Why blame God or satan? [Archive] - Page 2

Nick333

20-12-2006, 04:54 PM

you are missing the point, sir isaac newton and the earliest scientists how much you wish to disgard them now planted the seed for the scientists to follow...

Einstein...i don't think he dismissed god either... i will check it out.

The seed on which the great USA with all is masterfull scientists and economy was build is the bible, their constitution is bible...

Only and only now that everyone is flourishing satan is doing everything to bring the USA as empire down...

eastern europe dismissed god and they just collapsed... and the same will happen in western europe if they don't change their ways...

There's a cup of iniquity for every nation and once that cup is full god can not give any more grace or mercy to such nation, deny god long enough and he will deny you...

Newton was a genius but also a nut job of note. Don't forget that a large part of his career was dedicated to trying to turn base metals into gold (alchemy) and studying floor plans of the temple of david trying to figure out the exact time of the second coming.

Einstein certainly didnt believe in any god YOU would recognize.

The US was not founded as a Christian state. Fundamentalist liars base that entire claim on one line in the constitution: "one nation under god." (which of course doesn't specify which god) and completely ignore the entirely secular nature of the rest of the document.

nthdimension

20-12-2006, 04:55 PM

The religious bits were added much later (for example, "In God We Trust" was added in the 1950s, IIRC).
That and the part about god in the pledge of allegiance.

from The Pledge of Allegiance A Short History (http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm)
In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

God does not feature in the constitution. Our Godless Constitution (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050221/allen)

Nick333

20-12-2006, 05:00 PM

That and the part about god in the pledge of allegiance.

Oh is that that bit was from? :o

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 05:04 PM

you are missing the point, sir isaac newton and the earliest scientists how much you wish to disgard them now planted the seed for the scientists to follow...
Agree.

Einstein...i don't think he dismissed god either... i will check it out.
Einstein dismissed the idea of a personal God i.e. the God of organised religion. Read up on Pantheism and the God of Spinoza, what some people refer to as a personal God, Einstein referred to the universe itself as God. However you don't pray to the universe because for example it doesn't make any sense to pray to the laws of gravity. This is where the confusion arises - the fact that Einstein used to the word "God". In the strictest sense, Einstein was actually Atheist.

The seed on which the great USA with all is masterfull scientists and economy was build is the bible, their constitution is bible...
On the contrary, the founding fathers wished for a secular society where religion and law are separated. In recent times, it is mainly with Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. that they tried to fuse religion and state together. Not surprisingly under their leadership there was/is much war and turmoil.

Only and only now that everyone is flourishing satan is doing everything to bring the USA as empire down...

You can't blame Satan for their incompetencies. They chose their course of action, they are ultimately to blame for their decisions.

eastern europe dismissed god and they just collapsed... and the same will happen in western europe if they don't change their ways...

I'm not following, western Europe offers among the best quality of life anywhere on the planet.

There's a cup of iniquity for every nation and once that cup is full god can not give any more grace or mercy to such nation, deny god long enough and he will deny you...
No thanks. If you fight over religion then you're responsible for your own downfall - you can't peg everything on God or Satan.

nthdimension

20-12-2006, 05:06 PM

eastern europe dismissed god and they just collapsed...
I'm sure it had nothing to do with an unworkable economic system and politicians interfering with science.

noxibox

20-12-2006, 05:12 PM

Einstein referred to the universe itself as God. However you don't pray to the universe because for example it doesn't make any sense to pray to the laws of gravity. This is where the confusion arises - the fact that Einstein used to the word "God". In the strictest sense, Einstein was actually Atheist.

The universe is alive in the same sense that the earth is alive.

Edwe

20-12-2006, 05:28 PM

That's not really a good excuse. Firstly God, if perfect, should have been able to formulate the book perfectly, and ensured that it remained perfect through translation. Secondly there was nothing stopping God from starting with the basics and moving onto advanced topics.

God has now had a couple of thousand years to release a new edition or volume two.

The bible was not written by God - it was written and compiled by people. Various different people who lived hundreds or thousands of years apart. Nobody claims the Bible was written by God.

1 Kings 7:23 And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about."

Thus the value of pi as quoted in the Bible is 3.

Sadly, this disagrees with the scientifically and experimentally accepted value of pi of ~3.14159.]

See my point above

The universe is alive in the same sense that the earth is alive.

i.e. not at all? :confused:

Mr TB

20-12-2006, 06:04 PM

Yes you can do it with N and S, please explain to me why you can't? N and S are not fixed, I'm not sure where you're getting this from.

In fact you can travel an infinite distance on all three axes - in space there's no such thing as N, S, W, or E unless you specify that it's a certain direction relative to some point. So your E could be my N, depending on which point of reference we choose. On earth our reference is typically magnetic north.

Your axis i believe in first place is completely cocked up...i believe flat it is x and y, and 3 dimensional you add z, if you want to do a spacewalk you are quite welcome... i don't think you will get far with your sense of direction.

if you are on the equator and you are instructed to walk north and we assume there are no obstacles at one point in time you will start walking south... that is not the case if you are instructed to walk east or west...you will keep on walking either east or west into eternity...how high is your IQ?

Nick333

20-12-2006, 06:10 PM

Is it just me, or did dodos english just improve about 10 fold with that last post?

Mr TB

20-12-2006, 06:17 PM

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 06:22 PM

Your axis i believe in first place is completely cocked up...i believe flat it is x and y, and 3 dimensional you add z, if you want to do a spacewalk you are quite welcome... i don't think you will get far with your sense of direction.

WTF? The three axes that I was referring to IS x, y and z. So what on earth are you going on about?

if you are on the equator and you are instructed to walk north and we assume there are no obstacles at one point in time you will start walking south... that is not the case if you are instructed to walk east or west...you will keep on walking either east or west into eternity...
You're still talking crap, no offense it's not your fault. I know what you mean regarding the shape or the earth and what not so I wish I could draw you a picture to illustrate this.

Indeed once you pass the north pole, then as you approach and pass the equator on the other side of the globe you would be moving south relative to your original starting point. However the north pole is just a point of reference.

Using your line of thinking, for the east/west argument, we'll use the longitudinal greenwich meridian line as the reference point. If you start off on the greenwich meridian and move east, as you approach and pass the greenwich meridian line on the other side of the globe you will in fact be moving west relative to the original starting point. It seems as though your sense of direction is as one-dimensional as your thinking ;)

The north and south poles (assuming we're working with a two-dimensional axis) are only there as point's of references, without a point of reference direction has no meaning.

how high is your IQ?
136

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 06:26 PM

Is it just me, or did dodos english just improve about 10 fold with that last post?
LOL yeah it seems like he put a lot of thought into that one, and with the thought came semi-proper english. So what would that say about his other posts? :D

ghoti

20-12-2006, 06:49 PM

Einstein was not religious.

I believe that is incorrect. I remember a quote he said once when he was confronted with Quantum Mechanics, he said that he did not believe God controlled the universe with dice.

I believe he was a Jew.

Edit:

Wiki .nfo

Einstein was an Honorary Associate of the Rationalist Press Association beginning in 1934, and was an admirer of Ethical Culture.[36] He served on the advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York.[37][38] He publised a paper in Nature in 1941 entitled Science and Religion which gave his considered views on the subject.[39]

Quotations on religion and God

A religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance of those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation [39]

I do not think that it is necessarily the case that science and religion are natural opposites. In fact, I think that there is a very close connection between the two. Further, I think that science without religion is lame and, conversely, that religion without science is blind. Both are important and should work hand-in-hand.[40]

A Jew who sheds his faith along the way, or who even picks up a different one, is still a Jew.[41]

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.[42]

As an adult, he called his religion a "cosmic religious sense".[43]

In The World As I See It he wrote:

You will hardly find one among the profounder sort of scientific minds without a peculiar religious feeling of his own. But it is different from the religion of the naive man.

For the latter God is a being from whose care one hopes to benefit and whose punishment one fears; a sublimation of a feeling similar to that of a child for its father, a being to whom one stands to some extent in a personal relation, however deeply it may be tinged with awe.

But the scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation. The future, to him, is every whit as necessary and determined as the past. There is nothing divine about morality, it is a purely human affair. His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.[44]

In response to the telegrammed question of New York's Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein in 1929: "Do you believe in God? Stop. Answer paid 50 words." Einstein replied "I believe in Spinoza's God, Who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind." Note that Einstein replied in only 25 (German) words. Spinoza was a naturalistic pantheist.

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 06:55 PM

I believe that is incorrect. I remember a quote he said once when he was confronted with Quantum Mechanics, he said that he did not believe God controlled the universe with dice.

Actually, to quote Richard Dawkins from The God Delusion:

There is every reason to think that famous Einsteinisms like 'God is subtle but he is not malicious' or 'He does not play dice' or 'Did God have a choice in creating the Universe?' are pantheistic, not deistic, and certainly not theistic. 'God does not play dice' should be translated as 'Randomness does not lie at the heart of all things.' 'Did God have a choice in creating the Universe?' means 'Could the universe have begun in any other way?' Einstein was using 'God' in a purely metaphorical, poetic sense.
Einstein's use of the word "God" often led to much confusion. Many of his quotes making use of the word "God" are explained in the first chapter of the book.

ghoti

20-12-2006, 07:05 PM

Actually, to quote Richard Dawkins from The God Delusion:

Einstein's use of the word "God" often led to much confusion. Many of his quotes making use of the word "God" are explained in the first chapter of the book.

"Einstein was very unhappy about this apparent randomness in nature. His views were summed up in his famous phrase, 'God does not play dice'."

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/dice.html

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 07:09 PM

Hawking himself speaks in metaphors regarding the issue of God ;)

Much unfortunate confusion is caused by failure to distinguish what can be called Einsteinian religion from supernatural religion. Einstein sometimes invoked the name of God (and he is not the only atheistic scientist to do so), inviting misunderstanding by supernaturalists eager to misunderstand and claim so illustrious a thinker as their own. The dramatic (or was it mischievous?) ending of Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time, 'For then we should know the mind of God', is notoriously misconstrued. It has led people to believe, mistakenly of course, that Hawking is a religious man.

The_Librarian

20-12-2006, 07:21 PM

That can be answered when we get to see the original set of commandments.

These are in the Bible.

AntiThesis

20-12-2006, 09:19 PM

You know... you go away for a few hours and people post madly :D

Bear in mind that the Second Law applies to a closed system, and while the universe itself may be a closed system, subsections of the universe (e.g. the Earth) are not.

Well we are talking about a God of the Universe, not the earth (or at least I am) so we can assume the universe is a closed system. Even if it wasn’t, all systems, whether open or closed, tend to deteriorate. Assuming that the chaos of the big bang has transformed and evolved to create the complexity of a human brain with 120 trillion connections is probably about as close to a violation of the Second law as you get.

Omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent (as the Christian god is claimed to be) are self-contradictory. You can have any two, but not all three...

How are these self-contradictory?

Can you explain to me how the second law of thermodynamics has anything to do with evolution?
Since the propagation of a species relies on the transfer of genetic information and not energy I can't for the life of me see the laws of entropy apply to the process.
Evolution actually relies on the break down of the process. In other words corrupt data in the form of mutations.

See above. I didn’t say that evolution relies on the passing of energy (I’m sure sex would be pretty boring if that were the case). The evolution of a more complex and ordered system relies on the break down of the system?

Why would Einstein (or Haking for that matter) speak of God metaphorically? If Einstein meant the Universe he really should have said so. Just as I would expect people to misunderstand if I say "I worship ducks" I think Einstein would realise that the following statement could easily be open to interpretation:

I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.

That statement doesn't seem at all vague. Einstein refers specifically to a (singular) God rather than a Pantheon.

Forgive me for being brief but I have stuff to do tonight :( I'll read up more on Einstein & Religion as well as some other interesting points that people have raised here.

ghoti

20-12-2006, 09:26 PM

Hawking himself speaks in metaphors regarding the issue of God ;)
Yup in a sense they do. Just because neither have traditional monolithic versions of God does not make them any less religious. They just have broader conceptions of what God is.

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 09:34 PM

Mr TB

20-12-2006, 10:13 PM

Well Einstein and Hawking were/are really great thinkers. They're well respected within and outside the scientific community so it's difficult for them to really say anything directly without them offending anybody on either side. I guess in a way that's one of the very things that makes them great.

congrat's with that IQ of yours, 136 ye say? well no wonder you find it difficult to relate to god. the bible says god is spirit and you will be not be able to understand him in the mind. the way to god is through j esus. It is a spiritual thing...

Highflyer_GP

20-12-2006, 10:16 PM

congrat's with that IQ of yours, 136 ye say? well no wonder you find it difficult to relate to god.
Yeah I guess it is difficult for me to relate to God, only those with an IQ below 100 have that ability :p

ghoti

20-12-2006, 10:18 PM

Well Einstein and Hawking were/are really great thinkers. They're well respected within and outside the scientific community so it's difficult for them to really say anything directly without them offending anybody on either side. I guess in a way that's one of the very things that makes them great.

I will disagree, I honestly believe both of them believe in God, perhaps not in a way most religious and non-religious folk understand God to be.

Nick333

20-12-2006, 10:18 PM

congrat's with that IQ of yours, 136 ye say? well no wonder you find it difficult to relate to god. the bible says god is spirit and you will be not be able to understand him in the mind. the way to god is through j esus. It is a spiritual thing...

You must find it very easy to relate to god then.

ghoti

20-12-2006, 10:19 PM

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 07:20 AM

God only wants stupid people as followers or something? What is meant by that statement? Oh wait.. its you... never mind.

so you want to tell me PAUL was stupid,gee but you can be arrogant... the same goes for SIR ISAAC NEWTON, what you refuse to admit, and that you expect from arrogancy. The early breakthroughs in science innitiated tne revolution in tech and you wish to ignore that but that is indeed your option...

yes maybe that is why god rather make use of the simple(not stupid) people, they are the salt of the earth not arrogant bums that want the honour for themselves...

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 08:07 AM

I don't think I'm particularly stupid. :)

But lets keep intelligence out of this whole thing as that path can only lead to mudslinging in one form or another.

douwdouw: You seem to have problems expressing yourself. I'm not sure what your point was in your last post. Nobody particularly said that Paul was stupid and it's equally arrogant to say Isaac Newton was stupid as to assume all Christians are.

Anyway, I will keep looking in today but I have to *spit* work.

Neo

21-12-2006, 08:34 AM

How many people are posting under the douwdouw ID? I've picked up at least two (one who can spell and one who can't).

You guys must please make sure you read each others posts as it confuses the cr*p out of us when one dodo post implies intelligent people will battle with the concept of a god as per below:

congrat's with that IQ of yours, 136 ye say? well no wonder you find it difficult to relate to god.

