What is Tim Duncan's religion?

[SpursRock20]

lucky ginobili's there to keep the team's collective head screwed on straight

So let me get this straight, you think less of Duncan because he is a religious man? Those same morals have allowed him to grow into the man he is today. And I wouldn't have him any other way.

[Agloco]

Some non-believers say that man's existence was dumb luck.

Can you conclusively demonstrate otherwise? I'm all ears.


Man has thus far been unsuccessful at finding life on other planets. It's 2012 and we have the most powerful cameras and satellites, the smartest scientists in the history of the world and to this day, have not been able to find life on other planets. Forget the Universe, lets narrow it down to our own Galaxy. -- Nothing. Zip.

I don't follow. Why is it necessary to invoke a God to fill in the gaps in our knowledge? Everything in due time. At one point in time we had no knowledge of bacteria either. At that point we had the most advanced technology and smartest scientists in the history of the world as well.

We now know what caused bubonic plague, etc. It wasn't a God, just as most assuredly a God isn't the cause of todays failings either.


You believe in the Big Bang theory ? Cool, who or what caused it ?

It's the "what" part of your statement that you don't really entertain tbh.

[jARS mEsH sEt]

:lol it's too easy ain't it Agloco? The same, rehashed, irrational arguments over and over again.

"There's no way the universe could have come into being through natural means, an infinitely powerful, infinitely complex, all knowing deity must have created it!"

Really? Cool. What created that infinitely powerful, infinitely complex, all knowing deity? If an infinitely powerful deity is required to create universes, surely a process of infinitely infinite complexity is required to create that being!

"LOL DON'T BE DUMB GOD ALWAYS EXISTED I'VE DEFINED HIM TO BE MAGICAL HE CAN DO ANYTHING HE'S ALWAYS EXISTED"

Really? So deities can always exist but universes cannot always exist? How do you know that?




======================

It's like you have to spoon feed them step by step (Wait, that's an argument from ignorance! Just because you can't fathom how a universe could come into being through natural means doesn't mean you can make up your own explanation for it to assuage your own ignorance. Wait, that's special pleading - you claim the universe requires a cause but you fail to apply the same, faulty logic to your own God. Wait, that's a non-fucking-sequitur, even if I agreed that you proved that the universe has a cause, that's all you can say about it, you can't then go "oh by the way that cause is Allah, an infinitely powerful infinitely complex being who has written his law into the Q'uran), one simple idea after another, before they "get it," and inevitably like clockwork they'll throw their hands up in the air and say something along the lines of "it's my faith I've had a personal experience that proves it and nothing you say could change that."

[SpursRock20]

:lol it's too easy ain't it Agloco? The same, rehashed, irrational arguments over and over again.

"There's no way the universe could have come into being through natural means, an infinitely powerful, infinitely complex, all knowing deity must have created it!"

Really? Cool. What created that infinitely powerful, infinitely complex, all knowing deity? If an infinitely powerful deity is required to create universes, surely a process of infinitely infinite complexity is required to create that being!

"LOL DON'T BE DUMB GOD ALWAYS EXISTED I'VE DEFINED HIM TO BE MAGICAL HE CAN DO ANYTHING HE'S ALWAYS EXISTED"

Really? So deities can always exist but universes cannot always exist? How do you know that?





And you're point? Why do you have a problem with people who have faith? Does it affect you in any way? You choose what you want to believe and they choose what they want to believe. Plain and simple. Look, life can be a real s.o.b. Sometimes religion can help, and if it does help and makes a person a better version of what they are, then there is nothing wrong with it.

Now there is no doubt that the religous bigots that enforce their faiths on to others and are a walking contradiciton for what they supposedly believe in hamper the improvement of society. But some one on the internet that has a different view on how the world is created causes you to have a problem with the person is kinda comical. What he believes has no impact on your life.

Would it upset you if he believed that a certain fruit you absolutely hate is his favorite?

[pgardn]

And you're point? Why do you have a problem with people who have faith? Does it affect you in any way? You choose what you want to believe and they choose what they want to believe. Plain and simple. Look, life can be a real s.o.b. Sometimes religion can help, and if it does help and makes a person a better version of what they are, then there is nothing wrong with it.

Now there is no doubt that the religous bigots that enforce their faiths on to others and are a walking contradiciton for what they supposedly believe in hamper the improvement of society. But some one on the internet that has a different view on how the world is created causes you to have a problem with the person is kinda comical. What he believes has no impact on your life.

Would it upset you if he believed that a certain fruit you absolutely hate is his favorite?

Seems it is reasonable to ask why one has faith in what one believes to be true. Some people require reasonable explanations that are based on testable ideas. Others can have faith in tradition and beliefs that have come before them that are not testable. One can be proven right or wrong based on what we believe to be rigorous testing and modeling; The other is impossible to even begin to lend itself to the rigor involved in the first.

So imo its no big deal... Very different ways of looking at how faith in a belief is acquired. Because both are usually attempting to answer very different types of questions both of which rely on very different methods. Its when people try to mix these "ways to belief" that it gets ugly.

As far as Tim:
Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. That is my belief based on faith in absurd thoughts. Carry on.

[SpursRock20]

Seems it is reasonable to ask why one has faith in what one believes to be true. Some people require reasonable explanations that are based on testable ideas. Others can have faith in tradition and beliefs that have come before them that are not testable. One can be proven right or wrong based on what we believe to be rigorous testing and modeling; The other is impossible to even begin to lend itself to the rigor involved in the first.

So imo its no big deal... Very different ways of looking at how faith in a belief is acquired. Because both are usually attempting to answer very different types of questions both of which rely on very different methods. Its when people try to mix these "ways to belief" that it gets ugly.

As far as Tim:
Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. That is my belief based on faith in absurd thoughts. Carry on.

Good point. There is nothing wrong with asking. But insulting another for their faith and carrying on and on does not get either of the two anywhere. Is it actually possible that one will budge on the religion that they have valued for their lifetime over an internet forum? They are just getting entrenched deeper in their ideas.

[Leetonidas]

jARS mEsH sEt shitting on religites :lmao

[tmtcsc]

Can you conclusively demonstrate otherwise? I'm all ears.


Lol, I'll do that after you explain to me how Something can come from Nothing.



I don't follow. Why is it necessary to invoke a God to fill in the gaps in our knowledge? Everything in due time. At one point in time we had no knowledge of bacteria either. At that point we had the most advanced technology and smartest scientists in the history of the world as well.


There are no gaps to be filled. My faith tells me God is the creator. The how is merely entertainment. Science will never be able to explain how the Universe was created because Science can only measure that which exists. In other words, there are no formulas to explain Nothing. Even dark matter is Something. If you believe in the Big Bang theory as the beginning of our universe, you are still stuck trying to explain who or what caused the big bang. It didn't just merely happen out of Nothing.

My faith in God wasn't the result of a search for the beginning of the Universe. In all actuality, I really don't care how it was created. That's for philosophy junkies to banter about.

[GSH]

Good point. There is nothing wrong with asking. But insulting another for their faith and carrying on and on does not get either of the two anywhere. Is it actually possible that one will budge on the religion that they have valued for their lifetime over an internet forum? They are just getting entrenched deeper in their ideas.

Once in a very rare while, I will drop in on this thread. I don't know why. Sort of like leaning over to look at a traffic accident. But out of all the times I have scanned the posts in this thread, this is certainly the most (and perhaps the only) mature and rational comment I have ever read.

The one thing I can say is that the group who scream their unwavering belief in science (and our understanding of it) are acting on "faith" every bit as much as those who scream their belief in God. Our scientists are shamans of the first order, teaching of things like quantum entanglement and wave-particle duality as if they really know what the hell is going on. They don't. The sad thing is that some people simply "take them at their word", but scoff at those who do the same thing when considering the existence of God.

The only things we really know for certain are that we are desperately short on answers, and there is more here than meets the eye. I could spend another couple of pages on that, but I won't. SpursRock20 pretty much said it all: nobody's getting convinced to change their view on an Internet forum. It would give me a little extra hope for the world if a few people could at least learn to chill out and quit trying.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Lol, I'll do that after you explain to me how Something can come from Nothing.


There's this thing called quantum physics/mechanics and even though it's not mentioned in the bible for some strange reason, you might want to read a bit about it.

[DrSteffo]

The one thing I can say is that the group who scream their unwavering belief in science (and our understanding of it) are acting on "faith" every bit as much as those who scream their belief in God. Our scientists are shamans of the first order, teaching of things like quantum entanglement and wave-particle duality as if they really know what the hell is going on. They don't.

Anyway, it's a good thing you have enough trust in science to use stuff like computers and the internet, inventions based on speculations about "electrons" and other crazy things scientists/shamans have made up... But I agree with the general idea of your post, let people believe what they want if it makes them happy :toast

[tmtcsc]

There's this thing called quantum physics/mechanics and even though it's not mentioned in the bible for some strange reason, you might want to read a bit about it.

I'm familiar with Quantum physics/mechanics (even though its not mentioned in the bible - for a very good reason). I think you need to read about it, learn it and then come back here and explain how it answers Something coming from Nothing. It doesn't.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

You really aren't familiar with QM, so I've nothing further to discuss with you. I don't mind people who are genuinely truly religious, I don't like people who are obnoxious when they know fuck all. Cheers.

[tmtcsc]

You really aren't familiar with QM, so I've nothing further to discuss with you. I don't mind people who are genuinely truly religious, I don't like people who are obnoxious when they know fuck all. Cheers.

Weak. You've been exposed as nothing more than sarcastic and cowardly, hiding behind a Physics theory you don't understand. Therefore you are bailing on this conversation.

Your big answer to how Something can come from Nothing lies in the fact that Quantum Physics describes the universe as being different then the world we see.

Contrary to the way you've entered and exited this conversation, I'll give you an answer:

1.Quantum Physics didn't exist as a subject to be studied when the Bible was written. - Pretty straight forward a not a strange reason at all for it not being in the Bible.

Even so, the authors of the Bible were wise enough to explain that God is, was and always will be.

-- God exists outside of the Time and Space continuum as we know it, and as far as science has taken us.

-- I thought you would come in here with theories of a Multiverse. Nope, you ran.

Cheers, run fast and enjoy the breeze!

[Blake]

Even so, the authors of the Bible were wise enough to explain that God is, was and always will be.

Why wasn't God wise enough to give mankind something better than the Bible?


-- God exists outside of the Time and Space continuum as we know it, and as far as science has taken us.


Is this also explained somewhere in the Bible?

[tmtcsc]

Why wasn't God wise enough to give mankind something better than the Bible?


Define better, I think its pretty amazing. What did you have in mind considering the audience? Some sort of textbook filled with science that really wasn't developed as a discipline yet? The Bible wasn't meant to appease science.

Would you have rather God waited until now to send Jesus or prophets to Earth?

Just trying to discuss these topics put forward by scientists, philosophers and amateurs (like me) is mind boggling. The Bible is a collection of parables and/or stories that needed to be simple, to the point and understandable.

[Proxy]

The Bible is a collection of parables and/or stories that needed to be simple, to the point and understandable.

There were collections of similar stories projecting the same code of morality long before the Bible.

[redzero]

Lol, I'll do that after you explain to me how Something can come from Nothing.

Who is making that claim?

[Paranoid Pop]

I don't believe in any of the established religions (that make no sense to me at all because they are human-centric and humanity is nothing in the universe but a grain of sand really) but I don't look down on people who do because I think it gives some kind of confidence that can really help some people. Most successful athletes believe in God. Actually even some great scientists believe in God.

That said the big bang theory and the origin of water (by extension life) that exists in several places inside the universe do present questions we are not able to answer right now. But human centric religions are most likely power tools used by human to control their peers, wives etc...

Now in the not-so-distant future there will be a cross-road and a clash between Old religions and the Technology-centered religion. Ultimately technology followers will fuse with machines to increase their abilities, life expectancy and so on (technically evolving from humanity) while God followers will resist/oppose it.

There's a good documentary that talks about that :

00IklMjF2f8

[Blake]

Define better, I think its pretty amazing. What did you have in mind considering the audience? Some sort of textbook filled with science that really wasn't developed as a discipline yet? The Bible wasn't meant to appease science.

Would you have rather God waited until now to send Jesus or prophets to Earth?

Just trying to discuss these topics put forward by scientists, philosophers and amateurs (like me) is mind boggling. The Bible is a collection of parables and/or stories that needed to be simple, to the point and understandable.

If the Bible was simple, there wouldn't so many different denominations.

It's a contradictory, mis-translated crock of shit, imo.

[Russ]

Secular humanism! :flag::flag::flag:



If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe.
Soren Kierkegaard

That's you're best and only argument folks. Forget about "what could be before nothingness?" and "how could a sunset exist without Him?" and "how could a flagella come to be without some grand design?"

That's all faux rationality intended to persuade people who lack the capacity for faith to begin with. And you'll only get the dumb ones.

Kierkegaard was no dummy and he was a believer. He knew that your best argument is that having no proof is the essence faith and that faith is somehow central to this whole thing. In other words, it's no accident that you don't know and can't prove -- that's the point and that's the test.

Or as Dylan put it more bluntly, "God said to Abraham, kill me a son. Abe said man, you must be puttin me on." But he would have been willing to it. Now that's faith (and insanity in a court of law).

But what has any of this got to do with Duncan?

[tmtcsc]

Who is making that claim?

Those who reject a theory of a Divine creator or designer.

[tmtcsc]

If the Bible was simple, there wouldn't so many different denominations.

It's a contradictory, mis-translated crock of shit, imo.

Denominations are man-made.

