how you worship Jesus...but not God
Dude just be a man. Your BS has been exposed take your medicine and shut your mouth. You are only being annoying and ruining it for everyone. I would think seeing your ugly mug would be enough George.
Your level of arrogance is stagerring, Why should anyone believe anything that you say. I would have lied like you always do and say it wasnt me, but oh I forgot you have a big mouth. It got you in the jam you are in, and from the google search it appears you get pissed on quite a bit, even literally.
KEEP on spouting that I AM AN INDIAN bull, okay. You are only going to make it worse.
I feel like reporting all the thread and do everyone a favor you are loosing your novelty.
-
Title: Organized Religion
Post by: xmedia2012 on November 29, 2005, 04:35:00 PM
-
I remember some pasty white bitch would say she was indian, everyone would just look at her and laugh. Laugh long and laugh hard, good times.
btw what is BSDM or whatever?!!?!
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 24, 2005, 12:10:00 PM
Tell the POPE to say Hi to Hitler for me.........
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 24, 2005, 12:22:00 PM
And killing is evil to all of you christians, am I right ?
Post by: puckSR on November 28, 2005, 05:24:00 PM
He worships Jesus....but not God?
So he is violating the commandments....does Xmedia not believe in the commandments?
This should be interesting..since i think it was this question that began his whole "i hate catholics" phase.
My guess would be that Xmedia had never thought of this before...this would be a strong support of "organized religion". The average person does not apply himself to religious studies in a very helpful way. Xmedia never considered the problem with worshipping Jesus and not God. He also probably has not considered the problem with worshipping both Jesus and God.
The trinity is a theological construct of the Catholic Church...it explains how modern christians can worship both God and Jesus without violating the 10 commandments.
Post by: DARKSHADOW666 on November 28, 2005, 07:30:00 PM
Post by: KRAK_JOE on November 29, 2005, 04:25:00 AM
Love the avatar, it's brilliant.
Also, what's all this about facts...........show me conclusive proof that the bible is anything more than an eloborate story book.
Unbelievable.
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 04:39:00 AM
QUOTE(KRAK_JOE @ Nov 29 2005, 12:32 PM)
Darkshadow,
Love the avatar, it's brilliant.
Also, what's all this about facts...........show me conclusive proof that the bible is anything more than an eloborate story book.
Unbelievable.
Suggestion, read the entire book front to back, that would be a start.
Post by: KRAK_JOE on November 29, 2005, 07:25:00 AM
You definately pulled that out of your arse hole.
There isn't any proof, and no amount of reading it will make it spring to life.
THE BIBLE IS NOTHIG MORE THAN AN ELABORATE STORY BOOK
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 09:04:00 AM
QUOTE(KRAK_JOE @ Nov 29 2005, 03:32 PM)
Dickhead, If i read a steven king book from front to back would that make it real ??????
You definately pulled that out of your arse hole.
There isn't any proof, and no amount of reading it will make it spring to life.
THE BIBLE IS NOTHIG MORE THAN AN ELABORATE STORY BOOK
Most people result to insult or personal assault when faced with the dilemna of the totality of their ignorance
on a subject matter of particular passion is exposed.
Post by: lordvader129 on November 29, 2005, 09:32:00 AM
QUOTE
Most people result to insult or personal assault when faced with the dilemna of the totality of their ignorance
on a subject matter of particular passion is exposed.
on a subject matter of particular passion is exposed.
Case In Point
QUOTE
Also, what's all this about facts...........show me conclusive proof that the bible is anything more than an eloborate story book.
hmm, maybe thats why religions are also referred to as faiths
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 03:53:00 PM
QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Nov 29 2005, 05:39 PM)
Those are insults really I can do better but you boyfriend has done a better job than I ever could do.
The Real PuckSR
P.S. I guess when you tried to insinuate me being in the NAVY means I am gay wasnt an insult either. I didnt take it as such although it was what you meant.
You guys must have met at one of those c*ckholding sessions he mentions.
Post by: xmedia2004 on November 29, 2005, 04:21:00 PM
QUOTE(puckSR @ Nov 30 2005, 12:19 AM)
Awww....now Xmedia is afraid.
Instead of spending time trying to figure out what I do behind closed doors....
why dont you get back to the topic...and explain how you worship Jesus...but not God
Dude just be a man. Your BS has been exposed take your medicine and shut your mouth. You are only being annoying and ruining it for everyone. I would think seeing your ugly mug would be enough George.
Your level of arrogance is stagerring, Why should anyone believe anything that you say. I would have lied like you always do and say it wasnt me, but oh I forgot you have a big mouth. It got you in the jam you are in, and from the google search it appears you get pissed on quite a bit, even literally.
KEEP on spouting that I AM AN INDIAN bull, okay. You are only going to make it worse.
I feel like reporting all the thread and do everyone a favor you are loosing your novelty.
Post by: xmedia2012 on November 29, 2005, 04:35:00 PM
btw what is BSDM or whatever?!!?!