# How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?



## james bond (Apr 9, 2017)

The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.


*Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
*De-facto Theist:* I cannot know for certain but I strongly believe in God and I live my life on the assumption that he is there.
*Weak Theist:* I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.
*Pure Agnostic:* God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.
*Weak Atheist:* I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.
*De-facto Atheist:* I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable and I live my life under the assumption that he is not there.
*Strong Atheist:* I am 100% sure that there is no God.
If this has been posted before, then please forgive. I did a search and did not find.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 9, 2017)

Strong theist here because when you have a personal relationship with the living God, then you KNOW.  I do appreciate the agnostics who do not have that personal experience yet but who keep an open mind.  I agree that is the thinking person's position.


----------



## MarathonMike (Apr 9, 2017)

Of those choices, De Facto Theist.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Apr 9, 2017)

I'm somewhere between 4 and 5 on the scale.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)




----------



## IsaacNewton (Apr 9, 2017)

The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.


Agnostic is derived from the word ignorant.
So no, while agnostic is about thinking, a thinking person must seek the truth and find it.


----------



## Hossfly (Apr 9, 2017)

IsaacNewton said:


> The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.


A Creator.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...


The most interesting thing from your list is I don't think there has ever been a 1 in human history, but you do find a large number of 5's, assuming you intended it to also include the phrase you never question your belief.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Apr 9, 2017)

_Strong theist. I don't think it makes sense to walk into a house and make the claim that there was no builder, citing the fact that you never met them as evidence._


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.


----------



## cnm (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Agnostic is derived from the word ignorant.


One can tell you are an expert on ignorance.

* Origin and Etymology of agnostic *
_ Greek agnōstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnōstos_ known, from _gignōskein_ to know —
Definition of AGNOSTIC​


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


Everyone seeks the truth, agnostics simply acknowledge that we haven't found it yet.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

cnm said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Agnostic is derived from the word ignorant.
> ...


It's all Greek to me!

1895-1900; < Greek agnōsía ignorance,equivalent to ágnōt(os) unknown (see agnostic )


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Neither theist nor atheist, since neither theory is provable.

This is a bit like asking "how much of a Democrat or Republican are you" as if two binary choices covered everything.  It doesn't.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Please. 12% think Elvis is alive, people think we never walked on the moon and half of America thinks Islam is a religion of peace.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Pumpkin Row said:


> _Strong theist. I don't think it makes sense to walk into a house and make the claim that there was no builder, citing the fact that you never met them as evidence._



Bad analogy.  A house is a construction.  Obviously a construction is by definition constructed.  Nowhere near as bad an analogy though as the post immediately before this one crashed with.

Substitute "universe" for "house" and the point is quite valid.  But by the same logic --- neither does it make sense to claim there was one.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.


There can be no 100%.  No God believer will be truthful if they say they never have questioned.  But many athiests will tell they know they are 100% certain.


----------



## mamooth (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.



I can see that the definition of "God" commonly used falls apart in a mass of contradictions, hence I know that such a being can't exist.

And no, stating that God is outside of logic isn't a solution, because it turns God into Cthulhu, an unknowable alien thing. Once logic no longer holds, you can't know anything.


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.
> ...


Well, it's an ideology, one way or the other.  And part of being an ideologue is literally talking yourself into something you'd otherwise know isn't true.
.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


You are correct to infer that only agnostics are right. Why? What did you choose?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I never said athiests are right.  I said they think they have no possibility in their thought process that maybe they are wrong.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


I'm an engineer, it got down to statistical probabilities using the evidence available. And when you get to 99.99999998% you go with it, no matter how uncomfortable the answer is.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


ag-nos-tic, not atheist.


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


My youngest daughter is in college right now, majoring in engineering/biomedical engineering.

When we visited her there, she was talking about how finding seats in class is different than in high school:

"Nobody makes fun of you because you want to sit in the front row.  We ALL want to sit in the front row!"


.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


An agnostic is someone too lazy to make up their mind in the most important issue in their lives.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Show me some real proof to tilt me one way or the other and I'll stop being lazy.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



On the contrary, an agnostic is at the least one who sees the folly in binary thinking.


----------



## cnm (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> Well, it's an ideology, one way or the other.


I didn't realise lack of knowledge was an ideology.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


The existence of God is a binary issue.  It's a yes/no issue.
And the most important issue every person has in their lives.


----------



## cnm (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> An agnostic is someone to lazy to make up their mind in the most important issue in their lives.


Or someone who realises, unlike certain engineers, that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.


Means you have simply made Science your religion.

You have ignored Religion and you are ignorant of Philosophy.

So you are not completely superstitious but not completely smart either.


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

cnm said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Well, it's an ideology, one way or the other.
> ...


I meant claiming to know for sure, one way or the other.  Religiosity or atheism.
.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I said the decision must be made upon available evidence. It's like gravity. All the available evidence is there and you can make a decision if it exists or not.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> IsaacNewton said:
> 
> 
> > The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.
> ...


Your azz has been miraculously saved so many times Hossfly that you probably have seen angels and leprechans too.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


Some people probably know for sure one way or the other, but not many.


----------



## Mousterian (Apr 9, 2017)

One may say that 'God' made the Universe, but the idea that 'God' is an old male human with magical powers is no more than a fairytale.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> IsaacNewton said:
> 
> 
> > The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.
> ...


This is "Deist" actually Hossfly .

The O/P has never heard of Deist.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Pumpkin Row said:


> _Strong theist. I don't think it makes sense to walk into a house and make the claim that there was no builder, citing the fact that you never met them as evidence._


This is also Deist.


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mousterian said:


> One may say that 'God' made the Universe, but the idea that 'God' is an old male human with magical powers is no more than a fairytale.


Yeah, I have a pretty hard time buying into the notion that He is/would be as advertised, but I do hold out the possibility that some creator may exist.
.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.


Well if an angel or a God appeared to you then you would know.

That way is guaranteed.

That's sort of what Moses and Akmed claimed.  Then their followers did a huge amount of conquest in their wake.

Same with Peter, James, John, Paul and Constantine.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

cnm said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > An agnostic is someone to lazy to make up their mind in the most important issue in their lives.
> ...


Whatever. Being happy to sit on the fence in the most important issue of their live is lazy, foolish, and plain stupid.  I know, I was there.  Then it dawned on me this was the most important issue and I better start doing my homework to get an answer.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Neither theist nor atheist, since neither theory is provable.
> 
> This is a bit like asking "how much of a Democrat or Republican are you" as if two binary choices covered everything.  It doesn't.


I'm nonpartisan/unaffiliated.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> Mousterian said:
> 
> 
> > One may say that 'God' made the Universe, but the idea that 'God' is an old male human with magical powers is no more than a fairytale.
> ...


This is Deist not Theist, Atheist, nor Agnostic.


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Mousterian said:
> ...


Yes, but I only hold out the possibility.

I'm not sure of THAT, either.


.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


You should check out Aquinas' 5 proofs of God -- it will help from a Philosophy perspective:

Five Ways (Aquinas) - Wikipedia


----------



## RodISHI (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> I meant claiming to know for sure, one way or the other.  Religiosity or atheism.
> .


I have been a believer since my early childhood. Its not a religion it is a faith. Over time it is the spirit that builds on that faith. For some of us we have seen that spirit in action, some have actually seen God's angels and others have seen miracles or experienced them. As a child I lay my self down in a river in the middle of the night hoping to float away. I did not recount that experience or inspect it through until I was adult and my own children were adults as it held to many painful aspects in it. 

It is up to each to seek the truth of it all and that happens in time.


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 9, 2017)

RodISHI said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I meant claiming to know for sure, one way or the other.  Religiosity or atheism..
> ...


My guess is that it is easier to initially develop and maintain that faith when you're young than when you're older.  Would that be a fair theory?
.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Atheists normally (1) are born with a silver spoon in their mouths and never received any instruction in religion or (2) are embittered by some tragedy and blame God for it.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Theists have normally been brainwashed from their early childhood.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Agnostics have normally fallen in love with rationality and science without learning the limits of rationality and science and have therefore made Science their Religion.


----------



## mamooth (Apr 9, 2017)

cnm said:
			
		

> Or someone who realises, unlike certain engineers, that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.



That's incorrect. Absence of evidence _is_ evidence of absence, provided you have enough incidents of absence of evidence.

That's mathematically provable, in a "as N -> infinity, P -> 1" kind of way.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Most true philosophers are Deists because it is very hard to deny the rationality of Aquinas.

Five Ways (Aquinas) - Wikipedia


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

mamooth said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Funny.

Arguing from ignorance either way is a fallacy.

And anything otherwise is sophistry.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia


----------



## aris2chat (Apr 9, 2017)

skeptical deists, don't really care either way


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

If you are arguing against the fallacies and trying to make them logical then you are a sophist using sophistry.

The modern simply word for that is liar.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

aris2chat said:


> skeptical deists, don't really care either way


Skepticism is an entire separate class of Philosophies.


----------



## mamooth (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Arguing from ignorance either way is a fallacy.



Strawman fallacy on your part.



> And anything otherwise is sophistry.



Are you agnostic concerning Santa Claus?

Why not?

Answer that, and you know why I'm not agnostic concerning deities.


----------



## RodISHI (Apr 9, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


Believe me it wasn't easy to maintain even as a child. Through beatings and abuse it was all a learning experience. It is tough to hold onto that faith through those times especially for a child. It was though by the grace of God that many things happened in my life where I should have probably been gone from this earth yet I was saved. We all have purpose. We do not all find it at the same time.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

mamooth said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > Arguing from ignorance either way is a fallacy.
> ...


Argument from ignorance is not a straw man.

Saying that it is however is sophistry.

A lot of people hate you mamooth and I can see why.

I am getting ready to put you on my iggy since I have no use for liars and sophists.


----------



## Muhammed (Apr 9, 2017)

5. Because supernatural BS is absurd.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

mamooth said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > Arguing from ignorance either way is a fallacy.
> ...


Like I said, you were either born with a silver spoon in your mouth or you are embittered about something.


----------



## mamooth (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Argument from ignorance is not a straw man.



Saying that we use it certainly is, being we don't use it.



> A lot of people hate you mamooth and I can see why.



True. Irrational people can get extremely upset when you force them to face their irrationality. People tend to react badly to being proven wrong.

As for you, you should demonstrate that others use argument from ignorance, instead of simply claiming it, and then deflecting and running away when challenged. That doesn't reflect well on your intellectual honesty.



> Like I said, you were either born with a silver spoon in your mouth or you are embittered about something.



Is "Because I say so!" the only argument you have, or are there some other dishonest fallacies that you plan to use?


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



It's a yes/no *question*.  But as such, an invalid one.

Pop quiz --- do you believe Mrs. Irma Schwartz of Pineapple South Dakota has blue eyes or brown eyes?  You have to choose one.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



Specifically, "zero".


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Mousterian said:


> One may say that 'God' made the Universe, but the idea that 'God' is an old male human with magical powers is no more than a fairytale.



Of course the first question I always put to that contingent is ---- where's the female that makes "God" "male"?
Usually get a lot of humma-humma on that.  But the last guy tried to tell me God is hermaphroditic.  Kind of a SuperSnail.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


Says a lot about you thinking the existence of God or not is just as important as the color of Irma Schwatz's eyes.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Mousterian said:
> 
> 
> > One may say that 'God' made the Universe, but the idea that 'God' is an old male human with magical powers is no more than a fairytale.
> ...


Dufus probably looks for the penis in what Spanish word to use.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Muhammed said:


> 5. Because supernatural BS is absurd.


Right on cue.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

IsaacNewton said:


> The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.




Indeed, the question cannot be waded into without first defining terms.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Mousterian said:
> ...



That sentence ^^ almost resembles English.  Who knows what its intention was.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



Nope, it really isn't the most important issue.  Not even close.


----------



## Pogo (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



Irma Schwartz's eye colour is not a matter of how "important" the question is.  It's a matter of being forced into a binary choice that is illegitimate.  You _can't_ make that choice.  For all you know Irma Schwartz has green eyes.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


If the color of her eyes were the most important issue in every persons life, I would work hard to get that question answered, dufus.


----------



## dblack (Apr 9, 2017)

Other: Gods are real, but not necessarily in the way believers imagine. Gods are essentially distributed personas existing in the networked minds of followers. Think of them as elaborate 'memes', with motives and ambitions all their own, propagating themselves via the minds of their hosts (believers).


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Because you decided that?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


Philosophy and religion are just words. You can't prove god with words only. Dingbat already tried.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


So you're saying that gravity didnt exist until there was enough available evidence?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 9, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...


Dawkins wimped out by admitting he was a "6.5".  First, because he didn't have the guts to just say "7" and, secondly plus more importantly, he didn't admit the most logical position is Agnostic, "I don't know and I can't prove either position".


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Theism and Atheism are belief systems.

Deism is a Philosophy.

Agnosticism is a science.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 9, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



Ignorance is no crime or disgrace.  It simply means somebody does not know or has not been informed.  The person who does not know if there is a god/deity/creator/et al but who keeps an open mind may indeed be ignorant.  But he is head and shoulders more educated than the person who is absolutely convinced there is no god and considers all who disagree to be fools or gullible or disallusioned etc etc.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


You will be hard pressed to argue against Aquinas.  And Aristotle also agreed with Prime Mover too.
Five Ways (Aquinas) - Wikipedia


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

dblack said:


> Other: Gods are real, but not necessarily in the way believers imagine. Gods are essentially distributed personas existing in the networked minds of followers. Think of them as elaborate 'memes', with motives and ambitions all their own, propagating themselves via the minds of their hosts (believers).


Get an avatar.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Admitting lack of knowledge is, indeed, the smartest position to take, but saying only smart people take it is ignorant.


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


Who is Irma Schwartz ??

Irma Schwartz - 37 Public Records Found


----------



## yiostheoy (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


Your fallacy is an argument from ignorance.

This makes you a fool.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Mousterian said:
> 
> 
> > One may say that 'God' made the Universe, but the idea that 'God' is an old male human with magical powers is no more than a fairytale.
> ...


LOL.  Sex is a mortal, natural universe limitation.  Asking the gender of an entity capable of creating the Universe and also exists outside of it is like asking "How many Angels can dance on the head of a pin?"


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > yiostheoy said:
> ...


Agreed, as are all those who claim, as statements of fact, things which cannot be proven.  That's why it's called "Faith".


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...





Mudda said:


> So you're saying that gravity didnt exist until there was enough available evidence?


Like gravity, the existence of God is seperate to a person deciding if gravity or God really exist.
Your intellectual retardation says a lot about why you have such opinions.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Apr 9, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > _Strong theist. I don't think it makes sense to walk into a house and make the claim that there was no builder, citing the fact that you never met them as evidence._
> ...


_I think it's a perfect analogy, it makes far more sense for everything in the universe to have been made that way, rather than just... being there... because... just because. _


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 9, 2017)

*How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You? *


Pumpkin Row said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


.


Pumpkin Row said:


> I think it's a perfect analogy, it makes far more sense for everything in the universe to have been made that way, rather than just... being there... because... just because.










the genome of life has not had much of an impact on the rest of the universe, why isn't there an interrelated universe per a master builder ...


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 9, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.


You know how when you bring up the impossible stories in the bible theists say those are just allegories, but they never admit Jesus is also an allegory? Well today the priest in church was telling about how lazeris was brought back from the dead. And he wasn't telling an allegory. He really believes that.

Are you agnostic about lazeris?


----------



## ding (Apr 9, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


I don't recall anyone saying that the miracles that Jesus performed were allegories.  Except Hobo and he doesn't count.  He's a militant atheist like you guys.


----------



## dblack (Apr 9, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



I see them more as tall tales to impress the dimwits. Sophisticated spiritual enlightenment just isn't as flashy as magic tricks.


----------



## MaryL (Apr 9, 2017)

What level of theist are YOU? A total koolaid drinking plane crashing  idiot, Or are  you lost fool like the rest of  us and don't  have a clue and don't care if god  exists? I am the latter. Good luck with that god shit, it hasn't worked for a millennium or two.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 9, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Mousterian said:
> ...



A Deist is a theist.  A Deist is convinced that there is a Creator God, he/she just doesn't believe in a personal relationship with that Creator/God.  You are correct that a Deist is neither Atheist or agnostic.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Not Jesus. He's the one you claim is real. What about lazeris? My priest told the story as fact. He also tells the Jonah story as fact. Don't pretend these are just allegories. Your church says they are facts.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

MaryL said:


> What level of theist are YOU? A total koolaid drinking plane crashing  idiot, Or are  you lost fool like the rest of  us and don't  have a clue and don't care if god  exists? I am the latter. Good luck with that god shit, it hasn't worked for a millennium or two.


If there is a God it's not worrying about if you believe in him. Christianity worries you don't believe in Christianity. God don't give a fuck.

If he exists he may care about rape and murder but not if you believe father nick


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

yiostheoy said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > yiostheoy said:
> ...


I checked out the 5 ways, all are simplistic, unscientific, and wrong. NEXT!


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Not smart people, thinking people. A lot of really intelligent people believe in god or are atheists. But their critical thinking is impaired.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


That's why I an agnostic, the existence of god is independent of my personal opinion, but objectively, god had not been proven either way yet.


----------



## ChrisL (Apr 10, 2017)

Wouldn't a "weak atheist" be the same as an agnostic.  Not sure whether or not a God exists?  I guess I'm either an agnostic or a "weak atheist."  I don't really believe in all the stories and I don't know if there is a god (s) or not, but I fall on the skeptical side.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


What's the proof? Let's examine that first.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


So what's the proof that Jesus turned water into wine?


----------



## dani67 (Apr 10, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...


what is god? 
allah or jesus father ?   im sure this god is bullshit.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Hard to prove something that doesn't exist doesnt


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


There is no proof. So are you agnostic about lazeris?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Does it matter to you? Because I don't have proof he didn't walk on water. So you're agnostic about that too right?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

I


Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I'm just glad it isn't atheists blowing up churches. Islam is an example how the god hypothesis is not healthy


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


If it's in the bible, the bible has been proven to have been written a minimum of several generations after the facts, so basically hearsay. No big events/miracles/weird, unrealistic shit in it can be or has been proven.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The bible is full of fairy tales, and no I am not agnostic about fairy tales.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


And a lot of dumbasses who "think" they're thinking people believe they know it all.  

Smart people are critical thinkers.  In the case of ideas about existence, they realize there is a spiritual component to mankind.  Mind, Body, Spirit.  That latter doesn't fit the tangible aspects of the first two, but just like there is a strong relation between mind and body in illnesses, there is a strong relation with spirit to the first two and a person's relationship with existence.  This might explain why Atheists only compose about 3% of the population.

10 facts about atheists
*1. * *3.1% of American adults say they are atheists when asked about their religious identity

2.  68% are men, and the median age of atheist adults in the U.S. is 34

3.  About two-thirds of atheists (69%) identify as Democrats (or lean in that direction), and a majority (56%) call themselves political liberals

4.  8% of those who call themselves atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit.

5.  atheists are more likely than U.S. Christians to say they often feel a sense of wonder about the universe (54% vs. 45%).

6.   two-thirds (65%) say they seldom or never discuss their views on religion with religious people.

7.  About a third of atheists (32%) say they look primarily to science for guidance on questions of right and wrong

8.  Americans like atheists less than they like members of most major religious groups.

9.  About half of Americans (51%) say they would be less likely to support an atheist candidate for president

10.  About half of Americans (53%) say it is not necessary to believe in God to be moral, while 45% say belief in God is necessary to have good values*





http://www.pewforum.org/files/2014/01/global-religion-full.pdf
*The Religiously Unaffiliated*
The religiously unaffiliated population includes atheists, agnostics and people who do not identify with any particular religion in surveys. However, many of the religiously unaffiliated do hold religious or spiritual beliefs. For example, various surveys have found that belief in God or a higher power is shared by 7% of unaffiliated Chinese adults, 30% of unaffiliated French adults and 68% of unaffiliated U.S. adults.6


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Just as hard to prove something doesn't exist.  "An absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence".  

Smart people acknowledge this is a matter of faith, not logic.


----------



## ricechickie (Apr 10, 2017)

I'm a weak atheist.  I used to consider myself agnostic, but I get more skeptical with time.

But here's a question for everyone. If someone in your town started proclaiming he was the son of God, would you worship him, withhold judgement and observe, or send him to the nearest mental hospital?

Just for clarity, same questions if a woman claims to be the daughter of God.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Your spiritual component has never been proven. And so you have stats about atheists. So what?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Faith is the absence of evidence. Thinking people need evidence.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

ricechickie said:


> I'm a weak atheist.  I used to consider myself agnostic, but I get more skeptical with time.
> 
> But here's a question for everyone. If someone in your town started proclaiming he was the son of God, would you worship him, withhold judgement and observe, or send him to the nearest mental hospital?
> 
> Just for clarity, same questions if a woman claims to be the daughter of God.


I'd recommend they go to a hospital, but in the US they are free to believe as they like just like theists and atheists.

FWIW, if surveyed, I'd be among the "religiously unaffiliated" since spirituality and dogmatic religion are two different things.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ....so you have stats about atheists. So what?


LOL.  So much for your self-asserted high ability for "critical thinking".



Mudda said:


> Faith is the absence of evidence. Thinking people need evidence.


Thinking people know an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.   Obviously you're not one of the "thinking people".


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Again.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ....so you have stats about atheists. So what?
> ...


Which is why agnostic is the only thinking person's position, because absence of evidence isn't evidence. It's faith.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


The dog doesn't pretend to be the creator of fleas. Failed meme. Please try again.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Agreed on Agnostic.  Disagreed that absence of evidence is evidence.  That's the point; it's just absence of evidence.  It means no evidence exists to prove or disprove an assertion.  To believe either way, in this case either atheist or theist, is to take the matter on faith since neither can prove their position with evidence.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



On faith or experience.  None of us can prove to another what experience we personally have or have had.  Many theists take it on faith that God or whatever deity(ies) exist. 

And there are those who believe based on experience in which case most--perhaps not all--faith is transformed into a kind of certainty.  Certainty in the existence; uncertainty in full understanding so an element of faith is required to trust.

You are correct that agnostics are willing to believe, but have not had sufficient reason or experience to have any certainty.  Atheists choose not to believe based on lack of evidence--lack of evidence for them personally.

It is always interesting to me how readily some people are willing to believe politicians or media or scientists or whomever tell them that such and such exists or has happened even though they have not seen the evidence or experienced it themselves.  But they are not willing to believe millions/billions of people who tell them that they have experienced God.

The concept actually frightens or bothers them to the extent that they will belittle, ridicule, or become downright hostile, even militantly hostile, to the reported faith of others.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Except for the fact that they are sitting on a real life dog???  If you are now claiming that the planet earth is god, or that everything is god, how do you know this?  See, I hate not knowing if you are bible thumper or a generic god believer.  Because either way, where did you come up with the concept that there must be a god?  And then when did you make the leap that it cares about you?  Then when did you come up with the idea that you yourself become a god when you die?


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> On faith or experience.  None of us can prove to another what experience we personally have or have had.  Many theists take it on faith that God or whatever deity(ies) exist.
> 
> And there are those who believe based on experience in which case most--perhaps not all--faith is transformed into a kind of certainty.  Certainty in the existence; uncertainty in full understanding so an element of faith is required to trust.
> 
> ...



Point is, faith is necessary according to the Bible.  If it was beyond reproach that God existed and all that is said about eternal life true, then faith would not be a thing. 

A person can choose to have faith in nothing, themselves, others or God.  Faith in nothing is hopelessness.  Faith in yourself is doomed to death.  Faith in others leads to disappointment.  That leaves God.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


You mock what you don't understand.


----------



## saveliberty (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> The dog doesn't pretend to be the creator of fleas. Failed meme. Please try again.



Interesting, how long have you held this belief that a dog considers itself a God?  Does it even cognate to the point of seeing itself separate from the fleas or consider how to rid itself of the fleas?  Does it simply accept the fleas as part of life?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Your questions are legitimate.  But let's be careful to not confuse religion, which is always man made, with faith.

Again, many theists have a kind of certainty of God because they have a very real experience, even a relationship with some force or Being that they only vaguely understand.  They may not fully understand it, and sometime fear or perhaps stubbornness prevents them from fully embracing or trusting this Being that they know, but they have little doubt that the Being exists.

Religion attaches liturgy, rules, regulation, expectations, requirements, dogma and doctrine to some being or beings that may or may not be useful or necessary or even proper.

I suspect when we meet the God (being) that we have experienced face to face, that Being won't be particularly interested in or impressed by our theology but rather who and what we choose to be as human beings or the souls that have been created.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



I used to think I had a personal relationship with god, even when I gave up on religions.  You can't fake belief.  You can pretend to believe but you can't fake it.  If a person doesn't believe a god exists what can you do?  The answer is nothing.  Either something in their brain convinces them sometime down the road that there is a god or it doesn't.  I can tell you that nothing you or any Christian can say to me to convince me your god is real.

And as for generic creator of all the universe?  One that doesn't care but created everything?  That god doesn't care if you believe the Jesus, Lazeris or Jonah stories.  So it doesn't matter that you worship it and I don't.  If you think you are scoring points with this generic creator then by all means, if that makes you feel better about yourself.  But to suggest someone is less good of a person for not believing in a creator to me seems stupid.  Unless of course you believe one of the organized religions and then they'll tell you it is wrong, in fact BLASPHEMY to suggest there is no creator.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Ummm, it's a cartoon.  Meant to poke fun at a concept, not be the basis of scientific fact.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


They get all agitated at the silliest things.  Part of the insecurity issue.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


The most vehement anti-smokers and anti-religious types are often former smokers and lapsed believers. 

I'm on the other side; a former atheist until I had a NDE when I was a junior in HS.  Not a Bible-thumper by any means and not a believer in a "personal God", but certainly a believer that there is more to existence than what we see and touch.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I'm not insecure.  You know who's insecure?  Theists.  When I try to tell my dad or brother there is no god boy do they get defensive.  And I am not even allowed to suggest it to my nephew.  I guess the brainwashing isn't complete at 15 years old.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Are you aware that this is the prime age when young adults "find" religion?

And I doubt at 17 years old you were smart enough to come to the conclusion there is no god.  What reasons did you have for not believing in God(s) back then?  And then tell us about this experience that changed you.  Not that it will impress me.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...





sealybobo said:


> That god doesn't care if you believe the Jesus, Lazeris or Jonah stories.



And you have the audacity to claim you know this how? 
You fabricate it because you need a lie to prop up what you wish to believe.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


I love debating theology with those of differing views.
But only atheists resort to childish responses like "you just hate science" or "your big spaghetti monster".  So yes, atheists are insecure. 

And did it ever occur to you that your family reacts to your statement that there is no God because they love you?  They believe what Jesus said - faith in Him is what gets you into heaven.  If your family supported you rejecting that offer from Jesus then I would be concerned.  But obviously they care about you.  Ponder that.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

_“Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.”_ – Thomas Gray

_Being an atheist is like being the only sober person in the car – and no one will let you drive.

“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all species are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.” – Richard Dawkins

Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones._
_
“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

“I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.” – Mark Twain
_


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Isn't that what Christians do?  No!  They tell us that God told them these things.  I say BULLSHIT!  

You have the audacity to suggest god cares if you believe the Jesus story?  Why?  Because your man made book says so?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


And you have the audacity to claim that you know what Jesus said how? And that it even matters, how?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Claiming to know what others experience, tsk tsk.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


History.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ....And *I doubt at 17 years old you were smart enough* to come to the conclusion there is no god.  What reasons did you have for not believing in God(s) back then?  And then tell us about this experience that changed you.  Not that it will impress me.


Of course you doubt it;  You make the common mistake of assuming I'm just like you.

I was reading at college level when I was 12.  I progressed from standard child Bible school attendee to agnostic to atheist by 16.  My parents even had elders from our church come over for an "intervention".  Everyone was nice about it, but they were very questioning about why I disbelieved.  (Mostly due to the inconsistencies between science and statements in the Bible).


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Not insecure?  Then why would you feel compelled to tell a theist that there is no God?  What prompts those who try to destroy the faith of somebody who takes comfort in that faith?  Who finds value in that faith?

What sort of evil prompts somebody to take away that which harms the Atheist in no fashion whatsoever, but others value and cherish?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


The bible's earliest fragments date to several generations after the facts, making it all hearsay at best. It's a well-know fact that nothing was written down when (and if) Jesus spoke. Got anything for real or is that it?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> The bible's earliest fragments date to *several generations* after the facts, making it all hearsay at best. It's a well-know fact that nothing was written down when (and if) Jesus spoke. Got anything for real or is that it?


No several "generations", but decades.  This also explains why the Romans didn't document the execution of a simple rabbi.


----------



## mamooth (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Which is why agnostic is the only thinking person's position, because absence of evidence isn't evidence. It's faith.



No, incorrect. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence, if there's enough of it.

If A sometimes implies B, and B _never_ happens after zillions of observations, then logic says we should conclude A is wrong.

Everyone acts that way for most things in their life. Some people just make a special exception to that common sense rule for the matter of religion, which isn't logical.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > The bible's earliest fragments date to *several generations* after the facts, making it all hearsay at best. It's a well-know fact that nothing was written down when (and if) Jesus spoke. Got anything for real or is that it?
> ...



Or common thieves or anybody else who the government decreed merited execution via crucifixion.  The Roman government and military did have some policy with merit, but was not big on social justice and was exceedingly cruel and insensitive to the suffering they imposed upon those who did not matter to them.  It is noteworthy that something so common as crucifixion of criminals would become uncommon soon after it was done to Jesus of Nazareth.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > The bible's earliest fragments date to *several generations* after the facts, making it all hearsay at best. It's a well-know fact that nothing was written down when (and if) Jesus spoke. Got anything for real or is that it?
> ...


There's zero proof that those who are claimed to have written parts of the bible (like Luke) actually wrote them. None.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Your problem, IMO,  is that you equated the man made disciplines or liturgy of religion to be God,  And then, because such man made disciplines and liturgy designed by flawed human beings are of necessity in themselves flawed, you chose to discard God along with the trappings of religion. 

Your error I think was in assuming that the religion was God.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



We think this does harm us.  From ISIS to the stupidity of christian voters.  We think it has held civilization back thousands of years.  Religion has been anti science for hundreds of years.  And the attrocities.  And then you try to say this is a Christian nation.  No it is not.  If you understood this isn't a Christian nation it's for all of us then I would back off.  So don't wonder why atheists attack religions because they brainwash people.

And I don't do this in public.  If you are here in this thread, you are asking to hear the truth.  You don't see us spouting off on street corners telling anyone they'll go to hell if they believe, do you?  You can't come on USMB and be a pussy.

I think religion is very harmful so I am encouraged to see that the internet has had a lot to do with turning people atheist.  Our species will be far less gullible when it gives us delusions of grandure.  And people will start looking to improve their here and now rather than cope with a shitty life waiting for an afterlife.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Maybe there is a creator.  Man has been contemplating that for a long time.  Maybe there is and maybe there isn't.  So what?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

A fucking men


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



It is true that there are various theories on the compilation and authorship or editorship of the synoptic Gospels, all of which are collections of testimonies of Jesus life and teachings here on Earth and were no doubt pulled from myriad sources.  All were edited to be more theological statements rather than chronological history.

Did those events documented nowhere else that we know of actually happen?  Nobody knows for certain. Nevertheless countless millions have been instructed, encouraged, strengthened, comforted, empowered, and influenced by that text, as well as all the others, that has endured the test of time as nothing else ever written has.

Yes there are those fanatics who misinterpreted the scriptures and misused them with terrible consequences.  Yes there are those who deliberately misuse the scriptures for their own gain or motives.

But first the Jews who embraced the God of the Old Testament, and the Christians who gained a different understanding of God in the New Testament have affected and changed the world for good as no other force has done.  Most of the world's democratic republics, almost all of the thrift shops, soup kitchens, ministries to the homeless, the addicted, leper colonies, and relief effort for some of the world's most poor and desperate people as well as many hospitals, universities, and other institutions of learning or ministry were and are organized and influenced by people of the Christian or Jewish faith.

Without the JudeoChristian faith it would be a very different world than what we have, and I think even the Atheists who enjoy liberty and justice as few peoples of the world have ever known would not like that world.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

mamooth said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Which is why agnostic is the only thinking person's position, because absence of evidence isn't evidence. It's faith.
> ...



Referencing your paragraph I highlighted, I would agree that it is probable that B does not exist.

But given testimony of millions/billions of Christians who testify to a personal relationship or real life experience with B, would it not logically follow that it is probable that B exists?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



So why would somebody so persistently attempt to destroy the faith of those who believe in a Creator?   How does somebody justify denigrating, ridiculing, or demeaning those who find value in something that does no harm in any way to those who do not believe?

And in defense of your side, I have to sympathize with those who suffer the infrequent fanatical Christian who is in your face with all manner of threats and/or being accused of all manner of evil if they do not believe as that Christian does.  Some of us Christians have suffered that.

I seriously doubt anybody has ever been persuaded to seek a relationship with the living God by being told he or she was going to hell.  And I suspect some continue to reject the possibility of the living God because of the unattractive and toxic way that they were introduced to Him.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Like I said I would never tell a believer to their face that they are dumb.  I have to hope they run into me here.  
All the nice people at the church I went to Sunday.  You are right, I wouldn't want to be the one to wake them up from their brainwashing.  If that ignorance is making them bliss I should just ignore it and let them stay happy even if I think it's holding us all back.  Because there are an awful lot of dummies on this planet.  Sheep if you ask me.  And you can't cry that I'm doing it to you because you asked for it coming here.  It's like I'm a shark and you ventured off into shark invested water.  Had you just stayed on land you would have remained safe.  And I'm a shark not a croc.  A croc doesn't wait for the pray to jump fully in.  At least I wait.  





I would never do that to a theist.

Once you come on to USMB you pretty much become a Seal


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Science as a discipline was developed mostly by Christians, almost entirely by theists. I know no Christians who are anti-science in any form or fashion.  Yes there is a small minority who rejects some popular scientific theory but they are a small minority and do not represent the large bulk of us.  It is as dishonest to tar all Christians with that brush as it would be to tar all Atheists as 'little Marxists, Lenins or Stalins' who were Atheist.

Show me the Atheist organizations who have organized thrift shops, soup kitchens, ministries to the desperate poor, ministries to lepers, who have risked their lives to open the minds of the ignorant before you make religion a destructive force on Earth.  Christians routinely do that all the time, often at great personal risk and sacrifice.

I am currently fund raising for a group who will travel to Peru this summer to deliver refurbished wheel chairs, walkers, crutches, and other helpful apparatus to the poorest of the disabled who cannot afford such things themselves.  And yes, the group is Christian motivated by Christian teachings and values.  I would go with them if I was physically able, but I am not.

Show me an Atheist nation where social justice is the norm and in which all the people have opportunity to prosper beyond bare existence.  And all such nations have defacto dictatorships or totalitarian governments.

Tell me one way that my being a Christian harms you in any way.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



If you would not do that to people in your social circle, why would you feel justified to doing it to people here at USMB?


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

mamooth said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Which is why agnostic is the only thinking person's position, because absence of evidence isn't evidence. It's faith.
> ...


But there isn't absence of evidence. There are more than 24,000 written manuscripts.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Well we have to be intellectually honest though and admit that those manuscripts were written by human beings as testimony to the living God.  We have nothing that was literally penned by a deity.

But I have to smile at those posting writings by famous Atheists as being somehow authoritative on the subject when those 24,000 or however many there are manuscripts written by famous Christians are summarily dismissed as delusional fiction.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


It is your christian nation that causes poor people to need thrift shops and soup kitchens.  There wouldn't be a need for those things if us atheists ran things.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



*Why can’t atheists just leave theists alone?*

Because religion has been, and continues to be, responsible for countless horrors throughout human history. See also: Religiously motivated animosity, violence and oppression and discrimination.
For all the problems we face as a society, many theists choose not only to do nothing to help, but actually engage in sabotage by actively preventing solutions from being instigated, usually by supporting irrational political positions e.g. stem-cell research, contraception, women’s rights, sexual equality and even global warming.
Because belief in a god taps into mankind’s natural tendency to defer moral decision making to authority figures (including priests, prophets, holy books, popes, ayatollahs and imams). Acting out ‘God’s plan’ or ‘God’s will’ is a sure-fire way to absolve one’s-self of responsibility for one’s actions. See also: Cituke.
Because as a functional member of society it benefits everyone if your decision making process is founded on evidence and reason, not on superstition. Faith isn’t a virtue; it is the glorification of voluntary ignorance.
Because religious superstition erects an absolute monarchy in a person’s mind. It teaches them to be satisfied with with not understanding the world and represents a surrendering to ignorance under the pretension of ‘devine knowledge’. Many of the greatest thinkers in human history have been repressed, sometimes forcefully, by those with faith. It is not skeptics or explorers but fanatics and ideologues who menace decency and progress. See also: Hypatia, Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno, The relationship between science and religion.
Note: The common theist response “Those people aren’t really [insert religion]” is an example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. If all the Christians who have called other Christians ‘not really a Christian’ were to vanish, there’d be no Christians left.

See also: The Ethics of Belief (a must read).

_“Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.” – _Blaise Pascal

_“No belief held by one man, however seemingly trivial the belief, and however obscure the believer, is ever actually insignificant or without its effect on the fate of mankind”_ – William Clifford


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


25,000 after I post this

Atheism and secularism correlate highly with the well-being of individuals and societies by almost every possible measure.

Atheism is correlated with better scientific literacy [2][3], lower poverty rates, higher literacy rates, higher average incomes, less violence, lower divorce rates, lower teen pregnancy rates, lower STD infection rates, lower crime rates and lower homicide rates.

Irreligion by Country, Democracy Index, Education Index, Economic freedom, Overall Human Development.

Atheism is correlated with higher intelligence: Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4Source 5 Source 6 Source 7 Source 8 Source 9.

See also: Epiphenom – The Science of Religion and Non-Belief

_“I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs.”_ – Sam Harris


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Because you ask for it coming to this subject.  AND, I don't worry about hurting your feelings or having you say bad things about me in my neighborhood or worse KILL ME for my beliefs.  Yes, some theists feel compelled to killing us atheists.  So don't ask me why I would do it here and not in person.  Because on the internet, in this message boards, you are asking for it simply by coming here. 

And if you are sooooo sure of your faith, why do you care what I say?  See I hate your argument lady.  It's basically the "why would you hurt someone's feelings" argument.  It has nothing to do with if god exists or not.  Its basically saying even if he isn't, shut up and let ignorant people be blissful.

_“A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it.”_ – David Stevens

Ever hear the truth will set you free?  I'm trying to set you free.  You guys tell people they'll go to hell if they don't believe.  That's pretty harsh, rude and ignorant no matter how effective it is.  It offends me.  So sorry if I offend you.