The Bible can seem contradictory but there's no reason to become so discourage by it. What particular contradiction are you having issues with ?

[z0sa]

Wwtd?

[redzero]

Those who reject a theory of a Divine creator or designer.

No, that isn't necessarily true. You do not know what you are talking about.

[TimmehC]

Why does an all-powerful God constantly feels the need to "test" people? What kind of sick SOB causes so much death and destruction, and allows monsters(serial killers, child rapists, and the like) to get away with it for so long(in some cases, never getting caught at all)?

If there's a God, he obviously doesn't have some grand plan for humanity. He's more like a 5-year old with an ant farm.

[tmtcsc]

No, that isn't necessarily true. You do not know what you are talking about.

Enlighten me. Yes I do know what I am talking about.

[admiralfats]

Why does an all-powerful God constantly feels the need to "test" people? What kind of sick SOB causes so much death and destruction, and allows monsters(serial killers, child rapists, and the like) to get away with it for so long(in some cases, never getting caught at all)?

If there's a God, he obviously doesn't have some grand plan for humanity. He's more like a 5-year old with an ant farm.

If there is a perfectly good God, his personality is more mature than that of a 5-year old. If he is completely good, you and are I in just as much trouble as a serial killer or rapist. If he is completely good, every selfish action or hateful thought or little lie is making each of us an announced and purposeful enemy of an all-good God. So you and I would be in as much trouble as the other ants, be they wickeder ants or not.

Thus God being called graceful. We just wish he only displayed grace to a certain type of sinners.

[Blake]

Denominations are man-made.

And in the Bible, man is God-made.

God failed.


The Bible can seem contradictory but there's no reason to become so discourage by it. What particular contradiction are you having issues with ?

I can list a large number of obvious contradictions, mostly from Old to New Testament, but one contradiction is enough to invalidate the entire Bible.

[Blake]

Enlighten me. Yes I do know what I am talking about.

Who created God?

[tmtcsc]

And in the Bible, man is God-made.

God failed.


How so?



I can list a large number of obvious contradictions, mostly from Old to New Testament, but one contradiction is enough to invalidate the entire Bible.

Ok, name the one you have in mind and lets start there.

[tmtcsc]

Who created God?

God has always been. If you start with the "what or who came first" line of questioning, it will continue forever. For example, who created the person who created God ? etc. etc.

Even if you say the Universe has always been, we know that it isn't a bunch of nothingness. There are planets, stars, gasses..Who put all that there ? What caused it ?

Our Universe started with God's creation. Nothingness was prevalent. No time, no dark matter of outer space, nothing.

[Russ]

God has always been.

So God is a has been?

Even Nietzsche would blush.

[tmtcsc]

So God is a has been?

Even Nietzsche would blush.

I see what you did there. Funny.

[redzero]

Enlighten me. Yes I do know what I am talking about.

No, you don't know what you are talking about.

If you say that God has always been, I can say that the universe has always been.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

No, you don't know what you are talking about.

If you say that God has always been, I can say that the universe has always been.

There are hundreds of religious and creationist sites with ready-made answers for all such questions which people could simply copy and paste, but it's obvious he's too green for such debates yet. I could defend his position better than him.

Anyway, as for something coming out of nothing, it is possible of course, as per quantum mechanics, but then it begins from how you'd define what 'nothing' is. If, for example, we accept that vacuum is nothing, then yes - something can and does come out of it, namely pairs of particles pop in and out of existence spontaneously in vacuum. There are a lot of physicists who have been working on this matter, including Einstein, Heisenberg, Hawking, Casimir. There is a very interesting experiment made in the 1940s with two Casimir plates - identical metal plates put very closely to each other in vacuum, where vacuum fluctuations create a pressure pushing them together. It's quite a famous experiment for people in this area of physics and has been reconfirmed in 1997 again. If you know people dealing with nano-technologies they'll tell you how this phenomenon is causing them a lot of trouble. Basically this challenges one of the main laws of physics - the one of conservation of energy - in a short enough period of time energy conservation can be briefly violated, which is amazing. This leads us to the Heisenberg uncertainty and I could go on for hours as it's an endless topic.

Bottomline is, yes, something can come out of nothing. This is a fairly recent article about such an experiment, so if someone is interested, it might be useful for them.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2000483/Sparks-mirrors-Quantum-scientists-make-nothing.html

[pgardn]

Do not try to reason a man out of something he did not reason himself into.

-Jonathan Swift


Which is basically why this stuff never resolves anything.

Jonathan Swift did not say God was Santa Claus for adults. And God did not say science is trying to test your beliefs in me, beware. At least I hope "he" did not, cause I dont want to have anything to do with the almighty if he did.

[Blake]

How so?

If God is perfect and that which he made "good" ends up being less than perfect, then he screwed up.

Which means either God is imperfect, he is not omnipotent, he is not omniscient or any combination of these three.


Ok, name the one you have in mind and lets start there.

There's so many to choose from.

I googled bible contradictions and picked the first one:


Matt 5:16 "In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven."

(NIV) Matt 6:3-4 "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." (NIV)

[tmtcsc]

No, you don't know what you are talking about.

If you say that God has always been, I can say that the universe has always been.

Ok, go ahead and say the universe has always been and then state your challenges to the scientific community which seems to agree that it began with the Big Bang. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Its above you.

[tmtcsc]

There are hundreds of religious and creationist sites with ready-made answers for all such questions which people could simply copy and paste, but it's obvious he's too green for such debates yet. I could defend his position better than him.


You're funny. You can't explain your own answers much less mine. You seem to want to keep defining Nothing as really Something. As I stated before and you can't seem to conceptualize is that physics doesn't work here.

I'll address your other false statement regarding "nothing". The definition of "Nothing" is "Not Anything". Meaning, there is an absence of anything. Even a vacuum is something. Please don't even begin to think you can label me as green.

You were right to scram the first time. You have nothing to offer here.

[tmtcsc]

If God is perfect and that which he made "good" ends up being less than perfect, then he screwed up.

Which means either God is imperfect, he is not omnipotent, he is not omniscient or any combination of these three.


You're premise is flawed and without merit. God is perfect, omnipotent and anything else that is good. He made man independent, autonomous and with free will. Because man is not perfect, its reasonable to believe man will make mistakes.

You seem to want God to return and fix that which man has fucked up. Pretty lazy on your part tbh.

[underdawg]

If God is perfect and that which he made "good" ends up being less than perfect, then he screwed up.

Which means either God is imperfect, he is not omnipotent, he is not omniscient or any combination of these three.



There's so many to choose from.

I googled bible contradictions and picked the first one:

If you're going to bring up a contradiction, it helps to look at the whole context of the chapter - Jesus was telling his listeners to not make their giving a public spectacle like some were doing because they wanted public recognition for their good deed and therefore performing the good deed for the wrong reason (Matt 6:5). As far as letting God's light shine throught the believer - 2 Corinthians 4:6 is a better comparison for Matt 5:16.

It's pretty simple folks -a believer believes that God is, was and will ever be (Rev. 1:8). God transcends limitations of the physical world because he is a spirtual being that comprises everything. God cannot create evil, but he did give man the free will to choose between good and evil. To argue that God is himself evil because he allows evil is ignorant of God's view of the big picture of humanity and how he uses evil to produce good (see the plight of Joseph in Genesis 39). Only God can measure the overall weight on the scale of justice and one can only understand love because they've experienced hate or a lack of love.

There's my preaching for the day, but to say that you can prove away God is pretty bold especially given that even the world's most famous atheist won't even say that there's no chance of God's existence:

dfk7tW429E4

[tmtcsc]

There are hundreds of religious and creationist sites with ready-made answers for all such questions which people could simply copy and paste, but it's obvious he's too green for such debates yet. I could defend his position better than him.


Maybe these guys can help you with your arguments...be careful of Krauss, he doesn't get "nothing" either. I'm sure you'll like his smart-ass, cynical approach though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUe0_4rdj0U

Here's this genius' book:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SK-4nrZbL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_AA278_PIkin4,BottomRight,-47,22_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

[tmtcsc]

If you're going to bring up a contradiction, it helps to look at the whole context of the chapter - Jesus was telling his listeners to not make their giving a public spectacle like some were doing because they wanted public recognition for their good deed and therefore performing the good deed for the wrong reason (Matt 6:5). As far as letting God's light shine throught the believer - 2 Corinthians 4:6 is a better comparison for Matt 5:16.

It's pretty simple folks -a believer believes that God is, was and will ever be (Rev. 1:8). God transcends limitations of the physical world because he is a spirtual being that comprises everything. God cannot create evil, but he did give man the free will to choose between good and evil. To argue that God is himself evil because he allows evil is ignorant of God's view of the big picture of humanity and how he uses evil to produce good (see the plight of Joseph in Genesis 39). Only God can measure the overall weight on the scale of justice and one can only understand love because they've experienced hate or a lack of love.

There's my preaching for the day, but to say that you can prove away God is pretty bold especially given that even the world's most famous atheist won't even say that there's no chance of God's existence:

dfk7tW429E4

Thanks Underdawg. It's too easy isn't it? Bible beaters used to be the ones that plucked statements from the Bible to make a point but now non-believers are doing the same. READ THE CONTEXT. Don't be lazy.

[redzero]

Ok, go ahead and say the universe has always been and then state your challenges to the scientific community which seems to agree that it began with the Big Bang. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Its above you.

The universe as we know it came about as a result of The Big Bang. Find a single scientist who claims that everything came from nothing.

:lol thinking that belief in The Big Bang theory means belief that everything came from nothing

Laughing at idiots like you never gets old.

[tmtcsc]

The universe as we know it came about as a result of The Big Bang. Find a single scientist who claims that everything came from nothing.



Here's your answer: Lawrence Krauss
His Book is titled "A Universe from Nothing" w/ a foreward by your hero Richard Dawkins


:lol thinking that belief in The Big Bang theory means belief that everything came from nothing

Laughing at idiots like you never gets old.

Laughing at people smarter than you must keep you in stitches. Fucking moron. You got owned again.

[Proxy]

tmtcsc... you won't ever be taken seriously. One reason is that you base your knowledge on one source. Two, you display your 14 year old age by using an edited picture of tits as your avatar and use the word "owned."

You believe in God because you either grew up that way and never attained a reasonable level of intelligence to see how flawed and obviously fake dogma is, and/or you're terrified of your mortality because in all brutal honesty, you're just a coward that can't except things for how they really are.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I'll address your other false statement regarding "nothing". The definition of "Nothing" is "Not Anything". Meaning, there is an absence of anything. Even a vacuum is something.


So, if I get you correctly, such a thing as 'nothing' does not exist anywhere, right, as even vacuum is something, black matter is something, etc. Is this correct?

[redzero]

Here's your answer: Lawrence Krauss
His Book is titled "A Universe from Nothing" w/ a foreward by your hero Richard Dawkins

Did you read this book? Is it necessary to believe that the universe came from nothing to believe the Big Bang theory is correct?

[redzero]

You're premise is flawed and without merit. God is perfect, omnipotent and anything else that is good. He made man independent, autonomous and with free will.

Yeah, God made them imperfect.


Because man is not perfect, its reasonable to believe man will make mistakes.

So God knowingly made something that would make mistakes?

[tmtcsc]

tmtcsc... you won't ever be taken seriously. One reason is that you base your knowledge on one source. Two, you display your 14 year old age by using an edited picture of tits as your avatar and use the word "owned."

You believe in God because you either grew up that way and never attained a reasonable level of intelligence to see how flawed and obviously fake dogma is, and/or you're terrified of your mortality because in all brutal honesty, you're just a coward that can't except things for how they really are.

Hey look its Proxy! The answer to the question no one asked. The geek with a cartoon character for an avatar calling me juvenile. Comical.

You reek of a pampered Trinity punk who thinks because he's taken a few philosophy classes that he can trot on these boards and sling and parrot what his professor taught him last week.

You're whole existence is cliche. One day you're going to have to get a job. You know that right? You're going to have to shelve the chuck Taylor's and cut that scraggly ass.beard your sporting. Unless of course your Mommy and Daddy leave you enough $ to sling BS from your ipad at Starbucks.

Mental midget.

[all_heart]

Yeah, God made them imperfect.



So God knowingly made something that would make mistakes?

Only God knows this, only He knows his plan for us and the world. I think part of that plan is for life not to easy for us, we all have tough choices to make and survive hard times which hopefully makes us better people.

Other than that........ GO SPURS GO!!

[Budkin]

Why does he have to have a religion?

[Proxy]

Hey look its Proxy! The answer to the question no one asked. The geek with a cartoon character for an avatar calling me juvenile. Comical.

You reek of a pampered Trinity punk who thinks because he's taken a few philosophy classes that he can trot on these boards and sling and parrot what his professor taught him last week.

You're whole existence is cliche. One day you're going to have to get a job. You know that right? You're going to have to shelve the chuck Taylor's and cut that scraggly ass.beard your sporting. Unless of course your Mommy and Daddy leave you enough $ to sling BS from your ipad at Starbucks.

Mental midget.

I find it humorous that I am assumed to be a psychology/philosophy major. I guess I'll take it as a compliment that you think that. It's funny that you try to use intellectualism as some kind of insult.

To address your question in a more direct manner: You're a fool trying to hang on to whatever petty argument you have by addressing what science has admittedly said it has no answer for... yet. Read up on fallacies and you'll find your arguments littered with them.