And then another dodo respond with the stupid comment about Paul.

so you want to tell me PAUL was stupid,gee but you can be arrogant... the same goes for SIR ISAAC NEWTON, what you refuse to admit, and that you expect from arrogancy. The early breakthroughs in science innitiated tne revolution in tech and you wish to ignore that but that is indeed your option...

yes maybe that is why god rather make use of the simple(not stupid) people, they are the salt of the earth not arrogant bums that want the honour for themselves...

By what stretch of logic can you form this train of ideas?

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 08:54 AM

How many people are posting under the douwdouw ID? I've picked up at least two (one who can spell and one who can't).

You guys must please make sure you read each others posts as it confuses the cr*p out of us when one dodo post implies intelligent people will battle with the concept of a god as per below:

And then another dodo respond with the stupid comment about Paul.

By what stretch of logic can you form this train of ideas?

Sir i am afrikaans , maybe you are also, but most english people can not spell or write their own language properly...

i have seen enough pommies screw it up at employment agencies, their CVs looking like crap because of spelling errors..so please let go of that one... it will not work on me...

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 08:56 AM

Oh yes and read your post, i think you mean IQ not ID right?

chiskop

21-12-2006, 09:02 AM

Thanks, both of you, for your thoughts.

:D

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 09:05 AM

Neo

21-12-2006, 09:42 AM

Oh yes and read your post, i think you mean IQ not ID right?

Surely you jest?

Let's see, if I actually meant:

How many people are posting under the douwdouw IQ?

The answer would probably be: None

As to your home language; Can only English-speaking people form coherent thoughts or remember what they posted?. Spelling can be sorted with a spell-checker, have a look at the abc icon on the top right when you post, but logical though patterns are language independent, of so hoop ek in elk geval......

nthdimension

21-12-2006, 10:15 AM

These are in the Bible.
Bible versions do not agree. I want to see the stone tablets so we can verify they could not have been created by human tools and so we can read what they really said.

Neo

21-12-2006, 10:29 AM

He admitted himself he only formed it because he didn't want to be created by a god...

Reference please.

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 10:42 AM

I'm going to go ahead and guess that douwdouw is talking about the Lady Hope story of Darwin recanting Evolution on his deathbed. This is mostly discredited even by Christians :)

Neo

21-12-2006, 10:49 AM

I'm going to go ahead and guess that douwdouw is talking about the Lady Hope story of Darwin recanting Evolution on his deathbed. This is mostly discredited even by Christians :)

I rather suspect it is from those little cartoon-like booklets some churches distribute. His previous 18-pointer (and other statements) seem to be verbatim extracts from them.

Claymore

21-12-2006, 10:58 AM

It was a stretch of imaginary ideas that formed Darwin's theory on evolution

He admitted himself he only formed it because he didn't want to be created by a god...

Reference please, as others have asked. Darwin himself was actually quite religious up till his voyage.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 10:59 AM

wait i am trying to hang on to NEO he typed seven afrikaans words in the correct order, he must have an IQ of at least 140 guys...

since there is no spellchecker to help you out it is well done...

...mmm...stop admitting what you are doing is not of you own doing sir, you are showing of trying to let your star shine...its fatal man... at least what i type is my own thoughts, not regulated by a computer...

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 11:00 AM

Spellcheckers are evil? O_o

Neo

21-12-2006, 11:05 AM

Spellcheckers are evil? O_o

Yup, nowhere is it written: "Thou shalt use a spell-checker"

So it must be evil and of Satan's doing.

at least what i type is my own thoughts, not regulated by a computer...

Maybe this is the answer to the whole problem; The bible's been spell-checked and therefore not God's original thoughts. No wonder we can't make sense of it....

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 11:07 AM

Reference please.

if i give the bible as a reference for a thing i said it is not acceptable, why now press for references sir?

if the one is not good enough obviously you will indeed not accept any other reference given by me...

that is human nature sir.. whether you like it or not...

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 11:11 AM

Claymore

21-12-2006, 11:21 AM

Well we are talking about a God of the Universe, not the earth (or at least I am) so we can assume the universe is a closed system. Even if it wasn’t, all systems, whether open or closed, tend to deteriorate. Assuming that the chaos of the big bang has transformed and evolved to create the complexity of a human brain with 120 trillion connections is probably about as close to a violation of the Second law as you get.

Read up on the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and pay attention to the bit on isolated systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_system

In any case, bear in mind that it applies to the system as a whole; there can be isolated points within the system, and in that context, Earth can be considered a very tiny point within the entropy of the universe.

How are these self-contradictory?

If God is:
- Omniscient and omnipotent, he knows about all the evil and terrible things in the world, and has the power to prevent them...but doesn't, therefore he cannot be omnibenevolent.

- Omniscient and omnibenevolent, he knows about the evil in the world, and wants to prevent it...but since this has not happened, he cannot then be omnipotent.

- Omnipotent and omnibenevolent, he wants to rid the world of evil, and has the power to do so, but because there is still evil, he obviously does not know about it all.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 11:26 AM

douwdouw: Neo was looking for a reference to the statement that you made about Darwin renouncing evolution on his deathbed.

It is incorrect to say that because the bible is not an accepted reference therefore all other references will be unacceptable as well. This is a false comparison.

you missed it , a reference given by me , any reference given to show the bible is true is not accepted, if you do not accept the bible you will not and you will accept any given by whoever even by allmighty god himself.

don't you understand sir if you don't want to know the truth you will never know. god can come and sit in front of you and explain the whole bible to you and you will still not believe... that is why faith in god allmighty is required.

Nick333

21-12-2006, 11:33 AM

you missed it , a reference given by me , any reference given to show the bible is true is not accepted, if you do not accept the bible you will not and you will accept any given by whoever even by allmighty god himself.

don't you understand sir if you don't want to know the truth you will never know. god can come and sit in front of you and explain the whole bible to you and you will still not believe... that is why faith in god allmighty is required.

Oh J3sus ****ing Chri5t on a tree, a reference backing up the claims you made about Darwins aledged death-bed renunciation of he's theories of natural selection.

Clearly no one expects you to provide one from the ****ing bible you troll. Stop avoiding the topic and admit you were talking unsubstantiated ****.

Neo

21-12-2006, 11:36 AM

if i give the bible as a reference for a thing i said it is not acceptable, why now press for references sir?

if the one is not good enough obviously you will indeed not accept any other reference given by me...

If you make a vague statement with no direct reference it does not count, for example a statement like "It's written in the Bible" without a direct reference cannot be held up as evidence in the first place.

Where-ever you directly referenced the Bible (i.e. by quoting a specific verse), I've given you a counter reference from the same Bible.

So I've got no problem using the Bible as a reference, I just don't do it selectively or attach vague interpretations to what's written in it.

You made a comment about Darwin, so now please substantiate or withdraw it.

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 11:48 AM

douwdouw... you really need to pay attention here mate. I'm a Christian. I believe in God. You really don't need to try convince me :p What I'm saying (and I'm trying to put this as clearly as the other people have) is this:

You need to give people references to back up statements. If you say Darwin gave up on evolution on his deathbed, you need to link it to some reference.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 12:03 PM

If you make a vague statement with no direct reference it does not count, for example a statement like "It's written in the Bible" without a direct reference cannot be held up as evidence in the first place.

Where-ever you directly referenced the Bible (i.e. by quoting a specific verse), I've given you a counter reference from the same Bible.

So I've got no problem using the Bible as a reference, I just don't do it selectively or attach vague interpretations to what's written in it.

You made a comment about Darwin, so now please substantiate or withdraw it.

i unfortunately don't carry tons full of ,the comment was made by a friend and i did not investigate, did i ask anyone to withdraw personal on my IQ , did i , no i did not think so i just accept your childish actions did i not?

the same goes for the verse concerning east and west, are you really that short sighted to see what it mean..gmf..you were quite childish there were you not... for someone that actually rate himself in putting arguments together...

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 12:09 PM

Oh J3sus ****ing Chri5t on a tree, a reference backing up the claims you made about Darwins aledged death-bed renunciation of he's theories of natural selection.

Clearly no one expects you to provide one from the ****ing bible you troll. Stop avoiding the topic and admit you were talking unsubstantiated ****.

go on like this with your comments and one of these days you are gonna get a smack from god...

when he does you must let us know on this forum, a warning for everone...

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 12:20 PM

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 12:22 PM

I love wiki :D Man I might even donate to them (although I see they're doing just fine by themselves)

In any case, bear in mind that it applies to the system as a whole; there can be isolated points within the system, and in that context, Earth can be considered a very tiny point within the entropy of the universe.

Are you trying to say here that Earth is an isolated (closed) system?

WRT omniness, by assuming the existence and definition of evil this implies a moral law and therefore a maker of the law. Actually, I'm not going to argue the point because wiki (see? I love wiki) has done the whole thing for us :D
Check out Problem of Evil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil). Some interesting stuff there.

riscbroker

21-12-2006, 12:24 PM

@douwdouw
quote 'the comment was made by a friend and i did not investigate'
This response typifies your arguments and rebuttals. At least try and think for yourself before regurgitating everything you've read or heard.

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 12:31 PM

i unfortunately don't carry tons full of ,the comment was made by a friend and i did not investigate.
Retract your statement about Darwin and apologise to everyone for speaking ****.

What bothers me is that if you can defend your friends word without investigating, why should we entertain anything that you have to say about religion? You've just given everybody here an indication of the credibility of all your statements.

Neo

21-12-2006, 12:34 PM

I love wiki :D Man I might even donate to them (although I see they're doing just fine by themselves).

Can't agree more. When I look at Wiki and the quality of the content, and taking into account it's self regulated, it really gives me hope for mankind. What a great example of what civilisation is about. :)

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 12:40 PM

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 12:46 PM

Retract your statement about Darwin and apologise to everyone for speaking ****.

What bothers me is that if you can defend your friends word without investigating, why should we entertain anything that you have to say about religion? You've just given everybody here an indication of the credibility of all your statements.

You also like to follow ****ty arguments...

Theoretically if you're on the northpole with your compass does it show north
Theoretically if you're on the southpole with your compass does its show south?
What is IQ again? oh yes 136

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 12:46 PM

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 12:57 PM

dodo the difference is that we actually read and investigate for ourselves before commenting. We don't take some random guy's (false) claims and then pass it off as our own. We have references to back up our claims, and indeed the bible is full of contradictions no matter how much you deny it.

Still going on about the IQ thing? Obsessed with it are we? How about you take a test and let us know yours, I'm sure that would be quite entertaining for all of us.

mine is nil according to you and your friends , but why did you not answer my question ???

nthdimension

21-12-2006, 01:02 PM

Are you trying to say here that Earth is an isolated (closed) system?
The earth is an open system within a probably closed system, the universe.

Some chemicals once formed are stable. They'll remain in their new state unless more energy is introduced. Life itself is like this - once you're born you cannot become spontaneously unborn, therefore the process is not reversible. This is an important factor in the second law of thermodynamics.

by assuming the existence and definition of evil this implies a moral law and therefore a maker of the law.
We define what is evil. Nothing outside of humanity is required to create this definition. To assume otherwise is to assume that we're incapable of certain behaviour without an outside influence. At the same time this assumes the outside influence is capable of making these distinctions correctly without its own outside influence. Who tells God what's right and wrong?

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 01:03 PM

dodo the difference is that we actually read and investigate for ourselves before commenting. We don't take some random guy's (false) claims and then pass it off as our own. We have references to back up our claims, and indeed the bible is full of contradictions no matter how much you deny it.

Still going on about the IQ thing? Obsessed with it are we? How about you take a test and let us know yours, I'm sure that would be quite entertaining for all of us.

your claim is a false one, descent honest...not biased...show there is none that can not be solved...

you also just believe what you are told man can't you see that...? backed up by what.. some other guys research?... that may be proofed wrong when you are dead and buried?

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 01:06 PM

Theoretically if you're on the northpole with your compass does it show north
Theoretically if you're on the southpole with your compass does its show south?

mine is nil according to you and your friends , but why did you not answer my question ???
The earths magnetic field is three dimensional. At the south pole they move in the direction away from the ground and at the north pole they move in the direction into the ground.

Therefore it doesn't point in any particular direction. If you were at the north pole, the compass would point towards your feet if it could. If you were at the south pole it would point towards the sky if it could. Actually this would happen if you were at magnetic north or magnetic south.

Happy dodo? Unhappy dodo?

Claymore

21-12-2006, 01:06 PM

Are you trying to say here that Earth is an isolated (closed) system?

No, quite the contrary! Earth definitely is not. What I'm saying is that *if* you consider the Universe to be a closed system, then the Earth is a very, very small part within that system, and while the system as a whole may experience entropy, there are localised parts which do not for periods of time.

WRT omniness, by assuming the existence and definition of evil this implies a moral law and therefore a maker of the law. Actually, I'm not going to argue the point because wiki (see? I love wiki) has done the whole thing for us :D
Check out Problem of Evil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil). Some interesting stuff there.

That was an interesting read, thanks! Evil, of course, depends on what you consider to be evil; I don't follow a moral law laid down, but rather a definition of evil that basically includes malicious intent towards others.

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 01:08 PM

your claim is a false one, descent honest...not biased...show there is none that can not be solved...

you also just believe what you are told man can't you see that...? backed up by what.. some other guys research?... that may be proofed wrong when you are dead and buried?

Listen here dude, you were quoting what Darwin said on his deathbed. WTF is there to prove - either he said it or he didn't. You agree with your friend that he said something, so back it up. It's not fscking rocket science. Stop dodging the issue.

Claymore

21-12-2006, 01:09 PM

Can't agree more. When I look at Wiki and the quality of the content, and taking into account it's self regulated, it really gives me hope for mankind. What a great example of what civilisation is about. :)

Absolutely. I love Wikipedia - I've contributed several articles, and edited many more.

(I like the software too - I run my own wiki on Wikimedia 1.57).

Neo

21-12-2006, 01:10 PM

ok NEO while you are on my back about the statement concerning Darwin...

you or your friends are making false statements i saying the bible contradict, it does not.
you or your friends are making false statements saying the old testament, or then the old covenant, or then the law just as you wish to call it, is out of of date it was fulfilled in christ.
the difference today is we don't have to be obedient we want to be obedient... Paul is not contradicting j esus or whoever he is explaining this very point in galatians..
if you honest enough and do a proper study of galatians you will see it...

I've given you enough examples of some of these contradictions. You were helpful in giving the first statement, so I only had to post a specific reference.
(For example you said God will never interfere with our free will, and I pointed you to God's own words, in Exodus, where he tells Moses he will harden the Pharaoh's hart so he can teach him a lesson by killing a bunch of children.)