*Militant atheists are just as bad as religious ones.*
No, they’re not. There are no calls for slavery, rape or murder in the atheist holy book.

Atheists are most often called ‘militant’ when they passionately defend reason and advocate critical thinking. The bar theists set for perceived hostility appears to be any atheist simply voicing an opinion in dissent of religious belief. In contrast, the bar atheists set for perceived theistic hostility is any form of religiously motivated violence or oppression.

Atheism does not preclude someone from being argumentative or insensitive; those things are simply seen as being preferable to killing one another over an imaginary friend.

A ‘militant’ atheist will debate in a University theatre or appeal for the separation of religion and government. A militant theist will kill doctors, stone women to death, incite religious war, restrict sexual and gender equality and convince children they are flawed and worthless – all under the instruction of their imagined ‘god’ or holy book.

It can be argued that there is no such thing as a ‘militant’ atheist, that the term is itself a misnomer, because there is simply no ideology or philosophy in atheism to be militant about. If an atheist is someone who lacks belief in gods, then a ‘militant’ atheist is apparently someone who passionately lacks a belief in gods. All other possible beliefs and ideologies – including any desire to oppress theism – come from outside atheism. This is in contrast to religious belief, which often includes a set of laws and commandments purportedly derived from a supernatural source about which one can be ‘militant’.

Note: ‘Militant’ atheism is most often confused with gosateizm (state atheism), which was based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. It was this ideology which was responsible for the oppression and murder of theists under several 20th century communist regimes. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods with no inherit moral, political or philosophical baggage.

See also: The Ethics of Belief (a must read), Richard Dawkins on Militant Atheism, Christian Terrorism, Islamic Terrorism, Atheist Terrorism (no link found).

_“I’m sorry if my insensitivity towards your beliefs offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia and rejection of science and reason offend me. So I guess we’re even.” – _Anonymous


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Really?  Tell those to the poorest of the poor in China where Atheism is the official religion.  Tell that to the tens of thousands who starved in Russia under an Atheist Lenin and then Stalin.  Again, name a single Atheist nation anywhere in which the people enjoy liberty, freedom of expression, and unlimited opportunity to prosper.

And explain why, with a few exceptions, the nations that are most prospering are nations where Christianity is the predominant religion.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



How the Internet Is Taking Away America’s Religion

1990, about 8 percent of the U.S. population had no religious preference. By 2010, this percentage had more than doubled to 18 percent. That’s a difference of about 25 million people, all of whom have somehow lost their religion.  That raises an obvious question: how come? Why are Americans losing their faith?

the number of people with a religious upbringing has dropped since 1990. It’s easy to imagine how this inevitably leads to a fall in the number who are religious later in life. 

Less religious brainwashing by parents means less brainwashed citizens 20 years from now.

goes on to show that college-level education also correlates with the drop. Once it again, it’s easy to imagine how contact with a wider group of people at college might contribute to a loss of religion.

So we are better educated.  Smarter people don't fall for religions as much as poor people.  But although the correlation is statistically significant, it can only account for about 5 percent of the drop, so some other factor must also be involved.

That’s where the Internet comes in. In the 1980s, Internet use was essentially zero, but in 2010, 53 percent of the population spent two hours per week online and 25 percent surfed for more than 7 hours.

This increase closely matches the decrease in religious affiliation. In fact, Downey calculates that it can account for about 25 percent of the drop.

But there is something else going on here too. Downey has found three factors—the drop in religious upbringing, the increase in college-level education and the increase in Internet use—that together explain about 50 percent of the drop in religious affiliation.

But what of the other 50 percent? 

The drop in religious upbringing, increased intelligence and the increase in Internet use seem to be causing people to lose their faith. But something else about modern life that is not captured in this data is having an even bigger impact.  What is it?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

The share of U.S. adults who say they believe in God, while still remarkably high by comparison with other advanced industrial countries, has declined modestly, from approximately 92% to 89%, since Pew Research Center conducted its first Landscape Study in 2007.1 The share of Americans who say they are “absolutely certain” God exists has dropped more sharply, from 71% in 2007 to 63% in 2014. 

I wonder how many Americans are "absolutely certain" today that God exists.  Is it closer to 50%?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...




America.  America is a secular nation.  And every other civilized western country is secular.  None of them are Christian nations.  You do realize our religous nuts here in America are much nuttier than the nuts in Europe, right?  For example, they don't deny evolution like the nuts in America do.  

Name one Christian Nation that practically wiped out the Native Americans and who used slaves to build the new country the just stole?  

I've had all these arguments before.  Is this the best you theists can do?  And I'm sorry but I don't worship communism.  You associating me with that just exposes your ignorance.

We won't know for a long time how an atheist run society would do because you guys are so brainwashed you wouldn't vote for an atheist.  We vote for theists all the time.  

Americans Would Rather Vote For A Philandering, Pot-Smoking President Than An Atheist One | The Huffington Post

So it is your attitude that has to change.  You thinking us atheists are a bunch of pol pots and Hitler's is ridiculous.  Hitler used the Christians the same way Trump uses religion to win elections.  Who knows that Hitler truly believed but one thing we know is the Germans were a bunch of Christian sheep.  The pope helped Hitler for god sakes.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

More Than 50% of Americans Would Vote for an Atheist Presidential Candidate — But Would You?

in 1958, only 18 percent of Americans said they’d vote for a secularist. Over the past five decades, we’ve seen steady growth, though, with more than half of Americans now reporting the same.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


If I copy a Tarzan comic 25,000 times, is it more true than the bible?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > mamooth said:
> ...


So if people copy a Justin Bieber song 4,000,000 times, is he bigger than god?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



According to a latest survey, 85% of Chinese people have religious beliefs or had some religious practices and only 15% of them are real atheists. The real atheists here refer to those who lack belief in the existence of deities and do not join in any religious activities. 185 million people believe in Buddhism and 33 million have faith in Christianity and believes in the existence of God. Only 12 million people are Taoists, although more than one hundred million have taken part in Taoism activities before. Thus, it is obvious that the Buddhism has the widest influence. The other major religions are Taoism, Confucianism, Islam and Christianity.

Sorry but epic fail.  And I don't see the connection anyways.  Sure Christianity offered black slaves in the deep south some comfort for the shitty lives they were living.  The slave masters used religion so those slaves wouldn't take action to improve what little life they had left.  If they weren't told a heaven was waiting maybe they would have run or revolted a lot sooner.  

Like I said, religion has held us all back at least 5000 years.  Religions only went along with science when they could no longer fight it.  Or when everyone forgot that science has debunked your religions original claims and in fact your religion has softened in order to make sense to people.  For example, at one time people believed Adam and Eve to be real people.  That lie the church can no longer tell so they admit it's an allegory.   Evolution is the big one.  Your church can't admit YET that humans came from monkeys and monkeys were originally fish.  Your religion refuses to accept that.  So your religion thinks god POOFED fully grown adult zebra and giraffe and bears and humans onto the earth.  Is that your claim?  If you don't believe in evolution don't tell me you are pro science or that your religion hasn't held us back.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Christianity is the best of all the religions no doubt.  I'll give you that.

*People who believe in god are happier.*
The claim that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.

Atheism is correlated with better scientific literacy [2][3], lower poverty rates, higher literacy rates, higher average incomes, less violence, lower divorce rates, lower teen pregnancy rates, lower STD infection rates, lower crime rates and lower homicide rates. It correlates highly with the well-being of individuals and societies by almost every possible measure.

Atheists can be spiritual (a must watch).

Studies on happiness outside of predominantly religious countries (eg. the United States) find little to no correlation between happiness and religious belief. This corresponds with evidence which shows social and community bonding, rather than spiritual engagement, explains why religious people report greater satisfaction with life. Atheists, by comparison, may also simply be unhappy with the level of distrust and persecution they receive from their compatriots.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



*There is no evidence god doesn’t exist, so belief is as justified or as valid as non-belief.*
Argument from ignorance.

A common attempt to shift the burden of proof or ‘make room’ for a god. Represents a type of false dichotomy that excludes the fact that there is insufficient investigation and the proposition has not yet been proven either true or false.

The failure to disprove the existence of something _does not _constitute proof of its existence.

Belief is not as valid a position as skepticism when dealing with unsupported or unfalsifiable claims because all such claims would need to be believed implicitly. Agnostic atheism is the most rational position.

*Atheists should prove god doesn’t exist.*
Russell’s teapot.

The burden of proof is on the person or party asserting the claim; in this case, the theist.

See also: The Dragon in my Garage by Carl Sagan, Invisible Pink Unicorn and Flying Spaghetti Monster.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



Are there really that many people who like a Justin Bieber song?

The last time I looked it up, at least 6 billion and counting Bibles have been printed.  Bieber isn't anywhere close to being in the same league., 

Factoid:  the longest word in the Bible is Mahershalalhashbaz.  You'll find it in the Book of Isaiah.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Year after year after year the happiest countries in the world are presented and they usually include the same countries:
Australia - Canada - Denmark - Finland - Iceland - Netherlands - New Zealand - Norway - Sweden - Switzerland with Norway taking the top honors over Denmark this year.

Predominantly Christian nations every one.


----------



## ricechickie (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> More Than 50% of Americans Would Vote for an Atheist Presidential Candidate — But Would You?
> 
> in 1958, only 18 percent of Americans said they’d vote for a secularist. Over the past five decades, we’ve seen steady growth, though, with more than half of Americans now reporting the same.



I suspect we already have. But when you have so many people who won't vote for an admitted atheist, I think a lot of politicians are closeted in religion.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


The English word for that is Motherfuckingdouchebag. I think. 

But the point is, you can copy something 80 billion times, it still doesn't make it true on that fact alone.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Atheism requires self delusion, you prove the point.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> More Than 50% of Americans Would Vote for an Atheist Presidential Candidate — But Would You?
> 
> in 1958, only 18 percent of Americans said they’d vote for a secularist. Over the past five decades, we’ve seen steady growth, though, with more than half of Americans now reporting the same.


And no coincidence that the Presidents of the past few decades have been among the worst ever.

You make the case for Christian Presidents.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Again, you make the point for Christianity.

List the school murders from 1900-1960 then 1961-today.

Game Over.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


You hit the nail on the head.  A Christian talks to others about his/her faith because it is great news to all.  The only reason an atheist has for going around berating people for being Christian is their insecurity.  There is absolutely no downside to being a Christian, only upsides even if the entire Jesus thing was a fabrication 2,000 years ago.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

mamooth said:


> No, incorrect. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence, *if there's enough of it*.
> 
> If A sometimes implies B, and B _never_ happens after zillions of observations, then logic says we should conclude A is wrong.
> 
> Everyone acts that way for most things in their life. Some people just make a special exception to that common sense rule for the matter of religion, which isn't logical.


LOL.  You should try saying such things into a mirror before posting them on the Internet for everyone to see.  Hint:  *you can't have less than nothing*.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



American values differ from those of Western Europeans in many important ways. Most notably, Americans are more individualistic and are less supportive of a strong safety net than are the publics of Britain, France, Germany and Spain. Americans are also considerably more religious than Western Europeans.

People in the United States are much less likely to accept Darwin's idea that humans and apes share a common ancestor than adults in other Western nations, a number of surveys show.

Nuff said


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



When I became convinced that the universe was natural, that all the ghosts and gods were myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood, the sense, the feeling, the joy of freedom. The walls of my prison crumbled and fell. The dungeon was flooded with light and all the bolts and bars and manacles turned to dust. I was no longer a servant, a serf, or a slave. There was for me no master in all the wide world, not even in infinite space.

I was free to think. Free to express my thoughts, free to live in my own ideal. Free to live for myself and those I loved. Free to use all my faculties, all my senses. Free to spread imagination’s wings, free to investigate, to guess, and dream and hope. Free to judge and determine for myself. Free to reject all ignorant and cruel creeds, all the inspired books that savages have produced, and the barbarous legends of the past. Free from sanctified mistakes and “holy” lies. Free from the fear of eternal pain, free from the winged monsters of the night. Free from devils, ghosts and gods. For the first time I was free.

There were no prohibited places in all of the realm of thought. No error, no space where fancy could not spread her painted wings. No chains for my limbs. No lashes for my back. No flames for my flesh. No Master’s frown or threat, no following in another’s steps. No need to bow or cringe or crawl, or utter lying words. I was free; I stood erect and fearlessly, joyously faced all worlds.

My heart was filled with gratitude, with thankfulness, and went out in love to all the heros, the thinkers who gave their lives for liberty of hand and brain, for the freedom of labor and thought to those who fell on the fierce fields of war. To those who died in dungeons, bound in chains, to those by fire consumed, to all the wise, the good, the brave of every land whose thoughts and deeds have given freedom to the sons of men. And then, I vowed to grasp the torch that they held, and hold it high, That light might conquer darkness still.

-Robert Green Ingersoll (1833-1899)


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Ingersoll was exactly right.  Without a higher being holding him up to high standards of how he must attempt to live his life, he is free to be as narcissistic, evil, and uncaring as he wishes without feeling a bit of remorse or concern about it.  He can whatever he pleases simply based up if he thinks the law will catch him or not.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Bull.  We all know that god's favorite ISM is Capitalism, right?  And capitalism only works if the masses are poor.  Example, walmart can't survive paying a livable wage to all it's employees.  And all the good paying union jobs went to China and Mexico.  Why would they run from Capitalism?  Huh?

The company can't have everyone be middle class and rich.  We need to exploit poor people in order to make the rich richer.  If I was wrong about this then capitalism would make sure everyone made a livable wage.  But capitalists call that socialism.  And it's not.  Because I don't want to make that base living wage.  The masses make that.  Guys like me and you would make more than that just like we do now.  Only difference is everyone at the company would make a livable wage.  If that's not possible then Capitalism requires poor people.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


How is it that all of the richest nations on earth that are able to take care of their poorest are all capitalist?

If you are so concerned about jobs maybe you should look in the mirror and see why companies are sending their jobs offshore.

Honestly, you have to go to a university to learn to be that naïve.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > mamooth said:
> ...


You dismiss evidence of a historical event for no good reason or basis.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > mamooth said:
> ...


What does that have to do with the historical evidence for Jesus Christ?


----------



## MaryL (Apr 10, 2017)

I voted strongly theist. I lied.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Correct, there were no scribes writing down the words of Jesus as he spoke them.  Biblical scholars often agree as to when the books were written.  However, the source material is still up for evidence.  I fail to see why you think this is a revelation.  After Clint Eastwood's "Flags of our Fathers" came out a lot of young people were running around yapping about how the famous flag raising at Iwo Jima was actually the second flag raising.  No shit.  Every Marine knows that as a matter of history.  Not a revelation except to the ignorant non-Marines.

Still, how does that prove your statement that it was "several generations later".  Care to put an actual year figure on that?  Even +10? 

Time Line of Early Christianity--The Lost Gospel of Judas--National Geographic

When Were the Four Gospels Written?

The Dating of the Gospels


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

MaryL said:


> I voted strongly theist. I lied.


What do you believe?...if anything.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > More Than 50% of Americans Would Vote for an Atheist Presidential Candidate — But Would You?
> ...


Sorry, but disagree on the "causal" factor.  Human society has been evolving and changing for all of recorded history.  The only thing that is certain is that those who constantly view life through a rear view mirror are wrong.

George Santayana's famous quote applies, but we, as a species, must continue to move forward.  No, I don't agree with every idea the "liberals" offer, but I also don't agree with every idea offered by the "conservatives"/Tories.

It's natural for our species to advance by taking two steps forward and one step back.  That concept was clearly understood by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in his view  "_state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country._"

Laboratories of democracy - Wikipedia


----------



## dblack (Apr 10, 2017)

MaryL said:


> I voted strongly theist. I lied.



You're totally going to Hell!


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


There is no question civilization is imploding.  None.  Within 50 years the world will be a Mad Max movie in real life unless something drastic occurs to alter the direction.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> America.  America is a secular nation.  And every other civilized western country is secular....The pope helped Hitler for god sakes.


Do you know the best way to silence fanatics?  Stop being a fanatic.  When they sling shit, you respond with logic, not more shit.

America, and "every other civilized western country" aren't all secular.  I think what you are striving to say is that democracies are not theocratic.  That governments _should_ be secular, meaning differential to all beliefs, including atheists.  What I've seen on this forum are atheists advocating that our government advocate atheism.  That's not what the Founders intended.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

dblack said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > I voted strongly theist. I lied.
> ...


Are you a theist who truly believes this, a sarcastic atheist or something else?   Sarcasm doesn't translate well on text forums.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> ...I know no Christians who are anti-science in any form or fashion..


Sorry, Foxfyre, but there are plenty who deny science. Evolution for example or that a zygote is equal to a human being. 



Foxfyre said:


> ...Tell me one way that my being a Christian harms you in any way.


Agreed 100%


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Nice prediction, but disagreed.  Since the odds are you and I will be dead, there's no use betting on it.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The historical events of the bible, including what Jesus is supposed to have said, were dated to be several generations after the facts. And those were just fragments, most of it is dated much later. If anyone comes up with anything dated within jesus' lifetime, you could possibly have something. So it's a really good reason. Too bad for you, clown.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Carbon dating. Look on google.


----------



## dblack (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



You are so right. My apologies. I was merely riffing on what was, I assumed, deliberate irony. Strictly for humor.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



I understand.   But if millions of people testify to an experience, whether or not we know how to test to verify or falsify that experience scientifically, it seems to me that it is more reasonable to believe the people had that experience than to deny that it happened because it hasn't happened to us.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I'm a big fan of science.  Why do you assume carbon dating is unknown to me?  Is it wishful thinking on your part?  Hate?  A pathetic attempt at feeling superior over another?  What?  Please explain why you'd jump to a factless conclusion?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> I understand.   But if millions of people testify to an experience, whether or not we know how to test to verify or falsify that experience scientifically, it seems to me that it is more reasonable to believe the people had that experience than to deny that it happened because it hasn't happened to us.


Millions?  It appears only four did so.  There were more, but the Council of Nicaea in 325AD nullified their views.  Many were declared heretics.  Gnosticism was declared heresy.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > ...I know no Christians who are anti-science in any form or fashion..
> ...



That doesn't make them anti science though.  It is a difference of opinion about the science we have.  Those Christians who insist that it is an absolute fact that humankind is altering the climate in dangerous ways I believe are just as wrong about the science they believe in.  And I know for darn sure I'm not anti science.


Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > I understand.   But if millions of people testify to an experience, whether or not we know how to test to verify or falsify that experience scientifically, it seems to me that it is more reasonable to believe the people had that experience than to deny that it happened because it hasn't happened to us.
> ...



I believe I have had the experience and I'm not quite old enough to predate the Council of Nicea.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> I believe I have had the experience and I'm not quite old enough to predate the Council of Nicea.


LOL.  Agreed, my sweet Foxfyre.  Still, there are many theists who disagree with science. Such as those who take the Bible literally. 

Do you take Genesis literally?  Figuratively?  Something in between?  For me, all figuratively.  Up to Moses, after that, I there is the "Legend" factor.  That's the OT.  The NT is something different, but obviously influenced by human beings such as in 325 A.D.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


The earliest writing we have about Alex the Great is 400 years after his death.  So what's your point?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

dblack said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...


Thanks!  Like you, I love humor.  It's just difficult to tell via a text medium.  Thank you very much for honestly clarifying your position.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



Our history though is checkered with ebb and flow of falling away from and then an appreciation and  embracing a resurgence of spirituality or faith.  Some historians identify three and some four periods they call the 'great revivals' or 'great awakenings' dating back to the 18th Century. 

There is always a complacency that sets in, a falling away from the Church or synagogue, a falling away from religious faith evidenced by increased lawlessness, coarseness and incivility in the culture, and a decline in those things that contribute to peace and happiness in society.

Eventually people become fed up with the deteriorating condition of society and all they once knew to be good and they return to the Church and religious faith for a few generations.

I think we're about ripe for that again.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > I believe I have had the experience and I'm not quite old enough to predate the Council of Nicea.
> ...


Science is all about disagreement.  Yeah people who believe in the Bible may say the science is being interpreted wrong.  Does not make them anti-science.  Science used to say the universe always existed, now it says it has a beginning.  Science says time was a constant, now it says it can be altered.  Science said we have 4 dimensions, now it says we have over 3 dozen.  Science is about learning and seeking truth, that is why science is moving towards the Biblical accounts.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


You look at post Roman Empire, now hand those left in charge in Mad Max's world with nuclear weapons and Saran gas instead of swords and pikes like they had 1500 years ago and you get my drift.


----------



## MaryL (Apr 10, 2017)

Our society Is deteriorating,   truer words were never spoken . I lay that at laxity and ambiguity that liberals are forcing on us, and the hubris and the irony of that blows me away.


----------



## Muhammed (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Who told you that?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > I believe I have had the experience and I'm not quite old enough to predate the Council of Nicea.
> ...



I have taught theology within the framework of the history of Christianity for a few decades now.  And my approach to the stories of Genesis, at least up to Abraham, I teach the stories from a metaphorical point of view--old fashioned Jewish exaggeration to illustrate a point.  The point of course is to identify all that exists and all that happens as the will of God, to explain why things are the way they are, to illustrate how sin began with the individual, spread into the family, then  the community, and then the world.  And because sin harms us and/or others, the consequences extend into all subsequent generations.  God created a perfect creation and by our sin we have spoiled it.

Eventually we arrive at the First Century and Christianity that was heavily influenced by its ancient Jewish heritage.

Now while I am describing this to my wide eyed students, almost all college educated adults with advanced degrees, I assure them that my theory is only one of many.  And those who want to believe the Bible literally are encouraged to do so, and those who prefer another theory to mine are also encouraged to go that route.

For to me, God only wants us to love and seek him, and he really doesn't care what we think about all that other stuff.    (And he doesn't mind that I find religious history fascinating and have spent a good deal of my adult life studying it as an avocation.)

Abraham is a bit more iffy--I am more reluctant to take him metaphorically though I can see a possibility that he represents several people, but I'm happy to take him at face value too.  And Moses I am more reluctant to mess with.


----------



## Votto (Apr 10, 2017)

What's the difference between an agnostic and an atheist?

An agnostic is an atheist without any gonads.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

MaryL said:


> Our society Is deteriorating,   truer words were never spoken . I lay that at laxity and ambiguity that liberals are forcing on us, and the hubris and the irony of that blows me away.


Our society has been deteriorating for 2000 years according to some.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Votto said:


> What's the difference between an agnostic and an atheist?
> 
> An agnostic is an atheist without any gonads.


Says the ALT-THEIST ASSHOLES.   

I have no respect for people who desire to impose their beliefs upon others.  It doesn't matter if they are atheist or theist, they are all equally fucking assholes to me.


----------



## mamooth (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> LOL.  You should try saying such things into a mirror before posting them on the Internet for everyone to see.  Hint:  *you can't have less than nothing*.



Speaking of stupid things, that didn't address my post in any way. Why did you think it did?

Go on, explain to everyone what you meant by "You can't have less than nothing".

In contrast, my post was very clear. Absence of evidence can be evidence of absence, if you have enough of it.

For example, if someone tells me "Odin is a God who will strike you down if you curse him", and I curse Odin millions of times and I don't get struck down, I conclude the version of Odin as stated by the speaker does not exist. Why? Sheer repetition of absence of evidence.

We all use that logic in our everyday lives. Except, for some people, in the gods case.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> ...For to me, God only wants us to love and seek him, and he really doesn't care what we think about all that other stuff.    (And he doesn't mind that I find religious history fascinating and have spent a good deal of my adult life studying it as an avocation.)
> 
> Abraham is a bit more iffy--I am more reluctant to take him metaphorically though I can see a possibility that he represents several people, but I'm happy to take him at face value too.  And Moses I am more reluctant to mess with.


Accolades to you as a teacher. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Disagreed on what God wants from us.  That's a matter of interpretation.  

If God wanted us to do something, is there any doubt the Almighty could have imprinted it upon our DNA or in the sky?  So why the mystery?  IMHO, it goes back to the ultimate question:  "Why are we here?"


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 10, 2017)

mamooth said:


> ...For example, if someone tells me "Odin is a God who will strike you down if you curse him", and I curse Odin millions of times and I don't get struck down, I conclude the version of Odin as stated by the speaker does not exist. Why? Sheer repetition of absence of evidence....


Conversely, that person's understanding of Odin is flawed.  A person's flawed viewpoint doesn't mean anything about a third party.

Example;  Most people here have mothers (I've giving you the benefit of the doubt.  )  OJ's mother always believed he was innocent.  Fine.  Her beliefs are one thing and facts are another.  

Likewise, one person's religious views, even if they are atheistic, are just their views.  Unless they can prove those beliefs, they remain _beliefs_ AKA opinions.  All are free to have them...at least in this country.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Ha! I'm going to Germany in October to tell my European, Chinese counterparts how I'm doing what their not. And my company pays well just like they pay their German workers well. Imagine that


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


.


Weatherman2020 said:


> The earliest writing we have about Alex the Great is 400 years after his death. So what's your point?



the events of the 1st century were an open and spoken religion, progressively by the literature that culminated in the late 4th century the earlier 1st century truths were subordinated by the political agenda of the late 4th century and enshrined in the christian 4th century bible.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Embellishment


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


People been saying that for ten thousand years. 

But if the bees disappear and we over fish the oceans.

Maybe for a few years we only allow rich people to have kids and thin the herd that way.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


I don't need a god to keep me in line. I don't cheat, steal, lie much, murder, not a racist much, etc. I'm better that 90% of you mofos


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Imagine a god looking down on a good atheist and dick head Christian and choosing the dick just because he believes.

That's cult talk


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


You can but will you continue to? Will you make more people poor? I believe you will


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 10, 2017)

Hopefully I survive the next Republican crash that they'll blame Obama for


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Seriously?  That's your response?  

Sources for Caesar and Jesus Compared

Eyewitness to Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence about the Origin of the Gospels  - Christian Research Institute

The Earliest New Testament Manuscripts


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Hopefully I survive the next Republican crash that they'll blame Obama for


That's pretty funny considering that for over a decade Democrats blamed George Bush when it rained.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Imagine a god looking down on a good atheist and dick head Christian and choosing the dick just because he believes.
> 
> That's cult talk


Not as funny as you discussing something you don't believe.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Only a good man knows just how bad he is.  A bad man doesn't have a clue.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Like I said before, you dismiss evidence of a historical event for no good reason or basis.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > ...For to me, God only wants us to love and seek him, and he really doesn't care what we think about all that other stuff.    (And he doesn't mind that I find religious history fascinating and have spent a good deal of my adult life studying it as an avocation.)
> ...



I think each one of us has a purpose and we are given different gifts and ministries to accomplish it.  The happiest people are the ones who do.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Total mass hysteria, with a heavy sprinkling of wishful thinking and a complete lack of objectivity, never mind that these people always seem to be at the lower end of the intelligence scale.. It still doesn't make god true, it's a decent theory that needs to be explored more. Just like re-incarnation, there are so many stories about people knowing things in places they've never been... who can play instruments perfectly... But it hasn't been scientifically proven, so I'm of the opinion that for me, it's a very plausible scenario, and a the most likely, but i would never claim it as proven fact, because objectively, it isn't, no matter what my personal opinion might be about it.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The point is that you have no idea if the accounts of Alex the Great are factual. Unless there is other real evidence of his life.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Like I said before, your critical thinking is severly impaired.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


No eye witnesses. All hearsay. You sir are a liar. Even Josephus only read about the myth he heard about . Not one of the 5000 he ate with wrote about it. You're lyin


----------



## ding (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I see it the other way around. You dismiss evidence because it contradicts your beliefs.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


No one who wrote the bible met Jesus. It was all put together decades later if not centuries.


----------



## ding (Apr 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Of course there were eyewitnesses.  You dismiss evidence for no other reason than it contradicts your beliefs.   The early Christians wrote about Him, Jewish historians wrote about Him and secular historians wrote about Him.


----------



## ding (Apr 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


No different than any other event in antiquity.  It seems you have a higher standard for events which contradict your beliefs than events which don't contradict your beliefs.  The reality is that by any objective measure the evidence for Jesus Christ far surpasses any other event in antiquity.  It isn't even close.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


You have no real evidence. That much has been proven.


----------



## ding (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Over 24,000 written manuscripts says otherwise.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Your evidence is that people copied the book?


----------



## ding (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


The book didn't exist back then.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


So your evidence is that people copied some manuscripts?


----------



## ding (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Yes, just like every other event in antiquity which you accept.  The only difference is that in this case it was done many many more times and with far greater accuracy and must closer to the actual event in time.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Why, what do I accept that is historical? Give me an example.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Imagine a god looking down on a good atheist and dick head Christian and choosing the dick just because he believes.
> 
> That's cult talk


Agreed.  I doubt that's how it works.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Agreed on different gifts.  Our purpose is up for debate.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



Who wrote about him?  


*The Biblical God is real.*
There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god. Any ‘evidence’ proposed by theists to support the Bible’s various historical and supernatural claims is non-existent at best, manufactured at worst.

The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts. Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

The Bible is historically inaccurate [2], factually incorrect, inconsistent [2] and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

See also: Visualisation of Bible Contradictions (must read), Argument from the Bible, Criticisms of the Bible, Consistency of the Bible, A Compendium of Disbelief, Deconversion: The Bible and A History of God (both must watch), BBC The History of God.

Origins of the Bible: PBS Buried Secrets, CH4 Who wrote the Bible? (a must watch).

_“Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”_ – Isaac Asimov


*Biblical Jesus was real.*
There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artefacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reﬂections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death. These historical references generally refer to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus and, in some cases, directly contradict the Gospels or were deliberately manufactured.

The Gospels themselves contradict one-another [2] on many key events and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. The New Testament, as a whole, contains many internal inconsistencies as a result of its piecemeal construction and is factually incorrect on several historical claims, such as the early existence of Nazareth, the reign of Herod and the Roman census. Like the Old Testament, it too has had entire books and sections redacted.

The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented [2] by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

Even if Jesus’ existence could be established, this would in no way validate Christian theology or any element of the story portrayed in the Bible, such as the performance of miracles or the resurrection. Simply because it is conceivable a heretical Jewish preacher named Yeshua lived circa 30 AD, had followers and was executed, does not imply the son of a god walked the Earth at that time.

The motivation for belief in a divine, salvational Jesus breaks down when you accept evolution:

_“Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” _– Ken Ham

See also: Evidence for Jesus, Did Jesus Exist? [2][3], Why I am not a Christian (a must read), the Christological Argument, Hitchens – Core of the Jesus myth and Christianity is Immoral (both must watch).

_“Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.”_ – Anonymous


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



An overwhelming majority of New Testament scholars and Near East historians find that Jesus was a real person but then there's the separating myth from fact.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a _single_ contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well _after_ the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay does not provide good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.

The most "authoritative" accounts of a historical Jesus come from the four canonical Gospels of the Bible. Note that these Gospels did not come into the Bible as original and authoritative from the authors themselves, but rather from the influence of early church fathers, especially the most influential of them all: Irenaeus of Lyon who lived in the middle of the second century. Many heretical gospels existed by that time, but Irenaeus considered only some of them for mystical reasons. He claimed only four in number; according to Romer, "like the four zones of the world, the four winds, the four divisions of man's estate, and the four forms of the first living creatures-- the lion of Mark, the calf of Luke, the man of Matthew, the eagle of John (see _Against the Heresies_). The four gospels then became Church cannon for the orthodox faith. Most of the other claimed gospel writings were burned, destroyed, or lost." [Romer]

Not only do we not know who wrote them, consider that none of the Gospels existed during the alleged life of Jesus, nor do the unknown authors make the claim to have met an earthly Jesus. Add to this that none of the original gospel manuscripts exist; we only have copies of copies.

The consensus of many biblical historians put the dating of the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, at sometime after 70 C.E., and the last Gospel, John after 90 C.E. [Pagels, 1995; Helms]. This would make it some 40 years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus that we have any Gospel writings that mention him! Elaine Pagels writes that "the first Christian gospel was probably written during the last year of the war, or the year it ended. Where it was written and by whom we do not know; the work is anonymous, although tradition attributes it to Mark..."


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

The traditional Church has portrayed the authors as the apostles Mark, Luke, Matthew, & John, but scholars know from critical textural research that there simply occurs no evidence that the gospel authors could have served as the apostles described in the Gospel stories. Yet even today, we hear priests and ministers describing these authors as the actual disciples of Christ. Many Bibles still continue to label the stories as "The Gospel according to St. Matthew," "St. Mark," "St. Luke," St. John." No apostle would have announced his own sainthood _before_ the Church's establishment of sainthood. But one need not refer to scholars to determine the lack of evidence for authorship. As an experiment, imagine the Gospels without their titles. See if you can find out from the texts who wrote them; try to find their names.

Even if the texts supported the notion that the apostles wrote them, consider the low life expectancy of humans in the first century. According to the religious scholar, J.D. Crossan, "the life expectancy of Jewish males in the Jewish state was then twenty-nine years." [Crossan] Some people think this age appears deceptive because of the high infant mortally rates at birth. However, at birth the inhabitants of the Roman Empire had an even lower life expectancy of around twenty-five years. [source] According to Ulpian, a Roman jurist of the early third century C.E., the average life expectancy at birth came even lower to around twenty-one. [Potter] Of course these ages represent averages and some people lived after the age of 30, but how many? According to the historian Richard Carrier: "We have reason to believe that only 4% of the population at any given time was over 50 years old; over age 70, less than 2%. And that is under normal circumstances. But the Gospels were written after two very devastating abnormal events: the Jewish War and the Neronian Persecution, both of which would have, combined, greatly reduced the life expectancy of exactly those people who were eye-witnesses to the teachings of Jesus. And it just so happens that these sorts of people are curiously missing from the historical record precisely when the Gospels began to be circulated." [Carrier] Even if they lived to those unlikely ages, consider the mental and physical toll (especially during the 1st century) which would have likely reduced their memory and capability to write. Moreover, those small percentages of people who lived past 50 years were usually wealthy people (aristocrats, politicians, land and slave owners, etc.). However, the Gospels suggest that the followers of Jesus lived poorly, and this would further reduce the chances for a long life span. Although the New Testament does not provide the ages of the disciples, most Christians think their ages came to around 20-30 years old. Jesus' birth would have to have occurred before Herod's death at 4 B.C.E. So if Jesus' birth occurred in the year 4 B.C.E., that would put the age of the disciples, at the time of the writing of the first gospel, at around age 60-70 and the last gospel at around age 90-100! Based on just life expectancies alone, that would make the probability unlikely they lived during the writing of the first gospel, and extremely unlikely any of them lived during the writing of the last gospel (and I have used only the most conservative numbers).


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

The gospel of Mark describes the first written Bible gospel. And although Mark appears deceptively after the Matthew gospel, the gospel of Mark got written at least a generation _before_ Matthew. From its own words, one can deduce that the author of Mark had neither heard Jesus nor served as his personal follower. Whoever wrote the gospel simply accepted the story of Jesus without question and wrote a crude an ungrammatical account of the popular story at the time. Historians tell us of the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke), Mark served as the common element between Matthew and Luke and provided the main source for both of them. Of Mark's 666* verses, some 600 appear in Matthew, some 300 in Luke. According to Randel Helms, the author of Mark, stands at least a third remove from Jesus and more likely at the fourth remove.

Did Jesus exist?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

Virtually all other claims of Jesus come from sources outside of Christian writings. Devastating to the claims of Christians, however, comes from the fact that all of these accounts come from authors who lived _after_ the alleged life of Jesus. Since they did not live during the time of the hypothetical Jesus, none of their accounts serve as eyewitness evidence.

*Josephus Flavius*, the Jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. Although many scholars think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus (in _Antiquities_) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E. (well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus), puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote _Antiquities_ in 93 C.E., _after_ the first gospels got written! Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.

*Pliny the Younger* (born: 62 C.E.) His letter about the Christians only shows that he got his information from Christian believers themselves. Regardless, his birth date puts him out of range as an eyewitness account.

*Tacitus*, the Roman historian's birth year at 64 C.E., puts him well after the alleged life of Jesus. He gives a brief mention of a "Christus" in his _Annals_ (Book XV, Sec. 44), which he wrote around 109 C.E. He gives no source for his material. Although many have disputed the authenticity of Tacitus' mention of Jesus, the very fact that his birth happened _after_ the alleged Jesus and wrote the _Annals _during the formation of Christianity, shows that his writing can only provide us with hearsay accounts.

*Suetonius*, a Roman historian, born in 69 C.E., mentions a "Chrestus," a common name. Apologists assume that "Chrestus" means "Christ" (a disputable claim). But even if Seutonius had meant "Christ," it still says nothing about an earthly Jesus. Just like all the others, Suetonius' birth occurred well after the purported Jesus. Again, only hearsay.

*Talmud: *Amazingly some Christians use brief portions of the Talmud, (a collection of Jewish civil a religious law, including commentaries on the Torah), as evidence for Jesus. They claim that Yeshu in the Talmud refers to Jesus. However, this Yeshu, according to scholars depicts a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia at least a century before the alleged Christian Jesus or it may refer to Yeshu ben Pandera, a teacher of the 2nd centuy CE. Regardless of how one interprets this, the Palestinian Talmud didn't come into existence until the 3rd and 5th century C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud between the 3rd and 6th century C.E., at least two centuries after the alleged crucifixion. At best it can only serve as a controversial Christian or Jewish legend; it cannot possibly serve as evidence for a historical Jesus.

Christian apologists mostly use the above sources for their "evidence" of Jesus because they believe they represent the best outside sources. All other sources (Christian and non-Christian) come from even less reliable sources, some of which include: Mara Bar-Serapion (circa 73 C.E.), Ignatius (50 - 98? C.E.), Polycarp (69 - 155 C.E.), Clement of Rome (? - circa 160 C.E.), Justin Martyr (100 - 165 C.E.), Lucian (circa 125 - 180 C.E.), Tertullian (160 - ? C.E.), Clement of Alexandria (? - 215 C.E.), Origen (185 - 232 C.E.), Hippolytus (? - 236 C.E.), and Cyprian (? - 254 C.E.). As you can see, all these people lived well after the alleged death of Jesus. Not one of them provides an eyewitness account, all of them simply spout hearsay.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 11, 2017)

.
the 4th century christian bible is a biased political document disguised as a religion in an attempt to suppress the free Spirit that emerged in the 1st century - 

those same individuals from the 4th century are the same as those to this day that continue to disguise their true intent using the 1st century as a foil for their duplicitous intentions.

they are easily detected by their hatred for any free Spirited theology that is not enslaved by their repressive political agenda.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Thank you.  I'll advise my PhD friends and students, some who graduated prestigious schools magna or summa cum laude, that they are on the low end of the intelligence scale.  I'm sure they will be glad to know that.  Of course they will cease their faith in God immediately.