To quote an interview of someone (Neil Degrasse Tyson) much smarter than me:

...mean that if you don't understand and the community of physicists doesn't understand, then god did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, here is a list of things from the past that physicists at the time didn’t understand… and a talk show you might have conducted 200 years ago would have said, "The planets do retrograde? Can't understand that, must be a God." [Physicists] would say,"You know, you're right we can't explain that," but then ten years later we understand it... then what do you do? If that is how you want to invoke your evidence of God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that is getting smaller and smaller and smaller. So that's just simply the 'God of the gaps' argument.

[Blake]

God has always been. If you start with the "what or who came first" line of questioning, it will continue forever. For example, who created the person who created God ? etc. etc.

Even if you say the Universe has always been, we know that it isn't a bunch of nothingness. There are planets, stars, gasses..Who put all that there ? What caused it ?

Our Universe started with God's creation. Nothingness was prevalent. No time, no dark matter of outer space, nothing.

interesting that you have no problem with a God that has "always been" but seem to have issue with space and time always existing randomly in some form or another.

[Blake]

There are hundreds of religious and creationist sites with ready-made answers for all such questions which people could simply copy and paste, but it's obvious he's too green for such debates yet. I could defend his position better than him.


all of those ready-made answers from religious or creationist sites I've seen end up failing, imo.

If you've found an answer that doesn't fail, let me know please.

[Blake]

If you're going to bring up a contradiction, it helps to look at the whole context of the chapter - Jesus was telling his listeners to not make their giving a public spectacle like some were doing because they wanted public recognition for their good deed and therefore performing the good deed for the wrong reason (Matt 6:5). As far as letting God's light shine throught the believer - 2 Corinthians 4:6 is a better comparison for Matt 5:16.

It's pretty simple folks

Jesus says to let your good deeds be known before saying just one chapter later to hide your good deeds.

The contradiction is pretty simple to see, imo.

[Leetonidas]

Religious people logic:

"God has always been!"

"The universe cannot have always been! That doesn't make sense!"

[Blake]

You're premise is flawed and without merit. God is perfect, omnipotent and anything else that is good. He made man independent, autonomous and with free will. Because man is not perfect, its reasonable to believe man will make mistakes.

Was it reasonable to believe man would sin? If God is omniscient, he would have know that man would sin and fuck up.



Proverbs 6:16-19

King James Version (KJV)

16These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

God hates sin, yet in his omniscience, he created man knowing that he would sin......in essence purposely creating something that he hates.

Pretty fucked up, imo.


You seem to want God to return and fix that which man has fucked up. Pretty lazy on your part tbh.

Why didn't God create a man with free will that wouldn't fuck up?

Why dangle that apple?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

all of those ready-made answers from religious or creationist sites I've seen end up failing, imo.

If you've found an answer that doesn't fail, let me know please.

To the best of my knowledge, no, there aren't any, but then again I'm the science type.

Anyway, I'm not into the God vs Big Bang debate, people can believe whatever they want, I have no problem with this. My beef was with the 'something can't come out of nothing' line, which is incorrect, unless you believe such a thing as 'nothing' does not exist.

[tmtcsc]

I find it humorous that I am assumed to be a psychology/philosophy major. I guess I'll take it as a compliment that you think that. It's funny that you try to use intellectualism as some kind of insult.

To address your question in a more direct manner: You're a fool trying to hang on to whatever petty argument you have by addressing what science has admittedly said it has no answer for... yet. Read up on fallacies and you'll find your arguments littered wit them.

Easy now. No one claimed you were a philosophy major or an intellectual. I believed in God before I ever cared to know how he created the Universe. I still don't care. Science and technology will continue to evolve and provide more answers to how he did it. But there should be no mistaking I believe God is the reason. There are No gaps with God.

[Blake]

There are No gaps with God.

/caveman

[tmtcsc]

So, if I get you correctly, such a thing as 'nothing' does not exist anywhere, right, as even vacuum is something, black matter is something, etc. Is this correct?

Yep

[tmtcsc]

Yeah, God made them imperfect.



So God knowingly made something that would make mistakes?

Yes

[pgardn]

tmtcsc

There are 4 useful words that you might want to use in this sequence:


I do not know.

Then try: it is beyond my capability, I am only human, not God. Im sure your God enjoys the fact you are just shooting randomly from the hip.

[tmtcsc]

To the best of my knowledge, no, there aren't any, but then again I'm the science type.

Anyway, I'm not into the God vs Big Bang debate, people can believe whatever they want, I have no problem with this. My beef was with the 'something can't come out of nothing' line, which is incorrect, unless you believe such a thing as 'nothing' does not exist.

Something can't come out of nothing unless your definition of Nothing allows it to have some sort of value. Then, Nothing really is something.

[tmtcsc]

tmtcsc

There are 4 useful words that you might want to use in this sequence:


I do not know.

Then try: it is beyond my capability, I am only human, not God. Im sure your God enjoys the fact you are just shooting randomly from the hip.

Sure, I do not know. There you go. I don't have all the answers but I have the one that works for me. Does my answer make science junkies happy ? No. They need closure. They need proof. They need it to make sense with formulas and equations. That's why they will continue to search for it, denying (somehow) that a deity was not responsible for it. Never being able to offer an ounce of proof that God doesn't exist.

By the way, my God is the same as yours whether you choose to believe or not. From the hip.

I like your Avatar by the way. Good stuff.

[redzero]

:lol and now he brought up the old "you can't prove that God doesn't exist" argument.

You can't prove that Zeus doesn't exist, so why dont you believe in him? Face it, your belief is illogical.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Something can't come out of nothing unless your definition of Nothing allows it to have some sort of value. Then, Nothing really is something.

So, by your own stance, you admit that the big bang, and consequently the universe, did not come out of absolute nothingness? I thought your argument against the big bang was that it couldn't have come out of nothing - well there you go - you've said yourself that such a thing as nothing does not exist and by extrapolation - has never existed, thus the big bang did not come out of nothing.

[benefactor]

More fruitless religion discussion. ibtl tbh.

[Magua]

So, by your own stance, you admit that the big bang, and consequently the universe, did not come out of absolute nothingness? I thought your argument against the big bang was that it couldn't have come out of nothing - well there you go - you've said yourself that such a thing as nothing does not exist and by extrapolation - has never existed, thus the big bang did not come out of nothing.

Gf1WT8VEZxk&feature=related

[Magua]

Real talk tho, it's pretty fucking frightening that there are some people in positions of power who think as tmtcsc does.

One of these days the entire country will join us in the 21st century

[Arcadian]

Easy now. No one claimed you were a philosophy major or an intellectual. I believed in God before I ever cared to know how he created the Universe. I still don't care. Science and technology will continue to evolve and provide more answers to how he did it. But there should be no mistaking I believe God is the reason. There are No gaps with God.

Please try to view your statement from another perspective.

Suppose I believe the universe was created in a super-duper-alien laboratory in the seventeenth dimension. (As absurd as you may think this is, I could easily create a religion based on it if I wanted to.) If such a hypothesis were true, it would be impossible to disprove because humans are merely three-dimensional beings capable of understanding three-dimensional concepts. In other words, my hypothesis is totally unfalsifiable. When challenged for the details about how it happened, I respond by saying it doesn't matter, I don't care, I believed in it long before you started asking. Whenever an alternative hypothesis is proposed, I claim that X hypothesis still fails to explain Y phenomena, so the 17th dimension alien hypothesis must be true. Simply by virtue of the robustness of my belief, you are expected to be convinced.

How would you feel about me if I thought this way? How do we typically feel about people who believe things on insufficient evidence in ordinary life? To take an example from Sam Harris, you would demand evidence if someone claimed that your lover was cheating on you, but you have no qualms with believing in a supernatural creator of the universe. You would demand evidence if someone claimed to have a giant diamond buried in their backyard. We all demand evidence for these claims, but religion is thought to be different - somehow beyond this level of inquiry. But it isn't.

Michael Shermer famously said that claims which are unfalsifiable are "not even wrong." They're worse than wrong. They can never be found to be true nor false, so they can never contribute to any kind of progress or understanding. I'd rather have a hypothesis that is dead wrong than one that is unfalsifiable.

Maybe I'm dead wrong. But you're not even wrong.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Please try to view your statement from another perspective.

Suppose I believe the universe was created in a super-duper-alien laboratory in the seventeenth dimension. (As absurd as you may think this is, I could easily create a religion based on it if I wanted to.) If such a hypothesis were true, it would be impossible to disprove because humans are merely three-dimensional beings capable of understanding three-dimensional concepts. In other words, my hypothesis is totally unfalsifiable. When challenged for the details about how it happened, I respond by saying it doesn't matter, I don't care, I believed in it long before you started asking. Whenever an alternative hypothesis is proposed, I claim that X hypothesis still fails to explain Y phenomena, so the 17th dimension alien hypothesis must be true. Simply by virtue of the robustness of my belief, you are expected to be convinced.

How would you feel about me if I thought this way? How do we typically feel about people who believe things on insufficient evidence in ordinary life? To take an example from Sam Harris, you would demand evidence if someone claimed that your lover was cheating on you, but you have no qualms with believing in a supernatural creator of the universe. You would demand evidence if someone claimed to have a giant diamond buried in their backyard. We all demand evidence for these claims, but religion is thought to be different - somehow beyond this level of inquiry. But it isn't.

Michael Shermer famously said that claims which are unfalsifiable are "not even wrong." They're worse than wrong. They can never be found to be true nor false, so they can never contribute to any kind of progress or understanding. I'd rather have a hypothesis that is dead wrong than one that is unfalsifiable.

Maybe I'm dead wrong. But you're not even wrong.

:) As the famous quote goes :

When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you'll understand why I dismiss yours.

[Leetonidas]

:) As the famous quote goes :

When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you'll understand why I dismiss yours.

You gotta be fuckin kidding me :lmao

[silverblk mystix]

Jesus says to let your good deeds be known before saying just one chapter later to hide your good deeds.

The contradiction is pretty simple to see, imo.

You misunderstood the message when you said "hide your good deeds"...

that is one of the problems with relying on any "so-called" holy book...everyone interprets it differently...it ends up being not as it is written but as YOU see things...and people end up seeing the world not as it is- but rather as THEY are...

It wasn't about "hiding" your good deeds as it was about being conscious of doing it...in other words...if you are in a state of love...your right hand won't know what your left hand is doing because it is an unself-conscious act...

As sufi once said..."A saint is one until he or she knows it."

this is what was meant....

[Proxy]

Real talk tho, it's pretty fucking frightening that there are some people in positions of power who think as tmtcsc does.

One of these days the entire country will join us in the 21st century

co-sign

[jestersmash]

co-sign

+1

[pgardn]

While trodding over ground well-trodden, and while beating a dead horse, there are always quotes that I have not seen before and are delightful.

Thanks to the contributors.

[Blake]

Yes

Why?

[Blake]

You misunderstood the message when you said "hide your good deeds"...


It wasn't about "hiding" your good deeds as it was about being conscious of doing it...in other words...if you are in a state of love...your right hand won't know what your left hand is doing because it is an unself-conscious act...

As sufi once said..."A saint is one until he or she knows it."

this is what was meant....

I get this message. Apparently you don't get how this contradicts the other message.


that is one of the problems with relying on any "so-called" holy book...everyone interprets it differently...it ends up being not as it is written but as YOU see things...and people end up seeing the world not as it is- but rather as THEY are...

agreed that nobody should rely on "so-called" holy books.

Generally I really don't care if people rely on such holy books, unless it's politicians forming public policies.

[tmtcsc]

So, by your own stance, you admit that the big bang, and consequently the universe, did not come out of absolute nothingness? I thought your argument against the big bang was that it couldn't have come out of nothing - well there you go - you've said yourself that such a thing as nothing does not exist and by extrapolation - has never existed, thus the big bang did not come out of nothing.

Wow, you aren't following. I believe in the Big Bang theory. I believe that it came about by God. That before God started the Big Bang, there was Nothingness. Nothingness = The absence of anything (even dark matter).

So when I pose the question to those who don't believe in God, I ask, how did the Universe come out of Nothing ? What existed before the Big Bang ? If ANYTHING existed at all to spark the Big Bang, how did it get there ? Who made it possible ? What were the origins ?

Some have said, "I don't know, but eventually science will give us the answer."

I don't agree. :deadhorse

[TampaDude]

God is a lie.

Duncan is the truth.

BTW, his religion is BASKETBALL.

[tmtcsc]

Real talk tho, it's pretty fucking frightening that there are some people in positions of power who think as tmtcsc does.

One of these days the entire country will join us in the 21st century

If you fear people being in power who believe as I do , you should be very afraid. If you have no faith in God, you are the minority (maybe not on this board, although people who reject belief in God are often loudest on message boards) and its not even close. Take a quick look or do some research at how many people believe in some sort of deity. I guess you'd label them as ignorant or uneducated. Most atheists seem comfortable do so.

And why exactly do you think I'm so irrational ? I believe in science, medicine, technology, math, etc. If I get sick, I'm going to the doctor, not staying home and praying for miracles. I don't believe in waiting or relying on God to fix things that are wrong in my life or on this planet.

I'm a big believer in prayer. I just happen to believe that God is very real,exists and is the reason I'm here. I do my best to follow his guidance (although I'm pretty damn weak when it comes to not returning the vitriol and insults that get thrown my way.) I'm not perfect. I have a long ways to go.

[Magua]

I do my best to follow his guidance (although I'm pretty damn weak when it comes to not returning the vitriol and insults that get thrown my way.) I'm not perfect. I have a long ways to go.

Son of Sam did his best to follow that dog's guidance.

Same concept.