And including where J esus and Paul directly contradict each other on the validity of the old laws. It's all already posted in this thread, go read it again.

The (ongoing) problem is; which of these commands do we obey? 'Love thy neighbour' or 'Kill the gays' or 'Though shalt not kill' or 'If a women is raped within the city walls, and she did not cry out, she must be killed'....

Of course we "want to be obedient", if we're not we burn in hell for eternity. Quite an incentive.

Claymore

21-12-2006, 01:10 PM

You also like to follow ****ty arguments...

Theoretically if you're on the northpole with your compass does it show north
Theoretically if you're on the southpole with your compass does its show south?
What is IQ again? oh yes 136

Technically, if you're at the North Pole, your compass will point toward the north magnetic pole, wherever it is.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 01:57 PM

Technically, if you're at the North Pole, your compass will point toward the north magnetic pole, wherever it is.

you are insisting that you can still go further north when you are standing on the north pole compass wise and of course that insistence i expect too should you be standing on the southpole..

if you then insist on such rational behavior i do not need to apologise for any statements made by me... substantiated or not....irrational or not...

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 02:05 PM

Ok I say that his last post contained his most fluent english so far :/

nthdimension

21-12-2006, 02:14 PM

Technically because north and south are magnetic poles, and therefore can be said to be locations I'd rather have my sins as far away as north is from south. East and west are right next to each other.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 02:16 PM

I've given you enough examples of some of these contradictions. You were helpful in giving the first statement, so I only had to post a specific reference.
(For example you said God will never interfere with our free will, and I pointed you to God's own words, in Exodus, where he tells Moses he will harden the Pharaoh's hart so he can teach him a lesson by killing a bunch of children.)

And including where J esus and Paul directly contradict each other on the validity of the old laws. It's all already posted in this thread, go read it again.

The (ongoing) problem is; which of these commands do we obey? 'Love thy neighbour' or 'Kill the gays' or 'Though shalt not kill' or 'If a women is raped within the city walls, and she did not cry out, she must be killed'....

Of course we "want to be obedient", if we're not we burn in hell for eternity. Quite an incentive.

if that is your incentive...you are going to burn in hell with satan and his demons in any case...

the promise i have are that i will rule with the king of kings and the lord of lords. once again you lack of knowledge is showing in the incentives you are bringing to the front...

if i'm now insistent like you i must insist that you withdraw the lie you have just typed...

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 02:21 PM

Kings are power-hungry ****ers if you ask me.

Claymore

21-12-2006, 02:24 PM

you are insisting that you can still go further north when you are standing on the north pole compass wise and of course that insistence i expect too should you be standing on the southpole..

if you then insist on such rational behavior i do not need to apologise for any statements made by me... substantiated or not....irrational or not...

For someone who does not know the difference between a location and a direction, I'm glad you're not insisting on calling yourself rational.

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 02:27 PM

douwdouw... you're starting to sound more and more like the kind of Christian I wish would take a good hard look at him/herself and re-evaluate the way to interact with others.

Claymore

21-12-2006, 02:28 PM

if i'm now insistent like you i must insist that you withdraw the lie you have just typed...

Which lie was that? That there are contradictions in the Bible? That's quite true.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 02:29 PM

I've given you enough examples of some of these contradictions. You were helpful in giving the first statement, so I only had to post a specific reference.
(For example you said God will never interfere with our free will, and I pointed you to God's own words, in Exodus, where he tells Moses he will harden the Pharaoh's hart so he can teach him a lesson by killing a bunch of children.)

And including where J esus and Paul directly contradict each other on the validity of the old laws. It's all already posted in this thread, go read it again.

The (ongoing) problem is; which of these commands do we obey? 'Love thy neighbour' or 'Kill the gays' or 'Though shalt not kill' or 'If a women is raped within the city walls, and she did not cry out, she must be killed'....

Of course we "want to be obedient", if we're not we burn in hell for eternity. Quite an incentive.

if i have to agree that god hardened pharaoh's heart , then i have to accept that every murder rape whatsoever was planned by god...

this is just the way to run away from our responsibilities is it not?

do you think love thy neighbour come from the NT.? it does not fortunately so all your concerning murder ,rape, gays, etc. falls flat...

It is actually written in Deut 6v4,5. If a man follow this rule he will not be gay in the first place so your stupid argument holds no ground...

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 02:32 PM

BWAHAHAHAHA @ Love thy neighbour = not gay!!

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 02:37 PM

O_o

douwdouw... you may have to go through the logic of "Obeying love thy neighbour" = "Not gay" in detail for us. I think we're all confused by that statement.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 02:46 PM

douwdouw... you're starting to sound more and more like the kind of Christian I wish would take a good hard look at him/herself and re-evaluate the way to interact with others.

Will you be honest enough and answer the following question?
where are you going when you die?

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 02:53 PM

O_o

douwdouw... you may have to go through the logic of "Obeying love thy neighbour" = "Not gay" in detail for us. I think we're all confused by that statement.

Actually true, love = sex that is how the community have it, but it works the same with animals and you actually all agree you forefathers were animals. Its expecting a bit much from you to tell the difference...

nthdimension

21-12-2006, 02:56 PM

where are you going when you die?
When my chemical processes stop everything I am will be erased. My body is going to be cremated. And my family have strict instructions that no money is to be spent on overpriced wooden boxes.

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 02:58 PM

Where am I going when I die? My corpse will rot here or anywhere. My soul will go to Heaven. And your point?

Next...

Actually true, love = sex that is how the community have it, but it works the same with animals and you actually all agree you forefathers were animals. Its expecting a bit much from you to tell the difference...
Reply With Quote

I'm just trying to understand you here. You tell me that if people loved their neighbors (and I'm not putting any extra emphasis on love or interpreting it sexually, just as the bible says which is brotherly in nature) there would be no gay people?

I'm not sure what your explanation about love = sex has to do with the question about being gay. I also forgive you for insulting me.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 03:00 PM

Kings are power-hungry ****ers if you ask me.

you agree then that god is not power hungry right? otherwise he would have wiped satan out just like that...remember he was second in charge in heaven at that point in history...god did not misuse his power...

Neo

21-12-2006, 03:10 PM

if i have to agree that god hardened pharaoh's heart , then i have to accept that every murder rape whatsoever was planned by god.

So you're saying God did not hardened Pharaoh's hart?

Explain this then, from Exodus 10:

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh, for I have made him and his servants obdurate in order that I may perform these signs of mine among them
2 and that you may recount to your son and grandson how ruthlessly I dealt with the Egyptians and what signs I wrought among them, so that you may know that I am the LORD."

From Webster:

Main Entry: ob·du·rate
Pronunciation: 'äb-d&-r&t, -dy&-; äb-'dur-&t, &b-, -'dyur-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin obduratus, past participle of obdurare to harden, from ob- against + durus hard -- more at DURING
1 a : stubbornly persistent in wrongdoing b : hardened in feelings
2 : resistant to persuasion or softening influences

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 03:11 PM

Where am I going when I die? My corpse will rot here or anywhere. My soul will go to Heaven. And your point?

Next...

I'm just trying to understand you here. You tell me that if people loved their neighbors (and I'm not putting any extra emphasis on love or interpreting it sexually, just as the bible says which is brotherly in nature) there would be no gay people?

I'm not sure what your explanation about love = sex has to do with the question about being gay. I also forgive you for insulting me.

Thanking you for your forgiveness, read deut 6v4,5 if the community comply there will be no:

homosexual activity, theft, rape, murder, crime and what you want to add the list of sinfull activity...

If this accomplished by using these two verses going on telling me the bible lies, god is a murderer etc..., actually doesn't really mean anything...

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 03:27 PM

So you're saying God did not hardened Pharaoh's hart?

Explain this then, from Exodus 10:

From Webster:
Let us then accept your way of arguing here and say yes god indeed did.
This brings me back to the actual topic?
HANSIE CRONJE SAID THE DEVIL MADE HIM DO IT!
Not one of yo believe this true?... not me either... but looking at the statement concerning pharaoh i believe him now...

In the context why god hardened pharaoh's, have you made a carefull study of the plaques...pharaoh believed he was a god sir not just a normal man... just like Robert Mugabe believes the very same thing...so he was not going to let the israelites go unless god actually shows pharao he is the living god.

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 03:30 PM

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.

Right. And that verse tells me to love the lord my God. Which I do. People involved in the Crusades massacres loved God as well. And yet they murdered people for their religion.

I agree that there would certainly be less sin if people acted in the way I believe God/***** intended rather than in our own selfish ways. On whether being gay is a sin well, that's another point we'll probably disagree on.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 03:42 PM

Right. And that verse tells me to love the lord my God. Which I do. People involved in the Crusades massacres loved God as well. And yet they murdered people for their religion.

I agree that there would certainly be less sin if people acted in the way I believe God/***** intended rather than in our own selfish ways. On whether being gay is a sin well, that's another point we'll probably disagree on.

you can be gay ANTITHESIS, you indeed can be gay there is nothing wrong in being but you will have to abstain... brotherly love requires that from you, i certainly don't have to go into detail do i.

If you see it differently i do not blame you, it does not make me better than you, we both live our lives in christ...

Claymore

21-12-2006, 03:42 PM

you agree then that god is not power hungry right? otherwise he would have wiped satan out just like that...remember he was second in charge in heaven at that point in history...god did not misuse his power...

So you are saying that God has permitted Satan to sow all his evil among mankind, when God has the power to prevent it. Nice.

AntiThesis

21-12-2006, 03:55 PM

I confess myself to still be confused.

Brotherly love which basically boils down to being nice to my fellow humans means that one man cannot give another man an orgasm?

Neo

21-12-2006, 04:01 PM

Let us then accept your way of arguing here and say yes god indeed did.
This brings me back to the actual topic?
HANSIE CRONJE SAID THE DEVIL MADE HIM DO IT!
Not one of yo believe this true?... not me either... but looking at the statement concerning pharaoh i believe him now...

In the context why god hardened pharaoh's, have you made a carefull study of the plaques...pharaoh believed he was a god sir not just a normal man... just like Robert Mugabe believes the very same thing...so he was not going to let the israelites go unless god actually shows pharao he is the living god.

You now seem to agree that God hardened Pharaoh's hart. Sadly, you'll now have to stand by your earlier conviction:

if i have to agree that god hardened pharaoh's heart , then i have to accept that every murder rape whatsoever was planned by god.

I think you've now proven beyond any reasonable doubt that you've not read the bible.

Nod

21-12-2006, 04:21 PM

I think you've now proven beyond any reasonable doubt that you've not read the bible.

I think it's called: painting oneself into a corner?

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 04:32 PM

I confess myself to still be confused.

Brotherly love which basically boils down to being nice to my fellow humans means that one man cannot give another man an orgasm?

Once i have typed everything i realised this discussion with it medical and mental implications can not succeed, only the holy spirit can show you the damage that is done in such relationship....you be good...

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 04:47 PM

You now seem to agree that God hardened Pharaoh's hart. Sadly, you'll now have to stand by your earlier conviction:

I think you've now proven beyond any reasonable doubt that you've not read the bible.

oh yes this brings me back to another point you see, when it suites you in a debate or an argument it becomes the words of god. When it doesn't suite like in GENESIS 1v28 it becomes the words of man...

You have then something to think about also, double standards? ... Normally i find in anycase that the way to win your argument... confuse the audience that's how they do it with double standards...

Neo

21-12-2006, 04:58 PM

oh yes this brings me back to another point you see, when it suites you in a debate or an argument it becomes the words of god. When it doesn't suite like in GENESIS 1v28 it becomes the words of man...

Please show me where I ever said it????

I've never disagreed with Genesis 1:28. I've got 3 kids (how many do you have?) and would love to multiply some more, but unlike the old Israelites, I don't have access to scores of virgins.... :(
(In any case, in modern society it's called kidnapping and rape.)

Rather stop changing the subject.

You've now accepted that 'every murder rape whatsoever was planned by god.'

It must be quite a lot to absorb, so suddenly. Maybe take some time off to reflect a bit on that.

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 04:58 PM

you agree then that god is not power hungry right? otherwise he would have wiped satan out just like that...remember he was second in charge in heaven at that point in history...god did not misuse his power...

I couldn't care less about God or Satan - every religion has their own version of good and evil. What makes you so sure that yours is right?

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 05:01 PM

I think it's called: painting oneself into a corner?
the call is on you...

i don't know your age sir but the robber is standing with a .45 magnum holding it against your new born baby's head, about to pull the trigger...

how cruel are you will you want god to soften the robber's heart or continue with his deed, how cruel are you sir?

PostmanPot

21-12-2006, 05:03 PM

wtf :/

noxibox

21-12-2006, 05:04 PM

wtf :/
Good question :)

i don't know your age sir but the robber is standing with a .45 magnum holding it against your new born baby's head, about to pull the trigger...
I'm so glad I went for the bulletproof skull option.

Nick333

21-12-2006, 05:09 PM

go on like this with your comments and one of these days you are gonna get a smack from god...

when he does you must let us know on this forum, a warning for everone...

You mean a great big hands going to materialize out of thin air and whack me on the back of my head? ROFL. I take it you mean god will humble me in this life some how. How will I know, when it happens, that it is gods doing or just one of lifes hardships? Considering that my life, like most peoples on this earth has hardly been a bed of roses, all the way through, how would I know that he hasn't smacked me already?

Considering that I hardly ever get upset by personal attacks and that I'm just a mortal and ignorant human, why would god almighty be so childish and insecure as to avenge himself on me because of a little bit of blasphemy? Or is it a case, as I suspect it is, of your own vengeful thoughts being projected on to your god.

Anyway who the hell are you to decide what god will or won't do to me? Judge not lest you be judged. Take care of the log in your eye before trying to help me with the splinter in mine and all that biblical stuff.

Macguyver1

21-12-2006, 05:09 PM

People always seem to blame God or satan for their problems. They don't take a step back and ask themselves, "What have I done to contribute to the problem?" we all have that still small voice inside of us saying "Don't go there" or "Don't do that" but we often ignore that, myself included, and we wonder why bad things happen to us. That is my opinion, what's yours?

If your brother gets cancer and dies in hospital in your arms, I find this hard to blame on ones self.

Macguyver1

21-12-2006, 05:16 PM

I couldn't care less about God or Satan - every religion has their own version of good and evil. What makes you so sure that yours is right?

I am also not religious at all, but I don't believe in slamming other people's beliefs. God and Satan may be pointless illusions to you but they are important in the lives of some. All religions have their place, even if it is just a moral code for people to live by.

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 05:20 PM

I am also not religious at all, but I don't believe in slamming other people's beliefs. God and Satan may be pointless illusions to you but they are important in the lives of some. All religions have their place, even if it is just a moral code for people to live by.