The scientists among them will also will be surprised that we shouldn't believe anything unless it can be proved scientifically.  That sure isn't something they would teach.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I read somewhere that there were several guys named Jesus preaching in the same area around the same time.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Being able to memorize stuff and repeat it doesn't make you able to cut through the crap, intelligent or aware. Their belief of an invisible superbeing with zero tangible evidence is proof of that.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Virtually all other claims of Jesus come from sources outside of Christian writings. Devastating to the claims of Christians, however, comes from the fact that all of these accounts come from authors who lived _after_ the alleged life of Jesus. Since they did not live during the time of the hypothetical Jesus, none of their accounts serve as eyewitness evidence.
> 
> *Josephus Flavius*, the Jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. Although many scholars think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus (in _Antiquities_) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E. (well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus), puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote _Antiquities_ in 93 C.E., _after_ the first gospels got written! Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.
> 
> ...



I wonder how many biographies of famous people were written while those people were still living?  Of course autobiographies are common now, presumably written by people while relatively young, including somebody in his 40's who aspired to be President.

I wonder how many histories were written of the Revolutionary War or Civil War while these were still in progress.

The ancient Jews composed much of the Old Testament after Nebuchadnezzar ransacked Jerusalem and dispersed the Jews in Israel to the four winds--the disapora.  In exile, the elders feared the purity of the Jewish faith and culture would be infused and contaminated by non Jewish religions and customs, and they began collecting manuscripts that had survived the centuries and producing new ones from oral history and tradition that would form the Torah.  Other manuscripts would be added to the whole that makes up the Old Testament.  The original Old Testament was canonized--declared complete and unchangeable--in a series of steps but with virtually 100% agreement among the Jewish elders by the First Century A.D.

Likewise as the Christian communities developed and expanded beyond Judah, the Christians began collecting manuscripts, recorded or remembered sayings of Jesus, the authoritative letters written by Paul, and other documents to be distributed for purposes of teachings in the formed Christian congregations.  And in time, through common use, these were edited into what we know as the New Testament.  Though never formally canonized, the content became fixed over time and considered permanent as to what would be the New Testament scriptures.

Probably none of the New Testament writers had any inkling they were writing scripture, thus they omitted so much detail commonly known to themselves but that would have been so helpful to us now in understanding what they were saying.

And was the whole process inspired by God?  I believe it was based on the enormous staying power of the Bible despite so many efforts to destroy it, and because of the Bible's ability to inform, instruct, inspire, and encourage people all the way to the 21st Century so far.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Well I'll let them know though I think they won't agree with you that there is zero evidence.  I think they'll also consider the source of this new (cough) information as coming from one who seems to have no conscience about attempting to destroy the faith that gives so many comfort and purpose and wonder what creates such a motive in somebody.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 11, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Agreed.  I try not to argue religion with people who become angry and agitated and sometimes downright militant when it comes to religion.  I believe it grieves the Holy Spirit when that happens.

But I LOVE a good debate with somebody who enjoys the exercise and is secure enough to test his/her beliefs and opinions.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Virtually all other claims of Jesus come from sources outside of Christian writings. Devastating to the claims of Christians, however, comes from the fact that all of these accounts come from authors who lived _after_ the alleged life of Jesus. Since they did not live during the time of the hypothetical Jesus, none of their accounts serve as eyewitness evidence.
> ...



Of course the writings were inspired by god.  If you go to church and then leave and do a good deed later that day, was it inspired by god?  Sure it was.  

What I find interesting is that Paul went to Greece and told these stories and the Greeks believed it.  But then again they weren't that bright.  If they were they wouldn't believe in Greek gods.

Was myth allegory/metaphor or truth for the ancient Greeks? Did they really think there were gods and goddesses who took an active part in human life?

It seems pretty clear that at least some level of belief in the gods was part of community life among the ancient Greeks, just as it was for the Romans.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


If they are as smart as you say, they'll agree that there's no real evidence but that they choose to believe precisely because it gives them comfort. Which isn't bad in itself, but religions cause way too much suffering for me to give myth worshipping a pass.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




Because religion has been, and continues to be, responsible for countless horrors throughout human history. See also: Religiously motivated animosity, violence and oppression and discrimination.
For all the problems we face as a society, many theists choose not only to do nothing to help, but actually engage in sabotage by actively preventing solutions from being instigated, usually by supporting irrational political positions e.g. stem-cell research, contraception, women’s rights, sexual equality and even global warming.
Because belief in a god taps into mankind’s natural tendency to defer moral decision making to authority figures (including priests, prophets, holy books, popes, ayatollahs and imams). Acting out ‘God’s plan’ or ‘God’s will’ is a sure-fire way to absolve one’s-self of responsibility for one’s actions. 
Because as a functional member of society it benefits everyone if your decision making process is founded on evidence and reason, not on superstition. Faith isn’t a virtue; it is the glorification of voluntary ignorance.
Because religious superstition erects an absolute monarchy in a person’s mind. It teaches them to be satisfied with not understanding the world and represents a surrendering to ignorance under the pretension of ‘devine knowledge’. Many of the greatest thinkers in human history have been repressed, sometimes forcefully, by those with faith. It is not skeptics or explorers but fanatics and ideologues who menace decency and progress.  
_“Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.” – _Blaise Pascal

_“No belief held by one man, however seemingly trivial the belief, and however obscure the believer, is ever actually insignificant or without its effect on the fate of mankind”_ – William Clifford


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 11, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



The validity of a claim, such as the existence of god, is not governed by the intelligence of the minds which hold it. Evidence and reason are the deciding factors.

Sir Isaac Newton, one of history’s greatest scientists, was not only intensely religious but also believed in alchemical transmutation. Alchemy is, however, fully incorrect given our modern understanding of chemistry, the atom and nucleosynthysis.

The fact that an intelligent person holds an irrational belief is simply evidence that our brains are able to compartmentalze world-views and models from one another, usually in order to maintain a state of ‘ignorant bliss’ and escape the discomfort of cognitive dissonance.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



It is impossible to find any culture whose history does not include belief in some form of deity or deities. 

Actually neither the Greeks nor the Romans nor the Egyptians or the pagan cultures of the Old Testament in the Biblical lands believed in any kind of relationship with the gods.  Most especially the Romans thought the gods more nuisance than benefit, more entertainment than something to actually worship.  Homage was paid mostly so that the gods would not make mischief.  For the same reason it was required that all pay homage to the gods though a special exemption was given to the Jews in order to keep the peace.  Otherwise the people were free to be as good or evil as they wished as the gods could care less.

That is one reason that Jesus of Nazareth was such an enigma.  Certainly no one, other than the Jews, had heard of a god showing up on Earth to do good or have lunch with people.  Gods could do favorable or unfavorable acts but gods could not suffer or die.

That is why so many describe Christianity as a relationship instead of a religion.  The only thing that makes it a religion are the rules and regulations imposed by the various sects/denominations that formed since the crucifixion.


----------



## PK1 (Apr 11, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


Yes, *Agnosticism* reflects HONEST IGNORANCE about a claim. Science takes the agnostic position ... until evidence supports or denies the claim.
It's the most *rational* stance.

Those who deny their IGNORANCE are displaying emotional insecurities, including conformance to perceived social-cultural pressure.


----------



## PK1 (Apr 11, 2017)

Religion and supernatural beliefs are cultural artifacts salted with discomfort about uncertainty and/or the emotional need to "blend in" to appear "normal".


----------



## james bond (Apr 12, 2017)

IsaacNewton said:


> The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.



Generally speaking, I would think Dawkins is referring to certain monotheistic gods.  That's why I put "Other" in the poll for those who didn't think their beliefs fit or weren't comfortable with the above choices.


----------



## james bond (Apr 12, 2017)

Mac1958 said:


> I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.



I can't speak for everyone, but I think it starts with Faith.  In my case, from there is the Bible and the evidence for the Resurrection.


----------



## james bond (Apr 12, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> ...



I questioned his "I am a 6.9" comment, too.  Had to look it up, but he created his belief scale in 2006 in The God Delusion.  He made his 6.9 comment in 2012.  He considered himself an agnostic at one time, so will give him the benefit of a doubt and accept his answer.  A person can give a finer grade to their answers.  He's still a Strong Atheist and anyone can change their mind.  Something can happen to change a person's mind.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.
> ...


What evidence?


----------



## james bond (Apr 12, 2017)

dani67 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> ...



I'm not sure how to answer you.  Since this is a serious belief scale, I believe Dawkins capitalizes God such as in academia.  The way you put god with a lower case "G," refers to pagan gods in academia.  Those gods are not included in the discussion.  For example, those gods may be treated as myths in Philosophy or part of Literature courses.  I think Dawkins is referring to certain monotheistic gods, but it doesn't include all of them.

Monotheism
monotheism | theology .

Exploring the Monotheistic Religions of the World 
Exploring Monotheistic Religions


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


He was an atheist then and was hedging his bets.

"_The God Delusion_" was published in 2006.  He claimed to be a "6" on Bill Maher's show in 2008 then a "6.9" in 2012.

Richard Dawkins: I can't be sure God does not exist


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 12, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



While I certainly don't look to Richard Dawkins as any sort of authority on religious faith, I will give him props for being honest about it.  Many Atheists like to hold up Einstein as a model Atheist who rejected the Abrahamic God, but Einstein did not consider himself an Atheist and rejected the label.  He did not believe in a personal relationship with any God or gods, of course, but he did not reject intelligent design.

As he said:  
“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... "


----------



## Brynmr (Apr 13, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> IsaacNewton said:
> 
> 
> > The caveat with this scale is, which god is it that the person is professing belief in.
> ...




An argument can be made that we ourselves are our own creators.


----------



## Brynmr (Apr 13, 2017)

Pogo said:


> Neither theist nor atheist, since neither theory is provable.
> 
> This is a bit like asking "how much of a Democrat or Republican are you" as if two binary choices covered everything.  It doesn't.



Missed the 'other' button did you.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Did you witness the Roman Empire?  Did you know Socrates?


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


You need to make up your mind.  Did Jesus exist or didn't He?


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Virtually all other claims of Jesus come from sources outside of Christian writings. Devastating to the claims of Christians, however, comes from the fact that all of these accounts come from authors who lived _after_ the alleged life of Jesus. Since they did not live during the time of the hypothetical Jesus, none of their accounts serve as eyewitness evidence.
> 
> *Josephus Flavius*, the Jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. Although many scholars think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus (in _Antiquities_) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E. (well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus), puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote _Antiquities_ in 93 C.E., _after_ the first gospels got written! Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.
> 
> ...


And yet there are 24,000 written manuscripts which chronicle his 3 1/2 year ministry.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The R.E. never claimed that Caesar walked on water, came back from the dead, turned water into wine... Extraordinary claims require more proof than fragments of a manuscript dated to several generations after the facts.
Plus, who ever said that I blindly accept everything written about the past? Take Socrates, for example, who knows what he was really like? Or what he really did in his spare time? Ans how is this relevant to his historical writings anyways? We have writings that influenced western society attributed to him, that's it. So what's your point?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Apparently, there were several guys named Jesus pontificating in the area at that time.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


The man maybe the myth no


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


That's because they didn't.  

My point is the 24,000 written manuscripts from antiquity tell us He did.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


24,000 written manuscripts say otherwise.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


You are starting to sound like Michael HaShev.  And he thinks he is the messiah.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


24,000 copies of a manuscript whose earliest fragments date from several generations after the facts. And most of it is dated way after that. But you seem impressed by that, why is it?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


He could be right. After all, it's been foretold:


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Because it is the evidence you have so sorely been looking for.  You have been looking for evidence, right?


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Yes, he could.  But it could also be that he is as bat shit crazy as you are too.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


It's evidence that a lot of people copied a document full of hearsay. That's about it.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I'm bat shit crazy because I ask for real proof and you can't deliver any?


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


No.  You are bat shit crazy because you spend so much resources talking about something you don't believe in.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Agreed the "myth" is up for debate, but the man seems certain to me due to the almost immdiate impact he had on society.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Just looking for proof, nothing wrong with that. Or is there?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Ya, Jesus started a trend by wearing a diaper on the cross.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Loin cloths were common in those days.  

Are you a HS dropout or just young?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Loin cloths? That was a Tarzan.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 13, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Nah.  He had no impact on society.  In fact his followers disappeared.  The 5000 he fed with 3 fish and 2 loaves of bread didn't start churches, spread the word, erect statues or preserve anything.

So basically Paul went into Greece and those Greeks bought it hook line and sinker, just as many modern day Americans do.  It blows my mind how gullible people are.  Or look at Mexico.  Did any Mexican ever witness Jesus perform miracles?  Nope.  But look how many of them are named Jesus today. 

So the story is very impactful for people who are prone to being superstitious and then it's simple if you brainwash a person from age 2-18.  The priest in my church tells the Lazuris story and the Jonah story like they are fact.  Why does he do this?  Because if they believe those stories then they'll believe Jesus walked on water and was the son of god.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 13, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


And you spend a lot of time talking to people who don't believe plus you suck at converting non believers.  Not very convincing.  A terrible representative of Christianity.  LOL


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I'm sure you fervently believe this.  While the record of Jesus is scanty to nonexistent outside of the Bible, the Christian movement is better documented. 

Why Did Christianity Succeed? - The Rise Of Christianity | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS
_In similar fashion, archaeological evidence shows that from very early days, house churches were clearly identifiable--the neighbors would have been entirely aware that these were Christian gathering places (White 1990). In addition, soon many Christians began to take names that were distinctively Christian--scholars have no difficulty identifying them as such today (Bagnall 1993), and surely non-Christians in antiquity were sufficiently perceptive to have done so too. Funerary inscriptions also often bore clearly Christian identifications (Meyers 1988; Finegan 1992).

That Christians were not a secret sect is, of course, patent in the fact that they grew. If a group is to attract outside members, potential converts must, at the very least, be able to find it. Moreover, for a group to grow as rapidly as Christians did, it must maintain close ties to nonmembers--it must remain an open network. Thus had Roman repression been so consistent and severe that the Christians actually had become a hidden underground movement, this book would not have been written. A truly underground Christianity would have remained insignificant...._


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 13, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


A lot of false conclusions I believe.  Christianity didn't grow after all the people saw him get crucified.  Lets pretend it actually happened.  Those people lived out their days worshipping him but it died with them.  They didn't pass on the worship to their children who then passed it on to their children and you can't trace back any church to those people.  

Paul went into Greece and told stories and the Greeks started worshipping based on hearsay.  That's it.  Same with Mexicans.  No witness necessary.

Show me a Christian grave 10 years AD.  Or 20 years AD.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Skipped the reading the link, dintcha?  No worries.  You are free to believe as you wish.  I accept the historical record on the rise of Christianity.  The divinity of Christ is a matter of debate.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...





I bet you've seen this:
In January of 1936, a young girl named Phyllis wrote to Albert Einstein on behalf of her Sunday school class, and asked, "Do scientists pray?"

Dr. Einstein answered as follows:

January 24, 1936

Dear Phyllis, 

I will attempt to reply to your question as simply as I can. Here is my answer:

Scientists believe that every occurrence, including the affairs of human beings, is due to the laws of nature. Therefore a scientist cannot be inclined to believe that the course of events can be influenced by prayer, that is, by a supernaturally manifested wish.

However, we must concede that our actual knowledge of these forces is imperfect, so that in the end the belief in the existence of a final, ultimate spirit rests on a kind of faith. Such belief remains widespread even with the current achievements in science. 

But also, everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is surely quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive. 

With cordial greetings, 

your A. Einstein"
Letters of Note: Dear Einstein, Do Scientists Pray?



So....Einstein speaks for the scientific community here: "... end the belief in the existence of a final, ultimate spirit rests on a kind of faith. Such belief remains widespread even with the current achievements in science."

 And he claims to have even more than run-of-the-mill religious belief:  "... everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort,..."


Q.E.D. It would be impossible to claim that Einstein was an atheist.


----------



## james bond (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I agree Einstein rejected the Abrahamic God and think he was a de-facto pantheist.  His science led him to proclaim, "God doesn't play dice with the world."


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 13, 2017)

PoliticalChic said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



No, I had not seen that and thank you for posting it.  I had read of other comments Einstein had made on the subject though, and it was always from the point of view of possibilities rather than any firm conclusion that a God/gods/universal mind or spirit or however that might be characterized could not exist.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 13, 2017)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...




1. No, he certainly wasn't a pantheist.
In an article from Huffington Post, Amir Aczel writes: " As someone who has spent a decade and a half studying Einstein's writings, I see it as my responsibility to correct this prevalent misconception.

*Albert Einstein believed in something like Spinoza's "God": a powerful entity that transcends the world.* To Einstein, "God" was the maker of the laws of physics that he, Einstein, saw as his life's role to uncover. 


2. As for playing dice, you might enjoy Thomas Hardy's 'Hap,' as in happenstance.
If but some vengeful god would call to me 
From up the sky, and laugh: “Thou suffering thing, 
Know that thy sorrow is my ecstasy, 
That thy love's loss is my hate's profiting!” 

Then would I bear it, clench myself, and die, 
Steeled by the sense of ire unmerited; 
Half-eased in that a Powerfuller than I 
Had willed and meted me the tears I shed. 

But not so.   How arrives it joy lies slain, 
And why unblooms the best hope ever sown? 
—Crass Casualty obstructs the sun and rain, 
And dicing Time for gladness casts a moan. . . . 
These purblind Doomsters had as readily strown 
Blisses about my pilgrimage as pain.


----------



## RodISHI (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> The priest in my church tells the Lazuris story and the Jonah story like they are fact.  *Why does he do this*?  Because if they believe those stories then they'll believe Jesus walked on water and was the son of god.


Maybe he isn't really hearing or understanding the words. Many things happened in history and a person writes from their own experience. If a person has not had that experience in the super natural they have a tough time understanding the spirit of things. A lot of theologians, scribes, preachers, and such have struggled with this over the years. Personally I wouldn't have known the difference between what the spirit sees and what the flesh sees if I had not been shown the difference by the spirit. As carnal human beings we do not know the difference unless it is shown to us by the spirit. People see things all the time but do not have an understanding of what it is they are seeing because the spirit is not scientifically explainable.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



No impact on society?  An estimated 2+ billion Christians live on Earth now, roughly 1/3 of all people on Earth.  The total world population at the time of Jesus was roughly 250,000.

Most of the world's universities, social structures, most magnificent architectural structures are due to Christian influence as is much of the literature, art, and music that has been preserved and has endured into modern times.  The Bible has been the world's best selling book pretty much since the Gutenberg Bible was first published.

Most private social agencies, thrift shops, homeless shelters and ministries, ministries to lepers, addicts, orphans, and hands on ministries to some of the world's most poor and desperate people are founded and staffed by Christians.  (Pretty much none by Atheists.)

With very few exceptions, almost all of the world's most prosperous nations were heavily influenced by Christian organization, philosophy, and doctrines. That would include the United States.

With very few exceptions, even in countries with little Christian presence, most of the world's calendars and the identification of the centuries are based in part on the agreed birth of Jesus of Nazareth.

Those who do not wish to believe this will of course pick this or that story or fact from the Bible and hold it up as evidence that it is all bunk.  Many of those stories are indeed debatable as whether they are based on historical people or events or whether they are symbolic or parable to teach a concept. And it is legitimately debatable whether Jesus was God in human form or whether he was just a man.

But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed or that he did not have a profound affect on humanity as no other single individual ever has had.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


The church was responsible for many wars, greed, power, torture, lighting people on fire... so ya, Jesus did have a big influence on western society.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Atheism and Islam and paganism have waged far more violence on the world's people than have small groups/sects of Christians or corrupt Popes who indeed did bad things.  And the good that Christianity has done has outweighed the bad by a thousand fold.  Those following man made religion no matter what its label are probably going to get it wrong though much may be harmless or even satisfying to those who practice it.

I don't excuse the politically motivated crusades or the Inquisitions or the Salem Witch Burnings or any other atrocities committed in the name of Christianity.  But neither do I see any of those things as Christian acts but rather contrary to Christian teachings.  To judge all of Christianity by those isolated and short lived acts or events is to dishonestly characterize Christianity as something it is not.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 13, 2017)

_Albert Einstein and the Atomic Bomb_


_Einstein's greatest role in the invention of the atomic bomb was signing a letter to President Franklin Roosevelt urging that the bomb be built._
_
In April 1940 an Einstein letter, ghost-written by Szilard, pressed Briggs Committee chairman Lyman Briggs on the need for "greater speed" (Weart & Szilard, pg. 125+; Clark, pg. 680).

Einstein biographer Ronald Clark has observed that the atomic bomb would have been invented without Einstein's letters, but that without the early U.S. work that resulted from the letters, the a-bombs might not have been ready in time to use during the war on Japan (Clark, pg. 682-683).

According to Szilard, Einstein said the possibility of a chain reaction "never occurred to me"   .
_

how about lets not build the bomb instead ... especially during a world war.
_
_


----------



## Mudda (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Just look at Christianity today, all the hate on gays, the church still sees women as second class citizens, the pope praying for the poor while holding a staff with a solid gold cross on it, still trying to control people, with offshoots of pedophilia, polygamy and mass suicide. So what was it again that they did for the good of society? Maybe I'll give them comforting people in times of death... What else?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 13, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> _Albert Einstein and the Atomic Bomb_
> 
> 
> _Einstein's greatest role in the invention of the atomic bomb was signing a letter to President Franklin Roosevelt urging that the bomb be built._
> ...



Would we have built the bomb without knowing that Nazi Germany was well on its way to having one?  I think not.  Though they could not envision how horribly effective and devastating the bomb would actually be, they did know it was bad enough that if Hitler got it before we did, the war would be lost.

And then, coming from a humanitarian Christian point of view, once the threat had been removed from Germany along with most of the scientists who knew how to create the threat, how could we justify using the bomb on Japan?  And ultimately it was weighing 100,000 lives against the certain millions who would die if Japan was not defeated and if Japan had to be invaded to defeat it.

The bomb was cruel, horrendous, horrific, and so much more devastating that we ever imaged it would be.  But ultimately, it was the humane thing to do.

And the ultimate result was that it would never be used again by anybody in war.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


That's a lot of strawmen you have there.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


But I have given you proof.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > _Albert Einstein and the Atomic Bomb_
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> The bomb was cruel, horrendous, horrific, and so much more devastating that we ever imaged it would be. But ultimately, it was the humane thing to do.













sorry christian ... were there any not like you that actually thought it would not be used as their motivation for its construction - not if they wanted to be hired or recieve their pay check from the military. no 1st century free Spirits in that group.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


MLK Jr was a 4th century Christian.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Because if he was completely made up that'd be insane right?

What's amazing is 1/3 of humans buy the myth and the other 1/3 believe Mohammad was for real or Joseph Smith.

Isn't it odd so many believe the Mormon story? Does that make it valid?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Apr 13, 2017)

I believe in god but god within my mind is very much bigger then your concept.

He created evolution, science and made us in his imagine...Imagine as in made us able to create and consider the universe around us.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Before you determine who God is, you must first believe there is a God.  You don't, so everything you do on the who is a fools errand.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

Matthew said:


> I believe in god but god within my mind is very much bigger then your concept.
> 
> He created evolution, science and made us in his imagine...Imagine as in made us able to create and consider the universe around us.


I don't believe for a second that you believe in God.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


But you just did it to Islam.

Christianity has a very evil history. No matter how many good things a lie does it's still a lie and this lie is holding us back intellectually.

For example denying global warming and evolution is very Christian thing to do. Stupid


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


We are presently in an interglacial cycle.  Our present temperature is well below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles.  Deny that.


----------



## ding (Apr 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Your problem is that you deny evolution.  You deny that beings that know and create were predestined to exist by the laws of nature.  We came from dust and we will return to dust.  We were present when space and time were created, thus the universe knows itself.


----------



## Chuz Life (Apr 13, 2017)

I am a realist. I tend to believe in things that I can actually see or verify for myself. That said, I have never seen a "black hole" or many of the other celestial things that are supposedly out there in the universe. . . but I don't have any reason to doubt that they are (or could be) out there in existence.  The same goes for "God."

For the most part, that would make me a "pure agnostic" but I don't like the definition given.  It's not a "there is as much evidence for as there is against" aspect for me.

I simply remain open to the possibility.


----------



## BuckToothMoron (Apr 13, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.



I agree, as a former pure agnostic I can tell you that you'll eventually realize there is some sort of higher power, assuming you're indeed a committed thinking man.


----------



## ChrisL (Apr 14, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...



And how exactly did you come to "realize" this?  Lol.


----------



## ChrisL (Apr 14, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...



What it is is that humans have a difficult time facing their own mortality.  There is really nothing more to it than that, IMO.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed or that he did not have a profound affect on humanity as no other single individual ever has had.


Whoa, you were doing until until you started preaching and insulting. There's no evidence the Jesus character existed. He may have been borrowed or cobbled together from local folklore and deified as it went along. 

If you are going to insult people's intelligence then you need to back up your assertions. Clearly the religion had a great impact but all we know about Jesus is what was written long after he was said to have moved on and none of the fantastic stories are supportable., i.e., the multitude of rising dead at his death, torn temple curtain, day into night, earthquake, etc. 

In fact the historians of the day not only do not mention any of that they don't mention Jesus (except the forged snippet of Josephus mentioning his brother James). That's odd.

The most important message ever and he couldn't be bothered to write anything down? And then the message gets to mankind at least a generation later in a different language? I used to buy it all but the more I learned and thought about it the more faith I needed.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> If you are going to insult people's intelligence then you need to back up your assertions. Clearly the religion had a great impact but all we know about Jesus is what was written long after he was said to have moved on and none of the fantastic stories are supportable., i.e., the multitude of rising dead at his death, torn temple curtain, day into night, earthquake, etc.




Have you ever tried to find another way to interpret those events that conforms to reality?

For instance when Gandhi or Martin Luther King were assassinated it could easily be said that peoples hopes were dashed, day turned into night,  and a great darkness fell over the land. Are you old enough to remember?

 The veil of the temple being removed and the dead rising from their graves after Jesus was killed isn't an analogy that difficult to decipher is it? An earthquake comparable to an uprising or rioting perhaps?

Remember, there was no such thing as freedom of expression when these stories were written.

In fact the fact that the gospels were written after the destruction of Judea, the Temple and the slaughter,exile and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of Jews is all the more reason to look for what was buried and hidden within those fantastical stories and spread throughout the enemy empire..

Even when you claimed to be a believer did church teaching ever really sit right that Jesus was crucified because God loved the Romans so much???


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > If you are going to insult people's intelligence then you need to back up your assertions. Clearly the religion had a great impact but all we know about Jesus is what was written long after he was said to have moved on and none of the fantastic stories are supportable., i.e., the multitude of rising dead at his death, torn temple curtain, day into night, earthquake, etc.
> ...


I have no need or desire anymore to twist words into anything that satisfies a preconceived belief. Your history is way off though. Stories of all types were in abundance, many religious in nature. Christians accepted some, others not. Gnosticism was widespread until the Catholic church solved that little problem.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...




Ok, so you never really thought very deeply about it.


Without changing or twisting a single word, I showed you how day turned into night and a great darkness fell over the land during your own lifetime. If you re not old enough to remember ask someone who is and they will tell you that day turned into night is exactly what happened, unless they were on the opposing side.


Maybe you never had a reason before, but what's stopping you from thinking deeply about it now? Not to satisfy any preconceived belief,  but to discover the truth?


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...


Thank God they did.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Your god is an intolerant bloodthirsty monster then.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed or that he did not have a profound affect on humanity as no other single individual ever has had.
> ...



What did Constantine write down of his contribution to history?  Almost all was left to historians to report

What did any major figurehead from Napoleon to Lenin to Ghandi to Hitler to Martin Luther King write down of what they did?  It was left to historians to report.

I wasn't preaching.  I was simply stating fact.  And I did back it up in Post #315.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...




And ding wants to be just like him.....


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


So you can't come up with anything good the church is responsible for?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


You gave us a lot of clown fartsmoke, but no actual proof.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


But our planet shouldn't be heating up this fast. Which means that we're helping the warming.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


I'm very open to a higher power, of which there could very well be one. But as of right now, I see no actual proof. And neither do you.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Deny that all the pollution were putting up in the atmosphere is bad for us and the bees are disappearing because of it.

Is that destiny too?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 14, 2017)

ChrisL said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


No. Christians become gods after they


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



You can't know that because you cannot know what BTM knows or has experienced.  You can only speak for yourself when it comes to matters of faith and experience.  You have no information or authority to tell him what he does and does not have as proof of anything.

My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning.  But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning.  Just because it is overcast on your street one block over, does not mean that the sun did not break through on mine.  We should be very careful of dictating to somebody else what he or she is required to believe.

But you say you are open to the possibility.  Would you be willing to put it to the test?  Ask God to make himself known to you?  And put absolutely no restrictions of any kind of when, how, or in what form he does that?  This is an exceedingly difficult thing for most especially highly intelligent people to do.  But it is worth the effort.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




If there is  loving and benevolent creator, then he./she/it  has been intimately involved in your life from the beginning.

You see no actual proof.

That is the only problem you need to address.
'
Not seeing.

.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Everything I have read suggests that it is not pollutants in the atmosphere that is killing off the bees, but the fungicides and pesticides they are picking up from plant nectar and carrying back to the hive to feed to the baby bees.  This weakens the baby bees so that they are far more susceptible to parasites and bee diseases that then causes the collapse of the whole colony.

This goes back to the purest definition of sin, i.e. that which harms ourselves and/or others.  Sin can be born of the best intentions but have unintended consequences that are far worse than any good that is done.  That's why sin is bad and we are warned of it in our religious teachings.

Adam and Eve thought eating the forbidden fruit would yield good for them.  They were badly mistaken and all the world has suffered for all time because of their sin.  The story is probably parable to teach a concept.  But the deeper truth of it is very real.  Conversely by eliminating sin. it logically follows that we can begin reversing the damage done and that too will alleviate suffering for future generations.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


I am totally open to god contacting me, have been for quite a long time. I've said so many times on this board that my heart is open for the supreme being to contact me. So far nothing. Nada. Zip.
Proof isn't what you might think happened to you, proof is something tangible that can be proven scientifically.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


So I need to look at my life and say "you know that time I was hit by a car and spent 4 months in hospital, that was god trying to get in touch with me". Something like that?


----------



## hobelim (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




Sort of.

If God exists he has been leading you to him trying to get through to you already for very long time.

as if you were Helen Keller.

Eventually he will get through and a  light will go off in your mind and you will see with your own inner eye that he was always there.

Don't seek proof for God somewhere out there, look within.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Then prove scientifically that I went outside and saw my shadow this morning.  

Science is an incredible thing but it simply cannot answer all the questions of the universe.  At least the science we have now cannot.   As I believe God is the author of science, it very well may be that we simply have not evolved enough to be able to scientifically detect a spirit world.  I  believe we  know only a teensy fraction of all the science there is to know and are still in the primitive stages of all the technology that is possible.

But if you have truly opened yourself for God to make himself known to you, and you are not placing any conditions on how or when he will do that, just stand by.  And do not be stiff necked and reject the evidence as it comes to you.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


If god is going through all that trouble to lead me to him, why doesn't he just contact me directly? It makes no sense that he's there but won't actually do what it takes to convince me.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


"At least the science we have now cannot." That's why I'm agnostic.

But ya, I'm here any time god wants to contact me for real.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



The people talked and walked with Jesus and watched him perform miracles, and yet they didn't understand.  They didn't believe.  There are many miraculous things that happen to all of us and I just can't believe they are all due to pure chance.  If God spoke to you right now would you believe it?  Or would you think it was due to maybe mental illness or somebody's practical joke? 

You see, you are placing demands on God before you will believe.  That's not the best way to get acquainted with him.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


God knows that in my heart, I'm simply the type of person who needs concrete proof to believe something. He chooses not to contact me. That's his call.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you?



if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ... this would be the proof Mudda could not refute. is there any irrefutable proof you have to offer.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


.


Mudda said:


> I am totally open to god contacting me ...




the 1st century religion believed the only way you will communicate with the Almighty would be after you have Triumph between Good vs Evil and are told which you have accomplished ... just living a good life is what is meant for all beings and a bonus for those that aspire to be Admitted to the Everlasting.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


It's a fact that one is not intelligent if they don't share your faith? You can't see how stupid that is? It's called a faith for a reason. You don't need faith if you have facts. Constantine had a Christian historian, his name was Eusibius. We probably know the most about the early church from him but I don't get your question. Hitler wrote a book and was on a bunch of video giving speeches. We don't need to guess. Gandi, Napoleon, Stalin, etc were all well recorded at the time. We didn't wait a generation and ask people their opinion on their whereabouts or thoughts. You are obfuscating.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



I understand.  I also know that it is almost impossible to recognize the evidence when you put conditions on what the evidence must be.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Ah, more Christian arrogance.  don't share his fantasies so I don't think. LOL. What a mentally weak position.

Problem is you can't read with your head stuck up your holy ass that far. I said there was no record of those events as depicted in the bible. I answered your statements, you can apply metaphors to anything. I don't share your faith, therefore I can't accept them as fact. 

Show me facts, not your opinions.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


It's easy. People around the globe can look at the evidence and reach the same conclusion. You offer faith as evidence so no two humans will come to the same conclusions.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning.  But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning.


But any seeing person has seen their shadow so it isn't a leap. Fail.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade.  I however have experienced such confirmation myself, but in a way that would be incomprehensible to somebody who had never experienced it.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


From god it can be anything that he knows will convince me. Since he already knows what will do the trick, right?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


I'd be interested to hear that story of how god contacted you, if you don't mind sharing.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



There are all manner of beliefs and my belief is there is no absolute way that God communicates with people--he is not a computer program that can be expected to do it the same way every time.  As for what to expect in the hereafter, I don't presume to have a clue.  All I know is that I have certainty that there is a hereafter and I have no fear of experiencing it


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



Believe what you wish.  I'll stand by my post.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Believe what you wish.  I'll stand by my post.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Some people say that you'll see a bright light that you'll go towards when you die. Others say that the light is your head coming out of the womb into daylight on your next life.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning.  But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning.
> ...



Not a fail if your experience on the next block is different from mine on my block.  You still have to take it on faith that I had a different experience than you did.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



I do not presume to know the ways of God.  I can only testify to what I have personally experienced.  And I believe others who had a different experience that allowed them to know that God is.  Your experience may indeed be very different from mine.  But you are far less likely to have it if you refuse to recognize it and/or if you put conditions on what God must do to convince you.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I was one of the lucky ones who have always believed or I cannot recall a time that I did not.  But I have had confirmation along the way too, and reassurance that I was on the right track, or that I was the one called to do something.

One example:  I was on a group ministry team in another state.  There were about 30 or 40 of us in the room and the leader said she did not know who was to be the speaker that morning.  She asked us all to pray.  At some point I felt a presence--I cannot explain it but it was very real--and I knew I had been selected.  A moment later, the leader named me.  There is no way the others put that into her head telepathically or otherwise because they didn't really know me at all or what I had to offer.  Nor did she for that matter.

There have been many other instances of answered prayer, information furnished, solutions offered, suggestions that when followed yielded great things.  It is so difficult to explain to those who have not experienced it.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Thanks for the permission but you made statements of faith and declared non believers as unintelligent. That's just silly.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Yes, I've heard that too.  I haven't experience that yet so that's on my 'to do' list on down the road.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



Sorry but I did no such thing.  It is rather unintelligent though to accuse people of saying something they didn't say when you can read the evidence right here.

I know many extremely intelligent and very well educated people who are not believers.  But as the Bible says, it is difficult for the rich (in money or property, in knowledge, in anything) to get past their love for such wealth and see a higher purpose.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


What manner of thinking is this? If you said your shadow walked away from you you'd need some evidence to be believed. Saying you had a shadow isn't a stretch.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


*"But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed..."*

Looks plain enough to me. Does your god make you lie?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



Nope.  But believing the testimony of others about anything when you have not experienced it yourself is sometimes a stretch.  And refusing to believe just because you don't want to believe or because you haven't experienced it is very limiting to a person.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



So what is wrong with saying that the intelligent--those who recognize the profound influence Jesus of Nazareth has had on the entire world--or the educated who have actually studied and understood the evidence that there is will know that Jesus of Nazareth existed?   It is an either/or statement.  You focused on the intelligent only and took it out of the full context.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Off topic:

I'm enjoying the discussion all but I have company arriving after lunch and still have some housekeeping chores to attend to.  And unfortunately, I haven't found any way to practically get that done other than just doing it.

Later


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


So like, if a fluffy rabbit crosses the road in front of me, that's god contacting me? What am I looking for? What happened to you?


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...


I'll let Him know you feel that way.


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


You mean you don't?


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Problem solved.   Your loss.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


So you were hoping to get picked and you got picked. That's totally flimsy, if not completely non-existent as proof.


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Who says this is any different than previous interglacial cycles?  Does that mean you concede that our present temperature is below previous interglacial cycles.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


So in your opinion, what am I looking for as a sign from god? Maybe I've seen a bunch and never thought of them that way. Go for it. I have a big bag.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Science says that humans are influencing the warming of the planet. Or don't you believe in science today?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Not so. I absolutely was not wanting or expecting to be picked.  I was probably the most surprised person in the room.  But you illustrate how difficult it is to explain these things to somebody who refuses to even consider possibilities, much less believe.  So I won't even bother to finish the story as to why I think I was picked and what that yielded that morning.

The Bible instructs us not to throw our pearls before swine.  (Disclaimer:  That is a metaphorical reference and does not infer that you are 'swine' so don't even go there.)

The point of course is that we waste time and energy trying to convince those who refuse to even think about something, much less consider it as possible.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Ok, now you HAVE to tell me what you won, lol. It sounds like the clincher to your story, so let's have it. Because I'm simply having trouble seeing that you win a sort of lottery as god's intervention.


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I have no idea what you are looking for but then again I don't think you are looking at all.


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Science tells us they we have been cycling between glacial and interglacial cycles and that our present temperature is below the temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. What you are referring to are computer models.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Nope. Why do you mischaracterize people? I agreed Christianity plays a profound role but took issue with your statement that I even put in bold. Do you need giant red letters. I asked for said evidence, so far nothing. I have studied up on biblical matters for over twenty years so I'd love to see it.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post.  So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


It's one thing to accept that the Earth is round or what the speed of light is if those studying come up with the same answer. That's different than accepting beliefs based on faith. It isn't matter of what I want to believe, I wanted very much to believe in Christianity and did so for 20 plus years. My friends were Christian. It was comforting to believe that God knows me and cares. However the more I dug into things the more faith it required of me. And it took a good three years after knowing it wasn't true that I could call myself a non-Christian. It was very much part of me.