[tmtcsc]

When challenged for the details about how it happened, I respond by saying it doesn't matter, I don't care, I believed in it long before you started asking. Whenever an alternative hypothesis is proposed, I claim that X hypothesis still fails to explain Y phenomena, so the 17th dimension alien hypothesis must be true. Simply by virtue of the robustness of my belief, you are expected to be convinced.


You are trying to address 2 different arguments. One, is the belief that God created the Universe. I've responded that the "How" really doesn't matter to me. However, I did propose that God was the spark for the Big Bang. You say prove it, I say I can't, but I believe he did and here's why. I ask you to prove otherwise, and it can't be done.



How would you feel about me if I thought this way? How do we typically feel about people who believe things on insufficient evidence in ordinary life?


I would believe you were wrong and let it go. I wouldn't insult you for your beliefs and would hope that if you find peace in what you believe, good for you.



To take an example from Sam Harris, you would demand evidence if someone claimed that your lover was cheating on you, but you have no qualms with believing in a supernatural creator of the universe. You would demand evidence if someone claimed to have a giant diamond buried in their backyard. We all demand evidence for these claims, but religion is thought to be different - somehow beyond this level of inquiry. But it isn't.


Sam Harris' analogies are awful. Can proof be attained in the two cases you gave ? Of course it can. If there was no Bible, if Jesus didn't walk the Earth and preach his word then I wouldn't just believe in a God for the sake of believing in a deity. If you are familiar with Christianity, you know that I believe God sent his son to this world to share his message. His son was crucified and resurrected. These are things I believe to be true. I believe the Bible was divinely inspired and to be the word of God. This is my evidence. God said he created the world. I believe he exists, therefore its good enough for me.



Michael Shermer famously said that claims which are unfalsifiable are "not even wrong." They're worse than wrong. They can never be found to be true nor false, so they can never contribute to any kind of progress or understanding. I'd rather have a hypothesis that is dead wrong than one that is unfalsifiable.

Maybe I'm dead wrong. But you're not even wrong.

Look, I get it. If you gave me a math problem to figure out and there was never a way to know if the answer was right, I'd be frustrated to no end. You need proof, scientific proof that God exists. I don't. I don't view my faith as a math question. In order to believe in God, it takes faith. Some people don't have it. Fine with me.

[tmtcsc]

Son of Sam did his best to follow that dog's guidance.

Same concept.

Nice. So now you're likening me following moral guidelines of God with a homicidal lunatic. Is that what those with faith are to you ? You need serious help man.

[Magua]

Nice. So now you're likening me following moral guidelines of God with a homicidal lunatic. Is that what those with faith are to you ? You need serious help man.

You receiving guidance from "God" makes about as much sense as SOS receiving orders from a dog.

At least we can see the dog though, so his (original) story is actually more plausible.

[Arcadian]

Some have said, "I don't know, but eventually science will give us the answer."

I don't agree.

The question you have to ask is, what are the ways of knowing? This is the basic question of epistemology, the philosophy of knowledge.

These are the generally accepted ways of knowing:
Authority
+Easiest, fastest way
-Sources often disagree among themselves
-Sources change their minds
-Sources can be wrong
Logic
+A formal system
-The basis for reasoning could be false or only relatively true (see embodied cognition)
Common Sense Intuition
+Practical for mundane things
-Changes with time and place
-Unable to make predictions
Mysticism
+Taps into alternate states of consciousness, admittedly worth exploring
-Difficult to describe and agree on experiences
-Not immediately available to everyone
Science
+Available to everyone
+Objective, repeatable
-Doesn't describe subjective experience (but see Neurophenomenology)
-Still makes certain assumptions about the external world

Most people in the 21st century accept science as the most objective way of arriving at truth. But please be careful with interpreting this statement. Many people mistakenly believe that "science" is a body of facts, but it is not. Rather, science is a methodology for acquiring those facts. What makes the scientific method more objective than other methods? A short list:

1) Probabilistic conclusions - Real science does not deal with certainties. Read any (experimental) scientific report, and you will find every conclusion supported with an inferential statistical test and, critically, a "p-value" which represents the probability of a Type-I error, or the probability that the result was obtained by chance alone.
2) A system of checks and balances - When a discovery is made in science, it is not immediately accepted as true. In fact, it is assumed to be an anomaly until it is replicated by another researcher. At the very least, the initial researcher's results must be critically reviewed by several other experts in the field before it is allowed to be published. This is the "peer review" process.
3) Randomization and control of extraneous variables - In a true experiment, the variables of interest are isolated in a controlled fashion so as not to be confounded by other commonly occurring variables that do not bare direct interest in the study. Randomization refers to the process of eliminating unwanted variability due to chance (e.g., in psychological research, randomly assigning participants to groups or conditions so that factors such as age and gender play no role in the results). This is critically important and divides real science from pseudoscience.

For these reasons, science is considered more "objective" than other ways of knowing. The issue of objectivity is still very much an open question in philosophy of science. Some people say that science itself is merely a series of "paradigm shifts" that change our view of reality throughout time. While there is some merit to this, there is still a gradual accumulation of stable knowledge that does not alter from one paradigm to another. For example, it is unlikely that the paradigm of "the earth is round and not flat" will be overthrown, or that the structure of DNA will be radically re-conceptualized.

Sorry if this was lengthy, but these are all issues that you must consider if you are going to assume that science can or cannot give us the answer to something. If you think science cannot answer certain types of questions, that in itself is a hypothesis that will be tested in time. There is reason to believe those gaps, too, are dwindling. In my field, cognitive scientists are beginning to shift from the "computational" paradigm to the "enactive" paradigm, which allows minds to be understood in the context of sensory-motor interaction with the world. Through this and other paradigms, even consciousness itself is beginning to appear amenable to scientific inquiry - something that was previously thought impossible.

[Arcadian]

Look, I get it. If you gave me a math problem to figure out and there was never a way to know if the answer was right, I'd be frustrated to no end. You need proof, scientific proof that God exists. I don't. I don't view my faith as a math question. In order to believe in God, it takes faith. Some people don't have it. Fine with me.

Faith is an interesting concept, but if you examine it closely, it actually turns out to be two (or more) different concepts which become conflated in ordinary language.

Faith (1) - believing that a goal can be accomplished so as to motivate one to succeed; faith in action

Faith (2) - believing an abstract assertion without evidence; faith in abstractions

The two are quite different in terms of the ways they are employed in cognition. I would argue that religious dogma promotes Faith (2), and that is something I have a problem with. Faith (1), on the other hand, is perfectly fine.

[Fernando TD21]

SMH at the argument between athiests or belivers now like they have been dead before and know 100%! This argument always makes me laugh because everyone is right! They know it all. The truth might lie somewhere in the middle, I leave it there (Not whate either believes but an unknown).
:toast

[underdawg]

Jesus says to let your good deeds be known before saying just one chapter later to hide your good deeds.

The contradiction is pretty simple to see, imo.

I can see where you're coming from, but it's a general theme throughout the New Testament that Christians are to be a vessel for Christ to perform good works in them and therefore showing the world the light of Christ. This is more of a result of seeking God than actually intending to "do good." This also refers to letting others know about the good that Christ has done in one's life and not keeping it hidden.

The instruction to keep one's giving hidden (Matt 6:3-4) deals directly with the intention or motive of the giving as to honor God and not one's self interest - this also follows another theme throughout the New Testament that good deeds and obedience to God come from the heart and not from an outward display or religiosity. Jesus was criticizing many in his teachings for their hypocrisy of looking good on the outside, but being evil in their hearts. The practice of calling attention to one's self for the purpose of giving was a great example of this problem.

These verses that you quote are not a contradicition and that's not from my "interpretation" either - both themes are extremely prevalant in the New Testament and run parrallel to each other and not contrary.

[ElNono]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_CxO8uBT42rs/SoLhAs8y71I/AAAAAAAABmQ/AVkfvEDwAek/s400/Flying+Spaghetti+Monster.gif

You can't apply math or formulas to him either!

[Kori Ellis]

Weird thread.

Doesn't really belong in the Spurs forum at this point.

[all_heart]

You receiving guidance from "God" makes about as much sense as SOS receiving orders from a dog.

At least we can see the dog though, so his (original) story is actually more plausible.

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof. I get a kick out of "science" and the "crap" they come up with. If these geniuses are so freakin smart in solving problems a million light years away with blips on screens or random data spewing out on a screen, then they should switch careers and solve some real problems like diseases, new energy and world economy.

Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts.. that's why it's call FAITH. The chances of atheists changing a Believers mind is moot, don't bother trying, in fact you are probably increasing their Faith as you try to ridicule them.

[Magua]

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof. I get a kick out of "science" and the "crap" they come up with. If these geniuses are so freakin smart in solving problems a million light years away with blips on screens or random data spewing out on a screen, then they should switch careers and solve some real problems like diseases, new energy and world economy.

Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts.. that's why it's call FAITH. The chances of atheists changing a Believers mind is moot, don't bother trying, in fact you are probably increasing their Faith as you try to ridicule them.

woof woof, godmonger

[jestersmash]

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof. I get a kick out of "science" and the "crap" they come up with. If these geniuses are so freakin smart in solving problems a million light years away with blips on screens or random data spewing out on a screen, then they should switch careers and solve some real problems like diseases, new energy and world economy.

Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts.. that's why it's call FAITH. The chances of atheists changing a Believers mind is moot, don't bother trying, in fact you are probably increasing their Faith as you try to ridicule them.

Anyone else love the irony of posting this using technology (computer, internet, possibly wireless, etc. etc.) that represents the culmination of hundreds of years of scientific progress?

Newsflash, you're posting on some of the "crap" that science and the scientific method has come up with using hundreds of years of the same methodology that it uses for big bang cosmology.

You're driving (assuming you have a car or take public transportation) some of the "crap" that science has come up with using hundreds of years of the same methodology that it uses for big bang cosmology.

You're talking (cell phone) on some of the "crap" that science has come up with using hundreds of years of the same methodology that it uses for big bang cosmology.

It's actually quite difficult to think of an aspect of your life that isn't in some way the product of scientific progress.


Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts..

My heart pumps blood.

[Blake]

I can see where you're coming from, but it's a general theme throughout the New Testament that Christians are to be a vessel for Christ to perform good works in them and therefore showing the world the light of Christ. This is more of a result of seeking God than actually intending to "do good." This also refers to letting others know about the good that Christ has done in one's life and not keeping it hidden.

The instruction to keep one's giving hidden (Matt 6:3-4) deals directly with the intention or motive of the giving as to honor God and not one's self interest - this also follows another theme throughout the New Testament that good deeds and obedience to God come from the heart and not from an outward display or religiosity. Jesus was criticizing many in his teachings for their hypocrisy of looking good on the outside, but being evil in their hearts. The practice of calling attention to one's self for the purpose of giving was a great example of this problem.

These verses that you quote are not a contradicition and that's not from my "interpretation" either - both themes are extremely prevalant in the New Testament and run parrallel to each other and not contrary.

Whose "interpretation" is it if it's not yours?

Giving to the needy is a good deed. God says he wants others to see this but then later he says he doesn't. It's a contradiction.

If you want another alleged contradiction to try to debunk, just ask. :tu

[Blake]

Take a quick look or do some research at how many people believe in some sort of deity. I guess you'd label them as ignorant or uneducated.

Fascinating research, imo....


ScienceDaily (Feb. 24, 2010) — More intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds........

...religion is a byproduct of humans' tendency to perceive agency and intention as causes of events, to see "the hands of God" at work behind otherwise natural phenomena. "Humans are evolutionarily designed to be paranoid, and they believe in God because they are paranoid," says Kanazawa. This innate bias toward paranoia served humans well when self-preservation and protection of their families and clans depended on extreme vigilance to all potential dangers. "So, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become atheists."

Young adults who identify themselves as "not at all religious" have an average IQ of 103 during adolescence, while those who identify themselves as "very religious" have an average IQ of 97 during adolescence.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100224132655.htm

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Wow, you aren't following. I believe in the Big Bang theory. I believe that it came about by God. That before God started the Big Bang, there was Nothingness. Nothingness = The absence of anything (even dark matter).

So when I pose the question to those who don't believe in God, I ask, how did the Universe come out of Nothing ? What existed before the Big Bang ? If ANYTHING existed at all to spark the Big Bang, how did it get there ? Who made it possible ? What were the origins ?

Some have said, "I don't know, but eventually science will give us the answer."

I don't agree. :deadhorse

So you don't believe in what the bible literally says, you have your own personal religion, in which the christian god and the big bang that has happened some 14 billion years ago, co-exist. Gotta say that's a strange type of heresy :toast

[underdawg]

Whose "interpretation" is it if it's not yours?

Giving to the needy is a good deed. God says he wants others to see this but then later he says he doesn't. It's a contradiction.

If you want another alleged contradiction to try to debunk, just ask. :tu

Blake - you're being difficult for the sake of arguing and sorry, but I'm not biting. I explained the differences and I'm not going to qualify your "God says good deeds in one verse and in the other - they're the same" argument because I've shown that they are not. Thanks for the responses though.

[all_heart]

woof woof, godmonger

bow wow yourself mr. knowitall

[all_heart]

Anyone else love the irony of posting this using technology (computer, internet, possibly wireless, etc. etc.) that represents the culmination of hundreds of years of scientific progress?

Newsflash, you're posting on some of the "crap" that science and the scientific method has come up with using hundreds of years of the same methodology that it uses for big bang cosmology.

You're driving (assuming you have a car or take public transportation) some of the "crap" that science has come up with using hundreds of years of the same methodology that it uses for big bang cosmology.

You're talking (cell phone) on some of the "crap" that science has come up with using hundreds of years of the same methodology that it uses for big bang cosmology.