I have no problems with other peoples beliefs - as long as they don't preach it to me, as dodo has been doing to everyone throughout this thread.

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 05:21 PM

Nick333

21-12-2006, 05:29 PM

The .45 magnum was really not a joke, but then came the answer to me, you will pray "god dear god please don't let him do it!" PRAYER is the answer.

god softened his heart and he did not pull the trigger but you cried out to god.

the israelites was in slavery and god heard their cries for freedom, their prayers, and the way out was to harden Pharaos heart, interaction with his people but certainly not on his own!

You are seriously twisted. So you put someone in a hypothetical scenario where they are completely powerless and gloat because in their terror their minds grasps for anything that might help. Calling on the tooth fairy in that situation wouldn't prove that she exists.

Sorry dodo, many, many children have died violent deaths despite the fervent faith and prayer of their parents. God did **** all to save them.

The problem with your ****ty little scenario is that it is completely imaginary and proves absolutely nothing.

PostmanPot

21-12-2006, 05:31 PM

why hasn't god heard the cries of desperate starving africans? he must have selective hearing.

Neo

21-12-2006, 05:31 PM

I have no problems with other peoples beliefs - as long as they don't preach it to me, as dodo has been doing to everyone throughout this thread.

Agree.

There should be freedom OF religion BUT there should also be be freedom FROM religion.

Highflyer_GP

21-12-2006, 05:33 PM

why hasn't god heard the cries of desperate starving africans? he must have selective hearing.
Don't you know already - it's not God but Satan that's making them suffer :/

PostmanPot

21-12-2006, 06:03 PM

what did they do :(

Edwe

21-12-2006, 07:55 PM

why hasn't god heard the cries of desperate starving africans? he must have selective hearing.

what did they do :(

Since "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23), there is no such thing as no such thing as an innocent person suffering.

That being said, it is difficult for many Christians to understand why God allows such suffering in the world and it is an handy bit of criticism for atheists who wish to ridicule Christians.

Personally, I believe that, having been created by God in order to serve him, we are not meant to question His motives, nor do we have the mental capacity to grasp His working.

Also remember that Jesus Christ, the most innocent man to have walked the earth, suffered more than anyone who has ever lived.

This question reminds me of a story:

A very wealthy businessman once went on an tour to South America. He was apalled to see the conditions some of the people in the poorer countries had to endure. He was furious to think that God allowed such hell on earth.

On returning to his homeland, he asked the pastor of his local church to explain to him why God doesn't do anything to help these people.

"WHY DOESN'T HE SEND THEM ANY HELP?" he exclaimed, to which the pastor replied, "God did send help: he sent you, but you failed act."

It is important for us to realise that God created us in His image so that we may rule over the earth. We are His ambassadors on earth and it up to us to make a difference. God did send someone to help - you just need to realise that that someone is YOU. :)

PostmanPot

21-12-2006, 08:27 PM

are you an eveangelist too?

Mr TB

21-12-2006, 09:50 PM

why hasn't god heard the cries of desperate starving africans? he must have selective hearing.

yes sir your question may be valid but:

did they indeed pray to the living or their dead idols that can not help them?

Uganda for example had a hiv rate of 19%, without going into too much detail , the country once ruled by Idi Amin voted for a constitution based on placing the living god in control.

the hiv rate dropped from 19% to 6%, the only country in the world where a reversal concerning this was achieved...

Reader digest... and i do believe you find the same with a little lazy surfing...

cry out to the living god not the god of your choice and obey him...

Edwe

21-12-2006, 10:21 PM

are you an eveangelist too? Who, me? Not intentionally, but it's kind of difficult for me to keep quiet about it ;)

Claymore

22-12-2006, 09:42 AM

Uganda for example had a hiv rate of 19%, without going into too much detail , the country once ruled by Idi Amin voted for a constitution based on placing the living god in control.

Mwahahaha! I suppose the drop in AIDS in Uganda has nothing to do with a very sucessful government education program (starting in 1986), and one of the first antiretroviral drug campaigns in Africa?

Educate yourself!
http://www.avert.org/aidsuganda.htm

While you're at it, read about how America's faith-based programs are actually causing problems there, because they are against condom usage. Uganda's success has been *despite* religion, not *because* of it.

Debbie

22-12-2006, 09:58 AM

yes sir your question may be valid but:

did they indeed pray to the living or their dead idols that can not help them?

Uganda for example had a hiv rate of 19%, without going into too much detail , the country once ruled by Idi Amin voted for a constitution based on placing the living god in control.

the hiv rate dropped from 19% to 6%, the only country in the world where a reversal concerning this was achieved...

Reader digest... and i do believe you find the same with a little lazy surfing...

cry out to the living god not the god of your choice and obey him...

This is misinformation. Reader digest? Do you mean Reader's Digest? Hardly an academic source of information.

The 'success' of Uganda HIV prevention programmes is attributed to SEX EDUCATION, STD EDUCATION, PROMOTION OF SAFE SEX instead of abstinence, and CONDOM DISTRIBUTION.

The church opposes all of the above.

Don't tell me 'religion' turned the situation around in Uganda.

http://www.who.int/inf-new/aids2.htm

Please do not perpetuate lies and misinformation about this horrific disease.

edit- seems Claymore beat me to it!

Debbie

22-12-2006, 10:06 AM

Does the Catholic church still promote the spread of HIV/Aids through their 'condoms are ungodly' stance? Or have they grown up yet and decided that human life is more important?

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 10:13 AM

nthdimension

22-12-2006, 10:15 AM

Personally, I believe that, having been created by God in order to serve him, we are not meant to question His motives, nor do we have the mental capacity to grasp His working.
Doesn't really surprise me that God was in favour of slavery. But it is time for us to free ourselves from this bondage.

Also remember that Jesus Christ, the most innocent man to have walked the earth, suffered more than anyone who has ever lived.
Oh please, that's just nonsense.

It is important for us to realise that God created us in His image so that we may rule over the earth. We are His ambassadors on earth and it up to us to make a difference. God did send someone to help - you just need to realise that that someone is YOU. :)
Sounds a bit pathetic. Can't manage the job on his own.

you will pray "god dear god please don't let him do it!"
Well that would be a waste of time.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 10:19 AM

Doesn't really surprise me that God was in favour of slavery. But it is time for us to free ourselves from this bondage.

Because that's what Edwe said... "God loves slavery!". Wait no... he didn't.

Oh please, that's just nonsense.
Well if you accept for the sake of argument that ***** was the son of God then being killed and removed from God would pretty much be the worst thing possible ever. Of course from an Atheist perspective you wouldn't say so but that's understandable.

Sounds a bit pathetic. Can't manage the job on his own.
How does "it up to us to make a difference" "God did send someone to help" sound pathetic? Helping people and making a difference in the world is pathetic? Boy you must be loads of fun...

Debbie

22-12-2006, 10:26 AM

I believe Benedict is actually looking at allowing condom use as a way of preventing AIDS. To be fair, the Catholics haven't really said "Go out and get AIDS" but rather have been asking for Abstinence and fidelity. Which are kinda the most effective ways of preventing AIDS.

Antithesis, promotion of abstinence in order to reduce HIV/Aids is a bit like the govt saying 'to reduce road deaths, don't travel on the road', don't you think?

It's unrealistic.

And in the meantime, while benedict sits in his ivory tower and contemplates what he thinks the bible means, people die.

Ungodly, unholy, unchristian.

The average christian wouldn't even know it if J3sus Chr1st himself were sitting in his living room.

PostmanPot

22-12-2006, 10:34 AM

totally unrealistic.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 10:40 AM

Debbie

22-12-2006, 10:57 AM

Hey I didn't say it was realistic :)

It's an unrealistic goal unfortunately because well... people have sex. It's a given in today's world. In an ideal world people would probably be responsible and not sleep around.

You do have to admit that abstinence (if realistic) would be the most effective way to prevent getting HIV/AIDS.

Fortunately, I do disagree with the Vatican on quite a few things and condom use is one of them. I know they view it as a weakening of their stance and a possible advocacy for pre-marital sex.

Sadly that's probably true...

Absolutely, I 100% agree that abstinence is the best 'method' to prevent Aids, just like I agree that not travelling by road is the best 'method' to prevent road deaths, and not breathing is the best method to prevent lung infections, and not sleeping is the best method to prevent nightmares, etc etc etc :)

//you know what they say, 'God's followers give him a bad name' or 'i would be christian were it not for the christians' etc.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 10:59 AM

I prefer "Religion has ruined Christianity" :p

Edwe

22-12-2006, 11:26 AM

Absolutely, I 100% agree that abstinence is the best 'method' to prevent Aids, just like I agree that not travelling by road is the best 'method' to prevent road deaths, and not breathing is the best method to prevent lung infections, and not sleeping is the best method to prevent nightmares, etc etc etc :)

So you're saying that you need to have sex to be able to live? No wonder we have so many cases of AIDS in our country. :rolleyes:

Thanks to AntiThesis for defending my previous post. nthdimension, please try reading the Bible so you can at least post informed views instead of making unsubstatiated, false claims about God.

VernD

22-12-2006, 11:35 AM

Even in the Garden of Eden man refused to take responsibility. Adam blamed God, Eve blamed the snake(satan) and they all got punished. The result is a broken world...

Adam blamed Eve; Eve blamed the snake, but the snake didn't have a leg to stand on. :rolleyes:

Dastrix

22-12-2006, 11:43 AM

So you're saying that you need to have sex to be able to live? No wonder we have so many cases of AIDS in our country. :rolleyes:

Yeah and all those ungrateful sinners using the road and causing road deaths, because you know you don't need to use the road to live either. :rolleyes:

The issue I have with this is that in most religions sex has become taboo, which is absolute bollocks.

Debbie

22-12-2006, 11:58 AM

So you're saying that you need to have sex to be able to live? No wonder we have so many cases of AIDS in our country. :rolleyes:

Yes, the overwhelming majority of people do need to have sex. It is a normal part of being human. It is nothing unusual. It is nothing dirty. It is nothing to be ashamed about. But the 'right' to have sex, like all 'rights', comes with attached responsibilities...in this case, to practice sex safely.

Sex, by the way, results in life. So yes, life as we know it is kinda dependent on sex. Amazing how organised religion can take the most beautiful thing and make it nasty. Makes me sick.

I like what my old professor used to say about sex- "having sex is like having a glass of water. It's just something you need to do every day."

Thanks to AntiThesis for defending my previous post. nthdimension, please try reading the Bible so you can at least post informed views instead of making unsubstatiated, false claims about God.

nthdimension, your claims about god are obviously false because you are not a christian. You have to be a christian to be allowed to say stuff about god, you know. You're not allowed to make ANY claims about God, and if you do, then obviously everything you say is false. Why? Because christians know god better than you! Christians, alone and exclusively, have access to knowledge about god and what god wants, not you. You are not allowed to talk about god or postulate the meaning of life because that's, gulp, BLASPHEMY! Careful, christians/muslims/jews/mormons/flying spagetti monster worshippers could have you censored for attacking and offending them with your ideas about god.

So best you shut your mouth, nthdimension. Just shut up already and accept that what WE say about god is the truth....because we're christians, we're so special, god loves us, in fact he loves us more than he loves you, and just you watch, he will reward us. As for you, well you're clearly going to hell for eternity! Our god is a loving god!

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 12:07 PM

nthdimension, your claims about god are obviously false because you are not a christian. You have to be a christian to be allowed to say stuff about god, you know. You're not allowed to make ANY claims about God, and if you do, then obviously everything you say is false. Why? Because christians know god better than you! Christians, alone and exclusively, have access to knowledge about god and what god wants, not you. You are not allowed to talk about god or postulate the meaning of life because that's, gulp, BLASPHEMY! Careful, christians/muslims/jews/mormons/flying spagetti monster worshippers could have you censored for attacking and offending them with your ideas about god.

So best you shut your mouth, nthdimension. Just shut up already and accept that what WE say about god is the truth....because we're christians, we're so special, god loves us, in fact he loves us more than he loves you, and just you watch, he will reward us. As for you, well you're clearly going to hell for eternity! Our god is a loving god!

O_o

Far as I'm concerned you can say what you like... that's between you and God/the Universe/anything you believe in. There's no way for me to prove that the God that I pray to exhibits certain properties and there's no real way to prove that He/She/It doesn't. So who am I to judge what you think?

nthdimension

22-12-2006, 12:15 PM

Because that's what Edwe said... "God loves slavery!"

having been created by God in order to serve him, we are not meant to question His motives
We are meant as God's slaves

Therefore not surprising that God supports slavery in general.

was the son of God then being killed and removed from God would pretty much be the worst thing possible ever. Of course from an Atheist perspective you wouldn't say so but that's understandable.
God's not omnipresent? Even if he was 'removed' from his dad it was relative to his lifespan an instant.

His son, being an immortal, was not killed. A body he inhabited was killed. Happens to lots of people so he was not unique. Even within the Judeo-Christian mythology he cannot be said to have suffered more than anyone else.

How does "it up to us to make a difference" "God did send someone to help" sound pathetic? Helping people and making a difference in the world is pathetic? Boy you must be loads of fun...
God is so weak, that he cannot manage to achieve anything without using us. Sounds very pathetic for an allegedly all-powerful leader. Perhaps his abilities have been a bit overstated?

nthdimension

22-12-2006, 12:21 PM

nthdimension, your claims about god are obviously false because you are not a christian. You have to be a christian to be allowed to say stuff about god, you know. You're not allowed to make ANY claims about God, and if you do, then obviously everything you say is false. Why? Because christians know god better than you! Christians, alone and exclusively, have access to knowledge about god and what god wants, not you. You are not allowed to talk about god or postulate the meaning of life because that's, gulp, BLASPHEMY! Careful, christians/muslims/jews/mormons/flying spagetti monster worshippers could have you censored for attacking and offending them with your ideas about god.

So best you shut your mouth, nthdimension. Just shut up already and accept that what WE say about god is the truth....because we're christians, we're so special, god loves us, in fact he loves us more than he loves you, and just you watch, he will reward us. As for you, well you're clearly going to hell for eternity! Our god is a loving god!
Or so you think. You cannot ever know the truth about a being like a god. You can never know whether it is lying to you. For all you know hell could be the greatest place ever and heaven a place of eternal pain and bondage. You can pretend otherwise, but you don't know this is the truth.

nthdimension

22-12-2006, 12:23 PM

please try reading the Bible so you can at least post informed views instead of making unsubstatiated, false claims about God.
I am a reformed Christian so I know all about the claims made by the Christian god. God was very clear in supporting slavery.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 12:36 PM

We are meant as God's slaves

Therefore not surprising that God supports slavery in general.

"To serve" carries a different meaning... I don't work in the fields all day long to give God something. I also have freedom of choice. If I want to stop being a Christian, all I have to do is stop. Not so much with slaves.