So it is a little irritating when someone accuses you of not thinking because you don't share the faith. You are in effect saying it isn't a faith but a fact. And when asked for said facts you get defensive.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



It would irritate me too.  Which is why I didn't do that.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



I didn't attempt to.  I did provide proof that Jesus, whether he lived or not, had a profound affect on humankind.  And I also believe there is sufficient historical evidence to believe that such a man lived for those with the intelligence to see it - OR - the ability to study the evidence honestly and objectively.  Those who study the evidence with no intent to learn anything or just because it is expected of them or who intend to declare it all bullshit of course will reach the conclusion they had to begin with.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


 I didn't dispute the influence of Christianity and said I didn't want to believe it wasn't true but I'm the one that can't read? I gave a few examples of why it wouldn't be true, the historians of the day for example. Jesus not writing anything down. Different language tells the story, Greek. But Jesus spoke Aramaic. Why didn't he speak Greek if that was the goal? No original works are extant so the whole story is 250 years minimum removed from the supposed events.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



Jesus spoke Aramaic because he lived his entire life on Earth in a very small area in all Aramaic speaking communities. There are some first century manuscripts written In Aramaic but most of the late First Century and Second Century manuscripts were written in Latin or Greek.  Most of the New Testament was written in classical Greek which was fairly universally understood throughout the Roman Empire.

The earliest intact manuscripts we have of New Testament material were the letters of Paul written mid First Century when many eye witnesses to First Century events were still around and far too early for any kind of mythology to have time to develop.

We do not have the original manuscripts of Plato and Aristotle either, but nobody questions that they existed or that the words attributed to them are made up.  We have nothing from Cyrus of Persia or Alexander the Great but we are pretty sure they existed and had a profound influence on their part of the world at that time.  It is widely believed that many of the ancient manuscripts were in the great library of Alexandria when it burned.  It is possible that many of the original manuscripts of the Bible were also lost at that time.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


So you have no clue. Why does that not surprise me?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


No, science tells us that the earth's temperature has risen too quickly for it to be a natural event.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...




Not to mention that the gospels openly record that Jesus was ridiculed, rejected and despised as a nutjob and unrepentant sinner and drunk who was ultimately executed as a common criminal of no account.

The obvious reason for lack of historical corroboration is that no one recording important things going on back then would have thought otherwise.


Not the type of person even worthy of a footnote.


The only reason the name of Jesus is known at all unlike every other first century drunk is because the people who knew him personally believed in him and knew that he wasn't crazy to claim to be the messiah after hearing him teach  and seeing with their own eyes Jesus reveal things that had been kept secret since the foundation of the world.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



Exactly.  Nobody cared or thought about him as any more important than one more trouble maker.  The Romans could have cared less.  Certainly no notation of his existence needed to be made any more than the two thieves crucified beside him.  The Pharisaic Jews and the Sadduccees didn't consider him any more important than one more heretic to be disposed of.

Writing was tedious and painstaking in those days so only the most important events or personalities were recorded at all.

The ONLY ones who were at all even interested in his life and death were those moved by his message and a few bright historians who were more curious about their times and the people in it than were the average people.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


The same experience that tells them God exists I don't think would prove anything to you or I.

And besides, if there is a God he doesn't visit you just like he doesn't visit dogs or sheep. What makes humans think we are special? If you throw away all the holy books that say he visited this creator might not be caring. Are you agnostic about heaven? Seems to me to be made up


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


We are pumping too much pollution into the atmosphere now that India, mexico and china are all manufacturing and driving cars. We're in trouble


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade.





BreezeWood said:


> if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ...




who said anything about ordering the Almighty ... 

have you ever heard of more than one person hearing the same voice together, spoken in the open - has anyone heard the voice you say you hear while they were with you, is it audible.


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Do you think that CO2 is pollution?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



It is not audible at least it has never been to me.  I cannot speak for others.  It is an impression that I have no words to describe.  It must be experienced.


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Really?  How much resolution is in that data (i.e. how many data points per year)?  How much resolution is there in the previous interglacial periods?  And lastly, are you acknowledging that our present temperatures are below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial periods?


----------



## ding (Apr 14, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Maybe it doesn't surprise you because you really haven't been looking for God at all.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> It must be experienced.



that's not possible, have you reached the Apex of Knowledge, Triumphed Good vs Evil maybe they are angels you are hearing from ... the 4th century book is greater than any forbidden fruit, history is its witness.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 14, 2017)

.
and what of the Almighty's Garden vs the asphalt jungle ...






they say 100% of the deforestation of s america is caused by 4th century christians.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> and what of the Almighty's Garden vs the asphalt jungle ...
> 
> 
> ...



Really?  Who says that?  So far as I know, no Christian had ever set foot in the Americas until the late 15th Century.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 14, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I know what the right wing spin is. I have a global warming denier buddy at work. Co2, glabal warming, pollution, bottom line is what were doing ain't good. Even right wingers don't deny it anymore. They may say there's nothing we can do about it or that it's not that big a deal but only the most retarded still deny it altogether.

Co2 ya later


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> Really? Who says that? So far as I know, no Christian had ever set foot in the Americas until the late 15th Century.




and that was to soon enough ...




> Deforestation and Its Extreme Effect on Global Warming
> 
> *Deforestation and Its Extreme Effect on Global Warming*
> 
> From logging, agricultural production and other economic activities, deforestation adds more atmospheric CO2 than the sum total of cars and trucks on the world's roads



_By most accounts, deforestation in tropical rainforests adds more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than the sum total of cars and trucks on the world’s roads. According to the World Carfree Network (WCN), cars and trucks account for about 14 percent of global carbon emissions, while most analysts attribute upwards of 15 percent to deforestation.
_

those that turn a blinds eye to the truth ...


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


So are you afraid to admit that you believe CO2 is a pollutant or what?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Wow... doesn't that look like we have a problem!!!!







Not really. It is all part of a natural cycle that has been occurring for the past 400,000 years.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Scientists say you wrong


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


I know why the Jesus character is said to have spoken Aramaic. That wasn't my question. I asked why it was spoken in one language and written dowa generation later in another. Platos original words could have been altered, who cares? If we had people building a religion on his original words then it would be analogous. 

Post your evidence for first century NT manuscripts. Like I said, I've studied it. You obviously haven't. Speculating about what might have been burned up doesn't really help. 

We do know that the Greek writers of the NT used the Septuagint as their OT and its' mistranslations right along with it. There are rational explanations for everything and the more one looks into it the more they will need to rely on their faith as facts get dismissed for wishful thinking.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The science is already in, so stop being such a science cherry picker.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I'm open for god to contact me. Always have been. He knows that. Seem fair to me.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


No problem? Hmmm...





Welcome to Baoding, China's most polluted city - CNN.com


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Not to mention that the gospels openly record that Jesus was ridiculed, rejected and despised as a nutjob and unrepentant sinner and drunk who was ultimately executed as a common criminal of no account.
> 
> The obvious reason for lack of historical corroboration is that no one recording important things going on back then would have thought otherwise.
> 
> ...


So the lack of evidence is evidence of a cover up? See, that's what happens. Problem with your theory is if the gospels were true many things would have been impossible to ignore. All the multitude following this rabbi around and him performing miracles of various sorts. Josephus droned on and on in daily minutia but didn't think it worthy to mention a dude walking on water, feeding thousand with a little bread and fish, healing lepers and cripples. It was a small enclosed community, surely the word got around.

And as I mentioned before, the earthquakes, walking dead eclipse. All pretty hard to ignore. 

Also contemporary to the time was Philo. Now he loaned money to Herod and knew some of these characters personally. But more importantly was on the forefront of revisioning the OT in Hellenistic thought. We would consider it new age today. He was the first one we know of to use the term Logos to describe the physical operations of god.

Looking at the whole thing with no excuses or spin it's obvious the NT writers were familiar with his work, knew the OT only by the Greek translation, the Septuagint, putting oral stories into the written word.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


That isn't CO2, Einstein.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


And yet our present temperature remains below temperatures of the previous interglacial cycles, lol.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


No one except you disagrees that our present temperature is below peak temperatures of past interglacial cycles.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


And I correlate this ignorance with religion. If you can convince the masses God visited it's got to be easy convincing them things like 2000 election wasn't rigged, global warming aren't real, trickle down works or that Saddam had wmd's.

A creator might exist that's true. But no religion is real. Every one of them is a lie. We are not special in that God made all this for us. Here's why that's silly. Take the dinosaurs time on earth and put it on 14 squares of toilet paper. Humans time on earth is 1 millimeter of 1 square. Religions can't explain what God was thinking for the 13 squares before us.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Children do as they parents do and not as they say because they know that what their parents do is what they really believe.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I believe they are the cherry pickers.  The world we live in is an ice house world with bipolar glaciation.  Many consider this to be normal, but it is not.  In fact, it is geologically rare and possibly distinct.  For most of earth's history it has been a greenhouse world.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


CO2 isn't the only gas causing problems. Science can tell you that. Or is this a break-from-science weekend because you're celebrating Zombie Jesus day?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


WTF does that have to do with god contacting me? Are you lost?


----------



## hobelim (Apr 15, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Not to mention that the gospels openly record that Jesus was ridiculed, rejected and despised as a nutjob and unrepentant sinner and drunk who was ultimately executed as a common criminal of no account.
> ...



Please don't put words in my mouth.

I did not say that the lack of evidence is evidence of  cover up.

I said that the lack of evidence outside of the gospels is explained by the fact that Jesus was considered an unrepentant sinner and criminal of no account, most likely insane..

The style of writing used was the exact same style used in writing the OT. The entire story of Jesus can be factually and literally false but absolutely true at the same time depending on which way the words are interpreted.

Of course a story like feeding the multitude is impossible to be literally true but if you can perceive that it was never about feeding a large crowd of thousands of people with two fish and five loves but teaching a large crowd with seven disciples, represented by two fish and five loaves of bread, then it tells a hidden story that conforms to reality, the miracle, or sign that God was with Jesus, was that such a large and skeptical crowd was satisfied with his teaching and "miraculously" turned seven disciples into twelve represented by the 12 baskets full of the uneaten pieces of teaching, the little things that the crowd could not swallow.........

Part of the problem and an obstacle to understanding is that the word miracle is misleading. Originally they were recorded* signs *that God was with Jesus. These signs became demonstrations of divine power over reality when superstitious romans completely ignorant of Jewish thought, belief, and traditional literary expressions usurped authority over scripture and came to their own dumb conclusions..ie., Jesus was an edible mangod who hosted a  magical fish sandwich party in the desert, raised the dead and was executed because God loved the Romans so much....etc...

In the same way there is  rational way to interpret every single miracle of Jesus that conforms to reality. One need only apply well known and long established literary techniques, metaphors, allegory, homonyms, hyperbole, etc., to discern what was deliberately hidden by Jews who believed that Jesus was the Holy One of God.

If you look and look and keep on looking you will find it.

If you don't look, you will find nothing...


The truth of the gospels and the mystery of God remains above the grasp of those who do not think very deeply....


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


So you don't deny global warming, but you embrace it. Me too.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


The writings were nothing like the OT writers, don't know where you got that from. Not even all the NT books are written in the same manner. You are welcome to believe anything you want but it's wrong to call it rational when you are applying symbolism to whatever you want.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


You have to take dings word, his preachers word and you have to believe the impossible stories they tell you or you'll go to hell.

Apparently the creator gets offended when we don't believe dings faith. Sounds like something a cult would make up.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 15, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


At most 11 men spread this story. Judas didn't spread the word.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 15, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...


  I'll give you an example.

In the OT the story of ezekiel being carried from Babylon to Jerusalem by an angel flying through the air holding him by the hair where he proceeded to dig through the Temple wall of thirteen feet of solid stone with his bare hands to see the corruption going on inside was presented without the author bothering to mention that it was the eyewitness account of what was seen and heard in a dream.

Knowing this resolves many mysteries.

In the same way the eyewitness account of the transfiguration and every account of Jesus seen after the crucifixion was an eyewitness account of what was seen and heard in a dream.


Most intelligent people would know that such things do not happen in real life so either the story would be dismissed out of hand or the reader would be diverted and the story colored by their own brand of superstitious archaic lore.

The truth remains hidden securely above the grasp of the uninitiated and all those who do not think very deeply, whether you are a believer or an unbeliever.

"So he drove the man out and to the east of Eden he placed the cherubim with *a flaming and flashing sword*, that turns in every direction,* to guard the way to the tree of life.*"


Even Jesus clearly said that what he had found hidden and buried in the OT he had hidden and buried again..



"The kingdom of Heaven is like hidden treasure lying buried in  field. The man who found it,  buried it again..." Matthew 13:44

can you dig it?


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

hobelim said:


> can you dig it?


According to the oracles of Zoroaster it's all a bunch of hooey. I'd rather keep a lucid mind though, thanks anyway.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 15, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > can you dig it?
> ...




No problem.  Its not like I didn't see you slip something like a burning ember into your pocket...lol...



Eventually you won't be able to resist raising your eyes to see whats been going on all this time right over your head.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...


 
What?

 Not even one woman?


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Pure gibberish. You may never see clearly, period.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Sure, there are other greenhouses gases.  Water vapor being the biggest of all.  The problem isn't GHG, the problem is the faulty models which pile on feedbacks that aren't there.  No one is disputing the GHG effect.  We are disputing their models.  You don't understand any of this and have chosen to blindly accept that there is a problem despite the FACT that our present temperature is still within the normal range of an interglacial cycle.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


It has to do with what you say you do not matching with what you actually have done.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


lol, we are in an interglacial cycle.  Warming has been occurring for the last 22,000 years.  What is happening today is quite natural.  Relax, the sky isn't falling.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 15, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



If you have ever seen Aramaic writing you can understand why those educated in classical Greek chose to write in classical Greek instead of Aramaic.  Also Christianity has spread beyond Judah and Galilee into areas where classical Greek was spoken.  The Christian manuscripts were not written with the thought that they would be 'scripture' in the same context as the Old Testament Scriptures, but rather were intended for reading and circulation and teaching in the congregations forming across the eastern Roman Empire.  So they were written in the language that was most universally useful.

Apparently you haven't studied it as thoroughly as you think.  And I would be careful about accusing people you don't know about what they have and have not studied.  I would post my evidence but I doubt you would accept it and it would be really tedious to post the entire bibliography as well as the lesson notes from seminary courses.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Your thinking is limited.  It wasn't created for us per se.  It was created for intelligence.  It is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


And is rising at an un-natural way. Science tells us that.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


What have I done that I'm not open to a god contacting me? Anything?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


No.  It isn't rising in an unnatural way.  How do you define rising in an unnatural way?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Only you can answer that one.  But you'd have to be honest first.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Man-made rise faster than it would normally. Science tells us this.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


You said it's what i haven't done? So what's that?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


How fast would that be in terms of degrees C per year?


----------



## esthermoon (Apr 15, 2017)

Being Buddhist is a blessing in this specific case because I don't have to choose if I believe or not in a god.
We have the Holy Buddha


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Only you can answer that.  Don't you know?  Tell me what you have done and we can go from there.  Fair enough?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Only you can answer that one.  But I do know that just as it is difficult for the rich man focused on his possession to know God, so it is difficult for him who cannot put aside his intellectual prejudices and who sets conditions for what he requires of God.


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> If you have ever seen Aramaic writing you can understand why those educated in classical Greek chose to write in classical Greek instead of Aramaic.  Also Christianity has spread beyond Judah and Galilee into areas where classical Greek was spoken.  The Christian manuscripts were not written with the thought that they would be 'scripture' in the same context as the Old Testament Scriptures, but rather were intended for reading and circulation and teaching in the congregations forming across the eastern Roman Empire.  So they were written in the language that was most universally useful.
> 
> Apparently you haven't studied it as thoroughly as you think.  And I would be careful about accusing people you don't know about what they have and have not studied.  I would post my evidence but I doubt you would accept it and it would be really tedious to post the entire bibliography as well as the lesson notes from seminary courses.


You're spinning and no nothing of the time period other than what's in the bible. The Jews at that time were so Hellenized only a small minority could speak or read Hebrew or Aramaic. The Pharisees and Sadducees considered the language sacred, it's what God spoke. Sure Christianity spread and got translated into different languages but we're talking about the beginning.

So you are reading translations and interpretations of what the Jesus figure said. Seems implausible considering how important the message was. That was my point. 

A seminary education? That explains your ignorance.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 15, 2017)

Iceweasel said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > If you have ever seen Aramaic writing you can understand why those educated in classical Greek chose to write in classical Greek instead of Aramaic.  Also Christianity has spread beyond Judah and Galilee into areas where classical Greek was spoken.  The Christian manuscripts were not written with the thought that they would be 'scripture' in the same context as the Old Testament Scriptures, but rather were intended for reading and circulation and teaching in the congregations forming across the eastern Roman Empire.  So they were written in the language that was most universally useful.
> ...



Those who are so eager to deny, dispute, ridicule the text and those who have studied it and the history behind it become ever more angry, shrill, and insulting.  Why do you think that is?


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 15, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


I didn't ridicule the text, you lie. Anyone can believe anything they want, my problem with you is as stated at the beginning. You insulted the intelligence of anyone that disagrees with Jesus being a historical figure. 

As far as becoming more angry and shrill you are stuffed to the max with bullshit. You're a hypocrite and only double down when confronted. Now why do YOU think that is? I know.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Look it up, I don't know the exact numbers, but science has told us that human activity is causing the temp to rise faster than it would normally.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I've kept my heart open for contact.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 15, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


So what does that even mean? I'm doing something wrong? What?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


How exactly did you do that?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


If you don't know the exact numbers, I'll accept a ball park estimate.  So what is it?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Funny bible thumpers think the end of the world is coming too but they don't think pollution is the sin doing it they think butt sex is what we're doing wrong


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> Funny bible thumpers think the end of the world is coming too but they don't think pollution is the sin doing it they think butt sex is what we're doing wrong




they've been backwards since the late 4th century ... next to a Free Spirit, progress is their greatest hatred.


----------



## OnePercenter (Apr 15, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Strong theist here because when you have a personal relationship with the living God, then you KNOW.  I do appreciate the agnostics who do not have that personal experience yet but who keep an open mind.  I agree that is the thinking person's position.


How can you have a personal relationship with a belief?


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Don't worry.... I don't judge you.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 15, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I don't care. I laugh at people like you. 

Yea, when you die you become a god that lives forever because a religion you were born into says so. And anyone who doesn't believe your ridiculous story burns in hell. Lol.

For the record you're a liar. You judge.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I've never felt the need to laugh at people.  That would be a sign of judging them.  Actions and behaviors are a different matter all together though.  As for your belief of my belief, it's wrong, but I don't care, go ahead and see it that way.  But I am curious though now, are you having a lot of butt sex?  That would explain a lot.  Mind you, I'm not judging you.


----------



## ding (Apr 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I don't believe the end of the world is coming, but I do see a major correction headed our way.  I hope you are ready for it.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 15, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



I cannot judge what is right or wrong for you.  I can only say that those who presume to put conditions on how or when or in what form that God must make himself know to them before they will believe will have a much more difficult time finding God.  I don't know if that pertains to you so I offer it as a truth I believe.  If it is useful, good.  If not, then no harm, no foul.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 15, 2017)

OnePercenter said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Strong theist here because when you have a personal relationship with the living God, then you KNOW.  I do appreciate the agnostics who do not have that personal experience yet but who keep an open mind.  I agree that is the thinking person's position.
> ...



You don't.  You have a personal relationship with a person.  Once that person becomes real, tangible, experience, it is no longer a belief.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


God, if it exists , knows what's in my heart, doesn't it?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Look up the proper science of it, if you even know how to do that, which is seriously doubtful.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


But someone from your religion will, right?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Bigger than the housing crash?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


I'm open to god contacting me, no conditions.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


We should be so lucky.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I do sex my girl in the butt but wouldn't say I have "a  lot"


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Then God will find us when we die.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Yes. Trumps going to get rid of our debt by filing bankruptcy. That's why I don't worry about all the money he's spending flying back to Mars largo. They cried about how much the Obama spent in 8 years and in 100 days trump has spent more.

That's what CEOs do right before they file bankruptcy. Might as well right?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


And you can ask Him why He didn't do a better job of making Himself known to you, right?  I think that is a brilliant plan.  You should explain to the Creator of existence where He went wrong.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


He already knows


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Are you still crying about the election?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Knows what?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Looks like a judgement to me huh mudda?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


What's your dude doing, making hot dogs?

But it does show that your upset with my answer, why is that? Can't handle it? Why?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


That he is lying?  Yes.  That is a judgement of his action.  Do you understand the distinction or is that beyond your ability to grasp?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


You mean you couldn't figure out that it showed I don't believe you?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


ThatI believe that's called "moving the goalposts". Dingbat's fave move.


ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I figured that you like big hotdogs.

But I'm open to god contacting me, no conditions. Lump it, princess.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I love hot dogs.  The fatter the better.  With lot's of chili and cheese and onions and a little bit of ketchup.  Yum, yum.  You don't like hot dogs?


----------



## Iceweasel (Apr 16, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


So Christianity is not a faith? You are inconsistent.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Where he went wrong


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


God is not very convincing when he speaks to us through dings religion. Not buying it! Sounds like bullshit to me. And that's not rejecting God. I'm rejecting ding.

That's like if Halle Berry told ding to invite me to a party. I'm not rejecting Halle Berry I just don't believe dings ever met her


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I don't like the super size hot dogs. I prefer the classic size. But I bet you can take a big one real deep


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Tofu dogs for me, I'm vegetarian. 

And I'm open to god contacting me, no conditions. Lump it, princess.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


So you say.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Good, you're lumping it.


----------



## BuckToothMoron (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



First, if you're indeed a thinking man, stop the silly talk of proof of god.  We are discussing spirituality, not science. 

My reasoning is somewhat of an  "I think therefore I am" analogy. Man is a spiritually being. All thru history we see evidence of mankinds spirituality. It is apparent in all societies/civilizations. So is it possible for spirituality to exist if there is no spirit? My answer is no. That answer doesn't define god, but for me it does conclude there is spiritual existence.


----------



## BuckToothMoron (Apr 16, 2017)

ChrisL said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



My reasoning is somewhat of an "I think therefore I am" analogy. Man is a spiritually being. All thru history we see evidence of mankinds spirituality. It is apparent in all societies/civilizations. So is it possible for spirituality to exist if there is no spirit? My answer is no. That answer doesn't define god, but for me it does conclude there is spiritual existence or a higher power.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 16, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...




The way I see it, everything that a person thinks feels sees and hears, everything they remember and foresee and anything they can imagine whether real or pure fantasy is perceived through and within the conscious mind.

When scripture speaks about the heart of man, it is just speaking about the brain of man. When it speaks of an unclean spirit the subject is just a dirty mind.

It used to be the belief that the seat of consciousness was the human heart.



"The human heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" Jeremiah 17:9


 Now it is known that the seat of consciousness is the human brain, not the organ of the heart.. This should clear up many difficult to understand sayings and subjects in scripture.



The truth is that what many people have concluded to be spirituality,  as if it was some separate function of existence apart from what goes on in the brain,  in reality,  is just the unrestrained imagination of an unclean and self deluded mind.


So instead of saying that human beings are spiritual beings you can just be real and say that human beings are pretentious liars.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


So all you have is suppositions. Got it.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


You have a big enough brain to think and wonder and be superstitious. We understand it makes humans uncomfortable not knowing all the answers. So we come up with wild theories. Can't even call them theories because those require evidence.

We got nothing. Other than 1000 holy books all claiming it visited. Do you believe any of them?

Everything dies including your thinking soul. No heaven awaits. Come on now wake up to reality man.

You are such a speck of sand in the universe. Just be grateful you were born and relax. Be a good person. Laugh and vote


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 16, 2017)

hobelim said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


.


hobelim said:


> The truth is that what many people have concluded to be spirituality, as if it was some separate function of existence apart from what goes on in the brain, in reality, is just the unrestrained imagination of an unclean and self deluded mind.



I shouldn't bother, it is brain people that are deluded and simply are displaying their resignation from Spirituality ...








who came first, Flora or Fauna - .... few make the connection so much so it is distressing. among the primary failings of the desert religions, turning their backs against the Almighty.

at anyrate the Spiritualist sees spiritualism as all living beings - half do not have a CNS (central nervous system) to deny their spiritualism is a certain deathnail for an individual attempting admission to the Everlasting. but then just completing documents as the 10,000 pg 4th century book has the same affect so it is understandable the vast propensity for failure in the dialogue of religion.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 16, 2017)

hobelim said:


> ....So instead of saying that human beings are spiritual beings you can just be real and say that human beings are pretentious liars.


Interesting to see your true view of human beings.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Interesting theory, now prove it or just say it's your _belief_.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 16, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > ....So instead of saying that human beings are spiritual beings you can just be real and say that human beings are pretentious liars.
> ...




"The human heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure." Jeremiah 17:9

  It says so in the bible and I have seen the pretentious deceit with my own eyes and heard the lies with my own ears and so I believe.

If you don't believe peek inside any christian church that professes  that Jesus was an edible triune mangod and you will see for yourself sweet little old ladies misleading children  to openly engage in the insanity of pretending to be doing something holy by defying the commands of God.

What do you call it?

Spirituality?

Pft!


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 16, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Awesome!


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 16, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


.


hobelim said:


> "The human heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure." Jeremiah 17:9




why would anyone read that awful book.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


So the beliefs and practices of others offends you.  Which church do you attend?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


We are way more than a speck of sand in the universe.  By any objective measure we are the pinnacle of Creation.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


So you say.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Some call it The Way.  What do you have?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Do you feel better now?  Just as only sick people need a doctor, only people who are angry need to lash out.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I don't speak for God.  He doesn't like that.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Make sure you tell Him that.


----------



## ChrisL (Apr 16, 2017)

Perhaps there is a higher power.  Unless we can bring people back from the dead or some god shows him/her/itself, I guess we will never really know.  As far as all the stories in the Bible and things like that, I just can't buy those stories.  They are much too far fetched and "magical."  I can believe that they are parables.  I'm an agnostic who falls on the more skeptical side or "atheist" side.  It's nothing personal against Christians or any of their beliefs and I don't say it to hurt their feelings or anything.  This is just my personal opinion because I am just an "evidence" requiring kind of person I suppose.


----------



## Michelle420 (Apr 16, 2017)

What about Deist?


----------



## Mudda (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


Science.


----------



## Borillar (Apr 16, 2017)

I suppose that I am a de facto theist and weak Christian. I have had doubts about my faith all my life, but I have almost always believed there is a God or something that set everything in motion.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


You want proof of what you highlighted? OK, there was a time when primitive man prayed to the sun. Prayed every night it would come back and gave thanks in the morning when it did. The Indians had some crazy spirit world theories. Africans prayed to Juju. Greeks made up all the Greek gods. Mohammad, Joe Smith, jehovas.

These are all wild theories based on zero evidence. Now Christianity came up with an interesting hook. Believe or burn in hell. I find it laughable, idiotic, insulting and I believe this ignorance is holding us back.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BuckToothMoron said:
> ...


Somebody said the other day that the universe is new and we may be the first life to have happened but many many many more are to follow. 

I don't think we are the first. In our solar system alone I think there was life on Mars before earth. Imagine they thought the universe was made for them one time too. Or maybe they weren't smart enough to contemplate such things. 

It's arrogant and ignorant to think life won't pop up in the next ten billion years. When our star dies another star is just starting to sprout up new planets with life.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Carl Sagan said he has 2 questions when he meets God.

A. Which God are you? Humans have thousands of different gods.

B. Why did you go to such great length to hide from us?

He popped up in the most undeveloped part of the world 2000 years ago disappeared and we haven't seen him since and we're supposed to believe the stories?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

I do admit things have to be just right. You need a moon for example. And if a meteor didn't take out the dinosaurs we may still be rat monkeys that T-Rex eats. Because we stopped worrying about being eaten smart men advanced us more than strong men. When we became safe smart was able to invent and teach and we humans have built on the knowledge of our ancestors before us. Had dinosaurs stuck around we may still be tree dwelling monkeys. Our species of homosapian may not have survived.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


You aren't very good at it.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Hmmmm... do you have any proof for those beliefs or are you taking that on faith?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Aren't you the one who started the gay jokes? Or were you judging again?

I just find this fascinating. Today I asked a bunch of Christians if dinosaurs lives 13 toilet squares and us only 1 inch of one square, what was God thinking? We're dinosaurs a mistake? No one could answer me.

I think they were all born into the religion and brainwashed just like they are brainwashing their kids. Now you may argue its a good lie but is it?

I'd rather you tell us all the truth.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


A.  There is only one.  It doesn't matter what you call Him.  There is only one of Him.  

B.  He's not that hard to find.  

You can know Him from what He has created so that you are without excuse.


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Which gay jokes were those?  

I've already explained to you the difference between judging people and judging actions.  Two different things with two different consequences.  

Your question doesn't make any sense.  If you are asking why it took so long for nature to create beings that know and create, let me know and I'll walk you though it. 

As near as I can tell, you are a pretty bitter dude.  Are you sure what you are doing is working?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I certainly don't have faith in it like it's a religion. I've just deduced it in my head. What you have to do is think bigger than what is currently known. That's what Darwin did when he came up with evolution. Does he have proof? 

I don't have proof because I can't time travel and we don't have the capability to see far enough to know.

We think there's life in Europa. We don't know. Yet. Do you not think there is life in the universe outside of earth? Why do you think that? Does the bible say we are the only life in the universe?


----------



## ding (Apr 16, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I see.  I'll get back to that in a minute but I am curious what kind of life do you think is on Europa.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Not bitter at all. I passionately wish people would smarten up. I think we'd all be better for it. And I think we're already heading in the right direction but not fast enough. 

And I had a great Easter. I know, I should be ashamed making fun of all those good people but I just can't help it. I only do it here but I love running into like minded people and we have enough respect for our Christian friends to keep our beliefs to ourselves but really I wonder how many Christians really believe all the stuff the church is peddling. I think most don't ask questions that make them uncomfortable.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Fish


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 16, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


.


ding said:


> why it took so long for nature to create beings that know and create,




all beings know and create is why they are alive.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 17, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...




Personally I got fed up with all the sanctimonious bullshit coming at me from preachers and believers everywhere, so I decided to take  look to see for myself if their claims to moral authority are supported by scripture.

Thats why, and guess what.

I found out that most are just actors and lying frauds the rest are thoroughly deluded zombies being held in captivity....

Things are really far worse than they appear.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 17, 2017)

ding said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...




seriously? You think that I attend a church? lol, damn.

And no, its not the beliefs and practices of others that offend me, its their inability to perceive that to me their sin is as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of  plowed field yet they still try to deny it.

Its pathetic.

Kind of like you claiming to believe in one God yet bowing down before an edible triune roman perversion of Jesus.

So no, churches and the silly things people do in churches doesn't bother me in the least when I am walking by, just like a graveyard and all the dead people in there doesn't bother me at all when I am walking by.

Its just when some zombie sits next to me on the subway and vomits on my shoes when I am minding my own business, or some religiously addled poster butts in and tries to drag my soul into their hell is when I have to break out the crucifix, the silver bullet,  and the wooden stake.

I'll be damned if I let some low IQ nincompoop eat my brains.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 17, 2017)

ding said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I don't have to be, there are scientists working for me.


----------



## ding (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


People who aren't bitter don't enjoy making fun of others like you do.


----------



## ding (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Lol


----------



## ding (Apr 17, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I'm glad you acknowledge this limitation at least.


----------



## ding (Apr 17, 2017)

hobelim said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Do you believe in the God of Abraham?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Examples of man trying to use physical means to satisfy a spiritual need.

Doctors used to use leeches to suck "bad humors" out of patients.  Some died from bleeding, but as it turns out, leeches do have a use in medicine: Modern Leeching - Science Updates - Science NetLinks


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



5 Reasons Why I Hate Religious Christianity | The Huffington Post


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



And people use the spiritual to cure the physical.  I get it.  Mental and physical are connected.


----------



## BuckToothMoron (Apr 17, 2017)

Mudda said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> And people use the spiritual to cure the physical.  I get it.  Mental and physical are connected.


They can try.  Yes mental and physical are connected in many ways.


----------



## BuckToothMoron (Apr 17, 2017)

Hey science is great, I love it. The only problem for the truly thinking man with science is it can't explain the presents of spirituality demonstrated by man throughout history in virtually every culture. You can say it's just made up, but you're dismissing some of the greatest minds, most inspired architecture and art to ever exist. A mature mind will eventually understand and accept it is beyond science.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

BuckToothMoron said:


> Hey science is great, I love it. The only problem for the truly thinking man with science is it can't explain the presents of spirituality demonstrated by man throughout history in virtually every culture. You can say it's just made up, but you're dismissing some of the greatest minds, most inspired architecture and art to ever exist. A mature mind will eventually understand and accept it is beyond science.


Agreed.  True scientists know that science only deals with the natural universe.  Only those who _believe_ in atheism claim that science can prove or disprove what is outside of our universe.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



Well when you look and see Trilobites were around for millions of years before dinosaurs and then dinosaurs were around for millions of years before us, it sort of blows your theory that god created the earth for us.  It blows the story how god made the earth in 7 days and man on the 6th day.  If he made it for us why go through those periods?  Oh yea, we needed the dinosaurs to make oil.  LOL.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> .Well when you look and see Trilobites were around for millions of years before dinosaurs and then dinosaurs were around for millions of years before us, it sort of blows your theory that god created the earth for us.  It blows the story how god made the earth in 7 days and man on the 6th day.  If he made it for us why go through those periods?  Oh yea, we needed the dinosaurs to make oil.  LOL.


Only for those who take Genesis literally.


----------



## ding (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Actually it doesn't. Why do you think it does?  The realization of intention is based on the final product.


----------



## ding (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


People who aren't bitter don't hate.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > 5 Reasons Why I Hate Religious Christianity | The Huffington Post
> ...


Agreed. 

People who hate usually have deeper psychological issues.  Many times those issues involve self-loathing, unhappiness and other misery that causes them to lash out at others to spread their misery.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


That's what christians do!  LOL





Spreading their joy.

And I don't hate anyone.  Hate is an awfully harsh word but so is eternal damnation.

You have to see the movie Brimstone.  Best preacher ever!


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



WAAAAH.  Don't come to a thread like this and get all sensitive.  If you were on the street I'd leave your gullible ass alone.  I would just secretly be praying the dumb out of you all just like I do in church this weekend.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ...And I don't hate anyone.  Hate is an awfully harsh word but so is eternal damnation....


Disagreed you don't hate.  Clearly you do.

Example:





sealybobo said:


> WAAAAH.  Don't come to a thread like this and get all sensitive.  If you were on the street I'd leave your gullible ass alone.  I would just secretly be praying the dumb out of you all just like I do in church this weekend.



As for eternal damnation, I agree that no true all-loving, all-merciful power would do such a thing.  That's just mankind's interpretation like calling thunderbolts the anger of Zeus.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ...And I don't hate anyone.  Hate is an awfully harsh word but so is eternal damnation....
> ...


I don't hate the sinner i hate the sin


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...



They should have included "Evangelistic Atheist", the people who are so convinced that they're right about His non-existence that they feel compelled to go out and preach their beliefs and try to convert people to agree with them, which always seemed like an utterly pointless effort to me.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...



A thinking person must also accept that there may never be any "finding of truth" in this matter.  Sometimes, the smartest position to hold is the recognition that you're ignorant.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2017)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



. . . And you're nowhere near that on the subject of God.  The problem with atheists is that they view no-evidence as evidence, and jump to a conclusion from there.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2017)

cnm said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Well, it's an ideology, one way or the other.
> ...



Anything can be an ideology, if you're fanatical enough about it.


----------



## Mudda (Apr 17, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Is that where you're at?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> ...


Well it's not.  Turns out a lot of people out there are/were/have been struggling with this and it's nice running into like minded people.  Or to run into someone who thinks they believe but they have such a problem with the conflicting feelings they are having but never had anyone else to talk to.  I only wish I could have got to my gay neighbor who killed himself because he believed being gay was a sin.  He would have been much better off becoming fabulous and embracing who he is.  

I never preach to someone who says they believe in god.  If they tell me they believe in god I stop talking.  But if they give me that window where they admit not being that religious but at the same time claiming to be a christian.  No you are not.  Just because you were born into it and go to church on Easter doesn't make you a christian.  You have to believe what Christians believe in order to be called a Christian, right?  But the church isn't that picky when a ton of people show up with money to put in the hat.  Who cares what they actually believe.  It's more of a social group than a religion.  For example a lot of atheist Jews.  Their culture is Jewish but they themselves don't believe in god.  It is possible to be a jew and an atheist.  Did you know?

Anyways, this is the part of the argument where theists resort to guilt.  They say we are mean, hurtful, must be bitter.  This is a tactic because logically they got nothing.  

*Why can’t atheists just leave theists alone?*

Because religion has been, and continues to be, responsible for countless horrors throughout human history. See also: Religiously motivated animosity, violence and oppression and discrimination.
For all the problems we face as a society, many theists choose not only to do nothing to help, but actually engage in sabotage by actively preventing solutions from being instigated, usually by supporting irrational political positions e.g. stem-cell research, contraception, women’s rights, sexual equality and even global warming.
Because belief in a god taps into mankind’s natural tendency to defer moral decision making to authority figures (including priests, prophets, holy books, popes, ayatollahs and imams). Acting out ‘God’s plan’ or ‘God’s will’ is a sure-fire way to absolve one’s-self of responsibility for one’s actions. See also: Cituke.
Because as a functional member of society it benefits everyone if your decision making process is founded on evidence and reason, not on superstition. Faith isn’t a virtue; it is the glorification of voluntary ignorance.
Because religious superstition erects an absolute monarchy in a person’s mind. It teaches them to be satisfied with with not understanding the world and represents a surrendering to ignorance under the pretension of ‘devine knowledge’. Many of the greatest thinkers in human history have been repressed, sometimes forcefully, by those with faith. It is not skeptics or explorers but fanatics and ideologues who menace decency and progress. See also: Hypatia, Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno, The relationship between science and religion.
Note: The common theist response “Those people aren’t really [insert religion]” is an example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. If all the Christians who have called other Christians ‘not really a Christian’ were to vanish, there’d be no Christians left.

See also: The Ethics of Belief (a must read).

_“Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.” – _Blaise Pascal

_“No belief held by one man, however seemingly trivial the belief, and however obscure the believer, is ever actually insignificant or without its effect on the fate of mankind”_ – William Clifford


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...



I love running into like minded agnostics/atheists.  Wish I would have run into you when I was 10 years old.  Wish someone would have had an honest conversation with me about religion rather than lie to me for 30 years until I realized I'm not alone or evil.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ...And I don't hate anyone.  Hate is an awfully harsh word but so is eternal damnation....
> ...