It's actually quite difficult to think of an aspect of your life that isn't in some way the product of scientific progress.



My heart pumps blood.

I believe in science and technology the kind that can be studied here on EARTH, the problem is that these astrophysics scientists make a WHOLE lot of assumptions on something they can't entirely prove, enough to fill a book. It's all theoretical but they behave as if entirely true. I've got issue with that.. obviously, partly cause they create funding for themselves by coming out with this stuff. Illustrators are their best friends cause if it wasnt' for their pretty pictures (aka marketing) nobody would give a hoot about them. And even if these guys are mostly right, it amazes me they can figure this shit out from millions of light years away, but can't solve problems here at home.

I'll believe what I feel is right, and you will do the same... fair enough?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I believe in science and technology the kind that can be studied here on EARTH, the problem is that these astrophysics scientists make a WHOLE lot of assumptions on something they can't entirely prove, enough to fill a book. It's all theoretical but they behave as if entirely true. I've got issue with that.. obviously, partly cause they create funding for themselves by coming out with this stuff. Illustrators are their best friends cause if it wasnt' for their pretty pictures (aka marketing) nobody would give a hoot about them. And even if these guys are mostly right, it amazes me they can figure this shit out from millions of light years away, but can't solve problems here at home.

I'll believe what I feel is right, and you will do the same... fair enough?

Quoting this, just because such extreme cases of hypocrisy have to be admired :lol

[all_heart]

Quoting this, just because such extreme cases of hypocrisy have to be admired :lol

Really how so?! It's no different that what you guys are saying, but somehow that makes you smarter/better than me? I think not..

[Blake]

Blake - you're being difficult for the sake of arguing and sorry, but I'm not biting. I explained the differences and I'm not going to qualify your "God says good deeds in one verse and in the other - they're the same" argument because I've shown that they are not. Thanks for the responses though.

Your explanation failed imo. Sorry you don't like it.

[baseline bum]

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof. I get a kick out of "science" and the "crap" they come up with. If these geniuses are so freakin smart in solving problems a million light years away with blips on screens or random data spewing out on a screen, then they should switch careers and solve some real problems like diseases, new energy and world economy.

Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts.. that's why it's call FAITH. The chances of atheists changing a Believers mind is moot, don't bother trying, in fact you are probably increasing their Faith as you try to ridicule them.

Why do you have a nonbeliever as your avatar?

[E-RockWill]

I believe in science and technology the kind that can be studied here on EARTH, the problem is that these astrophysics scientists make a WHOLE lot of assumptions on something they can't entirely prove, enough to fill a book. It's all theoretical but they behave as if entirely true. I've got issue with that.. obviously, partly cause they create funding for themselves by coming out with this stuff. Illustrators are their best friends cause if it wasnt' for their pretty pictures (aka marketing) nobody would give a hoot about them. And even if these guys are mostly right, it amazes me they can figure this shit out from millions of light years away, but can't solve problems here at home.

I'll believe what I feel is right, and you will do the same... fair enough?

The main difference is that scientists admit they could be wrong. The amazing thing about research is when you fail, it means you have to find another way to prove you're right. You may never be right, but in the pursuit you may find answers to many other questions.
When you believe in a particular faith, everyone else is wrong & you are right. Regardless of the laws of nature & facts, your faith is the answer w/o knowing what the question is.
It is a stacked deck.

[all_heart]

Why do you have a nonbeliever as your avatar?

Should it matter? I don't mix b-ball with religion.... and cuz he's all_heart .. that's why!:lol

[all_heart]

The main difference is that scientists admit they could be wrong. The amazing thing about research is when you fail, it means you have to find another way to prove you're right. You may never be right, but in the pursuit you may find answers to many other questions.
When you believe in a particular faith, everyone else is wrong & you are right. Regardless of the laws of nature & facts, your faith is the answer w/o knowing what the question is.
It is a stacked deck.

People who have faith can't prove their right, they can only profess what they believe is true in their hearts and souls. It's hard to argue w/people about their religion, it's just the way it is. Doing so only makes us believe more... for me anyway. Difference is we don't ridicule you the way you ridicule people of faith, it may upset us, but at the end of the day we pray for you.. like it or not. It's best to have a mutual respect and that's it. The same way no Laker fan is going to convert me!!:lol

[Magua]

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof.

So you agree that following orders from a dog is just as baseless (or plausible, if you prefer) as following guidance from a supposed invisible, omnipotent being?

[Goran Dragic]

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof. I get a kick out of "science" and the "crap" they come up with. If these geniuses are so freakin smart in solving problems a million light years away with blips on screens or random data spewing out on a screen, then they should switch careers and solve some real problems like diseases, new energy and world economy.

Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts.. that's why it's call FAITH. The chances of atheists changing a Believers mind is moot, don't bother trying, in fact you are probably increasing their Faith as you try to ridicule them.
:lmao:lmao:lmao

[pgardn]

To put it nicely...you are being ridiculous.

The way I see it, nobody has proof. I get a kick out of "science" and the "crap" they come up with. If these geniuses are so freakin smart in solving problems a million light years away with blips on screens or random data spewing out on a screen, then they should switch careers and solve some real problems like diseases, new energy and world economy.

Non-believers try to rationalize with their minds, they must have empirical proof. Believers follow their hearts.. that's why it's call FAITH. The chances of atheists changing a Believers mind is moot, don't bother trying, in fact you are probably increasing their Faith as you try to ridicule them.

Those real problems ARE looked at by using the method called Science. Some people have faith in this method just like you have faith. Ask yourself what is this FAITH based on...? For Science and Religion. Maybe you will learn more about very human attempts to explain the world about us.

Next time you go to the doctor or think about how we got to the moon, use your heart and deny any drug treatment for an illness, and tell yourself we really did not walk on the moon.

[DMC]

All you knowledge people thank you know all this science stuff. It's just a religion, admit it. You are all made at God but he still loves you.

[Proxy]

http://i.imgur.com/9iM8Z.png

[jestersmash]

http://i4.dealtwith.it/i/n/f15c5eff2bab6025bc7e01706f40fdd8/c5gdg%5B1%5D.jpg

[Two10Whitey]

Bill Maher's Religulous is great.

[pgardn]

All you knowledge people thank you know all this science stuff. It's just a religion, admit it. You are all made at God but he still loves you.

Belief in anything requires some sort of faith.

Again, ask yourself what is your faith based upon.

How did you come to your belief system? A bit of self-examination is a very human thing. Personally, thats all I can do.

May Oden keep you safe from Frost Giants.

A blessing on your head, mozzletoff.

Continue with your own blessing...

[all_heart]

So you agree that following orders from a dog is just as baseless (or plausible, if you prefer) as following guidance from a supposed invisible, omnipotent being?

Only to a non-believer (or a computer) would that be true. Not for me. I don't think like you. You believe what you want, so will I.

[tmtcsc]

So you agree that following orders from a dog is just as baseless (or plausible, if you prefer) as following guidance from a supposed invisible, omnipotent being?

Nobody agrees with your dumb-ass analogy. It's insulting and filled with vitriol. You're either an idiot, an asshole or both. If you are this stupid, then let me explain the difference.

God came to Earth through his son Jesus. Jesus' words were placed in a Bible. The Bible was divinely inspired and written by man and chronicles among other things, the words and actions of a very real man - Jesus. Christians believe Jesus' message to be equal to that of God.

This isn't some sort of a joke. So no, the ramblings and actions of a delusional psychopath that says a Dog somehow developed speech and ordered/guided him to commit murder is not the same thing.

Debating the existence of God often becomes heated and its usually because of insensitive and ignorant people like you who wish to somehow place themselves at a higher intellectual level than those with faith.

You couldn't be more wrong in your assumptions about those who believe in God. Every religion has their extremists who are misguided. I don't think any form of extremism or intolerance is healthy, but when assholes like you choose to ridicule others who don't share your beliefs, you deserve every bit of the insults returned. There's nothing humorous about comparing God to the Easter Bunny, Odin, Zeus or Ferries.

[all_heart]

Those real problems ARE looked at by using the method called Science. Some people have faith in this method just like you have faith. Ask yourself what is this FAITH based on...? For Science and Religion. Maybe you will learn more about very human attempts to explain the world about us.

Next time you go to the doctor or think about how we got to the moon, use your heart and deny any drug treatment for an illness, and tell yourself we really did not walk on the moon.

The difference is I got Faith, you got faith. I've prayed and listened to the Word and have believed in my heart that to be true. Have you ever prayed? Has anybody ever taught you about God? I've already said I believe in science there is nothing wrong with most science. I also believe God has made this possible. Have you ever studied genetics? The structure of DNA and the way it works is amazing and for me it reaffirms it was God's hand that put it all together for us to figure out. I also believe NOBODY is perfect whatever it is you believe in or don't believe. Do you believe in truly evil people? If so, then you must believe in the opposite as well.

[all_heart]

Nobody agrees with your dumb-ass analogy. It's insulting and filled with vitriol. You're either an idiot, an asshole or both. If you are this stupid, then let me explain the difference.

God came to Earth through his son Jesus. Jesus' words were placed in a Bible. The Bible was divinely inspired and written by man and chronicles among other things, the words and actions of a very real man - Jesus. Christians believe Jesus' message to be equal to that of God.

This isn't some sort of a joke. So no, the ramblings and actions of a delusional psychopath that says a Dog somehow developed speech and ordered/guided him to commit murder is not the same thing.

Debating the existence of God often becomes heated and its usually because of insensitive and ignorant people like you who wish to somehow place themselves at a higher intellectual level than those with faith.

You couldn't be more wrong in your assumptions about those who believe in God. Every religion has their extremists who are misguided. I don't think any form of extremism or intolerance is healthy, but when assholes like you choose to ridicule others who don't share your beliefs, you deserve every bit of the insults returned. There's nothing humorous about comparing God to the Easter Bunny, Odin, Zeus or Ferries.

Thanks! +10000000

[tmtcsc]

Bill Maher's Religulous is great.

I agree. I thought it was very insightful. Like Maher says, "I don't agree."

[Magua]

Nobody agrees with your dumb-ass analogy. It's insulting and filled with vitriol. You're either an idiot, an asshole or both. If you are this stupid, then let me explain the difference.

God came to Earth through his son Jesus. Jesus' words were placed in a Bible. The Bible was divinely inspired and written by man and chronicles among other things, the words and actions of a very real man - Jesus. Christians believe Jesus' message to be equal to that of God.

This isn't some sort of a joke. So no, the ramblings and actions of a delusional psychopath that says a Dog somehow developed speech and ordered/guided him to commit murder is not the same thing.

Debating the existence of God often becomes heated and its usually because of insensitive and ignorant people like you who wish to somehow place themselves at a higher intellectual level than those with faith.

You couldn't be more wrong in your assumptions about those who believe in God. Every religion has their extremists who are misguided. I don't think any form of extremism or intolerance is healthy, but when assholes like you choose to ridicule others who don't share your beliefs, you deserve every bit of the insults returned. There's nothing humorous about comparing God to the Easter Bunny, Odin, Zeus or Ferries.

Neat post. You still haven't proved that the dog didnt give him orders, much like you havent proved god has given you guidelines/shown you a path.

There's only one thing we know for sure from either story: the dog existed

[all_heart]

Neat post. You still haven't proved that the dog didnt give him orders, much like you havent proved god has given you guidelines/shown you a path.

There's only one thing we know for sure from either story: the dog existed

Really how do you know, did YOU see the dog, did YOU ever meet him? How do YOU know for it to be really true?

We also know for sure that you are ignorant among many other things.. thanks for playing..

[ElNono]

Neat post. You still haven't proved that the dog didnt give him orders, much like you havent proved god has given you guidelines/shown you a path.

There's only one thing we know for sure from either story: the dog existed

You just don't understand.

[Magua]

Really how do you know, did YOU see the dog, did YOU ever meet him? How do YOU know for it to be really true?

We also know for sure that you are ignorant among many other things.. thanks for playing..

Are you disputing the existence of Labrador Retrievers now?:lol


You keep calling me ignorant just because the supposedly outlandish analogy i put forth holds just as much water as "God giving me guidelines."

That's a fact.

[Magua]

You just don't understand.

:lol

[ElNono]

:lol

[Amarelooms]

People who have faith can't prove their right, they can only profess what they believe is true in their hearts and souls. It's hard to argue w/people about their religion, it's just the way it is. Doing so only makes us believe more... for me anyway. Difference is we don't ridicule you the way you ridicule people of faith, it may upset us, but at the end of the day we pray for you.. like it or not. It's best to have a mutual respect and that's it. The same way no Laker fan is going to convert me!!:lol

Pretty sure what you believe is wrong dummy...keep believing though....God bless you and your family

:elephant

[all_heart]

Are you disputing the existence of Labrador Retrievers now?:lol


You keep calling me ignorant just because the supposedly outlandish analogy i put forth holds just as much water as "God giving me guidelines."

That's a fact.

You really don't understand, and no your argument doesn't hold water. It's weak and petty.

BTW, you never answered my questions: Has anybody ever taught you about God, have you ever prayed before? Simple question.

[all_heart]

Pretty sure what you believe is wrong dummy...keep believing though....God bless you and your family

:elephant

Right back at ya...

[Amarelooms]

Right back at ya...

Jesus hates you for your blindness son....God bless

:elephant

[Magua]

BTW, you never answered my questions: Has anybody ever taught you about God, have you ever prayed before? Simple question.