God's not omnipresent? Even if he was 'removed' from his dad it was relative to his lifespan an instant.

His son, being an immortal, was not killed. A body he inhabited was killed. Happens to lots of people so he was not unique. Even within the Judeo-Christian mythology he cannot be said to have suffered more than anyone else.

Believe what you will, it is up to you after all.

God is so weak, that he cannot manage to achieve anything without using us. Sounds very pathetic for an allegedly all-powerful leader. Perhaps his abilities have been a bit overstated?

Nowhere has it ever been stated that God needs us to make a difference... just that God wants us to make a difference. I don't see how encouraging people to be good to each other and be happy makes God weak. Perhaps you need to be more bitter than I am to think this.

God was very clear in supporting slavery.

"He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:16)

Yeah that's definitely in favour of slavery.

You say you are a reformed Christian? Out of interest, what happened to change you? And don't spout random crap about "I stopped being delusional."

What real-world event or sudden change caused you to stop believing?

ghoti

22-12-2006, 12:43 PM

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 12:51 PM

I'd be interested to but I only get the regular channels :( No DSTV for me.

ghoti

22-12-2006, 12:57 PM

I'd be interested to but I only get the regular channels :( No DSTV for me.

Theres very very very interesting information in it. Right now they are explaining how only four of the gospels got into the bible. One bishop decided that because there are only four directions, NSWE, and that there are only "four corners of the earth", so therefore there should be only four gospels.

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 01:01 PM

Or so you think. You cannot ever know the truth about a being like a god. You can never know whether it is lying to you. For all you know hell could be the greatest place ever and heaven a place of eternal pain and bondage. You can pretend otherwise, but you don't know this is the truth.
I think Debbie was being sarcastic there ;) Don't take it seriously

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 01:05 PM

There is a documentry on the Gospel of Judas right now. I love how more and more information is coming out.

Firstly there are 30+ gospels, not just 4. Wow the information is interesting.

Antithesis, if you can watch this now, or the later rerun later. Please do.

Sir i do not know why you still take a crack a j esus, you have already prove to us that since he died on the cross for our sins moral standards improved, my argument being that it is on the verge of taking a turn for the worse...

Sir will you also put dates on the copies of that gospels, including the four in the bible, this will show why you are misleading the people in the forum...

Debbie

22-12-2006, 01:09 PM

O_o

Far as I'm concerned you can say what you like... that's between you and God/the Universe/anything you believe in. There's no way for me to prove that the God that I pray to exhibits certain properties and there's no real way to prove that He/She/It doesn't. So who am I to judge what you think?

AntiThesis, if only all christians adopted this view. Sadly your view is representative of only a small percentage of the people who call themselves christians.

(btw, hope you know I was simply sending up religious dogma!)

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 01:13 PM

Sir i do not know why you still take a crack a j esus, you have already prove to us that since he died on the cross for our sins moral standards improved, my argument being that it is on the verge of taking a turn for the worse...

Sir will you also put dates on the copies of that gospels, including the four in the bible, this will show why you are misleading the people in the forum...
Absolutely amazing. Whenever new evidence comes out, (most) Christians will immediately dismiss it without giving a second thought. You know, you should be grateful if the whole thing is proved to be a sham - you can free yourself from being compelled to suck up to a power-hungry, deranged psychopath just to gain entry into heaven. You can save 10% of your salary while you're at it ;)

Debbie

22-12-2006, 01:22 PM

What real-world event or sudden change caused you to stop believing?

When I opened my eyes and saw for the first time that the dominant way christianity is practiced is based on fear, money, political power, spiritual abuse, and a stubborn unwillingness to accept the full meaning of unconditional love in its entirety.

Debbie

22-12-2006, 01:32 PM

Sir i do not know why you still take a crack a j esus, you have already prove to us that since he died on the cross for our sins moral standards improved, my argument being that it is on the verge of taking a turn for the worse...

Sir will you also put dates on the copies of that gospels, including the four in the bible, this will show why you are misleading the people in the forum...

It seems that the Gospel of Thomas was written CLOSER TO THE TIME OF J3SUS THAN MATTHEW MARK LUKE or JOHN.

But hey, let's all go on what Constantine wanted in the bible and ignore everything else.

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 02:22 PM

It seems that the Gospel of Thomas was written CLOSER TO THE TIME OF J3SUS THAN MATTHEW MARK LUKE or JOHN.

But hey, let's all go on what Constantine wanted in the bible and ignore everything else.

The suggestion i assume is that you believe what one man wrote is right and the oher 4 gospel writers wrong, fine that is your viewpoint i can certainlly not change that...

Well.. well.. yes what will i say to you? Did you like the boy J3sus killed and make alive again or the pigeons of clay that fllew away. Which did you like best..

so.. if we look at dates you not allowed to discard obvious noncence you must accept it... Is that how they study archeology ?

Neo

22-12-2006, 02:27 PM

It seems that the Gospel of Thomas was written CLOSER TO THE TIME OF J3SUS THAN MATTHEW MARK LUKE or JOHN.

But hey, let's all go on what Constantine wanted in the bible and ignore everything else.

One thing we do know is that none of the gospels, in the bible, were written in J esus's time, with John probably the closest at around 40AD (at the best). The others are most likely copies of John.

Most of what is written about J esus (in the gospels) was written by people who never even knew him. Reality is there is no historical evidence of any of these events, outside the gospels themselves.

I've read the Gospel of Thomas and the Dead Sea scrolls but have not yet read the Gospel of Judas (not sure if it is out?)

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 03:04 PM

One thing we do know is that none of the gospels, in the bible, were written in J esus's time, with John probably the closest at around 40AD (at the best). The others are most likely copies of John.

Most of what is written about J esus (in the gospels) was written by people who never even knew him. Reality is there is no historical evidence of any of these events, outside the gospels themselves.

I've read the Gospel of Thomas and the Dead Sea scrolls but have not yet read the Gospel of Judas (not sure if it is out?)

Really? gee... it seems that you know everything ... especially when comes to foolishness...

You are narrow-minded , how can you accept evidence of say millions and and millions a year ago if you refuse to accept evidence of 2000 yrs ago..

It bugs me...

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 03:30 PM

Really? gee... it seems that you know everything ... especially when comes to foolishness...

You are narrow-minded , how can you accept evidence of say millions and and millions a year ago if you refuse to accept evidence of 2000 yrs ago..

It bugs me...
You're getting the story confused with artifacts. The bible is a story written by man. Stone tablets etc. are artifacts. You cannot say that a story counts as evidence - that sounds absolutely absurd. But hey if you can find Noah's Ark that would be an artifact too, and would help silence many critics. So where is it?

Claymore

22-12-2006, 03:31 PM

You are narrow-minded , how can you accept evidence of say millions and and millions a year ago if you refuse to accept evidence of 2000 yrs ago..

It bugs me...

Eh? It seemed to me he was perfectly happy with the evidence of the Gospels being written long after *****. As for fossils - we have millions of fossils that the can handle yourself - heck, you can buy fossils 300 million years old at flea markets. By contrast, I don't think we have any original copies of any of the Gospels.

Claymore

22-12-2006, 03:34 PM

So best you shut your mouth, nthdimension. Just shut up already and accept that what WE say about god is the truth....because we're christians, we're so special, god loves us, in fact he loves us more than he loves you, and just you watch, he will reward us. As for you, well you're clearly going to hell for eternity! Our god is a loving god!

Brilliant! I almost choked! :)

Claymore

22-12-2006, 03:37 PM

"He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:16)

Yeah that's definitely in favour of slavery.

Does God approve of slavery? (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/interp/slavery.html)

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 03:41 PM

"He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:16)

Yeah that's definitely in favour of slavery.

Actually if you read that passage again you'll see that it's against kidnapping, not slavery ;)

"whether he sells him or he is found in his possession" implies that it was fine to sell or own a man as long as he wasn't kidnapped.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 06:11 PM

Since we appear to be doing the link thing only:

Does God approve of slavery? (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/slavery_bible.html)

"whether he sells him or he is found in his possession" implies that it was fine to sell or own a man as long as he wasn't kidnapped.

And how would you suggest slaves were normally got?
"Excuse me sir. Please come with me and serve me forever for no pay. There's a good lad."

Bah.

Unfortunately many people did use the bible and religion as a means to promote slavery. This to me speaks more about the assholishness of people than any deficiency of God. I make no excuses for Christians, they've been responsible for many, many bad things and many atrocities. Doesn't mean I am responsible for any of them or that I should renounce my chosen faith because of it.

Edwe

22-12-2006, 06:12 PM

nthdimension, your claims about god are obviously false because you are not a christian.

Interesting thought… care to explain how that follows from my post? I said people who have not read the Bible should not make claims about God or Christianity, which I believe is a fair statement. I’m not saying you have to be a Christian, but rather that you have to know something about the Christian faith before making ignorant statements like “God supports slavery”. Read this: http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

You have to be a christian to be allowed to say stuff about god, you know. You're not allowed to make ANY claims about God, and if you do, then obviously everything you say is false.

That attack by you was directed at this post from me, which you quoted:

please try reading the Bible so you can at least post informed views instead of making unsubstantiated, false claims about God.

Please justify your sarcasm. The fact that I labeled nthdimensions claim about God as false, does not mean I think that informed opinions of non-Christians are necessarily false.

Why? Because christians know god better than you!

Yes we do. Obviously. Just like architects know more about structural design than you.

Christians, alone and exclusively, have access to knowledge about god and what god wants, not you. You are not allowed to talk about god or postulate the meaning of life because that's, gulp, BLASPHEMY! Careful, christians/muslims/jews/mormons/flying spagetti monster worshippers could have you censored for attacking and offending them with your ideas about god.

Nobody is stopping non-Christians from voicing your opinion or denying you any of the limited knowledge we have of God, who is unknowable. Christianity is not exclusive in any way. You’re just excluding it from your life. Your loss.

So best you shut your mouth, nthdimension. Just shut up already and accept that what WE say about god is the truth....because we're christians, we're so special, god loves us, in fact he loves us more than he loves you, and just you watch, he will reward us. As for you, well you're clearly going to hell for eternity! Our god is a loving god!

No, you shut up – nobody likes sarcasm. We are all special, God does love us and God loves you too, since he created you. It is you who are rejecting His love and mocking Him and His followers. Debbie2, I’m not denying you your right to voice your opinion, but I found that post very insulting and inconsiderate and I used to consider you a reasonable person :(

Edwe

22-12-2006, 06:21 PM

When I opened my eyes and saw for the first time that the dominant way christianity is practiced is based on fear, money, political power, spiritual abuse, and a stubborn unwillingness to accept the full meaning of unconditional love in its entirety.

I can't disagree there. You don't have to follow this mainstream abuse of Christianity and God, however. You don't even have to go to church to be a Christian. I feel that as long as I accept God, his unconditional love and do my best to live according to his Scripture, I can call myself a Christian. I am no longer going to my church, since I feel the focus on God has been lost.

Unfortunately many people did use the bible and religion as a means to promote slavery. This to me speaks more about the assholishness of people than any deficiency of God. I make no excuses for Christians, they've been responsible for many, many bad things and many atrocities. Doesn't mean I am responsible for any of them or that I should renounce my chosen faith because of it.

Exactly what I think.

PostmanPot

22-12-2006, 06:57 PM

No, you shut up – nobody likes sarcasm.

i appreciate good sarcasm and i loved Debbie's post :) it really ruffled up your feathers!

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 07:08 PM

I loved Debbie's post too. If you can't handle the sarcasm then you obviously don't see the irony.

Pastors regularly condemn non-Christians at churches, yet when it's the other way around then everybody has to become sensitive about the issue?

Yes we do. Obviously. Just like architects know more about structural design than you.

You forget that most non-religious people were once religious. They made a conscious decision not to follow it anymore, therefore this comment of yours is uncalled for really. It's like telling a retired architect that he knows less about architecture than a noob.

PS: civil engineers are concerned with structural design, not architects.

Nick333

22-12-2006, 07:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Debbie2
Why? Because christians know god better than you!
Yes we do. Obviously. Just like architects know more about structural design than you.

Honestly, once you make a statement like that you lose the right to claim to be openly debating a subject. It's almost impossible to debate with someone as closed minded as you are because you think you have the ultimate answer to everything.
The thing about god is that it is a concept. Not even two christians who go to the same church and who were brought up in the same home could claim to have the exact same concept of god. How could you possibly know that the idea of god in your head is the same as any other christians?

Never mind christianity though. Every religion has a different claim to knowledge of god. From a objective perspective who is to say which one has the more valid claim?

In this country every person has a right to think what ever they like about god (what ever it is). And in the contest of debate anyone has the right to express there idea of god.

You've repeatedly told others in this debate that only christians have reliable knowledge of god and that they don't even have the right to their oppinion and now you've gone and told someone to shut up about god.

If you want to dictate what people can or can't say about god go do it in your own church, you've got no right to lay down the law here.

You actually had a good debate up till recently, but you've over stepped the line and now you can shut the **** up.

Edwe

22-12-2006, 07:56 PM

I loved Debbie's post too. If you can't handle the sarcasm then you obviously don't see the irony.

I can see the irony. It is mocking God and Christians. I do not like it. I respect Debbie2’s opinion, but I find her tone offensive.

Pastors regularly condemn non-Christians at churches, yet when it's the other way around then everybody has to become sensitive about the issue?

Pastors usually aren't nearly as sarcastic or demeaning. None I've listened to are, at least.

You forget that most non-religious people were once religious. They made a conscious decision not to follow it anymore, therefore this comment of yours is uncalled for really. It's like telling a retired architect that he knows less about architecture than a noob.

No, it's not like that. For the third time I say

people who have not read the Bible should not make claims about God or Christianity

That does take ex-Christians into account, except those who slept through every church service they attended and those that never opened their Bible.

Honestly, once you make a statement like that you lose the right to claim to be openly debating a subject. It's almost impossible to debate with someone as closed minded as you are because you think you have the ultimate answer to everything.

Seriously now, are you debating the fact that someone who studies something may understand less of the subject than someone who doesn't and never has, because that is all I said? I said that people who have read the Bible know more about Christianity than those who haven't. As far as I am concerned that is a fact, not because of my religion or my opinion, but because common sense says so. If I am misguided, please point out the flaw in my reasoning.

You've repeatedly told others in this debate that only christians have reliable knowledge of god and that they don't even have the right to their oppinion and now you've gone and told someone to shut up about god.