That post of mine doesn't prove hate.  You guys are brainwashed.  For example when you say things like, "you will be punished for rejecting god".  I'm not rejecting god.  I'm rejecting you and your preachers stories that god visited your ancestors.  Do you realize how dumb you would have to be to believe a story like that if I told you a story about how god visited my ancestors and impregnated a virgin?  Yet you expect us to take you seriously or give you any respect?  Lets be honest, if anyone talks about god in public for more than 5 seconds everyone starts to get uncomfortable.  Most people would not hire an overly religious person.  And so really religion should remain personal.  And yes I would love nothing more than for you to tell your children both sides of the debate.  What you do now is tell them god is a fact when in fact he is not.  I've seen your religious shows for kids.  They are not having honest discussions with those kids.  Sorry if this bothers me that we are holding ourselves back intellectually by remaining superstitious.  I think if we are dumb enough to believe crap like this we are an easy species to manipulate.  They've been manipulating us for thousands of years.  Holding us back.  I'm not angry or bitter.  I just passionately think we need to improve before it's too late.  For example, you believe in virgin births but not global warming, right?  

_I’m sorry if my insensitivity towards your beliefs offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia and rejection of science and reason offend me. So I guess we’re even._


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Disagreed.  You, like other religious fanatics, have made it abundantly clear you hate people who think, act and believe differently than you do.  You're not alone in doing that, sir, but you are certainly no different than those religious hypocrites you hate so much.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Disagreed you don't hate.  Clearly you do....
> ...


I've never said that and never would.  Quote me or be known as a low-down scumbag lying hypocrite.  Betcha a $25 Gold membership you can't!


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


Ideology is good if it's logical.  Fanaticism is not because fanaticism is emotional, not logical.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



Illogical or irrational or knee jerk conditioned.  One or the other. But when it comes to matters of faith and/or those who embrace matters of faith, some who reject that do so with equal fanaticism.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Illogical or irrational or knee jerk conditioned.  One or the other. But when it comes to matters of faith and/or those who embrace matters of faith, some who reject that do so with equal fanaticism.


Agreed.  Atheists can be as fanatical as theists.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



I don't hate my dad, brother and nephews.  GTFU with that shit.  Hate?  Hah!  This is just you getting sensitive because you can't argue your faith rationally and logically.  You can't prove it.  So you fall back on turning this into a personal thing.  I must be angry or bitter.  Well that's better than 100 years ago you would have said that was SATAN doing it.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Quote me saying I hate anyone for their religious beliefs.  If not you will be known as a low down scumbag lying hypocrite.  

I hate the sin not the sinners.  I feel sorry for you ignorant fools.  And you're holding us back as a species.

Has religion interfered with the advancement of humankind more than it has contributed to it?

the Dark Ages refers to a period of roughly 1,000 years during which the science of the ancient Greek and Roman societies was forgotten, discouraged, and suppressed by medieval Christians. By placing their "holy" book above all else and fighting anything that was not consistent with it, early Christians set back scientific progress approximately 1,000 years.

What is even more troublesome than losing the advances of the ancients to early Christians' war on reality is that there are Christians today working toward similar ends. Recall that opposition to modernism and anti-intellectualism are key components of Christian extremism.  The result is that we have a politically influential movement in the United States opposing education, battling science, and working to prevent equality for women, LGBT persons and many other groups.

You know who makes me mad?  Nancy Reagan.  She was against stem cell until Ronny got Alzheimers.  She was against gays before she found out her son was gay.  And I'm sure religion played a part in her initial ignorant positions.  

If you guys are offended, don't come to a thread like this.  You will run into extreme atheists like me.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Illogical or irrational or knee jerk conditioned.  One or the other. But when it comes to matters of faith and/or those who embrace matters of faith, some who reject that do so with equal fanaticism.
> ...



Why there is no god

#32 says you are WRONG!

*Militant atheists are just as bad as religious ones.*
No, they’re not. There are no calls for slavery, rape or murder in the atheist holy book.

Atheists are most often called ‘militant’ when they passionately defend reason and advocate critical thinking. The bar theists set for perceived hostility appears to be any atheist simply voicing an opinion in dissent of religious belief. In contrast, the bar atheists set for perceived theistic hostility is any form of religiously motivated violence or oppression.

Atheism does not preclude someone from being argumentative or insensitive; those things are simply seen as being preferable to killing one another over an imaginary friend.

A ‘militant’ atheist will debate in a University theatre or appeal for the separation of religion and government. A militant theist will kill doctors, stone women to death, incite religious war, restrict sexual and gender equality and convince children they are flawed and worthless – all under the instruction of their imagined ‘god’ or holy book.

It can be argued that there is no such thing as a ‘militant’ atheist, that the term is itself a misnomer, because there is simply no ideology or philosophy in atheism to be militant about. If an atheist is someone who lacks belief in gods, then a ‘militant’ atheist is apparently someone who passionately lacks a belief in gods. All other possible beliefs and ideologies – including any desire to oppress theism – come from outside atheism. This is in contrast to religious belief, which often includes a set of laws and commandments purportedly derived from a supernatural source about which one can be ‘militant’.

Note: ‘Militant’ atheism is most often confused with gosateizm (state atheism), which was based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. It was this ideology which was responsible for the oppression and murder of theists under several 20th century communist regimes. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods with no inherit moral, political or philosophical baggage.

See also: The Ethics of Belief (a must read), Richard Dawkins on Militant Atheism, Christian Terrorism, Islamic Terrorism, Atheist Terrorism (no link found).

_“I’m sorry if my insensitivity towards your beliefs offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia and rejection of science and reason offend me. So I guess we’re even.” – _Anonymous


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

This weekend I watched a horrible movie where Liam Neeson and Spiderman were Christians spreading the word in Japan.  Christians will say how the Japanese atheists killed thousands of Christians but they weren't atheists.  They too believed in a higher power.  Just not Jesus.  But Christians love to call them godless atheists.  That is a lie.  That's fudging history.  Watch the movie and see.  It's called Silence.  Horrible movie.  

Silence (2016) - IMDb


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Quote me saying I hate anyone for their religious beliefs....


I can't since you keep denying it, but then you make multiple posts like this:  Search Results for Query: christian | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Clearly you hate Christians.  Should I prove you hate me by your repeated lies and insults posted against me?  That'll take a $25 Gold Membership bet.  If you don't bet me, what does that prove?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> This weekend I watched a horrible movie where Liam Neeson and Spiderman were Christians spreading the word in Japan.  Christians will say how the Japanese atheists killed thousands of Christians but they weren't atheists.  They too believed in a higher power.  Just not Jesus.  But Christians love to call them godless atheists.  That is a lie.  That's fudging history.  Watch the movie and see.  It's called Silence.  Horrible movie.
> 
> Silence (2016) - IMDb


Nice atheist spin.  Yes, there are religious assholes, including atheist assholes. 

What's your point?  That Atheists and Theists have abused their fellow human beings?  I agree.  So what do you think we should do?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> This weekend I watched a horrible movie where Liam Neeson and Spiderman were Christians spreading the word in Japan.  Christians will say how the Japanese atheists killed thousands of Christians but they weren't atheists.  They too believed in a higher power.  Just not Jesus.  But Christians love to call them godless atheists.  That is a lie.  That's fudging history.  Watch the movie and see.  It's called Silence.  Horrible movie.
> 
> Silence (2016) - IMDb



You were saying?  Here is such a sampling of Atheists given power and who used it to murder, enslave, impoverish, and devastate millions of people.  You can find many Christians who have done bad things and yes people have suffered.  But not on the scale that you find the Atheists wrecking murder and mayhem on such a vast and terrible scale.





Napoleon





Lenin





Stalin





Than Shwe





Kim Jong II





Mao Ze Dung





Pol Pot


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Quote me saying I hate anyone for their religious beliefs....
> ...


When I say you I mean you theists not you personally. You not knowing that makes you seem a bit slow. And I'm insulting all theists not just Christians.

And I don't hate Christians. They've been brainwashed since birth and they aren't as intelligent or as brave as me. Do you know how hard it was to understand I'm not rejecting God I don't believe a God exists. Because every bit of evidence could have been man made up. If that's true then that wouldn't be gods test.

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings but when you continue to insist the world is flat bluntness is required. Then I start lumping you altogether.

Anyways, this is where you guys start to get your feeling hurt because you realize every argument you make comes with a fatal flaw


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > This weekend I watched a horrible movie where Liam Neeson and Spiderman were Christians spreading the word in Japan.  Christians will say how the Japanese atheists killed thousands of Christians but they weren't atheists.  They too believed in a higher power.  Just not Jesus.  But Christians love to call them godless atheists.  That is a lie.  That's fudging history.  Watch the movie and see.  It's called Silence.  Horrible movie.
> ...


Nothing to do. I don't want to stop people from worshipping. I only want to give the message to those who will receive it. The truth. There are people looking for it. It was one of the greatest days in my life when I finally decided the god people talk about doesn't exist. I was freed. And I'm happy to run into a lot of atheists here so I realize I'm not angry evil or going to hell. Other people agree you people are all nuts. And here is where I get to say it loud and proud. Can't do it anywhere else. You people are way too sensitive. So don't come to a sight like this and be shocked or offended.

And for the record I don't want to shake your faith if it provides you with comfort. I want to tell the holier than thou how ridiculous they sound. Sorry if you good people get caught up in the debate. You probably shouldn't be listening or participating.

And what do you care what I say? If you truly believed you would feel sorry for me. You wouldn't be talking about Christians as victims. They are all going to paradise when they die to become gods, right?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

If I truly believed I was going to become a god when I died and live in paradise I would be so anxious to die. I can't wait for the weekend. I'm going up north to ride my quadrunner. Are Christians looking forward to dieing?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > This weekend I watched a horrible movie where Liam Neeson and Spiderman were Christians spreading the word in Japan.  Christians will say how the Japanese atheists killed thousands of Christians but they weren't atheists.  They too believed in a higher power.  Just not Jesus.  But Christians love to call them godless atheists.  That is a lie.  That's fudging history.  Watch the movie and see.  It's called Silence.  Horrible movie.
> ...


Ha! They didn't kill because of atheism, did they?

What was the 100 or 30 year wars about? What about the crusades? And don't forget Isis is a religious organization. You own Isis. I realize Christians aren't Isis but Isis is an example of religion gone wrong.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



The 100 years war was a series of conflicts between England and France as they vied for control of the area.  The 30 years war was indeed retaliation against Emperor Ferninand who wanted to make Catholicism the official religion, but it was not genocide or mass murder of people.  It would be no different than you wanting to make Washington DC officially Atheist and the states objecting mightily to that out of fear that you would then try to impose that policy on them. The conflict was economically devastating to all combatants but it was less a religious war than a war to retain self determination.

The Crusades were all politically motivated, not religiously motivated, and the Inquisition, while terrible, was fairly regionally isolated and short lived.

The point being that Atheism is not some kind of benign live and let live philosophy when it is imposed as policy.  It has invariably created large scale oppression and tyranny on a scale that wars involving Christians never have.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 17, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> The point being that Atheism is not some kind of benign live and let live philosophy when it is imposed as policy.




the imposition from history was never from an existing state but the outcome and collapse of corrupt and oppressive regimes in all cases endorsed and supported by organized religions, 4th century christianity in Europe and a natural causal conclusion to the prevailing injustice.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 17, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


In other words when dictators want to rule they ban religions because religions stand up for the people. But other than being a secular nation I don't want to ban all religions. What if I find God tomorrow. I want to be free to worship if I choose


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Illogical or irrational or knee jerk conditioned.  One or the other. But when it comes to matters of faith and/or those who embrace matters of faith, some who reject that do so with equal fanaticism.
> ...



I think in a very real way atheists are MORE fanatical. I mean, theists evangelize because they were told to do so by God, at least in their eyes, and because they want to save other people from miserable lives on Earth and eternal damnation afterward.  What the hell is the overriding motivation for atheists to evangelize?  But they do it, frequently with more fervor than I've seen from most religious types.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



That is what all people who value liberty want.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Great question. First, I want to save people too like my neighbor who killed himself because his Catholic mom told him being gay sends you to hell. I never judged him. As an atheist it's OK to be gay.

Eternal damnation offends me. That's another reason I mock.


----------



## ding (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


You can make something out of almost anything.  I hope you don't mind if I call BS on your self professed altruism.


----------



## james bond (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Being an extreme atheist means you extremely disavow God.  It may not mean you're a hater, but it means that you'll likely turn into a Commie.  I think atheism is for those people who do not like to think and be rational.  Do you find yourself spouting liberal dogma and believe everything they tell you to believe?  What's funny is that they claim to be the ones who invented rational thought.  The theists are and will be better off.

Some of the current liberal trend is for politics to invade sports and consumerism.  The idea is to separate teams and individuals who are liberal vs conservative.  The actions are to buy products based on politics.  It's silly.  Buy what you want or need.  It's not Coke vs Pepsi.


----------



## james bond (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Just what do you think will be eternal damnation?  The burning 24/7 forever is an old Roman Catholic belief which is probably overblown.  What about losing your identity?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Doesn't really matter.  The point is, religious people who evangelize do so because they believe there will be eternal negative repercussions to people if they don't.  What each theist individually believes those repercussions are going to be is irrelevant to the point.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ... *GTFU with that shit*.  Hate?  Hah!  This is just you getting sensitive because you can't argue your faith rationally and logically.  You can't prove it.  *So you fall back on turning this into a personal thing.*  I must be angry or bitter.  Well that's better than 100 years ago you would have said that was SATAN doing it.


GTFU isn't you making it personal?  LOL  

Still waiting for you to quote me on the false claim you made.  No worries, I'm sure you've been rightfully called a liar several times before.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


Losing one's identity is actually an excellent question.  If "heaven" is transcending the mortal plane, what is the next step?  Just trading in one's mortal life for one with wings (or horns) isn't much of a transition.

IMHO, a true transcendence would be truly "becoming one with God".   Ergo, losing one's identity and becoming (rejoining?) God.  "Hell", in that case, would be not be "becoming one with God".


----------



## dblack (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Which raises the question of what constitutes "identity" in the first place. Is it a physical thing? Is it information? (thoughts, memories, emotions, ideas?)


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


The worst anti-smokers are usually former smokers.  The most zealous atheists have often been lapsed Catholics or other Christians.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

dblack said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I think it's a physical thing.  We are enclosed inside our own bags of skin and limited by our mortality.

If we could truly share each other's thoughts, wouldn't we often be drawn more closer to each other?  Most disagreements seem to be a mixture of miscommunications and distrust since none of us can really know what others are thinking.  

One analogy for our mortal selves and the great beyond is the cycle of water on Earth.  There is the Great Ocean covering the entire planet.  Water separates from the Great Ocean by evaporation.  Later, it condenses to form clouds then falls as individual raindrops.  Some fall back into the ocean.  Others fall onto the land forming streams then rivers before finally returning to the Great Ocean.  The cycle continues _ad infinitum_.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...




When Jesus said that the Father and I are one he was not saying that he became God and lost his identity.

Being one with God is just about being of one accord.

A person does not lose their identity when they transcend the mortal plane, they find it.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Nice belief.  Now admit it's a belief or prove your statement.  Your choice.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Actually, I'm fairly certain we would like each other less if we were privy to each other's thoughts.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's a physical thing.  We are enclosed inside our own bags of skin and limited by our mortality.
> ...


LOL.  No doubt there'd be an adjustment.  Two year olds don't like it when they are told to share.  It's a learning process.

Still, if we all grew up knowing exactly what each of our fellow human beings was thinking, don't you think we'd be a lot closer as a species? More sympathetic to each other?


----------



## hobelim (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



see John 17: 1-26



"But it is not for these alone that I pray, but for those also who through their words put their faith in me; may they all be one: as thou, Father, art in me; and I in thee, so also may they be in us, that the world may believe that thou didst send me.  The glory which thou has given me, I have given them, that they may be one, as we are one;

I in them and thou in me, may they all be perfectly one."



You don't think that the disciples were assimilated by some spiritual plane lost their identities and became God do you?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Nice belief.  Now admit it's a belief or prove your statement.  Your choice.
> ...


 That's not proof.  That's a quote from a book assembled by a group of men under the direction of Emperor Constantine in 325AD to push all Christians in one direction and away from other thoughts.  The Bible was cherry-picked from hundreds of books, both old and new. All other forms of Christianity were declared heresy and those who refused to follow the directed form of Christianity were banished, excommunicate or executed.

The concept of the "Trinity" didn't happen immediately.  It grew as the mandated church evolved.

Trinity - Wikipedia


----------



## hobelim (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


 

When you asked for proof I assumed you were looking for scriptural teaching on the subject of being one with God.


Whats your proof that people lose their identity in the spiritual plane or that being one with God is not simply about being of one accord?

And whats the trinity have to do with anything?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



No, I think we have the ability to hide the less-desirable aspects of ourselves for a very good reason.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

hobelim said:


> ...Whats your proof that people lose their identity in the spiritual plane or that being one with God is not simply about being of one accord?
> 
> And whats the trinity have to do with anything?


I have none since, unlike you, I readily admit it's a belief.  There is no proof either way, which is why these things are a matter of faith.

The Trinity is an example of a small group of men dictating to others on what to believe.  Religion should be a path to God, not an end to itself.  As the wise man said, "There are many paths to the mountaintop".


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


IMHO, that's like a crippled person saying that they are crippled for a reason.  

OTOH, there is the question of "why are we here?"  Human limitations may be part of the mystery.  I don't know, but it's something to think about.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > ...Whats your proof that people lose their identity in the spiritual plane or that being one with God is not simply about being of one accord?
> ...


 I agree with your objections to the trinity.

However I disagree with your assertion that my position about what scripture teaches about the subject of being one with God is a position of faith that cannot be proven by what scripture teaches..


I have shown it to you.


If you want to speculate on the nature of God without the benefit of thousands of years of teaching on the subject, you might as well try surviving without technology.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

hobelim said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Thousands of years of teaching?  Dude, a circle of men cherry-picked from hundreds of books and laid out the biblical canon in 325AD.  It hasn't changed any since then.  What has changed is that all other ideas on Jesus have been stomped out as heresy and heretics who didn't bend were executed.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Can't imagine why you would consider having privacy inside your own head to be "crippled".


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


The only reason to have privacy in such a case is to preserve one's identity; a selfish desire to remain apart and not become one with God. 

Identity is an illusion; a human limitation.  When we die, transcending our human limitations would be nice, eh?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



No, actually, a very good reason to have such privacy from other humans is because we would be a lot less likable if they knew everything that goes on in our heads . . . which I'm pretty sure I already said.

Please don't start conflating our previous conversation, which has been exclusively about human interaction with "You want to be separate from God".  I haven't said a single thing about God yet on this topic.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


And, like I already said, since we'd grow up with it, like a two year old learning to share, we'd get used to it.


----------



## hobelim (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...




They couldn't stomp out or repress what went over their heads in the stories that were included.


Anyway, dude, whether you like and I like it or not, much of modern society as fucked up as it is and the very notions of what is good or evil is based on stupid interpretations of those stories.

Do you need proof of that?

If you want to extirpate false doctrines and every consequent evil they must be pulled up by the roots.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



That's funny you say that

Why American Sports Are Socialist


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Atheists are most often called ‘militant’ when they passionately defend reason and advocate critical thinking. The bar theists set for perceived hostility appears to be any atheist simply voicing an opinion in dissent of religious belief. In contrast, the bar atheists set for perceived theistic hostility is any form of religiously motivated violence or oppression.

A ‘militant’ atheist will debate in a University theatre or appeal for the separation of religion and government. A militant theist will kill doctors, stone women to death, incite religious war, restrict sexual and gender equality and convince children they are flawed and worthless – all under the instruction of their imagined ‘god’ or holy book.

It can be argued that there is no such thing as a ‘militant’ atheist, that the term is itself a misnomer, because there is simply no ideology or philosophy in atheism to be militant about. If an atheist is someone who lacks belief in gods, then a ‘militant’ atheist is apparently someone who passionately lacks a belief in gods. All other possible beliefs and ideologies – including any desire to oppress theism – come from outside atheism. This is in contrast to religious belief, which often includes a set of laws and commandments purportedly derived from a supernatural source about which one can be ‘militant’.

Note: ‘Militant’ atheism is most often confused with gosateizm (state atheism), which was based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. It was this ideology which was responsible for the oppression and murder of theists under several 20th century communist regimes. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods with no inherit moral, political or philosophical baggage.

_“I’m sorry if my insensitivity towards your beliefs offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia and rejection of science and reason offend me. So I guess we’re even.” _


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ... *GTFU with that shit*.  Hate?  Hah!  This is just you getting sensitive because you can't argue your faith rationally and logically.  You can't prove it.  *So you fall back on turning this into a personal thing.*  I must be angry or bitter.  Well that's better than 100 years ago you would have said that was SATAN doing it.
> ...


Have you run out of thing to say so now you are using the "i'm offended" argument? Trying to make us feel guilty for attacking your ridiculous religion?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Atheists are most often called ‘militant’ when they passionately defend reason and advocate critical thinking. The bar theists set for perceived hostility appears to be any atheist simply voicing an opinion in dissent of religious belief. In contrast, the bar atheists set for perceived theistic hostility is any form of religiously motivated violence or oppression.
> 
> A ‘militant’ atheist will debate in a University theatre or appeal for the separation of religion and government. A militant theist will kill doctors, stone women to death, incite religious war, restrict sexual and gender equality and convince children they are flawed and worthless – all under the instruction of their imagined ‘god’ or holy book.
> 
> ...


....and sometimes "militant atheists" are just fucking assholes like militant theists.

Still waiting for you to quote me on the lie you told about me.  Sometimes "militant atheists" are just old-fashioned liars.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Atheists are most often called ‘militant’ when they passionately defend reason and advocate critical thinking. The bar theists set for perceived hostility appears to be any atheist simply voicing an opinion in dissent of religious belief. In contrast, the bar atheists set for perceived theistic hostility is any form of religiously motivated violence or oppression.
> ...



I already told you when I say YOU I mean YOU PEOPLE.  Not you specifically.  So what if you don't believe in hell?  So what you understand all the stories in the bible are allegories.  Many many Christians don't.

And I'm sorry, but where else but here are atheists "militant"?  No where.  In fact you can't even find us in public, can you?  You certainly can't send someone to blow up our church because we don't have one.  LOL.


----------



## james bond (Apr 18, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I can use facts, reasoning and historical truths.  Just because something could be material doesn't mean it exists as material.  For example, the unicorn, the flying spaghetti monster, aliens, multiverses, traveling back to the past and so on.  All of these are fictional and only exist in the imagination.  We have atheist scientists who believe in aliens or multiverses without one shred of evidence.  They claim we will find some microbe on another planet in ten years.  They think life can just happen.  It's all based on faith.  Faith in evolutionary thinking or what they call "science."

Is this short life of ours all there is?  No.  The evidence is in the Creator and us.  He's just like us.  He created this wonderful place called Earth and some take it for granted.  There are still places I haven't been to, sights I haven't seen, food I haven't tasted and things I haven't experienced.  For almost all of us, the experiences of our lifetimes will be here.  There are memories of our experiences.  That isn't material.  You have to ask yourself why there is so much power in love, the mind, ideas, intuition, certain thoughts and more.  We also have an immaterial thing called identity.  These aren't material things, but they exist.  Another is that we all have a sense of justice.  We all have a conscience.  A couple more immaterial things, but still very powerful.  All of these are evidence of an intelligent Creator and the immaterial exist.  

That leads us to... Will there will have to be some sort of final judgment over one's life.  Isn't that where religion comes in?  Even atheists want some kind of punishment for the wicked.  Those that murder.  Those that provide false witness.  Those that commit arson.  Those that cheat the system to reward themselves.  Even religions without so-called deity or deities think karma, the rebirth of one's spirit or the supernatural exists.  The only religion I can think of without this is atheism (maybe they believe in luck).  Why?  Because atheism is more political than religious.    



The biggest takeaway from this is another immaterial thing called identity.  We all have that in this life.  It's become more important now as one has to be able to prove one's identity.


----------



## james bond (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



See what I mean?  The liberal masters, i.e. the rich want you to think politics should be in everything including sports and consumerism.  I can show you an article between Nike (liberal) vs Under Armour (conservative) because UA's CEO spouted something.

My thinking is ignore all that BS.  If you like Nike products and their shoes look good and fit you well, then buy it.  Don't buy or not buy products because of political beliefs.  Also, people with a business shouldn't mix business with politics or religion.


----------



## james bond (Apr 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I notice you disavow state atheism which killed more people and committed more violence in the world than all of the religious killings put together.  It's part of atheism and that's where atheism around the world is taking us to Communism and state atheism.  Furthermore, Darwinism ended up as social Darwinism, Nazi racial policies, the Holocaust and black genocide with Planned Parenthood.

EDIT:  I guess I'm not going to get what you believe is eternal damnation.  I suppose there is none.  Thus, one can infect gays with HIV and get away with it.  Or oppose Hollywood values such as "public obscenities, decadence, narcissism, hypocrisy, rampant drug use, extramarital sex leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted disease, abortion, lawlessness and the promotion of the homosexual agenda" and get away with it.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Very easy to find the flaws in your logic.

We think there might be life on Europa and there might be multiverse. Key word might.  Why do you know there aren't?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I refuse to even try chic fil a


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



 But even if they do, what harm is there?  If the Chic-fil-a CEO advertises their policy that all their stores will close on Sundays so that their employees can attend church or just have a day off on what he believes is God's Sabbath Day, how does that harm anybody?  If Tom and Jerry's choose to put a float in a Gay Nazi parade, how does that harm anybody?  Am I going to refuse to buy something in either place because of their religious or political stances?  No.

Should I refuse to enjoy "Sister Act", a movie I do enjoy, just because Whoopi Goldberg is politically offensive to me?  Or "Moonstruck" (Cher) or "Shall We Dance" (Susan Sarandon.)

I do confess when Target refused to allow the Salvation Army Santa and kettle in front of their stores and Wal-mart continued that tradition, I chose to go to Wal-mart instead of Target.  But that was to reward Wal-mart for what I see as a wonderful tradition, not to punish Target.  If what I needed was at Target and not at Wal-mart, I would go to Target.

From one of my favorite all-time movies:  "Chocolat":


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 19, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Perhaps, but it would also create significant changes in who humans are and how they interact and form societies.  I highly doubt that we would be the social creatures we are now.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 19, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I think you mean Ben & Jerry's.  

To an extent, you're both correct.  Mixing political or religious views with business is probably bad business practice, but that doesn't mean people should be stopped from doing so if that's their choice.  Freedom means the freedom to be stupid, if that's what floats one's boat.

SHOULD you avoid things simply because one aspect of it is offensive to you?  Not if you don't want to.  By the same token, there's no "should" about ignoring those aspects, either, if you don't want to.

I stop doing business with companies when their offensive behavior becomes too much for me to ignore.  Maybe it's cumulative, or maybe it's just one big thing they do that's too much for me.  Depends entirely on the business and what they do.  I won't eat Ben & Jerry's or buy Starbucks because their self-righteous proselytizing through their products has just accumulated too much, to the point where it completely overshadows their actual product.  I won't watch a movie with Jake Gyllenhaal or Alec Baldwin in it, to name two, because their behavior outside of their acting has become so pervasive in my consciousness that I simply can't forget who they are and see them as their characters any more.  I think it's a serious mistake for actors to make the public too aware of them as regular people, because their careers depend on their ability to make us believe in them as their characters, at least for the length of time that the show lasts.

On the other hand, there are companies who do things I don't care for, but I still do business with, because they haven't shoved it into my face sufficiently to make me stay away.  There are actors whose personal politics I find distasteful, but they're smart enough to mostly keep it personal and allow to largely ignore it.

Won't shop at Target, because I don't like shopping somewhere I don't feel comfortable using the bathroom.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Frankly, a dissertation on all the things you think you're right about, and the ways in which you think you're vastly smarter and superior to other people has exactly fuck-all to do with the point.

WHAT, exactly, is the purpose of evangelizing about atheism?  Why would you bother to do it?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Lots of reasons. For one it's the truth.  2, theism is holding us back.  It makes people dumb.  Luckily there are a lot more atheists out there than you know.

New Study Suggests U.S. Has A Lot Of 'Closet' Atheists | The Huffington Post


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 19, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Perhaps, but it would also create significant changes in who humans are and how they interact and form societies.  I highly doubt that we would be the social creatures we are now.


Agreed except I think we'd be even more sociable.  You seem to think such a thing would be bad, while I think it would be the next step in our evolution.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps, but it would also create significant changes in who humans are and how they interact and form societies.  I highly doubt that we would be the social creatures we are now.
> ...


Sometimes religion has united us other times it has divided us. Maybe there was a time when they were useful but now they seem better when kept private. It's one of the 3 things you don't discuss. Politics race and religio


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 19, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


Religion, like politics, is simply a tool which can be used wisely or wrongly.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 19, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Frankly, a dissertation on all the things you think you're right about, and the ways in which you think you're vastly smarter and superior to other people has exactly fuck-all to do with the point.



their 10,000 page 4th century book is an insatiable opioid for their single minded world view.




Cecilie1200 said:


> WHAT, exactly, is the purpose of evangelizing about atheism? Why would you bother to do it?





james bond said:


> Will there will have to be some sort of final judgment over one's life. Isn't that where religion comes in? Even atheists want some kind of punishment for the wicked.





james bond said:


> That leads us to... Will there will have to be some sort of final judgment over one's life. Isn't that where religion comes in? Even atheists want some kind of punishment for the wicked. Those that murder. Those that provide false witness. Those that commit arson. Those that cheat the system to reward themselves. Even religions without so-called deity or deities think karma, the rebirth of one's spirit or the supernatural exists. The only religion I can think of without this is atheism (maybe they believe in luck). Why? Because atheism is more political than religious.




bonds beliefs are entwined by the errant message of christianity, to dwell on failure than the positive outcome their religion has no way of reconciling, the end of sin.




> bond: Because atheism is more political than religious ...



coming from a christian whose 4th century 10,000 pg book is nothing but a political / socioeconomic agenda disguised as a religion ...


_



			bond: there will have to be some sort of final judgment over one's life ...
		
Click to expand...

_
as the true religion of the 1st century, that will only occur if the individual triumphs one or the other, Good vs Evil to determine the correct outcome entitling Admission to the Everlasting.

the faults so described by bond are the very objectives the 1st century religion recognizes as the objectives necessary to be corrected on Earth before any individual will be made possible for Remission and the salvation of humanity.

the punishment is for those that allow the crime as much as those that commit it.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Yeah, I did mean Ben and Jerry's.  (I thought that didn't look right when I typed it, but. . .) 

I pretty much allow people to be who and what they are unless their actions are physically or materially harming somebody.  So I can honor and respect your choices who where to shop based on your personal code of ethics, right and wrong, etc. and will not criticize you for that.  You are acting on your convictions in a way that harms nobody.

 I personally take the point of view that if I value the right to be able to express my point of view, my values, my beliefs, my opinions without fear some gang of snowflakes will descend on me to prevent me for speaking at a venue, will try to get me fired from my job, or threaten my customers, suppliers, advertisers, etc. in my business. . .

. . .then it logically follows to me that I should allow them their point of view,  their values, their beliefs, their opinions without fear that I will try to punish, or if possible destroy them.

It sort of follows the commandment to do unto others what you would have them do unto you.  That is something the snowflakes among us neither embrace nor comprehend and certainly does not respect.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


True.  Hey, did you ever see the post where I said you have always responded very professionally, classy and respecfully no matter what an ahole I was?  I just wanted to give you props.  You seem like a good person.

Remember, this is the only place us atheists preach.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



But don't we have the right to descend onto an event you are speaking at and boycott your sorry ass?

If you are a right wing nutjob and we don't like rwnj's and you are open about it, don't we have to right to write your boss and tell them we are boycotting his business because he employs you? 

Is it illegal to fire someone for being a liberal or Democrat or Republican?  I hope it is.  But it's not illegal to boycott a conservatives business.  Least not last I checked.  And that's affecting his income or YOUR income.  So keep your politics to yourself until you find out all your co-workers and customers are conservative because if I found out you were a con I'd look for a new supplier.

Do unto others as I would have them do unto you?  Sorry pal.  I'm an atheist.  I would love it if theists didn't discriminate against atheists but the fact is they do.  So, I keep my religious beliefs to myself.  If not I would expect a lot of customers to stop buying from me.  For one reason because I'm an atheist and for two I'm stupid to have let it become public.  Same with your politics.  Don't put that on facebook.  You will lose friends.  You don't care?  Neither do I.  But I do care if I lose customers.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...



I don't even believe your results.  Why?

U.S. surveys in recent years have calculated atheists make up between 3 percent and 10 percent of the population.  But the percentage may actually be much higher, because the stigma surrounding disbelief in God likely prevents people from honestly answering pollsters’ questions about their beliefs.  Study concluded the true number of American atheists may be as high as 26 percent of the population.  That's more than 1 in every 4 people.    

*There are profound social pressures to be — or at least appear — religious.*

There is a social stigma surrounding atheism in the U.S., which may lead people to tell pollsters they believe in God even if they don’t. A January Pew asked respondents to rate different groups from 0 to 100.  Atheists received a rating of 50, the second-lowest rating for a religious group, after Muslims.  Why?  What do we do to theists for them to be so negative towards us?  I mean besides here.  Other than here we are virtually silent.  Look at how you treat Steven Hawking, Neal DeGrasse Tyson & Carl Sagan.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



You have every right to share as much or as little of your opinions and beliefs as you choose to do so.  You have every right to run your business as you see fit for your own benefit.  

You also have every right to boycott anybody you want to, to call people names, to insult their intelligence, or anything else you wish to do.

You even have the right to organize your buddies and picket my business, harass and threaten my customers, threaten my suppliers or advertisers or pretty much do anything you want to make my life miserable, punish me, and destroy me if you can because I don't agree with you.

That is pretty much legal.  It shouldn't be, but it is.

But when you do that, you diminish us all, you weaken us as a society, and make us meaner, more coarse, more hateful, and more intolerant.

I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better.  They will build people up, do good when all others are doing bad, and only those who have never sinned have any grounds to judge others as somehow morally inferior.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 19, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better.




what event during the 1st century makes you believe atheism was ever discussed or made an issue of for consideration.

that is your 4th century christ that placed himself before the Almighty in your book, who can disagree with loving of anything .... though it is not loving the Almighty that moves a Spirit to Remission.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


You have it backward. When we boycott business its because you are intolerant. We force you to behave better.

I want to form a union on the net made up of Walmart, target, meijers, public, CVS, rite aid, Kroger, etc. And this union made up of all these workers anonymously dish on the companies and we shame them into treating employees better and if we have to picket and boycott.

You don't picket your own company. Other members do that so you don't get fired.

Eventually workers will fight back if the wage gap keeps widening


----------



## ding (Apr 19, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Karl?  Karl Marx?  Is that you?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 19, 2017)

ding said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Did he argue that workers should make more? I didn't know he was pro union.


----------



## james bond (Apr 19, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



More holes in the atheist's logic.  I am confident that the atheist scientists are wrong about we'll find microbe alien life within ten years or even twenty years.  For one, we haven't found microbes anywhere else besides earth.  We have multi-million dollar equipment and equipment to collect samples, but still no evidence.  I think George Hanson (in Easy Rider) said that the aliens are here and hiding, but he was known to hit the bottle pretty hard.  That was the first time I heard of the idea when I was a kid.  The idea of multiverses is silly.  Not much common sense there.  Also, can we put the racist idea that our ancestors were apes to rest?  Not many believe in Lucy anymore except Uncle Degrasse.  Why not dolphins?  They're the smartest mammals and are from the sea.

I also can tell that the important immaterial things are being ignored by you.  What about the 5th dimension?  Mathematically, we can show the existence of the 5th dimension.  I'm not sure beyond that although people like to think there are.  Or the achievement of perfection?  Why do we admire perfection so?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 20, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



This is the second time you have posted something so non sequitur to what was being discussed that I don't have a clue what you are getting at.  I suspect you might not either.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 20, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



If I speak in defense of traditional marriage, how am I being intolerant in any way?

If you speak in defense of gay marriage, how are you being intolerant in any way?

But if I seek to punish you because of your point of view or to force you to speak differently, I am not punishing your intolerance.  I am being intolerant.

If you seek to punish me because of my point of view or to force me to speak differently, you are not punishing my intolerance.  You are being intolerant.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 20, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


We are also related to dolphins.


----------



## ding (Apr 20, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Yes, he was.  He was your kind a guy.  

Occupy!  Occupy!  Occupy!  Occupy!  Occupy!  Occupy!  Occupy!  Occupy!


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 20, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> This is the second time you have posted something so non sequitur to what was being discussed that I don't have a clue what you are getting at.



_*
How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You? *_




Foxfyre said:


> I think the message of Christ was that those who love God will do better.






BreezeWood said:


> what event during the 1st century makes you believe atheism was ever discussed or made an issue of for consideration.
> 
> that is your 4th century christ that placed himself before the Almighty in your book, who can disagree with loving of anything .... though it is not loving the Almighty that moves a Spirit to Remission.




I disagree that you find the response non sequitur to the subject of the thread, whether to respond to the content pertaining to the events of the 1st century from your post is not my concern.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 20, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps, but it would also create significant changes in who humans are and how they interact and form societies.  I highly doubt that we would be the social creatures we are now.
> ...



I can't imagine how you think that knowing intimately the negative aspects of another person's character and psyche would make us more sociable with them.  Right now, we have the ability to suppress and censor those things from others and keep them to ourselves and present to others the parts of ourselves that reflect the person we aspire to be, rather than everything about what we are at the moment.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 20, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



There's a difference between choosing not to do business with someone, and denying them their freedom to act as they choose.  I just see it as two separate expressions of the exact same freedom.

My decision to not do business with certain people isn't so much to act on my beliefs and ethics; it's more that their actions have made them sufficiently difficult and unpleasant to do business with that it's not worth it.  I also stopped watching Tom Cruise movies years ago, not because of repugnant beliefs so much as that he had been so over-hyped that it became impossible to see him as anyone except "Tom Cruise playing the part of . . ."

Pretty much, my position is that I will be more than happy to be oblivious to people's personal lives and choices if they will just give me the opportunity to do so by not insisting on telling me about it at every turn.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 20, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Thank God there are at least legal limits on how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives.  Now if we could only get the authorities to enforce those limits.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 20, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



I'm not faulting your choices or decisions expressed as your personal opinion.  I would not think well of an attempt to organize an  attempt to boycott or ban Tom Cruise movies because you don't like Tom Cruise, but that isn't what you are arguing for.  Kudos on standing by your principles while allowing others to stand by theirs.