Sure. I pray for the Buffalo Bills every season. Look where that's gotten me:lol

You (or tmtcsc) still haven't proven that "god giving you guidelines" is any more real than SOS's canine bidding. That came well before any of your questions, yet you still elude it or dance around it.:lol

[all_heart]

Sure. I pray for the Buffalo Bills every season. Look where that's gotten me:lol

You (or tmtcsc) still haven't proven that "god giving you guidelines" is any more real than SOS's canine bidding. That came well before any of your questions, yet you still elude it or dance around it.:lol

Of course we can't offer you concrete proof, we all know that. But you also can't prove we are wrong either. So you still really haven't answered my questions ^^.

This says a lot:

Proverbs 3:5-7

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths. Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.

[all_heart]

Jesus hates you for your blindness son....God bless

:elephant

You don't make any sense!

[Magua]

Of course we can't offer you concrete proof, we all know that. But you also can't prove we are wrong either. So you still really haven't answered my questions ^^.

This says a lot:

Proverbs 3:5-7

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths. Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.

You quoting scripture on a basketball forum says a lot.

brb, my Chow just told me to beat a hobo with a hammer.

[all_heart]

You quoting scripture on a basketball forum says a lot.

brb, my Chow just told me to beat a hobo with a hammer.

I didn't start this thread.

Yea Chows are mean like that, tell him to chill.

[tmtcsc]

Sure. I pray for the Buffalo Bills every season. Look where that's gotten me:lol

You (or tmtcsc) still haven't proven that "god giving you guidelines" is any more real than SOS's canine bidding. That came well before any of your questions, yet you still elude it or dance around it.:lol

Your existence is proof that God can attach fingers to assholes. I set you straight with my previous email and you're still sniffing that dog's ass. Flame away fucktard, pile on because I'm done responding to you.

[tmtcsc]

Jesus hates you for your blindness son....God bless

:elephant

:lol The Mavericks win a championship and you still don't believe in God or miracles. Shame on you.

:angel

[ElNono]

I thought this scripture was pretty cool too:

Aragorn: We have time. Every day Frodo moves closer to Mordor.
Gandalf: Do we know that?
Aragorn: What does your heart tell you?
Gandalf: That Frodo is alive. Yes. Yes, he's alive.

[Magua]

Flame away fucktard

Whoa now, Jesus would not approve of such language. It's ok, my chow told me to be merciful and forgiving to individuals such as yourself:lol


Invisible man in the sky speaks to me = truth/having faith
Dog (man's best friend) speaks to me = bullshit


:lolgodmongers

[Magua]

I thought this scripture was pretty cool too:

Aragorn: We have time. Every day Frodo moves closer to Mordor.
Gandalf: Do we know that?
Aragorn: What does your heart tell you?
Gandalf: That Frodo is alive. Yes. Yes, he's alive.

New Testament, right?:lol

[all_heart]

Whoa now, Jesus would not approve of such language. It's ok, my chow told me to be merciful and forgiving to individuals such as yourself:lol


Invisible man in the sky speaks to me = truth/having faith
Dog (man's best friend) speaks to me = bullshit


:lolgodmongers

Even Jesus would have a hard time not using this type of language on your silly ass..

[ElNono]

New Testament, right?:lol

Blasphemy! That's Return of the King.

smh

[Magua]

Blasphemy! That's Return of the King.

smh

crofl i know dude...

[Magua]

Even Jesus would have a hard time not using this type of language on your silly ass..

So you follow the guidance of a short-tempered, profanity-speaking narcissist?

[underdawg]

Whoa now, Jesus would not approve of such language. It's ok, my chow told me to be merciful and forgiving to individuals such as yourself:lol


Invisible man in the sky speaks to me = truth/having faith
Dog (man's best friend) speaks to me = bullshit


:lolgodmongers

I know y'all are trying to have fun at the expense of someone's beliefs, but you sure sound like a bigot. If you're cool with being a bigot, carry on.

[underdawg]

I thought this scripture was pretty cool too:

Aragorn: We have time. Every day Frodo moves closer to Mordor.
Gandalf: Do we know that?
Aragorn: What does your heart tell you?
Gandalf: That Frodo is alive. Yes. Yes, he's alive.

And Tolkien was a Christian, but that's probably you just being ironic since he had to be Christian to make up fairy tales - right? I hope others don't disrespect your beliefs like you disrespect others'.

[Magua]

I know y'all are trying to have fun at the expense of someone's beliefs, but you sure sound like a bigot. If you're cool with being a bigot, carry on.

You're free to differentiate the validity between talking to sky people and dogs. tmtcsc and all_heart have failed so far. Care to take a shot? Or are you another name-calling Christian?

[all_heart]

So you follow the guidance of a short-tempered, profanity-speaking narcissist?

You should know more than anybody that it's called being sarcastic.

[ElNono]

And Tolkien was a Christian, but that's probably you just being ironic since he had to be Christian to make up fairy tales - right? I hope others don't disrespect your beliefs like you disrespect others'.

Man made is man made. Would quoting a novel by a Muslim make any difference?

And you're being disrespectful by calling my belief a fairy tale. I hope others don't disrespect your beliefs like you disrespect others...

[all_heart]

You're free to differentiate the validity between talking to sky people and dogs. tmtcsc and all_heart have failed so far. Care to take a shot? Or are you another name-calling Christian?

Dude we all get it, you need hard proof. I guess I'm lucky that I don't need the burden of proof to have my Faith. You still avoid my questions ^^ so I can only guess what your experiences or lack thereof are..

[Magua]

Dude we all get it, you need hard proof. I guess I'm lucky that I don't need the burden of proof to have my Faith. You still avoid my questions ^^ so I can only guess what your experiences or lack thereof are..

I answered your 2 questions (yes, and yes).

You, like your Christian brethren, conveniently ignored the SOS dilemma.

We get it dude, you need hard proof that dogs can give orders to humans. I'm lucky that I don't need the burden of proof to have my Faith.


See how easy that was?

[underdawg]

Man made is man made. Would quoting a novel by a Muslim make any difference?

And you're being disrespectful by calling my belief a fairy tale. I hope others don't disrespect your beliefs like you disrespect others...

I'm sorry - I was just quoting Tolkien; I aplogize if you didn't know that he entended his books to be fiction.

As far as I'm concerned, you can believe whatever you believe and if you're a citizen of the US that's your right.

[underdawg]

Man made is man made. Would quoting a novel by a Muslim make any difference?

And you're being disrespectful by calling my belief a fairy tale. I hope others don't disrespect your beliefs like you disrespect others...

and no, quoting a fictional work by a Muslim would be just as ironic and no more or less.

[underdawg]

You're free to differentiate the validity between talking to sky people and dogs. tmtcsc and all_heart have failed so far. Care to take a shot? Or are you another name-calling Christian?

what are sky people?

[ElNono]

I'm sorry - I was just quoting Tolkien; I aplogize if you didn't know that he entended his books to be fiction.

As far as I'm concerned, you can believe whatever you believe and if you're a citizen of the US that's your right.

How do you know what Tolkien intended? How do you know whoever wrote the bible intended?

Anyways, that spaghetti dude in the sky told me to make this post and stop posting in this thread, so it shall be. You don't have to understand.

[underdawg]

How do you know what Tolkien intended? How do you know whoever wrote the bible intended?

Anyways, that spaghetti dude in the sky told me to make this post and stop posting in this thread, so it shall be. You don't have to understand.

Because that's what he said - if you have proof that he had other motives, please provide them. I'd hate to think that you would make something up just to attack someone elses beliefs. That would be dishonest and cruel no matter what you believe - right?

[ElNono]

Now you want proof :rollin

That's rich :lmao

[all_heart]

I answered your 2 questions (yes, and yes).

You, like your Christian brethren, conveniently ignored the SOS dilemma.

We get it dude, you need hard proof that dogs can give orders to humans. I'm lucky that I don't need the burden of proof to have my Faith.


See how easy that was?

No I don't see where you answered my questions. What's with you and SOS, is that what your learning about this week? This SOS BS is meaningless to me and if you can read, I already answered that at least 2 times.

What is so easy? Flipping words around.. yes I guess it is easy for you. congrats.

[underdawg]

Now you want proof :rollin

That's rich :lmao

It was supposed to be - thought you would get that Nono :depressed

[ElNono]

It was supposed to be - thought you would get that Nono :depressed

I noticed the hypocrisy :lol

[pgardn]

The difference is I got Faith, you got faith. I've prayed and listened to the Word and have believed in my heart that to be true. Have you ever prayed? Has anybody ever taught you about God? I've already said I believe in science there is nothing wrong with most science. I also believe God has made this possible. Have you ever studied genetics? The structure of DNA and the way it works is amazing and for me it reaffirms it was God's hand that put it all together for us to figure out. I also believe NOBODY is perfect whatever it is you believe in or don't believe. Do you believe in truly evil people? If so, then you must believe in the opposite as well.

You look at DNA and the way it works and it requires God's hand? Why in the world would God put partial viral DNA sequences, pseudo genes, and the information to make a back that is totally silly for an upright animal? Its more like the hand of a child. I do not try to look for God's intentions in cells.

Why is it that people always try to mix two human endeavors (religion and science) that are so different in their methods to prove something to make them comfortable? Does it not feel like a lie?

Please for the sake of religion and science understand and respect their differences. For me part of the definition of evil would be purposeful misrepresentation of how we come to believe in certain ideas, both rational and supernatural.

[all_heart]

You look at DNA and the way it works and it requires God's hand? Why in the world would God put partial viral DNA sequences, pseudo genes, and the information to make a back that is totally silly for an upright animal? Its more like the hand of a child. I do not try to look for God's intentions in cells.

Why is it that people always try to mix two human endeavors (religion and science) that are so different in their methods to prove something to make them comfortable? Does it not feel like a lie?

Please for the sake of religion and science understand and respect their differences. For me part of the definition of evil would be purposeful misrepresentation of how we come to believe in certain ideas, both rational and supernatural.

Oh pleeeeezzz, nothing I said was evil or could be interpreted as evil my most sane people.

BTW, some geneticists have made some similar comments to what I posted. Hand of a child? You mad cause you were born with elephant ears or a horses ass.. if anything the latter...

[pgardn]

Oh pleeeeezzz, nothing I said was evil or could be interpreted as evil my most sane people.

BTW, some geneticists have made some similar comments to what I posted. Hand of a child? You mad cause you were born with elephant ears or a horses ass.. if anything the latter...

Thats what I thought.

It seems on the surface like another fake who feels he has delved deeply into faith.

And the name calling, exactly what was to be despised by the holy. The contradictions never stop with people who profess not to be perfect but then feel they can find perfection.

And no, I cannot say how God will feel about your disingenuous arguments. I can actually say, "I dont know". You should try it.

[all_heart]

Thats what I thought.

It seems on the surface like another fake who feels he has delved deeply into faith.

And the name calling, exactly what was to be despised by the holy. The contradictions never stop with people who profess not to be perfect but then feel they can find perfection.

And no, I cannot say how God will feel about your disingenuous arguments. I can actually say, "I dont know". You should try it.

Oh looky here... apparently I fell into your little trap and now you get to stand up and point the finger at me calling me a hypocrite and fake.

First of all if I truly offended you, I'm sorry, it's been that kind of night here on ST.

Secondly, I don't know where you get your information, but people of Faith don't profess to be perfect or will find perfection. We all falter, but getting back up and going in the right direction is all that we can do. Anybody who tells you they are perfect cause they believe in God is BS. That is self-explanatory and you know this, so don't try to twist it all up for your argument.

Lastly: Name calling? You pretty much labeled me as evil with your last post, now that's offensive, cause even though I'm no saint, I'm not evil either.

As far as the science/God thing goes.. yea I don't know but obviously I believe He knows since he's God the Creator - the Alpha and the Omega. It's not my position to 2nd guess what he's done.

I'm off to bed, with any luck this thread will be deleted or locked by tomorrow. Hopefully nobody has any nightmares about SOS dog biting them in their ass or anything...:rolleyes
Adios and vaya con Dios.

[TampaDude]

The God is a lie.

[Proxy]

Oh pleeeeezzz, nothing I said was evil or could be interpreted as evil my most sane people.

BTW, some geneticists have made some similar comments to what I posted. Hand of a child? You mad cause you were born with elephant ears or a horses ass.. if anything the latter...

You're terrified of admitting you're mortal and that your life means nothing other than reproducing in the grand scheme. You're unable to comprehend the universe for what it is and what it is not. Ironically, evolution has given you the ability to comprehend pattern to the point of superstition which has resulted in dogma.... under the comfort in thinking you are immortal.

You are not immortal.

[Proxy]

The God is a lie.

http://mopies.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/portal-cake.jpg

let them eat cake

[redzero]

Dude we all get it, you need hard proof. I guess I'm lucky that I don't need the burden of proof to have my Faith. You still avoid my questions ^^ so I can only guess what your experiences or lack thereof are..

I wouldn't call being dumb enough to believe something for no logical reason being "lucky."

[pgardn]

Oh looky here... apparently I fell into your little trap and now you get to stand up and point the finger at me calling me a hypocrite and fake.

First of all if I truly offended you, I'm sorry, it's been that kind of night here on ST.

Secondly, I don't know where you get your information, but people of Faith don't profess to be perfect or will find perfection. We all falter, but getting back up and going in the right direction is all that we can do. Anybody who tells you they are perfect cause they believe in God is BS. That is self-explanatory and you know this, so don't try to twist it all up for your argument.

Lastly: Name calling? You pretty much labeled me as evil with your last post, now that's offensive, cause even though I'm no saint, I'm not evil either.

As far as the science/God thing goes.. yea I don't know but obviously I believe He knows since he's God the Creator - the Alpha and the Omega. It's not my position to 2nd guess what he's done.