Quote one instance where I did that. Just one. What I said was (for the fourth time now)

people who have not read the Bible should not make claims about God or Christianity

How can someone who has not studied the most important subject matter regarding this topic claim to know something about it? That is my point. I never said anything about Christianity being a requirement. That is an idea started by Debbie2, who totally distorted my one post. And I did not tell Debbie2 to shut up about God or Christianity – I told her to shut up the sarcasm because she ridiculed my post whereafter she mockingly told people to shut up about God and Christianity.

If you want to dictate what people can or can't say about god go do it in your own church, you've got no right to lay down the law here.

You actually had a good debate up till recently, but you've over stepped the line and now you can shut the **** up.

I believe that everyone is entitled to his own opinion, provided it is posted in a way that is not offensive and demeaning towards others. I was criticizing the other forumites for the tone of their post and not the content.

I’m not laying down any law. That person would be you. It’s you that’s drawing up a “line” that I’ve now apparently “stepped over” resulting in the penalty of “shutting the **** up”. If that’s not dictating and laying down law, I don’t know what is.

LoneGunman

22-12-2006, 07:59 PM

I just love the fact that - given that the Romans were wildly anal about keeping records for EVERYTHING - from census records onwards, there's absolutely NO mention in the historical records of any J3sus person AT THE TIME this J3sus person was apparently doing stuff. Nothing. Not a single solitary 'And oh by the way, there's this Carpenter causing problems in the Provinces.." mention. Nothing.
The so-called Gospels almost all appeared long after the event..

Like as if 500 years from now, people began writing about the mysterious 'Colonel Sanders' who walked upon the earth - with no verifiable records about him in any newspapers, writings, video, film.. Yet we're supposed to believe that this Colonel Sanders was a real person?

And the even more funny thing, is that every single aspect of the entire J3sus story, can be found in older and quite verifiable cultures - from the 'three wise men' story, to the 'son of G-d' stuff to the ''virgin birth' and onwards. All of it can be found from a few hundred years BC, back to a thousand or more, in a variety of other cultures myths and legends.

Yet not one whiney Roman scholar bothered to mention anything at the time, not even a single sentence - amidst all the writing and scribbling and record-keeping that the Romans were famous for. Three hundred years after the event, when Constantine began realising that this Cult was too popular and dangerous and needed to be co-opted into the mainstream and thus he (and Rome) became 'Chr1stian' - much scribbling began. Pity about the total absence of any genuine historical records AT THE TIME this J3sus fellah was supposed to be around.

Anyway, keep on arguing back n forth about this non-existent-in-contemporary-historical-records Person, who happens to be an amalgam of much older myths and legends.
*gets popcorn*

ghoti

22-12-2006, 08:04 PM

I can see the irony. It is mocking God and Christians. I do not like it.

I do not think she was mocking God.

Edwe

22-12-2006, 08:05 PM

The thing I am struggling to understand is that, when I post my opinion, other forumites are able to oppose and mock my views without interference, but when I do that, the whole forum turns against me.

In fact, everyone seems to condone the fact that I am being insulted for posting my views.

When I am ridiculed and insulted, it is a debate. When I oppose someone elses views, I am "closed minded" and am insulted again just for good measure.

Nick333

22-12-2006, 08:06 PM

people who have not read the Bible should not make claims about God or Christianity

Right there pal. You say it right there. So Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Athiests, Debbies and who ever else have no right to discuss god unless they've read the christian bible according to you.
By your same argument those who have not read the Koran or the bhagavad-gita have no right to discuss god.

Edwe

22-12-2006, 08:07 PM

I do not think she was mocking God.

You are right, she was mocking me and other Christians for what she thought I was saying. Not God as such.

Right there pal. You say it right there. So Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Athiests, Debbies and who ever else have no right to discuss god unless they've read the christian bible according to you.
By your same argument those who have not read the Koran or the bhagavad-gita have no right to discuss god.

Nice technicality you got there, Nick333. What I meant was God in the Christian sense. Sorry if I stated it in a way that was difficult to understand. I believe in God and know about God, but I do not claim to know anything about the other faiths you listed.

LoneGunman

22-12-2006, 08:07 PM

ps - as far as wasting energy or getting uptight at people who are supposedly 'mocking' G0d, get a grip folks -
if you're talking about a Supreme Being and Creator of Everything, I really think that He/She/It can fight its own battles :P

pps - the thing called 'the bible' is just one assembled chunk of old writings - and the Apocrypha, (as it tends to be called AKA 'Lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden') is another collection of writings from the same time period.
Who decided that one should be 'holy' and the other 'not'? Humans.
No 'word of G0d' anywhere in the decision.

So Chr1stians should really get a grip on reality and understand that they're arguing over man-made assembled writings, not the exact word of any supreme big Deity.

Nick333

22-12-2006, 08:08 PM

How can someone who has not studied the most important subject matter regarding this topic claim to know something about it?

Why the **** should we believe that your collection of fables is most important subject matter over anyone elses?

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 08:09 PM

Edwe if you read it properly you'd see that she wasn't mocking God, she was mocking the ignorant-type Christians.

I still don't see why we have to be so sensitive about the issue. Why is it ok for people to call Bush or Mugabe *******s, but you have to watch every word when it comes to religion due to people becoming easily offended if something is taken out of context. What's the difference between the two really? An opinion is still an opinion, and if one is overly sensitive to another's opinion then perhaps they not as open-minded as they think they are.

Nick333

22-12-2006, 08:10 PM

I’m not laying down any law. That person would be you. It’s you that’s drawing up a “line” that I’ve now apparently “stepped over” resulting in the penalty of “shutting the **** up”. If that’s not dictating and laying down law, I don’t know what is.

I'm reiterating the law that you don't get to tell people to shut up. If you do you get to shut up while the grownups carry on having a reasonably mature debate.

LoneGunman

22-12-2006, 08:13 PM

"Why is it ok for people to call Bush or Mugabe *******s, but you have to watch every word when it comes to religion due to people becoming easily offended if something is taken out of context. What's the difference between the two really?"

Because children arent brainwashed from birth to believe in the supernatural powers of Bush or Mugabe, and society hasnt built special ghost-amplifiers (aka 'churches') to talk to these Big Ghosts which the kids are schlepped to every sunday.

Its awesome what mind control and socially accepted brainwashing can do to logical reasoning, when you catch children young enough and bombard them with aburdity that society reinforces as 'acceptable'.
:P

Nick333

22-12-2006, 08:14 PM

LoneGunman

22-12-2006, 08:17 PM

yeah but religion inherently causes fascist prickdom in its followers - go speak to the tens of thousands of women who got burned and tortured during the witch crazes of the 1300's. Once you have a big imaginary ghost in your mind and on your side, you can do a whole lot of very very sick and evil things, without worrying too much about it.
The J3sus fella and that imaginary G0d guy said 'thou shalt not kill' - and 'love one another' - then look at world leaders launching wars. Bush in church, while being responsible for close on a million deaths thus far in the 'war on terror'. Hitler and the Nazi's were also quite devout Chr1stians. (Gott Mitt Ons 'Gods with Us' on the knife handles of umm the SS I think it was. )Welcome to the schizophrenia of 'religion'.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 08:19 PM

Let's all just calm down :)

No need for harsh words n all. I was hoping this debate would carry on being just that... a debate.

Edwe

22-12-2006, 08:25 PM

Edwe if you read it properly you'd see that she wasn't mocking God, she was mocking the ignorant-type Christians.

Yes, I conceded that two posts above yours. ;)

now you can shut the **** up

Why the **** should we believe that your collection of fables is most important subject matter over anyone elses?

Don't be a silly little, fascist, prick is what I'm saying.

If you do you get to shut up while the grownups carry on having a reasonably mature debate.

Yes, I can see you are being very mature. Now, Nick333, I'm trying to have a civilised debate, but your personal insults and profuse profanity are making things difficult for me.

Feel free to post your opinion and debate mine, but if you don't stop blatantly insulting me and swearing at me, I will not reply to your posts but rather report you to one of the moderators if they have not picked up on this already.

Nick333

22-12-2006, 08:36 PM

Nice technicality you got there, Nick333. What I meant was God in the Christian sense. Sorry if I stated it in a way that was difficult to understand. I believe in God and know about God, but I do not claim to know anything about the other faiths you listed.

I got a nice technicality and I had difficulty understanding you? Which is it? Or is it one of those self contradictory pieces of non-sense you're so fond of?

If you are going to talk about the christian god, say "the christian god" your usage of the term in an unqualified manner betrays your predjudice and believ that christians have the monopoly on god.
Second of all most of us here have had christianity crammed down our throats since birth and those of us who are at least thirty or so had it at school to, so as far as I'm concerned wwe have every right to discuss the christian bible and the christian god anyway we see fit, even if we have'nt read every single self-contradictory word in it. And lets face it even if wee had (actually I have. Did I mention I thought it was ****?) you'd just accuse us of not reading it with the right understanding or some such blather. BTW I'm allowed to call an ugly building ugly even though I'm not an architect.

Thirdly you still don't get to tell people to shut up.

Oh and I love sarcasm. Its the highest form of humour. Debbies example was quite brilliant, in fact it was actually satire, pretty good satire at that. You've actually only made it funnier.

Nick333

22-12-2006, 08:39 PM

Yes, I can see you are being very mature. Now, Nick333, I'm trying to have a civilised debate, but your personal insults and profuse profanity are making things difficult for me.

Feel free to post your opinion and debate mine, but if you don't stop blatantly insulting me and swearing at me, I will not reply to your posts but rather report you to one of the moderators if they have not picked up on this already.

You told debbie to shut up so feel free, they can ban us both.

Find me a direct insult directed towards you.

You're overly sensitive for any sort of debate I think.

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 08:45 PM

I will not reply to your posts but rather report you to one of the moderators if they have not picked up on this already.
Well there's no need to be a baby about it and report anything, if you find something offensive then state why you find it so and come to a constructive conclusion. You never know maybe it wasn't intended to be insulting at all.

By reporting something without attempting to find a middle-ground in a constructive manner, you're going to kill the debate for everybody else participating because the thread will inevitably be closed. Think about it, don't be selfish :)

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 09:15 PM

Everyone just needs to calm down :)

Atheists can talk to Christians without insulting them or their faith while still debating normally.

Christians can talk to Atheists without insulting them or their opinions/beliefs while still debating normally.

You're all rational, intelligent people. Don't be vol *** with each other. Of all the things about a person that could be objectionable, belief is riiiight down at the bottom for me.

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 09:18 PM

Precisely :) There's no need to be overly sensitive as long as you stick to the topic.

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 09:20 PM

Look, some of Nick's comments were if not offsides then approaching it very closely. But all around could have been handled better.

So can we move along?

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 09:22 PM

Gee?!... what happened in the forum while i was away, it seems that you really had a nice fist fight here... who's bleeding the most... if any of you incurred some mental damage,... let's follow Charles Darwin in his book "Descent of man". Based on natural selection you are worthless to mankind, so let's just eliminate you the strongest must survive...

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 09:32 PM

Precisely :) There's no need to be overly sensitive as long as you stick to the topic.

welcome, good to see you, you mentioned force, magnetic force if i remember correctly in our previous chat and force is that not related to distance?

Magnetic force determines north and south, and without magnetic force the earth does not exist...

AntiThesis

22-12-2006, 09:33 PM

douwdouw... we're just about getting back to some sort of normalcy in this discussion. Please don't poke at people.

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 09:37 PM

welcome, good to see you, you mentioned force, magnetic force if i remember correctly in our previous chat and force is that not related to distance?

Magnetic force determines north and south, and without magnetic force the earth does not exist...
No I mentioned magnetic fields. Big difference ;)

Debbie

22-12-2006, 09:40 PM

Edwe

22-12-2006, 09:51 PM

Well there's no need to be a baby about it and report anything, if you find something offensive then state why you find it so and come to a constructive conclusion. You never know maybe it wasn't intended to be insulting at all.

By reporting something without attempting to find a middle-ground in a constructive manner, you're going to kill the debate for everybody else participating because the thread will inevitably be closed. Think about it, don't be selfish :)

Okay, lets discuss it. I find the following offensive:

now you can shut the **** up

Why the **** should we believe that your collection of fables is most important subject matter over anyone elses?

Don't be a silly little, fascist, prick is what I'm saying.

If you do you get to shut up while the grownups carry on having a reasonably mature debate.

The logic behind my reasoning is that I do not like personal insults and profanity to be thrown around in a debate, unless it has relevance to the discussion. I believe it contributes negatively towards the discussion and demeans people, rather than making a relevant point.

I apoligise for assuming that the term "silly little, fascist, prick" is, in fact an insult, and I may have merely misunderstood it in context.

I also concede the words asterisked out may have been done so incorrectly by the vbulletin engine. I automatically assumed they were profanity and I apologise profusely for my prejudice and I would appreciate it if Nick333 were to paraphrase what was asterisked out, so that I may understand what was meant.

I also apologise for being "immature" and offending Nick333, as he is, in all probability, a totally reasonable person. He was, most probably, correct in telling me to "shut the **** up".

I would appreciate it if everyone who feels offended by my posts would let me know so I can make amends.

Apologetically,

The "immature, silly little, fascist, prick"

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 09:52 PM

No I mentioned magnetic fields. Big difference ;)

no sir you said magnetic pole, so their is a definite magnet pole north and a definite magnetic pole south. you should therefor be able to determine the distance between the two poles:rolleyes:

Edwe

22-12-2006, 09:53 PM

Additionally I would genuinely like to apologise to Debbie2 for my response to her satirical post. I overreacted, since I was really angry at Nick333 (possibly incorrectly, I might add). It was funny, I was just unable to appreciate it under the circumstances.

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 10:01 PM

no sir you said magnetic pole, so their is a definite magnet pole north and a definite magnetic pole south. you should therefor be able to determine the distance between the two poles:rolleyes:
Ok so first I said magnetic force and now I said magnetic pole? douwdouw please substantiate your arguments next time. I believe this is the post that you're referring to:

The earths magnetic field is three dimensional. At the south pole they move in the direction away from the ground and at the north pole they move in the direction into the ground.

Therefore it doesn't point in any particular direction. If you were at the north pole, the compass would point towards your feet if it could. If you were at the south pole it would point towards the sky if it could. Actually this would happen if you were at magnetic north or magnetic south.

Where about did I say anything even closely related to magnetic force? :confused:

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:03 PM

Yo Edwe, I was using satire there, bouncing off one of your posts. I was sending up christianity for contradictions. I wasn't commenting on you personally, and I am sorry if that's the impression I gave...I can see how people might think that, thought that is not what I intended.

Edwe I do not think that I mock God, I think it is organised religion which mocks God.

I do not consider myself to be an atheist.

Although you gave me brushing off, you see yourself as religious, so you i then believe you pray....so look at the following if you wish

In "OUR FATHER" we pray let your will be done on earth as it is in heaven...

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:07 PM

If you read carefully through this passage, where will you find heaven?