Yes, I will patronize the business that I believe stands for moral or defensible principles as opposed to the one I disagree with.  That would be my personal or moral choice.  But I won't try to harm the business I disagree with just because I disagree with them.  If they are physically harming somebody with unethical or malicious intention, then yes, I would take them on.

But not just because I disagree.

Of all the evil or wrongheadedness that I see in modern day American progressivism, one of the worst is that it seeks to attack, punish, silence, ban, and/or if it can, destroy those with whom it disagrees and calls that a moral choice.  I see that as intolerance of the most extreme variety and evil.

And I do credit my Christian faith with providing far more tolerance than anything the Atheists generally exhibit on that score.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 20, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



No I agree you often don't make any sense.  The other times you make little sense.  I think I understand the point you are trying to make but I'm not sure.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 20, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 20, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> No I agree you often don't make any sense. The other times you make little sense. I think I understand the point you are trying to make but I'm not sure.




not responding is the safest choice, I disagree in that post they were unable to respond from its content ... 4th century language is fun to replicate with christians, if they can not interpret from their book where in the 1st century atheism was ever discussed it makes it that much easier for them to respond the same through ignorance than reply with a definitive answer. I agree it is a bit of a shortcoming than clearly stating one's point of view.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 20, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


That's the point, we'll all human.  We all have "negative aspects", but we also have positive ones.  Why are you focusing on the negative?  By being able to read each other's minds, not only would we be able to see the weaknesses and strengths of others, but it would be impossible for assholes to hide themselves.  We'd all be laid open clearly.

The evolutionary step here is that we'd all be united in a single cause.  A multi-celled creature is more advanced than a single-celled one.  Being unified in mind and body with all of humanity is, IMHO, an evolutionary step closer to God.  An afterlife would do the same, be unified with God in totality, not separated from God.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 21, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



I'm focusing on the negative ones because those are the ones that are currently hidden behind our ability to keep things private and express only what we choose to express.  Those are the ones that would be exposed.

Yes, assholes would be unable to hide themselves, but that's the point:  we're ALL assholes somewhere inside us.

I think humans aren't a hive mind for a reason, and considering that the only creatures on Earth who ARE hive minds are much lower and less-advanced life forms than we are, I have to assume that becoming a hive mind is not a step in evolutionary progress for us.

As for God, He already sees and knows everything about us.  There is no advantage in terms of closeness to God to be found in other humans knowing those things.  I find no reason to believe that other humans are capable of unconditionally loving us despite knowing all our flaws the way God does.  Hell, humans have trouble loving each other NOW, when they DON'T know each other's worst aspects.  Knowing what I do about human nature, I think it's far more likely that any love or admiration we might feel for "knowing each other's strengths" would be inalterably poisoned by the presence of each other's weaknesses.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 21, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> *I'm focusing on the negative ones because those are the ones that are currently hidden behind our ability to keep things private and express only what we choose to express.  Those are the ones that would be exposed.*
> 
> Yes, assholes would be unable to hide themselves, but that's the point:  we're ALL assholes somewhere inside us.
> 
> ...


That's part of my point, by being "one" in mind and spirit, there would be no secrets, nothing hidden unless we're just fooling ourselves.  We would cease to be "individuals" but become something greater just as a multi-celled creature is greater than a single-celled one.

It's not God knowing us that benefits by becoming "one with God" but us knowing God.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 22, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > *I'm focusing on the negative ones because those are the ones that are currently hidden behind our ability to keep things private and express only what we choose to express.  Those are the ones that would be exposed.*
> ...



I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 22, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.


It's not a "conversion" nor is it a mindless "hive mind".  It's a different level of sophistication and advancement. 

When I was a child, there were times when I was concerned about "growing up" out of fear of losing my sense of wonder.  The fear turned out to be useless.  The sense of wonder remained, but what maturation brought was the ability to discern fact from fiction.  Example; as a child, watching a magician allowed one to fantasize about "magic", but as an adult, while the enjoyment was still there, was the wonder of how the magician did it.

What you dismiss as a "hive mind" would, instead, result in a world where crime was nonexistent.  Where the human race focused upon the betterment of the species.  All of the "Seven Deadly Sins" would cease to exist.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 22, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > I'll agree with you on the knowing God part, but I still firmly disagree with the conversion of humans to a hive mind.
> ...



I still disagree.

Since this is all speculation with no definitive proof either way, and since we obviously read very different types of science fiction , I'm gonna say we'll have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 22, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



And you equate the Westboro Baptists with Christianity?  Here is where the anti-religious, "I hate Christians" group goes way over the line.  I know of no Christian or conservative group anywhere that would approve of this sign or who condone what the Westboro Baptists do.  There should be some way to sue to prevent that hateful group from using the label 'baptists' as I know no Baptists, even the more fundamental groups who believe homosexuality is sin, who would condone this.

And I think it is pretty hateful to misrepresent it as appropriate for this thread.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 22, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


No worries.  Agreed we can disagree on the benefits or detriments of human beings who can read each other's minds.  

This conversation began regarding the meaning of becoming "one with God" and how, in my belief, we'd lose our mortal individuality in joining with God.  Like a raindrop falling into the ocean, the raindrop isn't lost, it's just becoming part of something greater than itself.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 22, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


While sealybobo is certainly a bomb-thrower when it comes to religion, in this case I think his comment was being juxtaposed against your comment to have authorities enforce laws against "_how much you can harass and threaten other people and interfere with their lives_"  As a veteran and supporter of the Constitution, I'm certainly conflicted on what is both Free Speech and Freedom of Religion versus a bunch of assholes who use religion to interrupt the funerals of veterans where families are grieving.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Apr 22, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



It's fairly amazing to me that the Westboro cult gets so much attention, and gets designated by the leftists as the official face of Christianity, given that there are only like 34 members of that church, and they're basically all members of the same family.

I don't think anyone can stop them from calling themselves Baptist, since there are lots of types of Baptist churches, and none of them actually own a patent or copyright on that term.  They can't claim affiliation with any of the mainstream Baptist denominations, and if anyone rushing to present them as Christian spokespeople ever bothered to research them, they'd realize that, in fact, they AREN'T affiliated with any denomination; in fact, they despise mainstream Christian denominations about as much as they do virtually everyone else who isn't them.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 22, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> It's fairly amazing to me that the Westboro cult gets so much attention, and gets designated by the leftists as the official face of Christianity, given that there are only like 34 members of that church, and they're basically all members of the same family.
> 
> I don't think anyone can stop them from calling themselves Baptist, since there are lots of types of Baptist churches, and none of them actually own a patent or copyright on that term.  They can't claim affiliation with any of the mainstream Baptist denominations, and if anyone rushing to present them as Christian spokespeople ever bothered to research them, they'd realize that, in fact, they AREN'T affiliated with any denomination; in fact, they despise mainstream Christian denominations about as much as they do virtually everyone else who isn't them.


The Westboro assholes certainly aren't the "face of Christianity", no matter who tries to paint them as such, but they do exhibit the worst among those who claim to be Christians.

Political extremists will often use the worst examples of their polar opposites in order to tar the entire group.  In this case, yes, the extremist atheists point at Westboro and claim all religion is bad because of those assholes.   Extremist theists point at the fucking communists who murdered tens of thousands of Christians and attempted to stomp out religion completely as being representative of all atheists.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 22, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



There are laws that punish those who physically assault others, very poorly enforced in the case of violent riots.  There should be laws against harrassing, threatening, or impeding people participating in a legal activity but the liberal courts won't uphold any such laws that are passed. 

Though I loathe and despise abortion clinics, for instance, so long as they were legal I 100% supported laws that would make it illegal to harass, threaten, impede those who patronized them.  But the courts won't uphold such laws, probably out of fear that they would then have to uphold laws prohibiting other protests that they approved of.

Certainly there should be laws prohibiting organizing and funding campaigns to harm, harass, materially damage, and if possible destroy somebody just because you disagree with that person's beliefs, opinions, or convictions.

And yes, these opinions arise out of my Christian convictions of what is right and wrong.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 22, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > It's fairly amazing to me that the Westboro cult gets so much attention, and gets designated by the leftists as the official face of Christianity, given that there are only like 34 members of that church, and they're basically all members of the same family.
> ...



There is a fine line between dishonestly characterizing the other and intellectual honesty though.

I agree that to hold up one small group claiming the Christian label but acting in a decidedly unChristian manner is as dishonest as claiming that Atheist regimes represent all Atheists.

On the other hand, it is intellectually honest to point out that no Christian nation, even under power of corrupt monarchs and popes, has set out to commit genocide or destroy all who do not believe.  Even wars and skirmishes identified as 'religious' wars have been more politically or economically motivated rather than religiously motivated.  Even in Tzarist Russia, when the Russian Orthodox Church reigned supreme, the pograms against the Jews were politically motivated, not sparked by any Christian principle or zeal.

It is intellectually honest to point out that in modern times predominantly Christian nations have generally had the best track records on respecting and enforcing human rights and individual liberty.

It is intellectually honest to point out that nations that have made Atheism the official policy have had the worst record for mass murders and genocide.

And it is intellectually honest to point out that no nation that made Atheism the official policy has had a good record on human rights or individual liberty,


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 22, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


.


Divine.Wind said:


> This conversation began regarding the meaning of becoming "one with God" and how, in my belief, we'd lose our _mortal_ individuality in joining with God. Like a raindrop falling into the ocean, the raindrop isn't lost, it's just becoming part of something greater than itself.




were a freed Spirit to be admitted to the Everlasting why would there be a reason for them to give up their identity by becoming a part of the Almighty that enabled their individuality to begin with. for as long as they can survive the new life that undoubtedly will have its own goals to be accomplished.


----------



## ding (Apr 22, 2017)

Does anyone understand this bozo?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 22, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> were a freed Spirit to be admitted to the Everlasting why would there be a reason for them to give up their identity by becoming a part of the Almighty that enabled their individuality to begin with. for as long as they can survive the new life that undoubtedly will have its own goals to be accomplished.


So you would do a lot for God, but not give up your identity for God?  Interesting.

IMHO, becoming one with God would be the greatest reward ever.  Knowing what God knows, seeing what God see, everything.


----------



## OZman (Apr 22, 2017)

ding said:


> Does anyone understand this bozo?



Yes, I understand what BreezeWood is saying.



*2 Corinthians 3:17* _“Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”_


----------



## baileyn45 (Apr 22, 2017)

Religion is mythology, period.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 23, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > were a freed Spirit to be admitted to the Everlasting why would there be a reason for them to give up their identity by becoming a part of the Almighty that enabled their individuality to begin with. for as long as they can survive the new life that undoubtedly will have its own goals to be accomplished.
> ...


.


Divine.Wind said:


> So you would do a lot for God, but not give up your identity for God? Interesting.




the Almighty is the gatekeeper to the Everlasting, they have said to enter one must Triumph Good vs Evil in a way of a decisive success they will judge to determine its outcome. that's it -

the animosity is removed but not the endless tribulations of being alive and certainly to survive the Everlasting may not be a realistic goal of immortality ... I will pursue becoming an engineer for the Genome of Life - the Almighty insures not its outcome but that something such as Adolf H is not involved in the process.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


I know a lot of Christians don't believe gays are going to hell but real Christians say those aren't real Christians and also going to hell.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I know born agains here on usmb who think Catholicism is a false religion. I agree but I also think so is theirs.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


Do you really believe there is an everlasting? So you are more than just an animal on one planet? You are more than that? You are a god yourself? Wow! Pretty impressive I'm talking to a god. I bet you can't wait to get to heaven. I hope you are old and dying. God forbid you have to live here much longer


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 23, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> You are a god yourself?



not yet, rookies have chores like volcano cleaning, hook up with a god and start living the good life - and yes eventually become a god yourself, the sky's the limit.

or simply perish, I hopefully will triumph and join the crowd upstairs.

there is Everlasting sealy, you can count it.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...


Let's put it this way. You have no idea how many atheists are out there. I went up north with a bunch of good Christians. They don't ask or don't tell, unless you ask. I had a great conversation about religion but never hunted to any of them that I don't really believe in God. I didn't want to have that conversation with people who truly believe. It'd blow their minds and I'm not going to convince them or make them happy. So most of us just shut up and agree. That's why I love the internet. It's a place to vent and share with like minded people. Yes us atheists love to debate this but u can only do that with people you don't mind offending. Here if you don't like it too bad. In a way that's a good thing.

I would love to have that conversation with my family but they'd have to bring it up. They just assume everyone in the room agrees. No one here can reasonably assume everyone here thinks god is a given. Not in this thread. So leave your feelings at the door if you want to have an honest conversation. If we think your god was made up and doesn't exist we think it best you hear the truth.

And don't worry we won't cut your heads off because you believe but there are theists who would do that to us or wouldn't lose sleep when they hear it happens. So no militant atheists are not as bad as militant theists.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


Just enjoy the life you have now. It could be the only one you get and life is short.

I don't mind the idea my spirit doesn't live beyond my 90 years. I'm lucky I was born and I'm going to enjoy my life till the day things go bad and they always do. No exceptions. But I realize how lucky I was to be born. There are millions of spirm in one load. Mine made it. And my parents met. And their grandparents met and so on.

Remember what it was like 1 million years before you were born? That's what it will be like 100 years after you die. But don't worry you won't suffer.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 23, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> ...*You have no idea how many atheists are out there. *I went up north with a bunch of good Christians. They don't ask or don't tell, unless you ask. I had a great conversation about religion but never hunted to any of them that I don't really believe in God. I didn't want to have that conversation with people who truly believe. It'd blow their minds and I'm not going to convince them or make them happy. So most of us just shut up and agree. That's why I love the internet. It's a place to vent and share with like minded people. Yes us atheists love to debate this but u can only do that with people you don't mind offending. Here if you don't like it too bad. In a way that's a good thing.
> 
> I would love to have that conversation with my family but they'd have to bring it up. They just assume everyone in the room agrees. No one here can reasonably assume everyone here thinks god is a given. Not in this thread. So leave your feelings at the door if you want to have an honest conversation. If we think your god was made up and doesn't exist we think it best you hear the truth.
> 
> And don't worry we won't cut your heads off because you believe but there are theists who would do that to us or wouldn't lose sleep when they hear it happens. So no militant atheists are not as bad as militant theists.


Multiple surveys indicate between 2-4%.  The problem is that some "atheists" believe in the supernatural, an afterlife, etc just not a "god".   That's playing semantics IMO.  Those same people often label Buddhist "atheists", which they are not.

10 facts about atheists


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > ...*You have no idea how many atheists are out there. *I went up north with a bunch of good Christians. They don't ask or don't tell, unless you ask. I had a great conversation about religion but never hunted to any of them that I don't really believe in God. I didn't want to have that conversation with people who truly believe. It'd blow their minds and I'm not going to convince them or make them happy. So most of us just shut up and agree. That's why I love the internet. It's a place to vent and share with like minded people. Yes us atheists love to debate this but u can only do that with people you don't mind offending. Here if you don't like it too bad. In a way that's a good thing.
> ...


Nope! They show those surveys aren't accurate. A lot of people won't admit it surveying them that way. They did it a different way, probably anonymously, and found more than 25% of Americans are atheists. And what does that say that you'll take any cockamamie notion as one for your team? Does the Muslim Jehova or Mormon cults give you more or less credibility? I think less.

Even without religions people believe there must be something. This is what it all boils down to. In the end you believe there must be a creator and I don't believe that's true. At least not one that visited. So if you want to believe there must be that's OK with me as long as it's OK that I don't believe.

I know if there is a creator it doesn't care if I don't believe Jesus, Moses, joseph Smith or Mohammad stories.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 23, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


I count 29 atheists and 9 true believers. 

So I see you want to claim everyone except the strong atheists? I want to claim anyone except the strong theists. Only 9 of those. The rest of us don't really believe. Some may want to believe, some are feared into not being an atheist and those "other" votes? Who knows what crazy things they believe.

Most hope. Even us atheists would love to find out there is a heaven that rewards intelligence.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 24, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



You need to meet a better class of Christians because I know a lot of Christians and not one who thinks or says any one of those things.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 24, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Nope! *They show those surveys aren't accurate. A lot of people won't admit it surveying them that way. *They did it a different way, probably anonymously, and found more than 25% of Americans are atheists. And what does that say that you'll take any cockamamie notion as one for your team? Does the Muslim Jehova or Mormon cults give you more or less credibility? I think less.
> 
> Even without religions people believe there must be something. This is what it all boils down to. In the end you believe there must be a creator and I don't believe that's true. At least not one that visited. So if you want to believe there must be that's OK with me as long as it's OK that I don't believe.
> 
> I know if there is a creator it doesn't care if I don't believe Jesus, Moses, joseph Smith or Mohammad stories.


Nice dodge, but it's an excuse.  Research methodology takes into account a person's privacy.  It's not like they ask them in class or at work by a show of hands.

Your "Us vs. Them" mindset is, IMHO, one reason why you have difficulty seeing the big picture on this.  This was exemplified by your comment "one for your team".

Agreed a truly all-powerful, all-knowing and all-merciful being doesn't care if you believe in religious stories _per se_.  Such a being would care about people who live lovingly and those who live hatefully. Not that such an entity would condemn hateful people to hell, since they do that to themselves.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 24, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Most hope. Even us atheists would love to find out there is a heaven that rewards intelligence.


It does......what makes you think you'll get in?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 24, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Most hope. Even us atheists would love to find out there is a heaven that rewards intelligence.
> ...


Because I'm a good person.

You know that guy who raped his kid to death? He's going to hell if there is one


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 24, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


You are free to say you are good, but the hate you spread indicates different.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 24, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


What hate? Why are you making it personal? Maybe you're not mature enough to be in this thread.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 24, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Most hope. Even us atheists would love to find out there is a heaven that rewards intelligence.
> ...


OK, what makes you think you'll get in? Don't answer because I already know the answer. It's like who's on first.

Fact is there is no heaven. You're not a god inside your moral human shell. It's a ridiculous notion and this stupidity is holding our species.

There was a time when it maybe was necessary and maybe god is necessary for current humans but soon we have to stop being superstitious and ignorant to reality. It's easy to control an ignorant masses


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 24, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> What hate? Why are you making it personal? Maybe you're not mature enough to be in this thread.


$20 says I can prove you made it personal first.  Bet?

Thanks for the insult.  It tells me you have no logical response to my point.



sealybobo said:


> OK, what makes you think you'll get in? Don't answer because I already know the answer. It's like who's on first.
> 
> *Fact is there is no heaven*. You're not a god inside your moral human shell. It's a ridiculous notion and this stupidity is holding our species.
> 
> There was a time when it maybe was necessary and maybe god is necessary for current humans but soon we have to stop being superstitious and ignorant to reality. It's easy to control an ignorant masses


I don't since I don't know anything about anything beyond the material universe. 

Fact?  Great!  If it's a fact, then you can prove it.  Looking forward to seeing your data.  Take your time, I can wait.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 25, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


 
If there is one?  You say definitively that there is no heaven but you don't know whether there is a hell? 

I can't speak for the Almighty and won' presume to.  But instinct tells me that 'goodness' doesn't include insulting people, calling them names, or suggesting they are somehow less intelligent or whatever if they are people of faith..

'Goodness' isn't actively attempting to destroy the faith of people who receive comfort and value from that faith.

I will never tell another person he or she is going to hell no matter what he/she has done because that is not my prerogative to determine or proclaim.  I can't say who will be in heaven either though I believe those who say they have personal assurance of that..


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 25, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



He without sin cast the first stone.  Are you perfect?  Then shut the fuck up.  And I already told you when you theists realize you aren't convincing any of us with your bullshit you resort to trying to make us feel bad.  Sorry, aint gonna happen.  I'm 100 times better person than most christians.  Just because you talk to a god and ask him to forgive your wickedness doesn't mean anything.

I don't say definitively that there is no heaven.  BUT, if you guessed that there is one that's an amazing guess.  Because no god ever came down and told you there was a heaven.  You made it up.  How sure am I?  Pretty fucking sure.  If I wasn't I'd still be a christian.

There is no hell either.  You see me wishing that guy to hell is the perfect example of how we wish a heaven for us and wish a hell for people who deserve a hell.  Sorry, no hell.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 25, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> BUT, if you guessed that there is one that's an amazing guess.




how do you account for the Genome of Life, sealy, I'm just curious. where you came from and were set free.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 25, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...



I love going to church.  I'm pretty sure I'm the smartest guy in the room.

_Being an atheist is like being the only sober person in the car and no one will let you drive._
_
_


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 25, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Sorry that's above my pay grade.  Ask a scientist.  They might tell you something like

Somatic mosaicism refers to the occurrence of two genetically distinct populations of cells within an individual, derived from a postzygotic mutation. In contrast to inherited mutations, somatic mosaic mutations may affect only a portion of the body and are not transmitted to progeny. These mutations affect varying genomic sizes ranging from single nucleotides to entire chromosomes and have been implicated in disease, most prominently cancer. The phenotypic consequences of somatic mosaicism are dependent upon many factors including the developmental time at which the mutation occurs, the areas of the body that are affected, and the pathophysiological effect(s) of the mutation. The advent of second-generation sequencing technologies has augmented existing array-based and cytogenetic approaches for the identification of somatic mutations. We outline the strengths and weaknesses of these techniques and highlight recent insights into the role of somatic mosaicism in causing cancer, neurodegenerative, monogenic, and complex disease.

*Keywords: *mutation, somatic, germline, mosaicism, complex disease, retrotransposition, neurodegeneration, aging

What is your point?  If I understand your question properly, a single cell organism mutated into a multiple cell organism and so on until fish crawled out of the water and became land creatures.  Yes we even share a common ancestor with allegators.  Hard to believe huh?  I agree.  But so is the bible.  At least evolution makes sense.  

I think this is all hard to believe too don't get me wrong.  Blows my mind.  But then I was watching tv this weekend and they were talking about an invasive species and they showed this fish that could leap out of the water and breath  and travel from one lake to the next.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 25, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> He without sin cast the first stone.  Are you perfect?  Then shut the fuck up.  And I already told you when you theists realize you aren't convincing any of us with your bullshit you resort to trying to make us feel bad.  Sorry, aint gonna happen.  I'm 100 times better person than most christians.  Just because you talk to a god and ask him to forgive your wickedness doesn't mean anything.
> 
> I don't say definitively that there is no heaven.  BUT, if you guessed that there is one that's an amazing guess.  Because no god ever came down and told you there was a heaven.  You made it up.  How sure am I?  Pretty fucking sure.  If I wasn't I'd still be a christian.
> 
> There is no hell either.  You see me wishing that guy to hell is the perfect example of how we wish a heaven for us and wish a hell for people who deserve a hell.  Sorry, no hell.



So sorry.  I must have really hit a nerve.  So you are now saying that you didn't say this in Post #697?


> Fact is there is no heaven. You're not a god inside your moral human shell. It's a ridiculous notion and this stupidity is holding our species.
> 
> There was a time when it maybe was necessary and maybe god is necessary for current humans but soon we have to stop being superstitious and ignorant to reality. It's easy to control an ignorant masses



So I think don't have to STFU in order to state what I believe goodness is and is not.  My comment was offered generally not personally.


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 26, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> What is your point? If I understand your question properly, a single cell organism mutated into a multiple cell organism and so on until fish crawled out of the water and became land creatures. Yes we even share a common ancestor with allegators. Hard to believe huh? I agree. But so is the bible. At least evolution makes sense.




well as usual you leave out Flora, do you really not recognize the physiology as the same that is also true for all Spiritual origin. you are as much a tree as an alligator sealy, they are from the same factory.

also there are no muticellular beings on planet Earth, either one cell or one multisubdivided cell all being the same inside one boundary.


I do not claim the Genome of Life created the universe, only all life is linked and predestined before its physiology is wrapped around it. that's where some of us are headed after purification and admission to the Everlasting.


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 26, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


Is your theory on this list?  

10 Alternatives to Evolution - Listverse


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 26, 2017)

.
evolution is settled science ....


----------



## james bond (Apr 26, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Huh?  Are you going space cadet, BW?  I understand Mars will be ready for colonization in the 2030s ha ha.


----------



## james bond (Apr 26, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



We agree this life is short.  However, I'm James Bond and You Only Live Twice.  It's a shame that some do not believe the greatest gift God gave us was to sacrifice his only Son so we can live again in joy everlasting.  I only say that to express condolence, not to sway anybody's thinking.  Oh my.  I wouldn't do that.

Congrats that your parents were one of the "fittest" according to the genocidal Darwin theory of "survival of the fittest.*"  It means you passed his test with flying colors having brought children into this world for his definition of "fit" is those who can procreate the most.

* - Survival of the fittest led to social Darwinism, the Holocaust and black genocide.  (I'll post a thread on this a bit later.)

>>Remember what it was like 1 million years before you were born? That's what it will be like 100 years after you die. But don't worry you won't suffer.<<

So, you don't think like NASA that we need to populate on Mars because of mass extinction here on Earth.  I've heard that from National Geographic and Elon Musk to name a couple?


----------



## james bond (Apr 26, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> evolution is settled science ....



Ha ha.  It's not even science.  Philosophy.


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 26, 2017)

james bond said:


> We agree this life is short.  However, I'm James Bond and You Only Live Twice.  It's a shame that some do not believe the greatest gift God gave us was to sacrifice his only Son so we can live again in joy everlasting.  I only say that to express condolence, not to sway anybody's thinking.  Oh my.  I wouldn't do that.
> 
> Congrats that your parents were one of the "fittest" according to the genocidal Darwin theory of "survival of the fittest.*"  It means you passed his test with flying colors having brought children into this world for his definition of "fit" is those who can procreate the most.
> 
> ...


Interesting post even if I don't agree with all points. 

IMHO, our universe was created with a specific set of rules.  Among those rules was an evolutionary process which allowed human beings to rise above all other Earthly creatures with a reasoning mind capable of understanding our universe through study.  We call that study "science", a method of research which helps us avoid mistakes and which allows us to verify the validity of our collective research.  

To deny we can have another extinction event is to deny the physics of our natural universe.  You are free to believe in magic, but I believe a power capable of creating the natural universe wouldn't "cheat" by intervening in the natural processes of that universe.  

If we are wiped out by an impact event or a supervolcano, eventually the process will begin anew.  What makes any of us think we are so special it won't happen?


----------



## Divine Wind (Apr 26, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


It's science. Why do you deny your God-given brain?


----------



## sealybobo (Apr 26, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


Yes, it's a shame I don't believe your cult story. What do you want me to fake it? I don't reject god I reject your stories of when god visited your ancestors. You do it too to all the other religions I just do it to one more, yours.

Do you think I'm arguing for Survival of the fittest? It led to the Holocaust? Are you trying to demonize the science


----------



## BreezeWood (Apr 26, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Huh? Are you going space cadet, BW? I understand Mars will be ready for colonization in the 2030s ha ha.



which is it - bond or






the joker ... it seems a case of mistaken identity.


without a continuous atmosphere they are just wasting their time, our Garden is all we have.


----------



## james bond (May 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Horrible fish.  I hate these invasive fish.  The ability for fish to be able to breathe air is nothing new.  There are species that aren't invasive that do the same thing as the lungfish.  We also have mammals that live in the ocean and breathe air such as the whale through its blowhole.  The evos here should know this.  Why they continue to promote this kind of fish as evidence for evolution is beyond me.  What we want is a fish that instead of fins that turned into lobes has developed limbs attached to vertebrae.  In other words a vertebrate.  For example, I use a whale that could have evolved from a tetrapod to show that evolution didn't have to go from fish to tetrapod and then back to marine animal.  It's just more ways for evolution to explain how animals have a common ancestor which is bogus.  The one that gets me is humans descended from apes and that is racist.  We should dump Darwin Day as Darwin's ideas led to the Holocaust and black genocide "evolving" into social Darwinism, eugenics, Nazis, fascism and Planned Parenthood.






The above didn't really happen though.  It's just a fairy tale made up by evos.

The evolution of whales


----------



## james bond (May 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh.  That is, what happens to us after death?  I've learned more about hell as a final destination.  It's not 24/7 of burning torture.  Want to know?  I can start a thread on it.  I did't think you'd be interested in the Traveler's Guide to Heaven.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 10, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> I've learned more about hell as a final destination.



that's obvious, you must have been a boyscout .... being prepared.




james bond said:


> My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death?



4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.

the 1st century is about the accomplishments before death, the Apex of Knowledge the Triumph of Good vs Evil during one's lifetime that allows the Spirit to be set free.

good luck being the cause for failure.


----------



## sealybobo (May 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...




*The Biblical God is real.*
There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god. Any ‘evidence’ proposed by theists to support the Bible’s various historical and supernatural claims is non-existent at best, manufactured at worst.

The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts. Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

The Bible is historically inaccurate , factually incorrect, inconsistent  and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

Origins of the Bible: PBS Buried Secrets, CH4 Who wrote the Bible? (a must watch).

_“Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”_ – Isaac Asimov


*Biblical Jesus was real.*
There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artefacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reﬂections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death. These historical references generally refer to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus and, in some cases, directly contradict the Gospels or were deliberately manufactured.

The Gospels themselves contradict one-another on many key events and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. The New Testament, as a whole, contains many internal inconsistencies as a result of its piecemeal construction and is factually incorrect on several historical claims, such as the early existence of Nazareth, the reign of Herod and the Roman census. Like the Old Testament, it too has had entire books and sections redacted.

The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

Even if Jesus’ existence could be established, this would in no way validate Christian theology or any element of the story portrayed in the Bible, such as the performance of miracles or the resurrection. Simply because it is conceivable a heretical Jewish preacher named Yeshua lived circa 30 AD, had followers and was executed, does not imply the son of a god walked the Earth at that time.

The motivation for belief in a divine, salvational Jesus breaks down when you accept evolution:

_“Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” _– Ken Ham

_“Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.”_ – Anonymous


----------



## BreezeWood (May 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.
sealy, there was nothing posted by you to quote ... the 4th century christian bible was the subject of your post, not sure why you did not chose a christian to address it to.

1st century Church of the Almighty is a spoken religion, Jesus was a mortal that accomplished the means for Admission to the Everlasting who likewise had faults, simply faults without evil.


----------



## sealybobo (May 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I don't know if it was the 4th, 3rd, 1st or 16th century.  The reason I posted that to you is because I thought you would find it interesting.  Especially when you realize there is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artifacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reﬂections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. 

The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.
10/4 - though you have posted the article before.

the post is interesting however the 1st century was a surfacing of what would become an uphill struggle for humanities survival - the primary derailment came in the 4th with such an awful book whose depiction is the opposite of the basic principles necessary to accomplish the task. no Jesus is required whether they existed or not. certainly not to be worshiped.


----------



## Divine Wind (May 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> 4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....


Wow.  You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.

How about "_Religion is a tool toward spiritual enlightenment.  Those who mistake the tool as the end goal instead of as a means to an end have a lot more to learn_"?   

...Or are you one of those "_When you're dead, you're dead.  Get real_" types of people?


----------



## sealybobo (May 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > 4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....
> ...


When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born


----------



## Divine Wind (May 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born


A standard atheist belief. 

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs.  Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others.  This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom. 

Freedom is worth fighting for.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > 4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....
> ...


.


BreezeWood said:


> 4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.





Divine.Wind said:


> Wow. You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.




“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.


your off the cuff comment DW is groundless as I have noticed about you in the past that though will have little lasting affect is as well a noted previous assessment.

their deception only insures a usefulness for as long as they are convincing after that their "religion's" lack of veracity becomes sadly complete in its fallacy.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born




where you came from, the Everlasting is somewhere worth returning to for who may attempt to accomplish the feat.


----------



## Divine Wind (May 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> ....your off the cuff comment DW is groundless as I have noticed about you in the past that though will have little lasting affect is as well a noted previous assessment.
> 
> their deception only insures a usefulness for as long as they are convincing after that their "religion's" lack of veracity becomes sadly complete in its fallacy.


You think I've offended your beliefs?  Interesting. 

Belief as you wish, sir.  As will I.


----------



## sealybobo (May 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
> ...


We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?


----------



## Divine Wind (May 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


In the US, all are free to talk.  According to the BBC, not every is free to talk.  I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.  

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it?  Dick measuring exercise?  A result of personal life frustrations acted out  online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome?   It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous.  Those who want to kill Americans.  

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji.  They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available.  LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers.  I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years.  Fine.  Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.


----------



## sealybobo (May 10, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.


----------



## Divine Wind (May 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Islamic Jihadists aren't the only terrorists. 

If you want to claim all terrorists are theists, say so.  I'd love to prove you wrong.....again.


----------



## sealybobo (May 11, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Not all.  Just 85% of terrorists are theists.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists


----------



## Divine Wind (May 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


So what do you propose?  Stomp out religion like Stalin and Mao tried to do?


----------



## james bond (May 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



This is one of the things I learned from my NDE investigation.  Atheists listen to other atheists.  Thus, if you have to get someplace when you need to, then can you trust their directions?

However, it's not just after you die, but when you are living.  Can you trust what BreezeWood is telling you ha ha?  Sorry, I couldn't help but make that little joke hahahaha?  Seriously, can you trust what other atheists here write?

When you come right down to it, that's what it comes down to.  That's why I say, "Atheists are usually wrong." 

Also, "Atheism leads to Communism."  Karl Marx talks about the mind-body problem (no duality), materialism (no immaterialism) and all the stuff atheists here have brought up.  Another Jew (Judaism) who says some weird things is Baruch Spinoza.  I believe he preached a form of Pantheism without the sacredness.  It could have been naturalism with God as nature.  He was excommunicated from his Jewish community and almost stabbed as a heathen.  He's interesting because he knows about the Bible better than most (not actually know the truth, but knows how explain it in a strange, persuasive manner).  These people are others that atheists listen to besides other atheists.

Mind-Body Problem/Everything is Matter
Marxist Philosophy and The Mind/Body Problem

Fifteen Propositions
Baruch Spinoza (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

As for Christians, it's not easy to determine the truth either.  I don't think one can know the truth by oneself just reading the Bible.  It's not an easy book to read, there are several translations and even more interpretations.  How can one find which one is true?  Are the Catholics just trying to make me feel guilty?  Are the Christians making me feel this way in order to get money?  It helps to have someone to guide us.  It helps not dwell on the correct interpretation and that we have to find it at this minute.  There has to be some balance between your religion and your life.


----------



## james bond (May 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



It's starting for you, isn't it?  Are you giving in to the madness?

Another smart atheist who has gone mad is Stephen Hawking.  I just finished reading his A Brief History of Time and A Briefer History of Time.  Most of both of these books are great.  However, he believes in multiverses and that we can build a time machine to time travel back to the past through a wormhole, so as a Christian and science buff, I think this guy has gone cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.


----------



## james bond (May 15, 2017)

Here's the weirdness of atheists and Spinoza.  Suddenly, they've made him an atheist.  Richard Dawkins is too much a moron for many to follow.

Atheists' god of Spinoza
An atheist's God: the paradox of Spinoza


----------



## Mudda (May 15, 2017)

*How much of a Thief or an Atheist are you?*

What kind of question is that?


----------



## Mudda (May 15, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


So you think what, that humans were made whole by an invisible being and the woman was made from a man's rib?


----------



## sealybobo (May 15, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



Stomp out religion?  Yes.  Like Stalin and Mao?  No.


----------



## sealybobo (May 15, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



So what does Christianity lead to?  Does it lead to slavery?  Because that is where it led to.  How about mass murdering Indians?  Yes Christians did these things.  So is that where Christianity leads?  Because if Atheism leads to murder, so does Christianity.  Agreed?  I don't.  


*Atheism inspired Nazism/Communism/Social Darwinism.*
An ad hominem deflection which demonstrates a failure to understand that atheism is simply a lack of belief in god(s), with no inherit moral, political or philosophical baggage, and thus no line can be drawn from it to the aforementioned ideologies. In the same vein, democracy could be called atheistic. See also: Association fallacy, appeal to emotion and irrelevant thesis.

Hitler was religious and publicly decried atheism. See also: Nazism and Religion, Reductio ad Hitlerum.

Stalinism and Communism exercised gosateizm (state atheism) based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. Atheism was a means to an end, _not a cause_. See also: Soviet Union and Religion.

Social Darwinism and Eugenics supplant actual natural selection with an unobjective personal perception of ‘fitness’. They are based on bad biology (genetic variability is actually very important for a species) and are completely independent of atheism.

Darwin observed and described evolution the same way Newton did for gravity. It was simply a discovery of a fact about the world – not an engineered philosophy on how to behave. Just as we do not blame Newton for the fact that gravity is used as a tool in the deployment of bombs, we cannot blame Darwin for individually misguided applications of ‘natural selection’.

Note: Religion inspires theocracy.

Note: ‘Survival of the Fittest‘ does not simply mean fastest, strongest, or most violent. It is a measure of an individual’s adaptation to the local environment, which can often mean demonstrating cooperation, intelligence and compassion [2]. Humans are outmatched in many ways by animals, but are successful because of their social skills and tool use.

See also: Early Critics of Eugenics were biologists, Natualistic Fallacy, Evolution and Philosophy, Talkorigins: Hitler, Stalin, Social Darwinism.

_“We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.”_ – Adolf Hitler


----------



## sealybobo (May 15, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...



I believe of an infinite number of universes outside or beyond our universe.  If you don't then you are putting our universe and god in a box.  Are you saying there is nothing beyond our little bubble of a universe?

Imagine we are living in one of gods lava lamps.  Which bubble is our universe?





Pick one little bubble.  That's our universe.  There are many many other bubbles beyond our one little bubble.  Hawkins not crazy you just can't wrap your brain around what he's telling you.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 15, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


.



james bond said:


> This is one of the things I learned from my NDE investigation. Atheists listen to other atheists. Thus, if you have to get someplace when you need to, then can you trust their directions?



the genome of life is not a matter of trust, the consequences of its existence are real there are only qualified answers to its understanding.




james bond said:


> However, it's not just after you die, but when you are living. Can you trust what BreezeWood is telling you ha ha? Sorry, I couldn't help but make that little joke hahahaha? Seriously, can you trust what other atheists here write?



it is the author that relies on "trust" for their destiny in a 4th century book without veracity that is the least logical choice for whence "when you need to" would be relevant for a sought for qualified answer. ha ha.




james bond said:


> When you come right down to it, that's what it comes down to. That's why I say, "Atheists are usually wrong."



atheist and the religious are able to discern fact from fiction those adhered to preset agendas have nothing to conform to naturally ...



james bond said:


> Are you giving in to the madness?



and is why they are "usually" in fact almost always deemed rabid in their final days.




james bond said:


> As for Christians, it's not easy to determine the truth either. I don't think one can know the truth by oneself just reading the Bible.



amen ... and knowing not to read further from the 1st pg is their best hope for a fruitful existence.