I'm off to bed, with any luck this thread will be deleted or locked by tomorrow. Hopefully nobody has any nightmares about SOS dog biting them in their ass or anything...:rolleyes
Adios and vaya con Dios.

I am not attempting to change your mind or twist anything.

I am calling it like I see it. You get to pick and choose where you find evidence of God's handywork or signs of his perfection. Thats fine. Natural disasters, horrible accidents, etc... and people are not supposed to question God's work or he works in mysterious ways. So people will look for his grandness inside genetic material. And I call BS because I see imperfection. But the dogma of perfection is used to trample on people who really take a close look and say wait a minute and question the perfection... then the labeling of heathen usually proceeds (you did not do this to your credit).

Seems to me this rather random choosing of where one finds God's work and then criticizing people who look closely and question the label is disingenuous. And yes you are right, other "geneticists" have also done this and have been similarly called out. We are only human. Just because we get a better understanding of how something intriguing works, does not necessarily mean we understand God better.

Sorry if I got personal. It is of course your personal choice on where you choose to find God. But a good I dont know, or an ok, maybe this example is not all that clear, is the honest way.

[underdawg]

I am not attempting to change your mind or twist anything.

I am calling it like I see it. You get to pick and choose where you find evidence of God's handywork or signs of his perfection. Thats fine. Natural disasters, horrible accidents, etc... and people are not supposed to question God's work or he works in mysterious ways. So people will look for his grandness inside genetic material. And I call BS because I see imperfection. But the dogma of perfection is used to trample on people who really take a close look and say wait a minute and question the perfection... then the labeling of heathen usually proceeds (you did not do this to your credit).

Seems to me this rather random choosing of where one finds God's work and then criticizing people who look closely and question the label is disingenuous. And yes you are right, other "geneticists" have also done this and have been similarly called out. We are only human. Just because we get a better understanding of how something intriguing works, does not necessarily mean we understand God better.

Sorry if I got personal. It is of course your personal choice on where you choose to find God. But a good I dont know, or an ok, maybe this example is not all that clear, is the honest way.

There has to be imperfection in God's creation for him to be realized and glorified (John 9:2-3). Man's free will has a lot to do with the imperfection of this world - God allows it so that he can use evil to bring about good in the overall picture. This doesn't make God evil or imperfect - only he knows the outcome and the greater good that comes out of it.

[underdawg]

I wouldn't call being dumb enough to believe something for no logical reason being "lucky."

calling someone stupid because they believe a certain way different from your own is certainly bigoted.

[Blake]

This says a lot:

Proverbs 3:5-7

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths. Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.

What's God going to do if you don't fear him?

[silverblk mystix]

What's God going to do if you don't fear him?

He might turn YOU into Chumpdumper?

[underdawg]

What's God going to do if you don't fear him?

He gives you what you want - an eternity separate from him. Isn't that fair? Would it be more fair to make you spend an eternity with him even though you didn't want him?

[Blake]

Your existence is proof that God can attach fingers to assholes. I set you straight with my previous email and you're still sniffing that dog's ass. Flame away fucktard, pile on because I'm done responding to you.

tmtcsc doing the Lord's work, turning the other cheek while dropping an f-bomb.

[Blake]

He gives you what you want - an eternity separate from him. Isn't that fair? Would it be more fair to make you spend an eternity with him even though you didn't want him?

Per Christian faith tenets, fear is not a requirement for salvation.

[Blake]

There has to be imperfection in God's creation for him to be realized and glorified (John 9:2-3). Man's free will has a lot to do with the imperfection of this world - God allows it so that he can use evil to bring about good in the overall picture. This doesn't make God evil or imperfect - only he knows the outcome and the greater good that comes out of it.

So free will is gone when you get to heaven.

If not, why didn't God just skip the earth step and just create everyone to be in heaven?

[ElNono]

So free will is gone when you get to heaven.

If not, why didn't God just skip the earth step and just create everyone to be in heaven?

I think "we're being tested" is the cop out for that one.

[underdawg]

So free will is gone when you get to heaven.

If not, why didn't God just skip the earth step and just create everyone to be in heaven?

why create man at all? God created man to have a relationship with him - that opportunity would be greatly de-valued if it were a "perfect" world.

I didn't say that free will is gone when you get to heaven.

[underdawg]

Per Christian faith tenets, fear is not a requirement for salvation.

I'm not familiar with the faith tenets that you're referring to - please elaborate.

[Blake]

why create man at all? God created man to have a relationship with him - that opportunity would be greatly de-valued if it were a "perfect" world.

I didn't say that free will is gone when you get to heaven.

So you are saying Eden and/or heaven is less valuable than earth?

That's a new one.

[Blake]

I'm not familiar with the faith tenets that you're referring to - please elaborate.

Are you really not familiar with John 3:16?

Srsly?

[underdawg]

So you are saying Eden and/or heaven is less valuable than earth?

That's a new one.

Not sure how you came to that conclusion from what I said - please explain.

[Blake]

Not sure how you came to that conclusion from what I said - please explain.

Eden was a perfect set up.

Heaven is a perfect place.

Do you really not know these things?

[underdawg]

Are you really not familiar with John 3:16?

Srsly?

Part of believing in God is to fear him - it's pretty common throughout the Bible:

Psalm 33:8
Rev. 14:7
Rev. 15:4
2 Kings 17:28
1 Samuel 12:14
Jeremiah 5:24
Joshua 24:14

Without reading your mind and just basing my guess from your posts, I'd guess that your definition of fear is different than what's in the Bible. Fear of the Lord in the Bible is more out of respect and gratitude than being afraid of someone pointing a gun at you.

[underdawg]

Eden was a perfect set up.

Heaven is a perfect place.

Do you really not know these things?

Humor me Blake - I'm still not following how you came to the conclusion that Eden and Heaven are less valuable than Earth from my statement.

[Blake]

Humor me Blake - I'm still not following how you came to the conclusion that Eden and Heaven are less valuable than Earth from my statement.

You said the relationship would be de-valued in a perfect world.

Eden was a perfect world.

Again, is this something you really did not know?

[Blake]

Part of believing in God is to fear him - it's pretty common throughout the Bible:

Psalm 33:8
Rev. 14:7
Rev. 15:4
2 Kings 17:28
1 Samuel 12:14
Jeremiah 5:24
Joshua 24:14

Without reading your mind and just basing my guess from your posts, I'd guess that your definition of fear is different than what's in the Bible. Fear of the Lord in the Bible is more out of respect and gratitude than being afraid of someone pointing a gun at you.


2 Chronicles 20:29
The fear of God came upon all the kingdoms of the countries when they heard how the Lord had fought against the enemies of Israel.

I think those kingdoms were afraid of Israel's "gun".

[underdawg]

You said the relationship would be de-valued in a perfect world.

Eden was a perfect world.

Again, is this something you really did not know?

Eden was not a perfect world - Satan was allowed to temp Eve.

Satan will not be in Heaven.

[underdawg]

I think those kingdoms were afraid of Israel's "gun".

I see what you're saying - a word can only mean one thing and has nothing to do with the context of the chapter or the subject. I disagree.

[redzero]

calling someone stupid because they believe a certain way different from your own is certainly bigoted.

Is the belief that the earth is flat a stupid one? Is the belief that the moon is made of cheese a stupid one?


why create man at all? God created man to have a relationship with him - that opportunity would be greatly de-valued if it were a "perfect" world.

What can God get from a a relationship with man? Was he lonely?

[all_heart]

Is the belief that the earth is flat a stupid one? Is the belief that the moon is made of cheese a stupid one?


What can God get from a a relationship with man? Was he lonely?

To the first: Oh geez... completely invalid question/argument... try again.

Good question.. who knows? Maybe He saw the world He created needed some people to enjoy His creation.

[underdawg]

Is the belief that the earth is flat a stupid one? Is the belief that the moon is made of cheese a stupid one?

That's not why you called all heart stupid - is it? You called him/her stupid because of his/her beliefs.

What can God get from a a relationship with man? Was he lonely?

If there's something in the Bible that gives a clear reason of why God created man, I'm not familiar with it. But, I can say that if I had to make a guess from the the Bible as a whole - he created man to love him and it would seem that God knew the overall value of the relationship would be greater than not creating man at all.

[redzero]

To the first: Oh geez... completely invalid question/argument... try again.

No, it isn't. He said that calling somebody stupid for believing a certain way is bigoted, so I respond with asking him if beliefs in a flat earth and a cheese moon are stupid. It has everything to do with his statement.


If there's something in the Bible that gives a clear reason of why God created man, I'm not familiar with it. But, I can say that if I had to make a guess from the the Bible as a whole - he created man to love him and it would seem that God knew the overall value of the relationship would be greater than not creating man at all.

I thought God was perfect. Why would he need to create man? Why would he need to love something? Isn't God infinitely great?

[underdawg]

I thought God was perfect. Why would he need to create man? Why would he need to love something? Isn't God infinitely great?

who said he "needed" to create man - it's not possible for him to want to create man?

[redzero]

Okay, so God is completely irrational and his actions make no logical sense.

[all_heart]

No, it isn't. He said that calling somebody stupid for believing a certain way is bigoted, so I respond with asking him if beliefs in a flat earth and a cheese moon are stupid. It has everything to do with his statement.


No it's a bad question, cause in todays world we all know better and also because they are not spiritual beliefs in the first place.

[underdawg]

[QUOTE=redzero;5681778]No, it isn't. He said that calling somebody stupid for believing a certain way is bigoted, so I respond with asking him if beliefs in a flat earth and a cheese moon are stupid. It has everything to do with his statement.
QUOTE]

You called him/her stupid for his/her beliefs and not because of different question - own your bigotism and don't try to change the subject.

[underdawg]

Okay, so God is completely irrational and his actions make no logical sense.

that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I politely disagree.

[redzero]

No it's a bad question, cause in todays world we all know better and also because they are not spiritual beliefs in the first place.

What does it matter that they aren't spiritual beliefs? Spiritual beliefs get a pass now?


You called him/her stupid for his/her beliefs and not because of different question - own your bigotism and don't try to change the subject.

What?


that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I politely disagree.

Oh really? Then why did God create man?

[all_heart]

Okay, so God is completely irrational and his actions make no logical sense.


So you truly believe that? Because you don't know how or why, or you don't understand something, you call it irrational? That's called arrogance.

[underdawg]

Oh really? Then why did God create man?

I answered this before - taking the Bible as a whole, I would say God created man to have a relationship with him and to love him.

[ElNono]

So you truly believe that? Because you don't know how or why, or you don't understand something, you call it irrational? That's called arrogance.

But you automatically attribute what you don't know or understand to god, for no apparent reason. There's no rationality on that. There's nothing arrogant in calling that irrational. He's just saying he doesn't know or understand (yet). What's arrogant about that?

[redzero]

So you truly believe that? Because you don't know how or why, or you don't understand something, you call it irrational? That's called arrogance.

Is belief that the earth is flat irrational?


I answered this before - taking the Bible as a whole, I would say God created man to have a relationship with him and to love him.

So a perfect being--something that already has everything that it could possibly want--created man because he wanted somebody to love?

As I stated before, it makes zero sense.

[all_heart]

What does it matter that they aren't spiritual beliefs? Spiritual beliefs get a pass now?


Do you not see the fallacies of your question? You can't compare physical beliefs with spiritual ones. You are comparing apples to oranges. It's like trying to compare the fact I believe in God and if I were to tell you this monitor in front of me is going to grow legs and walk away.

[all_heart]

But you automatically attribute what you don't know or understand to god, for no apparent reason. There's no rationality on that. There's nothing arrogant in calling that irrational. He's just saying he doesn't know or understand (yet). What's arrogant about that?

No not exactly, he's asking questions about why God does something and I'm replying I don't know only God knows the answer to that. He's calling God who is obviously a much higher being (in my beliefs) irrational and illogical because he can't understand him. It's like calling highly complex math problems illogical and irrational because you don't understand how to solve them and can't peek at the answer key. Is this clearer?

[redzero]

Do you not see the fallacies of your question? You can't compare physical beliefs with spiritual ones. You are comparing apples to oranges. It's like trying to compare the fact I believe in God and if I were to tell you this monitor in front of me is going to grow legs and walk away.

So if I spiritually believe that an invisible pink unicorn created a flat earth, would I get a pass?

[clambake]

math problems can be solved.

[ElNono]

No not exactly, he's asking questions about why God does something and I'm replying I don't know only God knows the answer to that. He's calling God who is obviously a much higher being (in my beliefs) irrational and illogical because he can't understand him. It's like calling highly complex math problems illogical and irrational because you don't understand how to solve them and can't peek at the answer key. Is this clearer?

He isn't asking you why god does things. He's asking you why do you believe god does the things you say he does.

Highly complex mathematical problems exist. It's a testable and undisputable fact. God? Not so much...

[Blake]

I see what you're saying - a word can only mean one thing and has nothing to do with the context of the chapter or the subject. I disagree.

I think fear means what fear literally means.

If it makes you feel better about the Bible to change meanings of words to avoid problems, then by all means, do what you feel you must. You aren't the first and won't be the last to do that.

[all_heart]

So if I spiritually believe that an invisible pink unicorn created a flat earth, would I get a pass?

Earth ain't flat...

[all_heart]

math problems can be solved.

Of course they can, so what's your point?

[underdawg]

I think fear means what fear literally means.

If it makes you feel better about the Bible to change meanings of words to avoid problems, then by all means, do what you feel you must. You aren't the first and won't be the last to do that.