I think you picked it- HEAVEN is where god's will is done-correct...?

Debbie

22-12-2006, 10:08 PM

Debbie

22-12-2006, 10:13 PM

If you read carefully through this passage, where will you find heaven?

I think you picked it- HEAVEN is where god's will is done-correct...?

Errr.....where's this going? :confused:

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:15 PM

Claymore

22-12-2006, 10:21 PM

no sir you said magnetic pole, so their is a definite magnet pole north and a definite magnetic pole south. you should therefor be able to determine the distance between the two poles:rolleyes:

Nope. The magnetic field lines go through earth. What you're thinking of are where the field lines and the earth's surface intersect. This is relatively arbitrary.

bwana

22-12-2006, 10:27 PM

Please, feel free to have a go at each others idea's but lets refrain from any more personal attacks.

You all know the cliché about playing the ball so I wont bother completing it.

:)

Debbie

22-12-2006, 10:28 PM

Lastly then- is it possible for HEAVEN-or then god's kingdom to exist on this planet?

YES! Every healing service every praise and worship service there the kingdom of light exist in the centre of the kingdom of darkness. This 2 kingdoms exist together on this earth but the light will overcome the darkness.

I can't really disagree with what you say here. I think we might argue over what we consider to be 'the light' and 'the dark' though.

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:28 PM

Ok so first I said magnetic force and now I said magnetic pole? douwdouw please substantiate your arguments next time. I believe this is the post that you're referring to:

Where about did I say anything even closely related to magnetic force? :confused:

don't worry you indeed never used the field as cleverly stated...so you could in anycase not remember and as the earth is ball shaped and you draw a straight line, it is pointing skywards in anycase...

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:35 PM

I can't really disagree with what you say here. I think we might argue over what we consider to be 'the light' and 'the dark' though.

yes we can simply argue about that day and night but in honesty and i believe EDWE will agree.

It is not his or mine decision to tell you what is right or wrong... as christians our task is to introduce you to j esus the son of god.

It is your choice to accept him as savior and, more we can not do...

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:45 PM

We are all born sinners, when you accept j esus as savior you are born again, now you are a child of god-not a sinner anymore. your spiritman comes alive and that's the battle inside you. You are a new creation but the old creation still exist. The old and the new is in a battle...

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 10:49 PM

We are all born sinners, when you accept j esus as savior you are born again, now you are a child of god-not a sinner anymore.
No we are all born Atheists, you were indoctrinated with Jesus and company from childhood. If you were born into a Muslim home, you would have been indoctrinated with Allah and company from childhood. Likewise with children born into the homes of every other religion.

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:50 PM

The new creation must be fed via prayer,worship,biblereading, attending church...etc...all ways to starve the old creation and old habits get rid off to grow as christians, to become sons of god...

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 10:52 PM

Dodo you're starting to preach again, I thought we've been through this issue already and you agreed to stop :/

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 10:55 PM

No we are all born Atheists, you were indoctrinated with Jesus and company from childhood. If you were born into a Muslim home, you would have been indoctrinated with Allah and company from childhood. Likewise with children born into the homes of every other religion.

you can have your way sir, read the book "I dared to call him father" van Biquis Sheikh, she was a muslem very interesting...

Debbie

22-12-2006, 11:00 PM

yes we can simply argue about that day and night but in honesty and i believe EDWE will agree.

It is not his or mine decision to tell you what is right or wrong... as christians our task is to introduce you to j esus the son of god.

It is your choice to accept him as savior and, more we can not do...

There are many many many many ways one could interpret this last statement of yours.

I didn't say I was religious, I just said I didn't consider myself to be an atheist.

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 11:01 PM

Dodo you're starting to preach again, I thought we've been through this issue already and you agreed to stop :/

is j esus having a word to is that why it keep on upsetting you sir?

Captain Beer

22-12-2006, 11:03 PM

is j esus having a word to is that why it keep on upsetting you sir?

Can like to spoke English ;)

Mr TB

22-12-2006, 11:16 PM

There are many many many many ways one could interpret this last statement of yours.

I didn't say I was religious, I just said I didn't consider myself to be an atheist.

did i hurt your feelings in saying that christians can not force you or any other person to accept j esus as savior or lord...

ain't that a bit touchy?... we are conceding defeat basically if really do our best to see if someone will convert and it doesn't happen...

o yes maybe do you also insist in being politically correct? That at least we slowly getting out of the way at our workplace...it is a hassle.

Yeah if you insist on above i should have taken out the dictionary and look for more descriptive...oh what the heck let me go to bed such foolishness.

Highflyer_GP

22-12-2006, 11:18 PM

we are conceding defeat basically if really do our best to see if someone will convert and it doesn't happen...

And there we have it folks - a Christian admitting that it's their goal to convert people.

PS: I understand that he only speaks for himself here, but there are millions of him out there.

Debbie

22-12-2006, 11:40 PM

We are all born sinners, when you accept j esus as savior you are born again, now you are a child of god-not a sinner anymore

What does it mean to be a sinner?

did i hurt your feelings in saying that christians can not force you or any other person to accept j esus as savior or lord...

ain't that a bit touchy?... we are conceding defeat basically if really do our best to see if someone will convert and it doesn't happen...

o yes maybe do you also insist in being politically correct? That at least we slowly getting out of the way at our workplace...it is a hassle.

Yeah if you insist on above i should have taken out the dictionary and look for more descriptive...oh what the heck let me go to bed such foolishness.

Uh....what's this about? None of my feelings have been hurt. I aint touchy at all :)

Debbie

23-12-2006, 12:33 AM

douwdouw on rereading your post I think I understand where you are coming from. I don't mind if you are trying to convert me, that's fine, I want to listen (just don't copy paste scripture as your complete argument). I was just asking questions..... the bible makes quite a bit of sense to me in a metaphorical way and I was probing what deeper meanings are attached by individuals to phrases commonly heard and spoken of in the context of christianity.

AntiThesis

23-12-2006, 12:55 AM

No we are all born Atheists, you were indoctrinated with ***** and company from childhood. If you were born into a Muslim home, you would have been indoctrinated with Allah and company from childhood. Likewise with children born into the homes of every other religion.

Well for me I was certainly born Atheist, brought up in an Atheist home with mostly Atheist friends. After a number of years I made a conscious decision to become a Christian.

Douwdouw despite any potential language barriers is correct in saying that Christians try to introduce other people to our faith. It's one of the things we do. I believe almost all religions do this as well. The point here is that we shouldn't try to force it on anyone. If you choose to be Athiest then that's your call. I've made mine and I'd wish for people to respect that as I would respect yours.

Please, feel free to have a go at each others idea's but lets refrain from any more personal attacks.

You all know the cliché about playing the ball so I wont bother completing it.

That's what I said ^_^ The world would be a much nicer place without all this tedious bickering. More boring certainly but still :D

Edwe

23-12-2006, 02:00 AM

No probs here Edwe.

Edwe, mind if I ask something, because I'm now geniunely very very curious. I would like to know what it means to be a Christian....ie, what does it mean to 'accept j3sus christ' as one's saviour? I know it's a very personal and difficult-to-explain thing, so no hassles if you don't want to. I'm just realy curious about what that means.

Thank you and thank you for your interest. I am very bad at explaining these things, but I very much appreciate the opportunity to try.

As you said, it is difficult to explain, especially in a general sense, but I'll try my best to explain what it means to me, personally. ;)

NOTICE: If you don't like "preaching", don't read the following. It's meant for Debbie2, as per her request

As you have heard so many times, God sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to earth to die for our sins so that we may have eternal life. This is the greatest display of love in all history and we did nothing to deserve it.

By accepting this fact and dedicating your life to God (no, I don't mean you have to become a nun ;) ) and His word, you are accepting this miraculous gift. The thing that many Christians get wrong, however, is saying that they've accepted Jesus as their Saviour so that they may have eternal life. This is, in my personal opinion, a wrong way of thinking.

Jesus has already died for our sins - we should accept this display of love and dedicate our life to God not so that we may achieve eternal life, but because Jesus has taken our sins upon him and we already have the promise of eternal life. God made us and cares for us and loves us unconditionally. Why would we not accept this love and try to return it and propagate it?

Furthermore, a relationship with God is something very special - words cannot even begin to describe it. Even in your worst hour and even when the world seems against you, God is still there with you.

A story I rarely tell people: a few years ago, my best friend died in a car accident. I was already deeply depressed before this happened and I was on the verge of suicide. As ridiculous as it may seem to atheists, I believe that the only reason I am still here today is because of God. He somehow allowed me to face what happened and here I am today - happy as can be.

I hope this at least begins to answer your question. More than this I don't know how to explain. I leave you with this thought:

Try it you might like it! What do you stand to lose? :D

Dastrix

23-12-2006, 05:49 AM

We are all born sinners

Here is my problem with all of this douwdouw, I simply cannot beleive that we are born into world in "the image of god" and at the same time labelled as filthy sinners. Guilt pounded into our heads from the start, I just cannot support a religion that in lesser words makes me "guilty until I prove myself innocent". Yes its about choice, but we are all born divine, we choose whether or not to stray from that path, not the other way round.

R0.02

I'm outta here, happy chrissims everyone, keep the debate going!

Debbie

23-12-2006, 12:59 PM

As you have heard so many times, God sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to earth to die for our sins so that we may have eternal life. This is the greatest display of love in all history and we did nothing to deserve it.

By accepting this fact and dedicating your life to God (no, I don't mean you have to become a nun ;) ) and His word, you are accepting this miraculous gift. The thing that many Christians get wrong, however, is saying that they've accepted Jesus as their Saviour so that they may have eternal life. This is, in my personal opinion, a wrong way of thinking.

Jesus has already died for our sins - we should accept this display of love and dedicate our life to God not so that we may achieve eternal life, but because Jesus has taken our sins upon him and we already have the promise of eternal life. God made us and cares for us and loves us unconditionally. Why would we not accept this love and try to return it and propagate it?

Furthermore, a relationship with God is something very special - words cannot even begin to describe it. Even in your worst hour and even when the world seems against you, God is still there with you.

A story I rarely tell people: a few years ago, my best friend died in a car accident. I was already deeply depressed before this happened and I was on the verge of suicide. As ridiculous as it may seem to atheists, I believe that the only reason I am still here today is because of God. He somehow allowed me to face what happened and here I am today - happy as can be.

I hope this at least begins to answer your question. More than this I don't know how to explain. I leave you with this thought: Try it you might like it! What do you stand to lose? :D

Here is my problem with all of this douwdouw, I simply cannot beleive that we are born into world in "the image of god" and at the same time labelled as filthy sinners. Guilt pounded into our heads from the start, I just cannot support a religion that in lesser words makes me "guilty until I prove myself innocent". Yes its about choice, but we are all born divine, we choose whether or not to stray from that path, not the other way round.

R0.02

Edwe thanks for your post I appreciate it and I appreciate your sincerity and time.

My thinking on this tends to run alongside Dastrix's. I agree that no one is perfect, and that every human being has and does things that are 'wrong'/'bad'. In that regard we are all sinners, yes. When it comes to the bible i interpret the word 'sinner' to mean someone who makes little effort to nuture their spirit, to become a 'better' person, someone who stops seeking ways to make themselves a better person. The penalties for this, I don't think, involves a firey hell: instead I see the penalties for this as unhappiness and a lack of internal peace.

To me, when the bible says that we are made in god's image, i interpret this to mean that we all have a little part of god in us, whether we like it or not (heh, that sounds funny). Another way of saying it i suppose is to say that i think all people have some good in them. I dont really see how anyone can live or be alive and not ever experience pure joy (ie joy that is derived from constructive actions/thinking as opposed to destructive actions/thinking).

I am admittedly confused about the whole j3sus chr1st thing. I am not even really all that sure that he existed. Sometimes I think he was an amalgamation, other times i think he was a single person, other times i think he's a product of mythology (some truth with ambiguities and various ways to interpret). However, regardless, to me its almost trivial whether he existed or not as a real single person. I know that sounds blasphemous but just hear me out- I hold the message around him and what he stood for/apparantly stood for to be far superior to anything else, including his real or potentially imagined existence. For me at least, the message is far far far superior to the medium. I think there is too much emphasis in christianity on worshipping this man called j3sus Chr1st....so much so that the message he brought/apparantly brought is lost because all the emphasis is elsewhere.

If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me. But if I do, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so you may understand and believe that the Father is in me, and I in Him.

The disciples asked *****, Why do you speak to them in parables? He answered, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whoever has understanding, more shall be given him and he shall have abundance. But whoever does not have understanding, what little he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore, I speak to them in parables because, not seeing and not hearing, they do not understand.

Debbie

23-12-2006, 08:19 PM

NOTICE: If you don't like "preaching", don't read the following. It's meant for Debbie2, as per her request

As you have heard so many times, God sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to earth to die for our sins so that we may have eternal life. This is the greatest display of love in all history and we did nothing to deserve it.

By accepting this fact and dedicating your life to God (no, I don't mean you have to become a nun ;) ) and His word, you are accepting this miraculous gift. The thing that many Christians get wrong, however, is saying that they've accepted Jesus as their Saviour so that they may have eternal life. This is, in my personal opinion, a wrong way of thinking.

Jesus has already died for our sins - we should accept this display of love and dedicate our life to God not so that we may achieve eternal life, but because Jesus has taken our sins upon him and we already have the promise of eternal life. God made us and cares for us and loves us unconditionally. Why would we not accept this love and try to return it and propagate it?

This was an interesting post so i keep returning to it and thinking more Edwe. Again and again it comes back to the concept of unconditional love. Why is it so important to hold j3sus chr1st as more important than anyone else besides god? What makes him more the 'son' of god than either you or i?

Edwe

24-12-2006, 01:59 AM

This was an interesting post so i keep returning to it and thinking more Edwe. Again and again it comes back to the concept of unconditional love. Why is it so important to hold j3sus chr1st as more important than anyone else besides god? What makes him more the 'son' of god than either you or i?

Well, he was firstly sent by God as his Son and representative on earth. If one believes that he truly died for our sins (personally, I believe this) and conquered death itself, I think it is reason enough to believe that Jesus should be regarded as very important to the Christian faith. Jesus was a symbol of God's love for us: He sent His son to die for us! :)

I am admittedly confused about the whole j3sus chr1st thing. I am not even really all that sure that he existed. Sometimes I think he was an amalgamation, other times i think he was a single person, other times i think he's a product of mythology (some truth with ambiguities and various ways to interpret).

Disregarding the Bible and Christian belief, there is no undisputable record proving that Jesus existed, but Roman records do indicate the beginnings of Christianity during the same time Jesus would have lived.