----------



## james bond (May 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



That Hitler was Christian story is fake news.  The rest of what you posted about Christians sound like Salon propaganda or is the stupid RationaWiki?  Hitler was able to piggy back Darwin's ideas on Darwinism and from those in The Descent of Man into backing the racial superiority of Aryans.  The Nazis were the National Socialist Party.  They wanted to distinguish themselves from Communists.  Notice that Darwin had the perfect white man as the top of the evolution heap.  There is nothing in the Bible to distinguish black men and aborigines as closer to apes (2nd and 3rd from left) and white men (farthest right) as the top of the food chain.  Not only that Darwin's cousin was the one who wrote with Hitler's chief scientist on Eugenics.  Hitler became like a schoolboy having a crush on Darwin's and his cousin ideas.  Not only that, the social Darwinists took up the survival of the "fittest" as their rally cry for getting rid of the lower races and for fascism.  The fittest means those who can pass down their genes the most.






Christianity leads to knowledge and truth.  It's not as politically based such as that of atheism. Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto.  Bruce Bueno de Mesquita has predicted that Iran and China won't be the ones that pose a danger to the United States as most people believe.  What's happening today is talk of Russia causing friction and the heated rhetoric leading to the possibility of another Cold War period.  It was Obama who first leaked intel to the Russians and then blamed Trump about it.  Thus, one can see the ideas of Marx starting to take shape.  Could this be something that leads to a major war with Russia and possible WWIII?  I don't think it will, but it is a possibility.  However, I won't be speculating about it anytime soon or say that the Bible prophecised it.  These types of stories are best left to the experts.  While I won't say that Christianity does not have its share of religious fanatics and Biblical end of the world nuts, I don't think it's as bad as those on the left who are into extremism and anarchy.  I can see bloodshed in the streets, but don't think I'll worry about it.  It was expected with atheists turning to Communism and it starting under Obama.  My motto is to walk softly and carry a big semi-auto rifle with plenty of ammo.


----------



## james bond (May 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



The lava lamps are nice.  I got one with the Beatles Yellow Submarine.  That said, I can see you know little about quantum mechanics and the Big Bang Theory.  If you did, then you would think it's based on a theoretical invisible black hole and objects traveling faster than the speed of light microseconds after the big bang.  I thought nothing could go faster than the speed of light.  Not only that, the first black hole was tiny.  It wasn't a gigantic one.  However, this invisible tiny black hole expanded and turned into our universe and it's still expanding today 13.7 billion years later.  This is a little hard to swallow when no on was there to witness.  We do not even have cave drawings of it while we do have ones of dinosaurs and cave people.  You should read those books I mentioned.  A Brief History of Time became a runaway best seller for a physics book.  It set records.  The second one is full of pictures.  If the origin of the universe according to atheists does not interest you, then you are a clodhopper.  This isn't like the chimpanzee bones of Lucy which most people didn't believe.  After all, it was one of the most racist evolution theories of all time.  Evolution is based on hate.


----------



## james bond (May 17, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Amen, BW.  Thank God your post is over.


----------



## sealybobo (May 17, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


During the time of the Nazis the German people we're Christians. 

It doesn't matter what Hitler or bush believed. They used religion to manipulate their citizens.


----------



## Divine Wind (May 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Like Mao and Stalin used atheism to murder millions of their own people?

Again, as much as the atheists want to stomp out religion, they can't do so without looking as evil as the theists they complain about.


----------



## james bond (May 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



You brought it up, so Hitler's religion matters now.  Truth matters.

"Hitler's major academic biographers conclude that he was an opponent of Christianity. Historian Laurence Rees found no evidence that "Hitler, in his personal life, ever expressed belief in the basic tenets of the Christian church".[2] Hitler's remarks to confidants, as described in the Goebbels Diaries, the memoirs of Albert Speer, and transcripts of Hitler's private conversations recorded by Martin Bormann in _Hitler's Table Talk_, are further evidence of his anti-Christian beliefs; these sources record a number of private remarks in which Hitler ridicules Christian doctrine as absurd and socially destructive.[3]"

I'm even using the liberal wikepedia as evidence ha ha
Religious views of Adolf Hitler - Wikipedia

The reason is to show that atheists are usually wrong.

Moreover, you're listening to RatiionalWiki.  That's for the low-life internet atheists who will believe anything.  Are you a contributor BW?  It used to be conservative, but taken over by the low level atheists, liberals and teenagers.  The truth is Darwin was racist and swayed by scientific racism.  Look at the full title of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.  The Descent of Man proved he was racist.  

"“He who wishes to decide whether man is the modified descendant of some pre-existing form, would probably first enquire whether man varies, however slightly, in bodily structure and in mental faculties; and if so, whether the variations are transmitted to his offspring in accordance with the laws which prevail with the lower animals” (1871, p. 395). Later, in his chapter titled “On the Affinities and Genealogy of Man,” Darwin wrote:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla (p. 521)."

Darwin, Evolution, and Racism

Ugh.  Darwin would be crucified by the liberals if he were starting this today.  

Not only that the Bible states that humans had one language in the beginning.  This was the default state.  However, God mixed up the language at the Tower of Babel.  This is the start of people speaking different languages.  We do not know the origins of language, but here it is.  It also goes to show that apes would be able to talk if we are descendants.  However, they cannot talk and could not talk.  Ever.  

As for your point of the German people were Christians, this is true.  That's why Hitler used the bishops and priests for his nefarious ends.  He courted them first in order to be able to sway the people.  Remember, he was a great orator and persuader.  That's why Hitler is the Second Anthchrist.

Religion of Nazi Germany.  Again liberal wikipedia
Religion in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia

I think we are making some progress into showing Darwin was racist and his ideas were to blame for Hitler's Holocaust.


----------



## Jason Williams (May 17, 2017)

I believe I'm a strong theist. There is just too much out there to deny the existence of God 25 Important Bible Verses About Atheism. I don't believe that we can account for creation without God and I can't deny that.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 17, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


Divine.Wind said:


> Again, as much as the atheists want to stomp out religion, they can't do so without looking as evil as the theists they complain about.



link ...

the correction of religion is shared by the sincerity of the individuals pursuit, the true path to the Everlasting is one of them. and that certainly for those at the turn of the previous century encompassed by the magnitude of religious indiscretion the remedy was mirrored by the consequential necessity to make the change. the history of religious zealots through time, the response was nothing new.


----------



## james bond (May 17, 2017)

Jason Williams said:


> I believe I'm a strong theist. There is just too much out there to deny the existence of God 25 Important Bible Verses About Atheism. I don't believe that we can account for creation without God and I can't deny that.



Nice article.  Atheism also leads to Communism.  Karl Marx said all the things that atheists say on these forums today.


----------



## james bond (May 17, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Sorry, it wasn't religion that caused the Holocaust and black genocide.  Darwin is linked to Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.  They're still doing it today with abortion.  You noticed atheists jumped aboard Darwin's bandwagon posthaste.  You have to wonder why because the default position before then was Christianity.  You had to go to church on Sundays.  You have to wonder why Christians are attacked online for their beliefs from atheists and liberals while Muslims get a free pass.  All of this is tied together.  There are threads going through these topics. 

Atheists have no moral values.  They just want to do the gay pile-on and not feel guilty about it.  They think there is no free will and these choices could not be helped.  They want to do hard drugs and pornography with no recriminations.  All of these are addictive behaviors and God warns us against them.  Atheists and liberals want no repercussions from living the lifestyle of Hollywood values -- public obscenities, decadence, narcissism, hypocrisy, rampant drug use, extramarital sex leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted disease, abortion, lawlessness and the promotion of the homosexual agenda.  This isn't what core values are about.  Core values are about doing onto your neighbor what you would have them do onto you.  You end paying the price in life and in the afterlife for one's moral indiscretions.  Atheists and liberals do not want to hear this.  Instead, the mentally ill liberals think morality is about masturbation and that's what Christianity is against.  It's no wonder the liberals go crazy and end up killing people and in jail.  It seems the only defense is buying a semi-auto rifle to go along with your pistol and plenty of ammo and learning how to use it and the law (use a gun and not go to jail) to protect oneself, one's families and their neighbors from these unhinged, wacko mentally ill liberals.  I think it starts with atheists being so obsessed with God.  Obsession is not good.  It's a wonder that God does not file a restraining order against the heathens.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 17, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> This isn't what core values are about.





james bond said:


> It seems the only defense is buying a semi-auto rifle to go along with your pistol and plenty of ammo and learning how to use it and the law (use a gun and not go to jail) to protect oneself, one's families and their neighbors from these unhinged, wacko mentally ill liberals



_
... use a gun and not go to jail





_

being caught red handed isn't what it use to be, cry a 1000 tears bond.




> The Fight Over Confederate Monuments Is Moving Beyond New Orleans









your people are coming out of the woodwork, speaking of the holocaust how many of the KKK are jewish ...


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


That's why it's better that it happens naturally like it is now U.S. Public Becoming Less Religious

And your argument is bad.  It's number 38 on why there is no god.  

*Atheism inspired Nazism/Communism/Social Darwinism.*
An ad hominem deflection which demonstrates a failure to understand that atheism is simply a lack of belief in god(s), with no inherit moral, political or philosophical baggage, and thus no line can be drawn from it to the aforementioned ideologies. In the same vein, democracy could be called atheistic. See also: Association fallacy, appeal to emotion and irrelevant thesis.

Hitler was religious and publicly decried atheism. See also: Nazism and Religion, Reductio ad Hitlerum.

Stalinism and Communism exercised gosateizm (state atheism) based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. Atheism was a means to an end, _not a cause_. See also: Soviet Union and Religion.

Social Darwinism and Eugenics supplant actual natural selection with an unobjective personal perception of ‘fitness’. They are based on bad biology (genetic variability is actually very important for a species) and are completely independent of atheism.

Darwin observed and described evolution the same way Newton did for gravity. It was simply a discovery of a fact about the world – not an engineered philosophy on how to behave. Just as we do not blame Newton for the fact that gravity is used as a tool in the deployment of bombs, we cannot blame Darwin for individually misguided applications of ‘natural selection’.

Note: Religion inspires theocracy.

Note: ‘Survival of the Fittest‘ does not simply mean fastest, strongest, or most violent. It is a measure of an individual’s adaptation to the local environment, which can often mean demonstrating cooperation, intelligence and compassion [2]. Humans are outmatched in many ways by animals, but are successful because of their social skills and tool use.

See also: Early Critics of Eugenics were biologists, Natualistic Fallacy, Evolution and Philosophy, Talkorigins: Hitler, Stalin, Social Darwinism.

_“We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.”_ – Adolf Hitler


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Ha ha.  Turns out anytime a Christian does bad Christians say, "well he wasn't a real Christian"

Hitler, attempting to appeal to the German masses during his political campaign and leadership, sometimes made declarations in support of religion and against atheism. He stated in a speech that atheism (a concept he linked with Communism and "Jewish materialism") had been "stamped out",[4] and banned the German Freethinkers League.[5]Hitler was born to a practising Catholic mother, and was baptised and confirmed in the Roman Catholic Church. In his book _Mein Kampf_ and in public speeches he affirmed a belief in Christianity.

So it doesn't matter what Hitler believed.  He suckered the stupid German Christians into WW2.  This is why religion is bad.  It makes people sheeple.


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

Hitler believed in god but didn't like Christianity.  So this proves no one is 100% bad.  LOL 

Hitler claimed that he continued to believe in an active Deity, and in one public speech, he stated that he held Jesus in high esteem as an "Aryan fighter" who struggled against Jewry.[11]

Religious views of Adolf Hitler - Wikipedia


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

Hitler didn't like Christianity.  Can you blame him?

the vast majority believe that Hitler was skeptical of religion generally, but recognized that he could only be elected if he feigned a commitment to and belief in Christianity.[13] Hitler himself was reluctant to make public attacks on the Church for political reasons.[14] Goebbels wrote in April 1941 that though Hitler was "a fierce opponent" of the Vatican and Christianity, "he forbids me to leave the church. For tactical reasons."[15]

However, once in office, Hitler and his regime sought to reduce the influence of Christianity on society.[16] From the mid-1930s, his government was increasingly dominated by militant anti-Christians 

Religious views of Adolf Hitler - Wikipedia


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



And the crosses they burn are Christian crosses, yes?


----------



## james bond (May 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I'm sure God is going to get you for, "It's number 38 on why there is no god."  Pain and suffering is not uncommon in our lives.  I found the number one prescribed medicine is for pain relief; It's opioids.  

Anyway, the millenials are,

"But the Pew Research Center study also finds a great deal of stability in the U.S. religious landscape. The recent decrease in religious beliefs and behaviors is largely attributable to the “nones” – the growing minority of Americans, particularly in the Millennial generation, who say they do not belong to any organized faith. Among the roughly three-quarters of U.S. adults who _do_ claim a religion, there has been no discernible drop in most measures of religious commitment. Indeed, by some conventional measures, religiously affiliated Americans are, on average, even more devout than they were a few years ago."

This does not mean they do not believe in God, but do not have a religious affiliation."


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


Without the religious affiliation theists are pretty benign


----------



## james bond (May 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



>>And the crosses they burn are Christian crosses, yes?<<

No, it's supposed to be a Scottish "X-shaped" cross.  Look at the patches on their uniform.  The history is here -- The Straight Dope: Why does the Ku Klux Klan burn crosses?.

>>your people are coming out of the woodwork, speaking of the holocaust how many of the KKK are jewish ...<<

The KKK are Democrats and started in the South immediately after the Civil War to support slavery.  Just the fact that BW brings it up shows that he's wrong and so are you trying to implicate them with Catholics.  White supremacy and hate is not that which is taught in the Catholic religion, but by Darwin's racist theories leading to social Darwinism and fascism.  I don't think any are Jewish, but white fascists and social Darwinists.

Ku Klux Klan | Definition & History

They are known to use the fascist tactics of Hitler that I mentioned in trying to associate themselves with the Catholic religion, like Hitler did with the bishops and priests, in order to drum up support for their leftist socialist organization and views.  If BW wasn't so ignorant, then he would not have posted such rubbish.  Most people understand what the atheists and racists such as Hitler, Darwin, Darwin's cousin and now BW are trying to do.  Very creepy.  BW has hit a new low with his ignorant and ugly posts.


----------



## james bond (May 18, 2017)

Darwin's common ancestor theory uses similarity to determine ancestry.  If we look at Darwin's scientific racist group, we find all white scientists.  If we dig a little deeper at the history, then we find they supported slavery and were Democrats.  Could it be they were your ancestors?

Scientific Racism
Scientific Racism | ReduceTheBurden.org

Whitewashing the Democratic Party’s History
Whitewashing the Democratic Party’s History


----------



## james bond (May 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



>>Without the religious affiliation theists are pretty benign<<

They are, but not the extremists.  I would think any religion, including atheism, has their extremists such as a Karl Marx type.

BTW do you know we had the 3rd Antichrist?  His code name is Mabus.  He knew the first two antichrists, Napoleon and Hitler.  He died a sudden death.  The prediction is World War III will come next.


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


The religious extremists always have a religious affiliation. They never believe in a generic creator that never visited. Unless they believe the creator doesn't care. I tend to agree. If something created the universe it probably doesn't care what animals do.


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


You Christians won't claim any horrible deeds. Anyone who claims they are christian and does bad things is written off as not a real christian.

And in a way I agree. Lots of people say they believe but don't really. I do it too. Someone says thank God or praise Jesus I dont correct them.

They did an anonymous survey and found more that 1 in 4 don't believe.


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Hitler believed in mystical stuff. That makes him a theist. Kim Jung un is a god. That means he's a theist.

You're confusing atheism with anti religious evil dictators who banned religions. Two different things. I just believe there is no God and they use religion to manipulate


----------



## BreezeWood (May 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> They are known to use the fascist tactics of Hitler that I mentioned in trying to associate themselves with the Catholic religion, like Hitler did with the bishops and priests, in order to drum up support for their leftist socialist organization and views.









the KKK were determined to prevent catholicism from being established in the south, your comment is pure ignorance and were active in that regard as a threat to their "fundamental" biblical beliefs.

they are your people bond, every last one of them, the southern bible belt those above as in the first example are in civilian attire how you must miss the good old days. history will not repeat itself in this country those days are gone forever despite rightwing fanatics as yourself.


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


It's true. Even most christian conservatives today are liberal compared to 50 years ago. They believe in evolution. They don't take religion literally. The harmful aspect of religion isnt as much anymore. For example it's not universally agreed that gays are bad. And a lot of theists don't want to ban stem cell or deny evolution.

Religions aren't benign. But hey, they are a big business. They pay no taxes and make nothing but they employ lots of people. I'll shut up


----------



## sealybobo (May 18, 2017)

Priest asked a dieing woman if she renounced Satan. Dieing woman says "no. Woman in my position can't afford to make any enemies"


----------



## james bond (May 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> I'm sure God is going to get you for, "It's number 38 on why there is no god."  Pain and suffering is not uncommon in our lives.  I found the number one prescribed medicine is for pain relief; It's opioids.





james bond said:


> >>Without the religious affiliation theists are pretty benign<<
> 
> They are, but not the extremists.  I would think any religion, including atheism, has their extremists such as a Karl Marx type.
> 
> BTW do you know we had the 3rd Antichrist?  His code name is Mabus.  He knew the first two antichrists, Napoleon and Hitler.  He died a sudden death.  The prediction is World War III will come next.





sealybobo said:


> You Christians won't claim any horrible deeds. Anyone who claims they are christian and does bad things is written off as not a real christian.
> 
> And in a way I agree. Lots of people say they believe but don't really. I do it too. Someone says thank God or praise Jesus I dont correct them.
> 
> They did an anonymous survey and found more that 1 in 4 don't believe.



I think I did accept responsibility in the post before yours, and am doing things so there won't be "1 in 4 don't believe."  I acknowledged there are extremist Christians just like there are extremist atheists.  Not all Christians are going to heaven.  Some will end up on earth again or in hell.

I need you to understand that stating things outwardly like, "There is no God" leads to pain and suffering or woe.  This means you continue to follow what Adam and Eve did.  It is no joking matter.  They were selfish and instead of being grateful and worshiping God for everything he gave them, they disobeyed God.  The ToK was a test of their free will.  You are being selfish in saying there is no God.  Instead, you try to explain everything that exists in the world and in your life is the product of natural occurrences.  It doesn't matter how far out these natural occurrences seem, you still believe that is the truth.

The strange part is even though God knows you are going to hell, there is still time to change it because you have free will.  If you change, then God can change.  That's the part that's difficult to convince people of.

One of the best evidence for God is whether you believe in materialism like the atheists or duality like the believers, the world is all in your brain (mind for the dualists).  What you see and sense is a 2D representation of the world.  Your brain/mind just fills in the 3D or depth part.  Your brain/mind fills in the five senses.  Your brain/mind fills in the sixth sense.  It's all in your brain/mind.  God is spirit.  We are like him, but we aren't 100% spirit.  Not yet anyway.  Do you see what I am trying to say?


----------



## james bond (May 19, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Again, you just continue to ignore what I said and proved to you.  Instead, you call me ignorant when I read the Bible and science books.  Before you were claiming the KKK were Catholics and now are saying they were trying to prevent Catholicism.  That follows what the atheists and liberals are doing today.  They want to disavow Christianity for Communism.

What about the Nostradamos prophecy?  Did another of his prophecies using the Bible come true?

The name "antichrist" is only found in 1 John 2:18, 2:22, 4:3, and 2 John 7. The Apostle John was the only Bible writer to use the name antichrist.  Studying these verses, we learn that many antichrists (false teachers) will appear.  We had Napoleon, Hitler and Usama (Mabus).

According to Nostradamos, WWIII is to happen next.

During the end times, between the time of Christ's first and Second Coming, there will be one great antichrist who will rise to power.  1 John 2:18 states it as the "last hour."

The one great antichrist will deny that Jesus is the Christ. He will deny both God the Father and God the Son.  He will be a liar and a deceiver.

Don't be the liar and deceiver, BW.


----------



## sealybobo (May 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure God is going to get you for, "It's number 38 on why there is no god."  Pain and suffering is not uncommon in our lives.  I found the number one prescribed medicine is for pain relief; It's opioids.
> ...



I am grateful for everything I have.  I just don't believe there is a god.  I am agnostic when it comes to a generic creator but the Abraham god, I don't believe exists.  In my mind not a chance in hell so I'm pretty safe doubting that stuff.  And a generic creator doesn't care about sin.  

I'm not any more or less selfish than the average Christian.  If I believed a god existed I would thank it but as for right now I'm just thankful that I was born.  I'm lucky.    

I haven't disobeyed God.  God never told me one thing.  When he does I will obey his every command.


----------



## sealybobo (May 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I said the KKK were catholics?  I think you are hearing what you want to hear pal.  Try going back and comprehending what I read.  I said the Nazi's were Catholics.  If not, please tell me when the German people stopped being Catholic and then tell me when they officially went back and rejoined the church.

You can't, because the Nazi's were always catholics.  Thank you.


----------



## sealybobo (May 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



You think John wrote the bible?  Sorry but he didn't.  

The traditional Church has portrayed the authors as the apostles Mark, Luke, Matthew, & John, but scholars know from critical textural research that there simply occurs no evidence that the gospel authors could have served as the apostles described in the Gospel stories. Yet even today, we hear priests and ministers describing these authors as the actual disciples of Christ. Many Bibles still continue to label the stories as "The Gospel according to St. Matthew," "St. Mark," "St. Luke," St. John." No apostle would have announced his own sainthood _before_ the Church's establishment of sainthood. But one need not refer to scholars to determine the lack of evidence for authorship. As an experiment, imagine the Gospels without their titles. See if you can find out from the texts who wrote them; try to find their names.

The gospel of Mark describes the first written Bible gospel. And although Mark appears deceptively after the Matthew gospel, the gospel of Mark got written at least a generation _before_ Matthew. From its own words, one can deduce that the author of Mark had neither heard Jesus nor served as his personal follower. Whoever wrote the gospel simply accepted the story of Jesus without question and wrote a crude an ungrammatical account of the popular story at the time. Historians tell us of the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke), Mark served as the common element between Matthew and Luke and provided the main source for both of them. Of Mark's 666* verses, some 600 appear in Matthew, some 300 in Luke. According to Randel Helms, the author of Mark, stands at least a third remove from Jesus and more likely at the fourth remove. 

Do you understand what hearsay is?  That means John didn't see Jesus do miracles and then write it down.  No no.  The person who wrote the gospel according to John heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend.  

Do you really think Jesus' 11 deciples penned the bible?  Like actually sat down and wrote the bible?


----------



## sealybobo (May 19, 2017)

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a _single_ contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well _after_ the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Did Jesus exist?


----------



## BreezeWood (May 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Instead, you call me ignorant when I read the Bible and science books.



no but your evaluation to be blunt is corrupt by the historical consequences since the 4th century of the former and the results of the latter.





james bond said:


> According to Nostradamos, WWIII is to happen next.



the events of the 1st century were the consequence of the spoken religion from the Almighty, The Triumph of Good vs Evil and the confluence of one over the other in its conclusion, evil over good. they murdered Jesus. that crime of society must be brought to justice before the path to the Everlasting can be reestablished otherwise the end will be a catastrophe however that is not a certainty till the last good person on earth as Jesus perishes. no bible is necessary. the bible itself is a corruption of the spoken religion. 

justice will be the bibles rewording to bring Jesus back to life.


----------



## james bond (May 20, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



>>God never told me one thing.<<






"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."  John 3:16


----------



## james bond (May 20, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Noooooooooooooooooo!  I am trying to point out here that the WWIII prophecies aren't Biblical prophecies.  You have no idea, so like most people believe it is from the Bible.  Nostradamus may be successful in his "prophecies," but skeptics think its a trick since his words are vague enough to apply to anything.  He takes topics from the Bible and ascribe things to it.  Thus, you have been exposed for the liar and charlatan that you are.

You do not even have Nostradamus in the correct century, so your history is mixed up, too*.  All of this will come out and drive you mad during the darkness, just like you are mad already.  

* - Nostradamus was a French Christian Jew who lived in the 16th century.


----------



## james bond (May 20, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Now, you're putting words in my mouth.  Don't confuse what I reply to BW from you.

Yes, the Bible was penned by some of Jesus' disciples, but that is besides the point.  The Book of James is that of Jesus' brother (actually half-brother).  John the Apostle, writer of Bible, is not the same person as John the Baptist.  *The important point to know is that it was God the Father who had others pen what he wanted to say and witnessed.  *Any other tricks you have up your sleeve?

There is much we can learn from the apostles and people in the Bible.

Who were the twelve apostles?
Who were the twelve (12) disciples / apostles of Jesus Christ?

Why is it important to study the characters in the Bible?  (They're like us.)
Why is it important to study the various characters in the Bible?

As for your Randel Helms, there are many who take the Bible and use it for their own purpose.  His income comes from writing books critical of the Bible.  I follow Nostradamus, but don't take him seriously.  Many write books about him and make money.  You sound like you believe this Randel Helms person and not God.  Aren't you the one believing in hearsay?

There is no question, the Bible is difficult to read and comprehend.  Yet, it is very simple, at the same time.  If I do not understand something, then I leave it to the scholars and experts.  I've thought about points in the Bible and ended up being wrong or mislead several times.  It leads to one being more confident of God's word.  I do not know where you went wrong, but perhaps you can find something in the above to help find your way to truth and knowledge.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.



[COLOR=#b30000]james bond[/COLOR] said:


> According to Nostradamos, WWIII is to happen next.





james bond said:


> Thus, you have been exposed for the liar and charlatan that you are.



I gave the 1st century time for the final Judgement, when the last member of either good or evil perishes, that calamity is not a certainty. no one needs your "written" bible to know the truth and if they are seeking it they will not find it in your 4th century book.




james bond said:


> "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16



_"For God so loved the world that they gave their one and only Son, that whoever believes in them shall not perish but have eternal life."_

your book is a forgery, nothing religious about it, purely political. and no, Jesus was not offered by the Almighty, _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” _however that crime remains the same from that time to this day. your book fails to bring justice for the very subject it relys on for remission.


.


----------



## sealybobo (May 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Where is the original book John wrote? The Bible was written centuries after. Hearsay


----------



## james bond (May 23, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> _"For God so loved the world that they gave their one and only Son, that whoever believes in them shall not perish but have eternal life."_
> 
> your book is a forgery, nothing religious about it, purely political. and no, Jesus was not offered by the Almighty, _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” _however that crime remains the same from that time to this day. your book fails to bring justice for the very subject it relys on for remission.



smh.  I hope you remember what you have said.  It'll get you the lower depths.

Now, Nostradamus is not the Biblical prophecies as I have said.  He was a French Catholic Jew living in the 16th century.  It's just that he prophecize using the topics in the Bible.  It's systematic evidence of things that may or may not happen in the future.  For example, his quatrains state that the LHC and Geneva will have some kind of accident.  I wouldn't take it seriously if I worked at LHC.  Yet, these things are part of his system.  The Bible predicted many antichrists before the last antichrist and we've had Saddam and Osama Bin Laden as Mabus.  Both died suddenly.  It could be Obama, too, if he ends up dying suddenly.  All of this prelude to WWIII.  

My point is the Biblical prophecies have been 100% correct.  Many have already happened.  The big one left is the 2nd Coming.  Moreover, Nostradamus says that it will be in 2060 or within our lifetimes.  Again, I do not know if any of Nostradamus' prophecies are indeed prophecies, but it's part of his systematic approach.  It's just something to tuck in the back of one's head.  

"*"What is the spiritual gift of prophecy?"

Answer: * The spiritual gift of prophecy is listed among the gifts of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:10 and Romans 12:6. The Greek word translated “prophesying” or “prophecy” in both passages properly means to “speak forth” or declare the divine will, to interpret the purposes of God, or to make known in any way the truth of God which is designed to influence people. Many people misunderstand the gift of prophecy to be the ability to predict the future. While knowing something about the future may sometimes have been an aspect of the gift of prophecy, *it was primarily a gift of proclamation (“forth-telling”)*, not prediction (“fore-telling”)."

A pastor/preacher who declares the Bible can be considered a “prophesier” in that he is speaking forth the counsel of God. With the completion of the New Testament canon, prophesying changed from declaring new revelation to declaring the completed revelation God has already given. Jude 3 speaks of “the faith which _was once delivered_ unto the saints” (emphasis added). In other words, the faith to which we hold has been settled forever, and it does not need the addition or refinement that comes from extra-biblical revelations.

Also, note the transition from prophet to teacher in 2 Peter 2:1: “There _were_ false prophets among the people, even as there _shall_ be false teachers among you” (emphasis added). Peter indicates that the Old Testament age had prophets, whereas the church will have teachers. The spiritual gift of prophecy, in the sense of receiving _new_ revelations from God to be proclaimed to others, ceased with the completion of the Bible. During the time that prophecy was a revelatory gift, it was to be used for the edification, exhortation, and comfort of men (1 Corinthians 14:3). The modern gift of prophecy, which is really more akin to teaching, still declares the truth of God. What has changed is that the truth of God today has already been fully revealed in His Word, while, in the early church, it had not yet been fully revealed."

What is the spiritual gift of prophecy?

Thus, in this sense, you're a prophesier stating the things that you do, "your book is a forgery, nothing religious about it, purely political. and no, Jesus was not offered by the Almighty."  "There were false prophets among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you."

Compare that to the Bible which has been 100% correct.  Some people feel these prophecies give God's word power in being forth-telling.

"Prophecy can be divided into two categories. *First, speaking forth the Word of God (the Bible) into the lives of people that they would be edified, exhorted, and comforted (1 Corinthians 14:3). In other words, prophecy is sharing applicable Scripture verses with someone, in order to draw him closer to Jesus (edify), to encourage proper behavior (exhort), or to give assurance of the Lord's faithfulness, control and help in any situation (comfort)."*

Compare that to Nostradamus, a historical figure whom many people think has been successful as a prophesier, but others think his quatrains are too general and could apply to anything.  I just use his premonitions as a system or something to compare against.  I don't think he was a false prophet, but just wrote down what he envisioned with his system.  He didn't claim these things would happen.

Was Nostradamus a true prophet of God?


----------



## james bond (May 23, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Where is the original book John wrote? The Bible was written centuries after. Hearsay



Before I can give you an answer, just where are you getting this hearsay?


----------



## sealybobo (May 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Where is the original book John wrote? The Bible was written centuries after. Hearsay
> ...


Most biblical scholars admit that Peter Paul and Luke didn't write the Bible's.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > _"For God so loved the world that they gave their one and only Son, that whoever believes in them shall not perish but have eternal life."_
> ...


.


james bond said:


> smh. I hope you remember what you have said. It'll get you the lower depths.



that will not be difficult as I did not read it out of a book and if it helpful will restate the truth again I have no qualms what the true religion of the Almighty is ...



BreezeWood said:


> your book is a forgery, nothing religious about it, purely political. and no, Jesus was not offered by the Almighty, _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” _however that crime remains the same from that time to this day. your book fails to bring justice for the very subject it relys on for remission.



my point was the ending may be two different closing scenes, one good one bad your book only predicts the latter for everyone but yourselves which is the very concept that will prevent it from ever happening the way you would like.

like sealy asked, where are your individual books if they are suppose to be from God - you have made everything up and your history over time proves what kind of religion you created.

stop your indictments, they only demean your own intractable mindset.


----------



## james bond (May 23, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Which ones?  Links?  I got an answer, but you're avoiding answering my question.


----------



## OZman (May 24, 2017)

james bond said:


> Which ones? Links?



Here is a start.


----------



## sealybobo (May 24, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Did Jesus exist?

Amazingly, the question of an actual historical Jesus rarely confronts the religious believer. The power of faith has so forcefully driven the minds of most believers, and even apologetic scholars, that the question of reliable evidence gets obscured by tradition, religious subterfuge, and outrageous claims. The following gives a brief outlook about the claims of a historical Jesus and why the evidence the Christians present us cannot serve as justification for reliable evidence for a historical Jesus.

*ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS*

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a _single_ contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well _after_ the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts.


----------



## hobelim (May 24, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...





I don't know about you but I highly doubt that the disciples would have endured the things they endured promoting the teachings of a figment of their collective imagination.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 24, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


. 


hobelim said:


> I don't know about you but I highly doubt that the disciples would have endured the things they endured promoting the teachings of a figment of their collective imagination.



do you suppose that would include the 4th century christian bible that throughout history has been the cause for torture and barbarity against Free Spirited individuals ... in particular.


----------



## sealybobo (May 25, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


What about all the other religions? They did. Why not this one?


----------



## sealybobo (May 25, 2017)

The followers of the new religion back then we're just as devout as followers today. Just look at how devout Muslims are. Do we doubt the deciples of Islam would believe a fairytale?

Christianity even deals with doubt. If you question or deny the story you're a Judas. Brainwashing on a massive scale


----------



## hobelim (May 26, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



What other religions did what? Claimed to know personally and learn teaching from a figment of their imagination?  Uh, no.

You were claiming that Jesus never existed.

Remember?


----------



## hobelim (May 26, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> The followers of the new religion back then we're just as devout as followers today. Just look at how devout Muslims are. Do we doubt the deciples of Islam would believe a fairytale?
> 
> Christianity even deals with doubt. If you question or deny the story you're a Judas. Brainwashing on a massive scale



  According to the story and historical accounts early christians were just as ridiculed, rejected,  despised, and persecuted as Jesus. People didn't seem to have any problem denying the story, just like you. Belief was never compulsory until the religion was assimilated and perverted by Rome.


Islam? WTF?

The religion may be bullshit but mohammed actually existed.

Are you claiming that Mohammed was a figment of their imagination too?


----------



## sealybobo (May 26, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...



No, I claim a guy who walked on water and was born from a virgin never existed.  That's a man made up story.


----------



## sealybobo (May 26, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > The followers of the new religion back then we're just as devout as followers today. Just look at how devout Muslims are. Do we doubt the deciples of Islam would believe a fairytale?
> ...



Well Mohammed was an actual man who invented a religion and you can probably go see his grave just like Joseph Smith.  Where is Jesus buried?  Where was Moses buried?  Funny the founders of these cults are almost mythical.  Almost a fairytale.  Instead of in a land far far away a long time ago Moses was somewhere around this place and 7 or 15000 years ago.  Jesus isn't a fairytale because his story supposedly happened 2017 years ago in Israel.  That's the only difference.  

Can't you see a good martyr story when you hear one?  If Jesus of Nazereth actually existed as a small cult leader then his story has been embellished over time greatly.  If not, how do you accept the virgin birth story?  Do you also believe in Angels, ghosts and demons.  Really?


----------



## hobelim (May 26, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> If Jesus of Nazereth actually existed as a small cult leader then his story has been embellished over time greatly.




So.

Given the historical reality of the worldwide and long lasting effect that small cult leader of no account has had on "the nations"  for good and evil, his claims of of having been given authority by God over life and death, to bless or to curse, according to the story that is,  was not just hubris from a fairy tale character...





sealybobo said:


> Do you also believe in Angels, ghosts and demons. Really?




Yes, really.


In scripture, angels and demons and all the wild beasts of the field,  whether clean or unclean,  are descriptive metaphors for ordinary people that reflect the heights and depths of human potential.


Do you not believe in scumbags, er, demons? really?  Have you not been paying attention to politics?

Have you never been visited by an angel?

If you were looking for evidence of invisible beings you wouldn't know if one was standing right in front of you either striking you with blindness or  setting your head on fire, would you.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 26, 2017)

hobelim said:


> In scripture ... are descriptive metaphors for ordinary people that reflect the heights and depths of human potential.




that's the point, you keep referring to different books, characters and descriptive discrepancies meant for interpretation but have no physical material from the time for either verification or reference. the sole source for your information is a late 4th century book that itself has no reference for its material.

that 4th century corruption of the 1st century religion is long overdue for correction, how many more people will fall prey to its diabolical content before justice is restored.


----------



## hobelim (May 26, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > In scripture ... are descriptive metaphors for ordinary people that reflect the heights and depths of human potential.
> ...


 

Thats not true at all. What the romans redacted for widespread publication in the fourth century was compiled from material that was written hundreds of years earlier that they could never comprehend without having the keys to understanding. Aside from that there exists volumes of material from the first century that sheds light on Jewish thought belief and expression based on the instruction in the Torah, not to mention the known historical context and volumes of commentaries on those events.

Knowing that Jesus lived during a time of brutal Roman oppression when there was no such thing as freedom of expression and people were killed and maimed on a daily basis for trivial reasons it should be obvious that what he was teaching to the oppressed was in a strange language, codified vernacular,  that went over their superstitious and illiterate foreign oppressors heads long before anything was ever written down..



BreezeWood said:


> that 4th century corruption of the 1st century religion is long overdue for correction,






When a car breaks down do you abandon it at the junk yard and expect it to be returned to you in good running condition?


----------



## sealybobo (May 26, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > If Jesus of Nazereth actually existed as a small cult leader then his story has been embellished over time greatly.
> ...



I was reading about the French Revolution.  The French Revolution completely changed the social and political structure of France. It put an end to the French monarchy, feudalism, and took political power from the Catholic church. 

Ok, so do you know the history of Christianity?  I do.  The Catholic Church is/was very corrupt.  For thousands of years.  That's a fact.  So, knowing this history, why would anyone believe this religions Jesus stories?

This is how I know Christianity is pure bullshit.  What you are asked to believe is unbelievable and a real god wouldn't make this the test for getting into heaven.


----------



## james bond (May 26, 2017)

OZman said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Which ones? Links?
> ...



Ha ha.  Ehrman is looney tunes, liar and a false witness.  3 strikes you're out.  He's also liberal, too.


----------



## james bond (May 26, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Eyewitness accounts.  These people were there with Jesus.  However, you base your worldview on an unknown writer on nobeliefs.com?  sealybobo, after all this you base your worldview on some blogger opinions?  I misjudged you badly.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 26, 2017)

hobelim said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


.


hobelim said:


> What the romans redacted for widespread publication in the fourth century was compiled from material that was written hundreds of years earlier that they could never comprehend without having the keys to understanding.





james bond said:


> *The important point to know is that it was God the Father who had others pen what he wanted to say and witnessed.*



_
*it was God the Father who had others pen what they wanted to say and witnessed ...*_


if that were so the documents would be available to "read" if that were the intent as stated. the fact that non of the documents exist is proof enough there never was an intent for a scriptural religion than by those that were using the 1st century event for their own interests. 

the spoken religion is all that was ever meant to be as even today christianity is followed by most not by the mirror image of their book but the messages spoken between themselves to reach their goals and for the path to the Everlasting. it is the specific 4th century scriptures that people recognize as the corruptions to the actual religion.


----------



## sealybobo (May 27, 2017)

So 33 of us really don't believe and ten do?

And last night I was in a house with two believers and three non believers.

I believe at least 60% if you have an honest discussion don't believe. They'll admit they hope but believe it's wishful thinking


----------



## hobelim (May 27, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Christianity was in existence for hundreds of years before the catholic church received its power and authority from caesar and was assimilated and perverted by Rome..