Sorry you feel that way - I would guess that most scholars on literature would agree that you can have more than one meaning for a word.

I get that you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing, but if you really do think that I'm changing the meanings of the Bible to to avoid problems then you are incorrect. There's no changes needed - I understand the context.

If you read the Bible as a whole and your take is that God wants mankind to fear him like a person does when they have a gun pointed at their head, I can't help you as you have ignored the context as it relates to the Bible as a whole.

[redzero]

Earth ain't flat...

How do you know? Maybe the invisible pink unicorn just tricks everybody into thinking that it is round.

[underdawg]

He isn't asking you why god does things. He's asking you why do you believe god does the things you say he does.

Highly complex mathematical problems exist. It's a testable and undisputable fact. God? Not so much...

is chance mathmatical?

[all_heart]

He isn't asking you why god does things. He's asking you why do you believe god does the things you say he does.

Highly complex mathematical problems exist. It's a testable and undisputable fact. God? Not so much...

Is he? If so I think it's pretty obvious that I don't know why God does the things he does. I don't have to know and it doesn't change my Faith or beliefs.

Of course complex math problems exist, man created them and the formulas to solve them. I'm not comparing God to a math problem. I was comparing the inability to fully understand God to the inability to understand hard math problems. Just because you can't figure out something, you don't tear it up and call it irrational. Not knowing something doesn't make you any less of a person Do you not see that?

[all_heart]

How do you know? Maybe the invisible pink unicorn just tricks everybody into thinking that it is round.

That's pretty lame and it's to be expected from you by now.

[redzero]

Is he? If so I think it's pretty obvious that I don't know why God does the things he does. I don't have to know and it doesn't change my Faith or beliefs.

Then how do you know that God isn't rational?


I was comparing the inability to fully understand God to the inability to understand hard math problems. Just because you can't figure out something, you don't tear it up and call it irrational. Not knowing something doesn't make you any less of a person Do you not see that?

Except there is reasoning and logic behind math.

[redzero]

That's pretty lame and it's to be expected from you by now.

How dare you attack someone's religious beliefs?!

[all_heart]

Then how do you know that God isn't rational?

Except there is reasoning and logic behind math.

Because his Word is rational. Just because I don't understand one aspect I don't throw the whole thing out the window.

[all_heart]

How dare you attack someone's religious beliefs?!

That's kinda funny.. but just in case.. whose religious belief is this? Yours?

[Blake]

Sorry you feel that way - I would guess that most scholars on literature would agree that you can have more than one meaning for a word.

I get that you're trying to argue for the sake of arguing, but if you really do think that I'm changing the meanings of the Bible to to avoid problems then you are incorrect. There's no changes needed - I understand the context.

If you read the Bible as a whole and your take is that God wants mankind to fear him like a person does when they have a gun pointed at their head, I can't help you as you have ignored the context as it relates to the Bible as a whole.

I understand that there are three [four?] different words in the original text that King James used the word fear for.

Rather unfortunate for the uneducated that you almost have to be a scholar to figure that out. God apparently favors the educated.

[all_heart]

I understand that there are three [four?] different words in the original text that King James used the word fear for.

Rather unfortunate for the uneducated that you almost have to be a scholar to figure that out. God apparently favors the educated.

God favors the Faithful who believe in Him. Sorry it's so difficult for you to understand, were you expecting a Wiki page to lay it all out for you? j/k Truthfully, the Bible can be difficult to follow sometimes, they do have versions that are easier to read, it helps.

[Amarelooms]

Because his Word is rational. Just because I don't understand one aspect I don't throw the whole thing out the window.

Word? You mean the stuff Jesus didn't write 2000 years ago?

Lol what a blind person you are....Jesus is disappointed in you blindly following and not searching for the truth....mostly your parents fault for brainwashing you. God bless you and your family though

:elephant

[ElNono]

is chance mathmatical?

Uh? You mean randomness?


Is he? If so I think it's pretty obvious that I don't know why God does the things he does. I don't have to know and it doesn't change my Faith or beliefs.

Of course complex math problems exist, man created them and the formulas to solve them. I'm not comparing God to a math problem. I was comparing the inability to fully understand God to the inability to understand hard math problems. Just because you can't figure out something, you don't tear it up and call it irrational. Not knowing something doesn't make you any less of a person Do you not see that?

:lol see what?

Rational people say I don't know (yet). Saying its X's will when you don't know if it's X's will at all (you don't even know if X exists at all) it's a pretty irrational proposition. You can replace X with god, the flying spaghetti monster, frodo, etc.

All that said, everyone is entitled to be as rational/irrational as they wish to be.

[Blue-Lightning]

Well... the theists and atheists both have brought my IQ down just reading these posts.

Here you go:

The universe can't exist without some kind of creator (first law of thermodyanics, mathematical impossibility of an infinite past while in the present). To determine what the creator is or is like requires a great deal of faith since we can only know factually what exists within our own universe. Saying that a god can't or doesn't exist is mathematical ignorance.

The bible is a mess as well, and the quicker you accept that the better. It teaches a lot of really good stuff... and then it also teaches about religious abortions by the priest in Numbers. So it's a hodge podge of good versus unacceptable, with mostly good in the New Testament. And yes, I have a degree in biblical studies.

Have fun,

BL

[BUMP]

Stoooooooooooooooooooooooooops!!!!

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

7t8xwpW8gJQ

[all_heart]

Word? You mean the stuff Jesus didn't write 2000 years ago?

Lol what a blind person you are....Jesus is disappointed in you blindly following and not searching for the truth....mostly your parents fault for brainwashing you. God bless you and your family though



Oh brother, who said I'm blindly following. I feel sorry for your parents having to put up with you. I'm blessed to have parents introduce me to God. Are your parents believers of God?

[baseline bum]

I wouldn't call being dumb enough to believe something for no logical reason being "lucky."

I don't think people are dumb for believing in white man in the sky god tbh. I mean, it's a huge and sophisticated con-job that begins in childhood when people are more apt to respect and pay attention to figures of authority. When someone gets cheated, you don't blame the victim; you blame the swindlers.

[Blue-Lightning]

Oh brother, who said I'm blindly following. I feel sorry for your parents having to put up with you. I'm blessed to have parents introduce me to God. Are your parents believers of God?

You're actually referring to YHWH, or the Judeo/Christian God. I doubt you would feel blessed if it were Allah or Gaia (with your current beliefs). It's important to remember there is a difference between believing in God and being a Christian. The two are not the same.

Also, both of you are just getting into personal attacks rather than debating anything meaningful. It's a game of pissing farther rather than teaching either person a damn thing.

Have fun with that,

BL

[ElNono]

Stoooooooooooooooooooooooooops!!!!

:lol

[Blue-Lightning]

I don't think people are dumb for believing in god tbh. I mean, it's a huge and sophisticated con-job that begins in childhood when people are more apt to respect and pay attention to figures of authority. When someone gets cheated, you don't blame the victim; you blame the swindlers.

This is also foolish in that the "cheated" (believers according to you), are also the "swindlers" (teachers according to you), since the believers teach what they are taught. This is the same as you teaching what you believe.

As I said, the IQ was dropping reading some of this stuff before.

BL

[baseline bum]

Biblical studies boy gotta defend his tool of fear. Fight on Christian soldier.

[redzero]

Because his Word is rational. Just because I don't understand one aspect I don't throw the whole thing out the window.

Do you believe in his word just because it is rational? And his word has magic and stupid actions in it, so I don't find it rational.


That's kinda funny.. but just in case.. whose religious belief is this? Yours?

What does it matter? How come when you make excuses for dumb aspects of your religion, but I can't make excuses for the invisible pink unicorn?

[Blue-Lightning]

Biblical studies boy gotta defend his tool of fear. Fight on Christian soldier.

Blue Lightning several posts earlier:


The bible is a mess as well, and the quicker you accept that the better. It teaches a lot of really good stuff... and then it also teaches about religious abortions by the priest in Numbers. So it's a hodge podge of good versus unacceptable, with mostly good in the New Testament. And yes, I have a degree in biblical studies.

Good job, asswipe. Just accept that your previous statement was a pile of steaming, ignorant shit. That way you can clean it up and avoid making a mess again =)

It's called "learning" and it's a process we all have to do,

BL

[all_heart]

Uh? You mean randomness?



:lol see what?

Rational people say I don't know (yet). Saying its X's will when you don't know if it's X's will at all (you don't even know if X exists at all) it's a pretty irrational proposition. You can replace X with god, the flying spaghetti monster, frodo, etc.

All that said, everyone is entitled to be as rational/irrational as they wish to be.

You still don't understand what I'm saying, I'm guessing you can't cause you don't see where I'm coming from.

BTW all this X stuff you are talking about is done everyday by a lot of people, including mathematicians and scientists. Sometimes it leads to something, sometimes it doesn't.

Obviously I'm not going to sway your opinion and you are definitely not going to change mine...

[Blue-Lightning]

You still don't understand what I'm saying, I'm guessing you can't cause you don't see where I'm coming from.

BTW all this X stuff you are talking about is done everyday by a lot of people, including mathematicians and scientists. Sometimes it leads to something, sometimes it doesn't.

Obviously I'm not going to sway your opinion and you are definitely not going to change mine...

He does know what you're talking about it and he has a really good point. You need to be able to defend your beliefs better. And that "x stuff," well, that's called math.

If he can't change your beliefs, then you're no better than an ignorant piece of dirt. Intelligent people can adjust their beliefs if they see they are wrong. Wise people know that they are not above being wrong. You're not omniscient, chief. And if you can't sway his opinion, then your's must not be all that impressive.

Maybe it's because you guys are high schoolers... I don't know, but yeesh you should both be able to do better than this.

BL

[ElNono]

Here you go:

The universe can't exist without some kind of creator (first law of thermodyanics, mathematical impossibility of an infinite past while in the present).

What? :lmao

Doubt your IQ went much lower after posting stuff like that, tbh

[baseline bum]

Nono man, bible boy needs you to do more "learning".

[redzero]

Fuck Thomas Aquinas up his gay ass.

[Blue-Lightning]

What?

Doubt your IQ went much lower after posting stuff like that, tbh

Prepare for an intellectual can of whoop ass in...

3

2

1

The first law of thermodynamics says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. That means the universe cannot be self-generated. The universe also cannot have existed forever as that would mean it has an infinite past. If it has an infinite past, then how did we arrive in the present? That would be like you saying you ran an infinite amount of miles to go to the grocery store. "No you didn't." You can't travel an infinite amount of space nor time as that would mean it wasn't infinite in the first place. So the fact that we live in the present means the past cannot be infinite.

Therefore, since the universe cannot be self-generated, and since it can't have existed forever, that leaves us with one option. The universe was created by an outside source. What do we call something that creates? We call it a creator. Now whether the creator is YHWH or made of pasta is up to your own faith to decide (or lack thereof)... but the fact that it exists(ed) is undeniable.

Have fun,

BL

[Blue-Lightning]

Nono man, bible boy needs you to do more "learning".

So you've become a cheerleader now? I guess that's what happens when you immediately realize you're waaaaay out of your league.

You do know that atheists hold biblical degrees as well, right? Not all biblical scholars are believers. You did know that right? Right?

BL

[redzero]

Prepare for an intellectual can of whoop ass.

3

2

1

The first law of thermodynamics says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. That means the universe cannot be self-generated. The universe also cannot have existed forever as that would mean it has an infinite past. If it has an infinite past, then how did we arrive in the present? That would be like you saying you ran an infinite amount of miles to go to the grocery store. "No you didn't." You can't travel an infinite amount of space nor time as that would mean it wasn't infinite in the first place. So the fact that we live in the present means the past cannot be infinite.

Therefore, since the universe cannot be self-generated, and since it can't have existed forever, that leaves us with one option. The universe was created by an outside source. What do we call something that creates? We call it a creator. Now whether the creator is YHWH or made of pasta is up to your own faith to decide (or lack thereof)... but the fact that it exists(ed) is undeniable.

Have fun,

BL

Does the creator have an infinite pass?

[baseline bum]

So you've become a cheerleader now? I guess that's what happens when you immediately realize you're waaaaay out of your league.

You do know that atheists hold biblical degrees as well, right? Not all biblical scholars are believers. You did know that right? Right?

BL

LOL butthurt christian soldier playing physicist.

[all_heart]

Do you believe in his word just because it is rational? And his word has magic and stupid actions in it, so I don't find it rational.



What does it matter? How come when you make excuses for dumb aspects of your religion, but I can't make excuses for the invisible pink unicorn?

I believe in John 3:16.. you know that one? And since I believe that I believe Jesus when he says: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

You may never understand that or care to understand that. Hope I'm wrong but if I'm not...sorry that's the path you've chosen for yourself.

[baseline bum]

I believe in John 3:16.. you know that one? And since I believe that I believe Jesus when he says: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

You may never understand that or care to understand that. Hope I'm wrong but if I'm not...sorry that's the path you've chosen for yourself.

You don't choose whether to believe in something. I can't choose to believe the grass is blue or the sky green.

[Blue-Lightning]

Does the creator have an infinite pass?

I'm assuming you mean "past." The answer to that question is that the creator must be outside our universe in order to be outside the first law of thermodynamics. Now since time is a part of our universe, we can't be sure that it exists outside of it, and if it does what it's like. So, there may not be a "past" for the creator to have. Then again their may be. Maybe the creator was created by another creator and another creator, etc. Who knows? Faith can tell you what the creator is like (outside of revelation, according to those who believe it), but we really don't have any concrete information on the multiverse, if it exists, what's there, or what the creator is.

Good question,

BL