The logic many atheists use to dismiss the Biblical evidence of Jesus, appears to be that the only records documenting his existence (i.e. the gospels) must be false because the authors believed in him and therefore had to be biased towards his existence. This is cyclical logic that will tend to dismiss any kind of proof of the existence of Jesus.

Many historical facts from around that time only come from one written source, since we do not have many accurate records of ancient times.

Well, merry Christmas everyone and, if you're not a Christian, do yourself a favour and read one of the gospels (if you have not already done so) for the sake of getting to know the history of the holiday, if for no other reason.

Happy holidays,

Edwé :)

PostmanPot

24-12-2006, 02:36 AM

Syndyre

24-12-2006, 09:13 AM

Neo

24-12-2006, 09:46 AM

Disregarding the Bible and Christian belief, there is no undisputable record proving that Jesus existed, but Roman records do indicate the beginnings of Christianity during the same time Jesus would have lived.

The logic many atheists use to dismiss the Biblical evidence of Jesus, appears to be that the only records documenting his existence (i.e. the gospels) must be false because the authors believed in him and therefore had to be biased towards his existence. This is cyclical logic that will tend to dismiss any kind of proof of the existence of Jesus.

Many historical facts from around that time only come from one written source, since we do not have many accurate records of ancient times.

Well, merry Christmas everyone and, if you're not a Christian, do yourself a favour and read one of the gospels (if you have not already done so) for the sake of getting to know the history of the holiday, if for no other reason.

Happy holidays,

Edwé :)

Not quite. I think Christians are often over-sensitive when the argument that a document can't be used to substantiate itself is brought up. It is a valid argument, would we have accepted evolution (as an example) if we only had Darwin's "Origin of Species'. Although well written, it was merely a trigger for a massive amount of work to prove evolution. And it's not finished yet....

Or the religion of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? It can only be 'proven' by what is written by one person. Yet, as a so-called religion it has the same claims as many others, with the same 'proof'.

Would you accept any broadband claim by Telkom without proof? ;)

Most Christians won't have a problem with this concept that proof for any concept must be well established, peer-reviewed, etc. Except when it comes to the Bible! Then logic seems to go out the window.

Can't think I've ever met a non-Christian who desperately wants to disprove the existence of J esus, rather they're all saying, as in any other case, 'Bring the proof and I'll accept it. But until there's acceptable proof, I'll be a skeptic.' Atheists are just that, non-believers, they're not demons.

Christianity started anywhere between around 50AD to 200AD, i.e. after J esus's time. The J esus of the gospels never tried to form any kind of organised religion.

As with all ancient stories, there probably is a historical base for the J esus of the gospels, although we've not found it yet.

I suspect there was a radical at that time who challenged Roman rule and the religion the Jews were practicing. There were a number of these groups around at the time, for example the Essenes.

The timing was right for a new religion to start, the country was occupied, the old prophesies said the coming of the king is nigh, there was an influx of new cultures and a lot of the old religions (from other regions such as Egypt) was still visible.

You then add a outspoken individual into this potpourri and it's easy to see how a new religion could start 50 years or so after these events as the events become part of the oral history.

You now takes these events that happened a few decades earlier, mix in a few concepts from the other religions (virgin birth, etc.) add a few pagan dates (25th December, etc.) and you spin a new religion, acceptable to a large portion of the population, from all of this.

This is my current believe based on what I've been able to read on the subject, but (as always) it's just a theory until better information comes along.

icyrus

24-12-2006, 02:42 PM

This thread has been pure comedy gold.

I often hear religious people asking what possible harm religion can do, despite the obvious. I think that douwdouw's view as expressed in this thread illustrate perfectly the sort of damage religion can do to a person's mind.

He stands as an example of how brainwashed someone can be, how hopelessly incapable of rational thought they can become and how dangerous to society as a whole this type of person is.

AntiThesis

24-12-2006, 02:46 PM

icyrus

24-12-2006, 02:52 PM

Mildly brainwashed I'll give you. Although personally I feel that the type of person who is likely to be brainwashed is likely to be brainwashed by almost anything. If not this then perhaps scientology *shrug*.

Dangerous to society as a whole? How exacly? By preaching at people?
Yeah I can see how that's the same as a psychopath.

By the effect he could have on the similarly weak-minded. Imagine a world dominate by such people and tell me its not a danger to society.

Highflyer_GP

24-12-2006, 03:08 PM

Dangerous to society as a whole? How exacly? By preaching at people?
Yeah I can see how that's the same as a psychopath.
Have you read his views (amongst others) regarding the gay community? Now imagine if he preaches something like that to other weak-minded subjects - still think it couldn't do any harm?

Nick333

24-12-2006, 03:41 PM

Mildly brainwashed I'll give you. Although personally I feel that the type of person who is likely to be brainwashed is likely to be brainwashed by almost anything. If not this then perhaps scientology *shrug*.

Dangerous to society as a whole? How exacly? By preaching at people?
Yeah I can see how that's the same as a psychopath.

I'd be willing to bet that dodo grew up in a christian house hold and had his values imprinted on him since birth.

Happy holidays to everyone.

AntiThesis

25-12-2006, 12:06 PM

Could be :) Of course I don't know him at all so you never know.

I suppose similarly weak minded people could be influenced but we could argue the same way with science or any influencing factor. In the end I don't think it matters all that much. You're only ever as convinced as you let yourself become.

Anyways, peace on earth to all :) Merry Holidays :p

Mr TB

28-12-2006, 01:09 PM

MERRY CHRIST_MAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!

I went on leave and it was not possible to make a contribution in the forum. I did not miss a lot in view.

Any of you making comments really checked where the writings in the Bible come from?

Did you see any other writing the book that you so easily accept as authentic? or are your skeptic only towards the Bible?

Claymore

28-12-2006, 01:54 PM

Merry Christmas, douwdouw!

Yep, I check where the books in the Bible came from. Doesn't say much for their provenance, unfortunately.

I like to check where other books come from too, though often it's less of an issue because no extraordinary claims are being made on their basis.

nthdimension

28-12-2006, 04:42 PM

The logic many atheists use to dismiss the Biblical evidence of Jesus, appears to be that the only records documenting his existence (i.e. the gospels) must be false because the authors believed in him and therefore had to be biased towards his existence. This is cyclical logic that will tend to dismiss any kind of proof of the existence of Jesus.

Many historical facts from around that time only come from one written source, since we do not have many accurate records of ancient times.

Well, merry Christmas everyone and, if you're not a Christian, do yourself a favour and read one of the gospels (if you have not already done so) for the sake of getting to know the history of the holiday, if for no other reason.
When studying history the goal is to find as much corroborating evidence as possible. This is particularly important when grand claims are being made. If the only documented evidence is from someone with a vested interest in promoting a particular idea or point of view, then we might view it with great skepticism.

And it needs to be said again that proving that there really was an actual person called Jesus proves nothing about the supernatural claims made for or about him. Napoleon also reall existed, but that doesn't mean he was a god.

The history of this holiday goes back long before Christianity. It was usurped by the Christian religion as part of its campaign to wipe out pagan religions. In the process it took the time of their holiday and many of their traditions.

As you have heard so many times, God sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to earth to die for our sins so that we may have eternal life. This is the greatest display of love in all history and we did nothing to deserve it.

Jesus has already died for our sins - we should accept this display of love and dedicate our life to God not so that we may achieve eternal life, but because Jesus has taken our sins upon him and we already have the promise of eternal life. God made us and cares for us and loves us unconditionally. Why would we not accept this love and try to return it and propagate it?

Furthermore, a relationship with God is something very special - words cannot even begin to describe it. Even in your worst hour and even when the world seems against you, God is still there with you.
This is where the Jesus story comes apart. Jesus could not be the son of God, hence immortal, and die. He would even have known in advance that his mortal body would come back to life. Not that having that particular body permanently destroyed should have been a source of any fear for an immortal. God sent his son who couldn't actually die, and who the Bible tells us is in heaven next to God. Where's the great gift and sacrifice by God? Why was this whole song and dance even necessary? Is God bound by some supernatural laws?

I have faced many setbacks, as well as the deaths of friends and family, as I'm sure virtually everyone has, non-believer and believer, and I have survived and grown stronger without the need to resort to a religious belief.

noxibox

28-12-2006, 04:51 PM

I suspect there was a radical at that time who challenged Roman rule and the religion the Jews were practicing. There were a number of these groups around at the time, for example the Essenes.

The timing was right for a new religion to start, the country was occupied, the old prophesies said the coming of the king is nigh, there was an influx of new cultures and a lot of the old religions (from other regions such as Egypt) was still visible.

You then add a outspoken individual into this potpourri and it's easy to see how a new religion could start 50 years or so after these events as the events become part of the oral history.
Something that interests me is how would we treat an individual like this today? More importantly how would the followers of the Christian religion treat a person like that?

Mr TB

28-12-2006, 04:55 PM

Nanfeishen

28-12-2006, 04:58 PM

They would probabily label him an anti establishment terrorist, and he would land up in jail for trying to warp the minds of the young, and he would have dosens of sexual harrasment charges against him for "laying on of hands" :D

Neo

28-12-2006, 05:04 PM

God knew from the very first moment that not one of the creatures created by him will be acceptable for adam as a partner.

Why did he still go ahead and present every single creature in front of adam, if god knew adam will reject each one of them?

Good question! You're beginning to get it!

Why indeed? Was he just jerking Adam's chain? And keep Adam busy with naming them all for a few hundred years... :rolleyes:

Neo

28-12-2006, 05:10 PM

Something that interests me is how would we treat an individual like this today? More importantly how would the followers of the Christian religion treat a person like that?

Christians would react in the only way they know, they'd attempt to kill him.

If you're one of his followers, you'd think his actions (say attacking the infidel in his own country, by flying planes into the symbolism of his decadent ways), was guided by God.

Mr TB

28-12-2006, 05:15 PM

Good question! You're beginning to get it!

Why indeed? Was he just jerking Adam's chain? And keep Adam busy with naming them all for a few hundred years... :rolleyes:

Yes friend he kept adam busy, adam also realised there is no suitable partner for him on earth (although god knew it), only then did god create a suitable partner for him.

There was no second thoughts with adam he knew eve was his partner because god showed him the other creatures...

Nanfeishen

28-12-2006, 05:23 PM

Fortunately for all , he wasnt into beastiality...:D

ghoti

28-12-2006, 05:39 PM

Yes friend he kept adam busy

Yup, he had to name all the animals. Naming the 67 odd million different species alive today (excluding the trillion or so extinct species) would have kept any man busy...

Mr TB

28-12-2006, 05:45 PM

Something that interests me is how would we treat an individual like this today? More importantly how would the followers of the Christian religion treat a person like that?

The type of viewpoint NOXIBOX is taking, is exactly the viewpoint the jewish Pharisees had...

He is spreading the bible story but words he use are just a bit softer...

ibanez

28-12-2006, 06:59 PM

My opinion: blaming god or satan (the two concepts belong in the same book) is a way of living in ignorant bliss and just short circuiting any logical forensic thought process as to why **** happens.

To put it another way, we don't have answers because we don't understand our role on this planet and interaction with all the other life forms that share it with us.

Human evolution and technology is great but we seem to have loss connectivity with our environment along the way, generally being consumer driven (narcissism).

The blame god/satan/supreme being concept fits this model perfectly and fuels good debates, but has never provided me with a connection to the planet and creatures I'm part of. I see this connection as key to finding any meaning in/to life.

Sounds weird?

Use or turf dude..

Safferbeauty

28-12-2006, 10:44 PM

The reason why I stopped posting here is because this has gone totally off the original idea.

Syndyre

28-12-2006, 10:51 PM

The original idea being?

Safferbeauty

28-12-2006, 10:53 PM

Why blame God or Satan. I just had nothing to say.

Debbie

28-12-2006, 11:37 PM

But it was a pretty good thread SB, even if it did go OT.

Aqox

28-12-2006, 11:57 PM

Quick question for the religious and non-religious people

1. Why did God create the Light / Darkness on Day 1, but on day 4, He created the sun, moon and stars ?

2. Why was John the Baptist never baptised with water + spirit ? ***** Christ is the one who baptises with the Holy Spirit and Fire...

3. Ephesians 4
8Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

9(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

10He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

11And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ

There is only one GOD. The God of all life. He is not a person or spirit or extra terestrial thing. He is the GOD of all.

Alot of people intrepet the bible on a natural way, and thus, dont understand what its all about. Read the bible again, over and over, and you'll see a deeper meaning to all of thats written.

By taking key words, and understanding them, putting them in context, you'll be able to see the spiritual meaning of the entire bible, folding into each chapter as it goes on. ie Water = Gospel, Light = Understand/Wisdom just to name a few...

Also remember, the Bible is still written today, not physiclly, but spiritualy, by you and me, who live the lives of those which was written about.

Ciao

Edwe

29-12-2006, 02:03 AM

1. Why did God create the Light / Darkness on Day 1, but on day 4, He created the sun, moon and stars ?

The sun and starts radiate light, so light had to have been created, defined and constrained before bodies radiating light could exist. Much like you have to invent the wheel before you can have a car. ;) That's my reasoning, anyway.

2. Why was John the Baptist never baptised with water + spirit ? ***** Christ is the one who baptises with the Holy Spirit and Fire...

I honestly don't understand that question. Maybe I'm just tired? :o Are you asking why John the Baptist was never really baptised by Christ into the Christian faith (i.e. with the Holy Spirit)? The answer to this is that he simply died before the death of Jesus, and hence did not live to see the beginnings of the Christian church or the practice of baptising with the Holy Spirit. John the Baptist was, therefore a Jew and NOT a Christian.

I assume the rest of the post is a statement and not a question, in which case I agree with the message. Some of the Bible is, indeed, meant to be taken literally and other parts, figuratively (please don't launch into a debate about how we should distinguish between these parts - I already posted my opinion on this a couple of pages back).

Mr TB

29-12-2006, 06:40 AM

The sun and starts radiate light, so light had to have been created, defined and constrained before bodies radiating light could exist. Much like you have to invent the wheel before you can have a car. ;) That's my reasoning, anyway.

I honestly don't understand that question. Maybe I'm just tired? :o Are you asking why John the Baptist was never really baptised by Christ into the Christian faith (i.e. with the Holy Spirit)? The answer to this is that he simply died before the death of Jesus, and hence did not live to see the beginnings of the Christian church or the practice of baptising with the Holy Spirit. John the Baptist was, therefore a Jew and NOT a Christian.

I assume the rest of the post is a statement and not a question, in which case I agree with the message. Some of the Bible is, indeed, meant to be taken literally and other parts, figuratively (please don't launch into a debate about how we should distinguish between these parts - I already posted my opinion on this a couple of pages back).

what is the reason for the sun and the moon... a 24 hour period time in other words true?