Let me make a suggestion.

 Try to differentiate between what is actually written in scripture and church doctrine and dogma established by superstitious people thousands of years ago who knew nothing of literary techniques or Jewish expression and teaching..


What is it that you think that you are asked to believe that is so unbelievable?


----------



## sealybobo (May 27, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Virgin birth.

My point is if your church was perverted 1000 years ago who's to say it's not all made up? If church is used to control people that's probably why it was invented in the first place


----------



## sealybobo (May 27, 2017)

Why follow a religion you don't believe? Why would they want me as a member?


----------



## hobelim (May 27, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...




Have you ever considered that the story of the virgin birth was made for children but conceals a hidden teaching meant for adults if they ever grow some teeth and learn to ruminate? Did you throw the story of the three pigs in the trash because swine can't talk or build houses? If you did you would have never learned the moral of the story.


Again, the NT was written hundreds of years before their interpretations were usurped by Rome, the enemy of Jesus, his disciples, and the authors of the NT long after all those who held the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of Heaven were ruthlessly slaughtered.

 Jesus was executed for sedition and fomenting insurrection against both Rome and the established religious authorities. Read the damn story, he was openly flipping off both church and state.


Think!

Of course the spin of his enemies rendered his teachings incomprehensible and even offensive to rational people by burying his revelation under a mountain of blasphemy.


----------



## hobelim (May 27, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Why follow a religion you don't believe?




Mind control? Brainwashing? Fear from threats of real and imaginary violence? ? what the ancients called sorcery?






sealybobo said:


> Why would they want me as a member?


 to steal 10% of your income and your vote  for life ?


----------



## BreezeWood (May 27, 2017)

.
curious, why they despise Free Spirits calling them Liberals (the one's fed to the lions) ... all the desert religion's histories are atrocious from that time to the present.


----------



## hobelim (May 27, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> curious, why they despise Free Spirits calling them Liberals (the one's fed to the lions) ... all the desert religion's histories are atrocious from that time to the present.


 
*

"Thus far, the spirits of truth and perversity have been struggling in the heart of man. Men have walked both in wisdom and folly. If a man casts his portion with the truth, he does righteously and hates perversity; if he casts it with perversity, he does wickedly and abominates truth"*


----------



## sealybobo (May 27, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


It's a great story no doubt. I get the message.


----------



## sealybobo (May 27, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Why follow a religion you don't believe?
> ...


They say atheism is dangerous? Look at the holy war we're in now. Only belief in God can make a suicide bomber. They believe they are doing what God wants.

Yes, throw the story away. It's a lie. At least admit they are just stories.


----------



## james bond (May 27, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



What part of atheism leads to communism do you not get?  Sure, it's dangerous.  We're very careful of the Russians and Chinese in terms of politics today.  We may as well toss in atheists to this list to be watchful of.  The liberals and atheists want to take our guns away and they will only do that from my cold dead hands, but not without a huge stink and fight first.  That's why I say for good folks to gather up all the guns and ammo that they can.  I will be buying a semi-auto rifle.  Maybe two and teach my family how to use it.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 27, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> The liberals and atheists want to take our guns away and they will only do that from my cold dead hands, but not without a huge stink and fight first.



how it must have grieved you when they made you take off your hood ...




james bond said:


> That's why I say for good folks to gather up all the guns and ammo that they can. I will be buying a semi-auto rifle. Maybe two and teach my family how to use it.










oops, I guess those good folks haven't gotten the memo yet.


----------



## sealybobo (May 27, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


When you are a greedy stupid white rich racist christian conservative American you don't see anything wrong with it and you see anyone who isn't like you as bad.

I love it how he thinks atheism has anything to do with communism. What he means is liberals want our government to provide us citizens some social services and if our government does anything like try to make healthcare affordable then we are socialists.

I can see why Christians and whites are upset. They're losing power.


----------



## hobelim (May 28, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...




If you got the message you would not be deprecating believers for taking the stories literally and you would not be dismissing the stories as nonsense.

Your heart would be filled with compassion.

You would be revealing the real meaning of the stories rationally,  giving life and freedom from captivity to the dead (in hells keeping).


----------



## hobelim (May 28, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> They say atheism is dangerous? Look at the holy war we're in now. Only belief in God can make a suicide bomber. They believe they are doing what God wants.




Only a despicable person, a bonafide devil,  would deceive a gullible person into blowing up themselves along with as many innocent people as they can in the name of God.

A gullible person would only think God wants them to do that because they had been deceived or had been driven insane. The real problem is not a belief in God it is the lack of education and the absence of critical thinking that opens people to falling for the lies of obviously evil, pretentious, greedy,  and corrupt men whose only concern is leading smooth and easy lives off the blood and suffering of their victims, er, followers...whether religious or political.

Belief in God is really not required.You must have noticed that people who follow no religion and do not have any belief in God can be every bit as despicable as the most corrupt religious fundamentalist bullshit artist out there..







sealybobo said:


> Yes, throw the story away. It's a lie. At least admit they are just stories.




lol,,, you just said;

"It's a great story no doubt. I get the message."


make up your mind please.


----------



## hobelim (May 28, 2017)

The way I see it, you have more of a belief in God, karma, honesty, ethics or something than anyone who collects 10% of someone else's income and then tells them that God was wearing diapers on christmas morning so if they want to live forever they have to get down on their knees, pray to a statue,  and eat a cracker for spiritual life..

Who on earth that really believed in God and the final judgement would do that?

Would anyone who really believed in God wage war against all other religions and regard all people as infidels who refuse to submit to the ravings of a hallucinating violent desert warlord who had a thing for prepubescent girls?


* If a man fills his mind with the truth, he does righteously and hates perversity; if he fills it with perversity, he does wickedly and abominates truth.*


----------



## BreezeWood (May 28, 2017)

hobelim said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


hobelim said:


> ... if he casts it with perversity, he does wickedly and abominates truth"



hob, how is someone suppose to respond to a quote that has not been attributed to its source ... the quote is subversive, what is perversion is that anyone that does not worship your 4th century bible.




hobelim said:


> If you got the message you would not be deprecating believers for taking the stories literally and you would not be dismissing the stories as nonsense.



you seem to have a reading comprehension problem when you are asked to verify your stories, individual books ever existed and why the ones chosen in the 4th century were the ones chosen when there is not a literal meaning to any of them or an appendix showing which stories were left out. -

or just show the _original documents_ from when they were "written" - or explain what happened to them, as someone like bond the magnificent may have thought they were by liberals and destroyed them.


how about a sequel to your book explaining just what you believe the non literal messages actually mean ... being supposedly the purpose for the book in the first place. * if it is interpretive how was it meant by the Almighty.


----------



## hobelim (May 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> hob, how is someone suppose to respond to a quote that has not been attributed to its source ... the quote is subversive, what is perversion is that anyone that does not worship your 4th century bible.



It was from the dead sea scrolls, *manual of discipline* under the section :"Of the two spirits in man". from about the year one, not the fourth century.


Manual of Discipline




BreezeWood said:


> how about a sequel to your book explaining just what you believe the non literal messages actually mean ... being supposedly the purpose for the book in the first place. * if it is interpretive how was it meant by the Almighty.




"And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life." revelation 20:12


to everything there is a season.......


----------



## james bond (May 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> oops, I guess those good folks haven't gotten the memo yet.



Is that your big family gathering?  Which one are you?  KKK are Democrats, so they'd be in the mix.



sealybobo said:


> When you are a greedy stupid white rich racist christian conservative American you don't see anything wrong with it and you see anyone who isn't like you as bad.
> 
> I love it how he thinks atheism has anything to do with communism. What he means is liberals want our government to provide us citizens some social services and if our government does anything like try to make healthcare affordable then we are socialists.
> 
> I can see why Christians and whites are upset. They're losing power.



Atheism leads to communism.  Karl Marx says the same thing as the atheists and your liberal leaders who tell you to, "Obey."  Others are the anarchists.  Most of it started with Obama in leading to a divided country.  The liberals and atheists have gone looney tunes.  Look at how you deny the truth.  If you had any brains at all, then you'd realize atheism has nothing to do with religion.  It's a political movement.  There aren't that many who will fall through the cracks with the new Republican medical plan.  Just look at who the socialists were in Germany and we get a picture of what's happening in the United States.






Anarchy in the United States






German National Socialist Party

So, we're fighting a new war against Nazis, Communists and KKK.  Take your pick sealybobo.  Which one are you?


----------



## hobelim (May 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > oops, I guess those good folks haven't gotten the memo yet.
> ...


  Before the revolution,the crowds protesting the abuses of power were not the problem. It was the abuses of the police protecting those tyrants who were abusing power that triggered the revolution.


----------



## james bond (May 28, 2017)

The other group, the good people have to watch are for are the extremist Muslims.  However, I didn't include the atheists in this group unless they were sympathizers.  Are you a sympathizer, sealybobo?  Plenty of liberals are.  Anti-Christian, but pro-Islamic.






I pray that these poor folks have gone to a better place.  Better buy the high-power ammo.

*In Ramadan Massacre, Egyptian Christians Killed for Refusing to Renounce Their Faith in Jesus*
Egyptian Christians Killed for Refusing to Renounce Their Faith in Jesus


----------



## james bond (May 28, 2017)

Is that you with the quotes, BW?  I'd just put the flamethrower on him.


----------



## james bond (May 28, 2017)

And now we start to get a profile of the atheists here:







*Study: Physically Weak Men More Likely to Be Socialists*
Study: Physically Weak Men More Likely to Be Socialists


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...



What is the difference between a strong and a weak agnostic?  

Most people are agnostic, of course that's my opinion since the proof of a supreme being has never been established, and having known and served on committees with couple of priests, even they hold misgivings.

I don't begrudge true believers; I do find the influence of the First Estate (The Clergy) out of place when used by Pols and Pols are used by them; the hypocrisy of the self righteous who judge others so harshly, and choose to support or invoke laws which restrict basic human rights, is an affront to the founders who who banished Authoritarianism and rule by fiat and replaced it by the rule of law.   

The Constitution makes clear the danger religion in the last sentence of Art. VI, and in the First Amendment.  We should heed this warning.


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> And now we start to get a profile of the atheists here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Exaggerated Machismo is a sign of a man who lacks confidence, and is a cover for his weaknesses.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > oops, I guess those good folks haven't gotten the memo yet.
> ...


.


james bond said:


> There aren't that many who will fall through the cracks with the new Republican medical plan.




GOP Health Care Bill Could Leave 24M More Without Coverage By 2026, CBO Says

_However, if the GOP bill were enacted, the uptick of uninsured would begin this year, to 31 million. By 2026, 52 million would be uninsured under the American Health Care Act, which is the first step in the Republican repeal-and-replace plan._


you just can't stand a law that is socially conscious.




hobelim said:


> It was from the dead sea scrolls, *manual of discipline* under the section :"Of the two spirits in man". from about the year one, not the fourth century.



*"Thus far, the spirits of truth and perversity have been struggling in the heart of man. Men have walked both in wisdom and folly. If a man casts his portion with the truth, he does righteously and hates perversity; if he casts it with perversity, he does wickedly and abominates truth"


spirits of truth and perversity ...
*
- has nothing to do with what was posted.

so, those are also copies. where are the original books, the above is an example whether what is written is what was original, according to bond that was their connection to the above - THE WRITTEN TEXT - neither you nor bond are in possession of what you claim to be irrefutable proof for your religions existence. no doubt that is the motivation of bond.


----------



## james bond (May 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > There aren't that many who will fall through the cracks with the new Republican medical plan.
> ...



I just can't trust an article by NPR, especially one posted by you BW.  You voted for Obama.  What cons do not want is socialist healthcare enacted by the USG.  Already our healthcare system is worse because of Obama and the Democrats.  






There should be a way to cover everybody using public healthcare.  We need to have medical insurers who will cover the people who can't afford it or have existing conditions.


----------



## james bond (May 28, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> What is the difference between a strong and a weak agnostic?



>>*Pure Agnostic:* God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.<<

Learn to read or get some glasses.  There is no strong and weak agnostic.  The choices are from Richard Dawkins, Atheist.



Wry Catcher said:


> Exaggerated Machismo is a sign of a man who lacks confidence, and is a cover for his weaknesses.



You better clean your glasses as you didn't read the article.  Do you question evolution now?  Do you use two hands to hold a coffee cup?  Do you wear fake plaid lumberjack shirts?







"Brunel University in London. “Physically Weak Men More Likely to Be Socialists.” (laughing) What timing! I said, “This is a godsend.” It is a woman that’s writing the story here. “Surprise, surprise. Men who are physically weak are more likely to favor socialist policies. An academic study from researchers at Brunel University London assessed 171 men, looking at their height, weight, overall physical strength and bicep circumference, along with their views on redistribution of wealth and income inequality.

“The study, published in the Evolution and Human Behavior journal,” one of my favorite magazines, by the way, right along with Prairie Farmer. The survey “found that weaker men were more likely to favor socialist policies than stronger men. Brunel University’s Michael Price believes this may be a product of evolutionary psychology.” Listen to this. Dr. Price said, “This is about our Stone Age brains, in a modern society. Our minds evolved in environments where strength was a big determinant of success.

“If you find yourself in a body not threatened by other males, if you feel you can win competitions for status, then maybe you start thinking inequality is pretty good.” See how this works? Strong, tough, self-reliant, studly, manly guys don’t believe in equality. You think you have a headline, you think you have a story that may really be on to something and then they totally blow it with their own analysis. Now, this story hit home for me obviously because of the circumstance that happened up there in Montana. But I myself — and I’ve mentioned this before — I imagine a lot of people will not remember me having said it because I didn’t make a big deal of it, didn’t do a whole segment on it."


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > What is the difference between a strong and a weak agnostic?
> ...





james bond said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > What is the difference between a strong and a weak agnostic?
> ...



Mea culpa.  That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Why don't you trust NPR?  Which programming offends you?  Have you ever listened to any of the programming?  I suspect you are only echoing the meme promulgated by the Right Wing?


----------



## sealybobo (May 28, 2017)

hobelim said:


> The way I see it, you have more of a belief in God, karma, honesty, ethics or something than anyone who collects 10% of someone else's income and then tells them that God was wearing diapers on christmas morning so if they want to live forever they have to get down on their knees, pray to a statue,  and eat a cracker for spiritual life..
> 
> Who on earth that really believed in God and the final judgement would do that?
> 
> ...


That's just it. People can be convinced to do great things in the name of God. People can also do horrible things in the name of God. Yes people who do suicide bombs truly believe God will reward them.

I'm glad the Christians lie doesn't encourage violence although Christians did own slaves and wiped out indians after stealing their land, so we do see Christians have no problem with murder and slavery when it suits them.

If you lived in the middle East you wouldn't see Americans or Westerners as innocent. To them we are evil and the devil's. Who said so? Why god of course. It's all in the Koran. How could that possibly be made up? And lots of nice things in the Koran, right?


----------



## hobelim (May 29, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > The way I see it, you have more of a belief in God, karma, honesty, ethics or something than anyone who collects 10% of someone else's income and then tells them that God was wearing diapers on christmas morning so if they want to live forever they have to get down on their knees, pray to a statue,  and eat a cracker for spiritual life..
> ...




If people are convinced to do horrible things in the name of God it is other people who have convinced them, not any God.

If anyone is convinced to do good things in the name of God it is someone else who convinced them as well.


If you took a group of 8 year olds who have never heard of religion and have not yet learned much about science or history and tell them that God impregnated a virgin and became a baby on christmas,  most if not all will believe.

If you took a group of 18 year olds who have never heard about religion but have learned the about the nature of reality and the difference between what is possible and impossible and tell them that God impregnated a virgin and became a baby on christmas morning,  most if not all will not believe.


The problem is not religion, it is the lack of education and the absence of critical thinking among believers who have confused obstinate stupidity with faith,  child abuse with religious instruction, and false teachers, sorcerers,  and con artists with holy men.


----------



## hobelim (May 29, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> so, those are also copies. where are the original books



They are most likely being preserved by the Israel Antiquities Authority.









BreezeWood said:


> - neither you nor bond are in possession of what you claim to be irrefutable proof for your religions existence.




I do not follow any religion. You must have mistaken me for someone else.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 29, 2017)

hobelim said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > so, those are also copies. where are the original books
> ...


.


hobelim said:


> I do not follow any religion. You must have mistaken me for someone else.




that's odd because you are always quoting the various bibles and interpreting their scriptures ....






the above is not written in American, how does that work if you are suppose to read the text to be religious ...




Wry Catcher said:


> Why don't you trust NPR?



_NATIONAL_ _PUBLIC_ .radio.

coonbottom can not stand certain words, NATIONAL - PUBLIC and both are in the title of the media they also can not stand ... when it is not FOX news. -

because there is no money to be made and everyone working together frightens them.


----------



## hobelim (May 29, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > I do not follow any religion. You must have mistaken me for someone else.
> ...



Odd indeed.




BreezeWood said:


> the above is not written in American, how does that work if you are suppose to read the text to be religious .




Like I said, I do not follow any religion.

Sheesh...


----------



## sealybobo (May 29, 2017)

hobelim said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


You have a personal relationship with God, right? I used to believe that too


----------



## hobelim (May 29, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Nah, my beliefs are not about reciting some magic words and then having an imaginary friend.

Lets just say that I am intimately acquainted with the essence of life. I read all of the stories, I understand the teaching. Nothing is hidden from me. I always do exactly as God commands and dwell in the sanctuary of God.


----------



## sealybobo (May 29, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


You always do as god commands? Always?


----------



## hobelim (May 29, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


 Yes, once you understand the hidden subjects and conform to the deeper implications only alluded to by the figurative language used in the written law its really very easy. do this , don't do that.


Most of the law is simply about not doing something inherently stupid. No positive action or work required at all.. How hard is that?


If you were walking down the street and a zombie offered you a piece of his own rotting flesh for you to eat would you have a hard time saying no thanks?

Would it be difficult for you to refrain from swallowing the teachings of unclean creatures that do not ruminate? How hard it is to not get down on your hands and or knees before a lifeless object, the work of human hands? How hard is it to not ask favors from a block of wood or seek guidance from ghosts?  How hard is it really to not bear false witness, mislead your neighbors,  and not murder by lying in the name of God?

Don't you already willingly conform to all these things? Or do you feel burdened and oppressed by God establishing law that promotes good mental health and peaceful coexistence?


do think its impossible for people to learn from their mistakes? Die and then come back to life?

You said you once went for that specious personal relationship with Jesus bs and all you had to do was recite a few written lines,  confess to being a worthless piece of shit and apologize to God for being human to be saved?

How can you possibly not believe that the dead can come back to life?


----------



## james bond (May 30, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Mea culpa. That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?



It must be my exaggerated Machismo (sarcasm).



Wry Catcher said:


> Why don't you trust NPR? Which programming offends you? Have you ever listened to any of the programming? I suspect you are only echoing the meme promulgated by the Right Wing?



You pegged me wrong.  I'm an independent and a contrarian now.  (A contrarian isn't one who goes against the majority, but one who thinks for himeself.)  Used to be slightly to the left of center, then moved to slightly to right of center as I got older.  The Democrats are too extreme leftist now if Hillary Clinton was their candidate.  I've met Nancy Pelosi and when she was younger, she wasn't as extreme left as she is now.  The only Democrat I'll support and work for is Dianne Feinstein because she knew my father.  I suppose one has to be perceived extreme left or right now to get elected.  I can't get behind libertarians because they're not loyal.  Their ideas for small government may be good, but they're unreliable.  It's too hard to talk with liberals even if they're slightly to the left of center now.  Maybe the last time they had a "decent" candidate was Barack Obama before the election in 2008.  However, he turned out to be very wrong for the country.  The slightly to the left of center liberals will end up voting more left.  Their minds are pretty much made up.  The only liberals I can talk with are the independents.       

I've listened to NPR and CNN when they first started and still do (forced to).  I used to donate to public broadcasting on a regular basis.  CNN is piped into the employees fitness center, smaller cafeteria and break room at Apple.  We listened to NPR in my previous van pool.  Both have become more biased mainstream news and opinion circa 2011.

So, it doesn't offend me.  It just voices liberal-biased news and opinion.  I'm not for USG sponsored healthcare because I don't think federal government should be in that business.  I favor smaller government and have more states power.  With healthcare, I realize it has to be federal.  Maybe a public corporation can run it.  There would have to be some changes to laws and government support for them to take on the high-risk insurable such as preexisting conditions and the poor.  (I get it's not fair for a family when grave illness strikes any family member.  It could wipe out their finances from which they cannot recover.)  However, everyone would have to participate.  Thus, there will have to be some government involved such as they're already involved with Medicare.


----------



## Wry Catcher (May 30, 2017)

james bond said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Mea culpa. That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?
> ...



My dad new Feinstein too, he worked at the City Hall in SF during her time as a member of the Board of Sups and Mayor.  He like her legs.  NPR may seem liberal to a conservative, but the varied programming is IMO well balanced, the interviews especially, and when contrasted to Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage, and others of their genre (conservatives) there is no doubt that NPR discusses all sides of the issues and all are given time and a fair hearing.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 30, 2017)

james bond said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Mea culpa. That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?
> ...


.....................................
.


james bond said:


> You pegged me wrong. I'm an independent and a contrarian now. (A contrarian isn't one who goes against the majority, but one who thinks for himeself.) Used to be slightly to the left of center, then moved to slightly to right of center as I got older. The Democrats are too extreme leftist now if Hillary Clinton was their candidate.





james bond said:


> What cons do not want is socialist healthcare enacted by the USG. Already our healthcare system is worse because of Obama and the Democrats.




the only reason you are discussing healthcare, beyond your own is because it was intractably brought to the public attention that now requires remediation. as in contrast to the previous administration that did nothing at all.




james bond said:


> Maybe a public corporation can run it.



run what ...


----------



## james bond (May 30, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> the only reason you are discussing healthcare, beyond your own is because it was intractably brought to the public attention that now requires remediation. as in contrast to the previous administration that did nothing at all.



Too much quote mining.



BreezeWood said:


> run what ...



I should run my own CO2 medical marijuana extraction lab called Heavenly Scents.  You get wax, shatter, tuna can hash, CBD, CBN, THC, hash oil, and an assortment of cartridges for 50% while your insurance pays the other 50%.  Takes care of all your ailments + alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos.  At least, you'll go with a smile on your face if you're too far gone.  Don't have primo insurance?  Never fear, we got the DIY roll your own doobie pack and edibles.  You'll find a plan that fits your lifestyle.  We take care of everybody.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 30, 2017)

james bond said:


> I should run my own CO2 medical marijuana extraction lab called Heavenly Scents. You get wax, shatter, tuna can hash, CBD, CBN, THC, hash oil, and an assortment of cartridges for 50% while your insurance pays the other 50%. Takes care of all your ailments + alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos. At least, you'll go with a smile on your face if you're too far gone. Don't have primo insurance? Never fear, we got the DIY roll your own doobie pack and edibles. You'll find a plan that fits your lifestyle. We take care of everybody.




thankfully we have the USG.





james bond said:


> ... alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos.



that's not a joke for many with chronic pain and as a remedy for certain ailments but why bother ...



> Florida Legislature Can't Agree on Medical Marijuana
> 
> Rules to enact Florida’s medical marijuana amendment went up in smoke on Friday after the Legislature failed to pass a bill.



_But it collapsed on Friday when the chambers could not agree on the number of retail dispensaries that a medical marijuana treatment center can operate.
_

states have no business setting national standards for Health Care.


----------



## james bond (May 31, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > I should run my own CO2 medical marijuana extraction lab called Heavenly Scents. You get wax, shatter, tuna can hash, CBD, CBN, THC, hash oil, and an assortment of cartridges for 50% while your insurance pays the other 50%. Takes care of all your ailments + alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos. At least, you'll go with a smile on your face if you're too far gone. Don't have primo insurance? Never fear, we got the DIY roll your own doobie pack and edibles. You'll find a plan that fits your lifestyle. We take care of everybody.
> ...



Ack.  However, again you have shown your true colors of being a dirkwut.  My Heavenly Scents and I will conquer the world because of its quality, safety and integrity.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 31, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> Ack. However, again you have shown your true colors of being a dirkwut. My Heavenly Scents and I will conquer the world because of its quality, safety and integrity.



sorry, conbottom your not the first in that line however probably the only one that failed to support the Affordable Care Act to allow those types of enterprises to operate freely in the public domain. -

and again as always thinking only for yourself.


----------



## james bond (May 31, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



What part of quality, safety and integrity did you not get?  Of course, it's to help those with health issues and it helps recreational users avoid jail time or fines as well as provide a cleaner, better and safer product.  We do not want to violate the law as there are still felony and misdemeanor laws to limit possession amount and personal cultivation.

Also, your second link above argues FOR medical marijuana.  It's safer than opioid like I said.  Big Pharma just wants time to figure out how they can make money with it.  Your first link is just a technicality and we've seen the legislation move forward.  Big Alcohol should take a hit, too.  I can't stop you from abusing OxyContin and booze.  You lose again, bunky.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...te-passes-medical-marijuana-implementing-bill


----------



## james bond (May 31, 2017)

I would think this is the typical internet atheist type.






"A New Hampshire police department has issued a public service announcement with an odd mug shot after a man was arrested with marijuana in his car.

Hampstead police said in a release Monday, "as a public service announcement — it is illegal to possess recreational marijuana in New Hampshire, even if you only 'smoke it in Massachusetts.'"

WMUR-TV reports (Danville man caught with pot in car, police say ) the announcement came after the arrest of 27-year-old Selket Taylor, who was pulled over for using his cellphone while driving.

Police say they arrested Taylor after they saw he had a bag of marijuana in a cup holder.

Taylor has been charged with possession of a controlled drug, transporting a controlled drug in a motor vehicle and use of an electronic mobile device. In his arrest photo, Taylor is sticking out his tongue while his eyes are closed and arms are crossed."

Police issue annoyed press release after pot arrest

If he had a vape pen, then he probably wouldn't been arrested but ticketed over the cell phone use while driving.


----------



## BreezeWood (May 31, 2017)

james bond said:


> I would think this is the typical internet atheist type.



who cares what you think ...


and the real culprit







EarthLink  - Top News
*
GOP health plan would be costly for those with coverage gaps*

_Under the bill, people who go without insurance for even just a couple of months — whether because of a job loss, a divorce, a serious illness that leaves them unable to work, or some other reason — could face sharply higher premiums if they try to sign up again for coverage, especially if they have a pre-existing condition. Some might find themselves priced out of the market.

_
all the christians want is something for themselves, no matter the cost to others. pretending they do not - "know what they are doing".


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 5, 2017)

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question.  Are you or are you not a theist.  You either believe or you don't.  Then came along agnostics.  They allowed people a 3rd option.  And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion.  In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems.  Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?


----------



## james bond (Jun 6, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question.  Are you or are you not a theist.  You either believe or you don't.  Then came along agnostics.  They allowed people a 3rd option.  And then there was light.
> 
> People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion.  In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems.  Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.
> 
> ...



Heh.  Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 6, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question.  Are you or are you not a theist.  You either believe or you don't.  Then came along agnostics.  They allowed people a 3rd option.  And then there was light.
> ...


Great that's your opinion not based on facts logic reason or science.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 6, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question.  Are you or are you not a theist.  You either believe or you don't.  Then came along agnostics.  They allowed people a 3rd option.  And then there was light.
> ...


If that's your best comeback no wonder we're losing our religion.

This is why Christians have a hard time converting people here. They need to get you alone to privately guilt and fear people into believing. Brainwashing. Make a bad argument here people call you on it.


----------



## james bond (Jun 6, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I said you were wrong agnosticbobo because we're gaining our religion.  Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 6, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.










you might start by defending your own values bond ... the "good folks" might be a little surprised.








you take to seriously, having a little fun.


----------



## james bond (Jun 7, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Unfortunately, it's not fun when people have taken to greed due to seeing all the bling, covetousness seeing all the beautiful women and men, illicit drugs, or the bizarre hedonistic lifestyle that we are all tempted to want.  The temptation of the ToK still hasn't gone away.  The truth is it was never meant to go away.  If Adam and Eve didn't fall, the ToK would've still been there except Cain wouldn't killed Abel.  However, we can't deal with alternative endings, we only have now to deal with and atheism and evolution doesn't promote anything but Communism, i.e. corrupt government power leading to mass genocide, the promotion of the Hollywood values or supreme selfishness.

How belief in evolution changes our behavior
"“If there is no Creator, if everything springs ultimately from natural causes, and if this life is all there is, why *ought* I do/not do certain things, or act/not act in certain ways?”; “If man is merely the latest in a long chain of animals, why should he be viewed as different from any other animal?” These, and other similar questions, inevitably arise from a belief in evolution.

But if a person freely chooses to believe in evolution, what, then, are the *implications* of that belief? And how does that belief translate into the reality of daily living? Though it is rare to see evolutionists actually admit it, the simple fact of the matter is that belief in evolution produces a society that is not a very pleasant one in which to live. Several years ago, British evolutionist Richard Dawkins [who has described himself as “a fairly militant atheist, with a fair degree of hostility toward religion” (see Bass, 1990, p. 86)] authored a book titled _The Selfish Gene_, in which he set forth his theory of genetic determinism. In summarizing the basic thesis of the book, Dawkins said: “You are for nothing. You are here to propagate your selfish genes. There is no higher purpose in life” (Bass, 1990, p. 60). Dawkins explained:

I am not advocating a morality based on evolution. I am saying how things have evolved. I am not saying how we humans morally ought to behave.... My own feeling is that *a human society based simply on the gene’s law of universal ruthless selfishness would be a very nasty society in which to live*. But unfortunately, however much we may deplore something, it does not stop it being true (1989, pp. 2,3, emp. added).
Dawkins is correct in his assessment that a society based on the truthfulness of evolution would be “a very nasty” place to live. But why is this so? The answer has to do with the implications of belief in evolution."

The Implications of Evolution

What floats your boat to the evolutionists out there?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


He said he's not trying to base a morality on religion. Religion is unnecessary as we have secular laws


----------



## james bond (Jun 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



smh.  Atheists are wrong again.  Never heard of sharia law?

Then the people of the USA believe that the US is a Christian nation.  This is the reason why atheists are trying undermine Christianity in order to promote Communism.  I'm referring to moral guidance here, not our laws pertaining to criminal, civil and business matters.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (_The Constitution of the United States of America, The Bill of Rights, Amendment I_)."

Evidence of Christian morality
"If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law” (_The Constitution of the United States of America, Article 1, Section 7_)."


----------



## james bond (Jun 8, 2017)

Speaking of secular, I heard about Secular Humanism for the first time.

Secular humanism is a philosophy that states human beings are the most important figures, and that social problems are best solved without the involvement of a religious doctrine, specifically Christianity.  People who are secular humanists purport to focus on ways to better themselves and human beings as a whole.  The American Humanist Association's motto on the main page of their website is "good without a God".  Christians view secular humanists, like atheists as a whole, as self-centered.

What's hilarious is the group seems to have kicked its founder out over disagreements on how to best run the group.  The current group may want more aggressive and militant posture.

So much for something today's atheists can agree upon.  In contrast to the Bible, the publication for atheists that have stood the test of time is The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx.  LOL BreezeWood #BreezeWoodGetPwn3dAgain.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



We all take Xmas off.  That doesn't mean we are all Christians.  We all take Good Friday off too.  Doesn't mean we are Christians.  But yes I see your point.  This countries roots are in Christianity.  I'm just saying we are no longer a Christian nation.  That is the main religion but we are a melting pot of all the religions.  And I don't give a damn what you Christians think about morality just like I don't care what Scientologists, Born Agains, Catholics, Muslims, Mormons and Jehova's believe.

Evidence we are not a Christian nation.  Is abortion legal?  Do we teach evolution in school? 

I heard Carl Sagan talking the other day on a commercial.  How we need to take care of this planet.  It's the only one we have.  This is the kind of morality us atheists have.  What's funny is you conservatives love Darwin when it comes to free market capitalism but you don't like the concept when it comes to the creation of our planet and how life got started here.  I'd call that cognitive dissonance.  

And I hear many parents teaching their children morality without ever bringing up god.  Maybe they do the brainwashing in private but I see them teaching their kids without scaring them with hell.  

Ethics Without Gods | American Atheists


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> Speaking of secular, I heard about Secular Humanism for the first time.
> 
> Secular humanism is a philosophy that states human beings are the most important figures, and that social problems are best solved without the involvement of a religious doctrine, specifically Christianity.  People who are secular humanists purport to focus on ways to better themselves and human beings as a whole.  The American Humanist Association's motto on the main page of their website is "good without a God".  Christians view secular humanists, like atheists as a whole, as self-centered.
> 
> ...



Which bible has stood the test of time?  Which version do you read?  LOL.

And excuse me but did you just say secular humanism says humans are the most important figures?  Isn't that what Christianity believes?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you think that a god created the universe all for us?  And didn't god put everything on earth for us according to your religion?  And didn't this god created a heaven for your spirit after you die where you yourself become a god and never get sick and live happy forever?

Get the fuck out of here with your securlary humanism bullshit.  LOL.

Atheists aren't a group.  We only agree on one thing.  God doesn't exist.  No offense to him if he does but he has never revealed himself so....

Consider this.  If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> Speaking of secular, I heard about Secular Humanism for the first time.
> 
> Secular humanism is a philosophy that states human beings are the most important figures, and that social problems are best solved without the involvement of a religious doctrine, specifically Christianity.  People who are secular humanists purport to focus on ways to better themselves and human beings as a whole.  The American Humanist Association's motto on the main page of their website is "good without a God".  Christians view secular humanists, like atheists as a whole, as self-centered.
> 
> ...



sec·u·lar hu·man·ism
_noun_

humanism, with regard in particular to the belief that humanity is capable of morality and self-fulfillment without belief in God.
So without god you would be an evil sick sonofabitch?  Interesting.  I wouldn't.  

*People need to believe in god / Without god people will do bad things.*
Argument from adverse consequences [2].

Just because something is perceived as having good consequences if it is true, does not actually make it true.

The fact that religiously free societies with a proportionally large number of atheists are generally more peaceful [2][3] than otherwise is evidence this perception is incorrect.

See also: Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being (a must read).

_“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”_ – Steven Weinberg


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> Speaking of secular, I heard about Secular Humanism for the first time.
> 
> Secular humanism is a philosophy that states human beings are the most important figures, and that social problems are best solved without the involvement of a religious doctrine, specifically Christianity.  People who are secular humanists purport to focus on ways to better themselves and human beings as a whole.  The American Humanist Association's motto on the main page of their website is "good without a God".  Christians view secular humanists, like atheists as a whole, as self-centered.
> 
> ...



You are making bad arguments that we've already answered here Why there is no god

*Atheists can’t know the difference between right and wrong.*
Note: The following answer is a generalization. Atheists are not a homogeneous group. There is no formal moral code resulting from a lack of belief. Atheists can and do subscribe to any number of ethical systems, or may simply decide such things for themselves.

Atheists generally derive their sense of right and wrong from an innate and reasoned understanding of which actions contribute towards a society most hospitable to continual well-being and personal fulfillment. They are accountable to their own conscience and to society at large. They do not require an absolute standard in order to make distinctions between the possible effects of their actions.

Atheists are attuned to the here and now. Their ethics are not derived from some reward or punishment after death, but from a rational consideration of the consequences in this life.  Impulsive desires are compassionately, empathetically and intelligently weighed against long term personal and social goals.

As social animals that have evolved to want and give love, to have freedom and security, we have learned that we are safer, stronger and more prosperous in a successful group. Crimes are inherently anti-social behaviours that introduce needless risk and are antithetical to the long-term needs and goals of a happy, stable society.

See also: Enlightened Self-Interest, Secular Ethics, Secular Humanism, Secular Morality, Compassion, Empathy, Sympathy, Conscience, Morality – Good without Gods (a must watch) Sam Harris – Science and Morality (a must watch), Trust, Morality and Oxytocin (a must watch), Christopher Hitchens on Atheist morality.

_I have no need for religion, I have a conscience.

#5 here Why there is no god

_


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

*Why do Christians pick and choose what to believe as the word of God?*
The Anglican Church allows women and homosexuals as ordained ministers, hell fire fundamentalist factions spew eternal damnation for gay lifestyle, Protestants can divorce, Catholics can have an annulment but not necessarily re-marry. How can Christians profess adherence to the "word of God", then interpret that word any way they please? Hypothetically - would God be confused by all this selective interpretation? Either he said it or he didn't.

I know lots of Christians who think gays are ok.  They think non christians go to heaven.  They don't believe it's a sin to jack off thinking about the neighbors wife.  I could go on and on about how most Christians cherry pick what they believe based on who they are.  If they know gay people, then being gay isn't that big of a sin.  But ask a right wing wack job and they'll tell you it's a sure way to go to hell.  

I eat meat on good friday.  I don't go to confession.  I don't believe Satan exists so I don't renounce him because I don't think he's real.


----------



## james bond (Jun 8, 2017)

tldr.  Wow, sealybobo.  Five-posts-in-a-row over secular humanism or the like.

What about the notion of atheists being selfish?  Today, we have the popular selfie.  I'm not saying it's just for the atheists as we all do it.  However, some do it too often or are focused on it.  Usually, to post on social media.  Is this a trend because of atheism?

Did an atheist die here or what?
Man taking selfie on Germany autobahn killed after getting hit by car


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> tldr.  Wow, sealybobo.  Five-posts-in-a-row over secular humanism or the like.
> 
> What about the notion of atheists being selfish?  Today, we have the popular selfie.  I'm not saying it's just for the atheists as we all do it.  However, some do it too often or are focused on it.  Usually, to post on social media.  Is this a trend because of atheism?
> 
> ...



I know losing our religion isn't all good.  I think overall we will be better off without it because reality is always better than fiction but I do worry about the results of losing our religion.  For example, think about all the preachers who go to war to help out when soldiers get blown up?  Not a lot of atheists providing comfort to wounded soldiers.  And charity will suffer.  But consider charities are mostly all rackets.  Maybe if we stop funding rackets then we will eventually getting around to solving the problems we have like poverty.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)




----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Check out Judah


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Every culture that we have a record of has asked the very same question: How did the world come to be? How did people and life come to be? Taken within this broader cultural context, it's no surprise that modern-day scientists are as fascinated with the question of origins as were the shamans of our distant ancestors.

From Myth To Science: Can We Make Sense Of The Origin Of All Things?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Religions across the globe and across time have dealt with the question of the origin of all things in a similar way. (An exception is Buddhism, which we will leave aside for now.) To create the world, with all its material things, there needs to be a stage where things exist — space — and an account where their histories unfold — time. To create space and time and the things within them, religions invoke deities capable of existing outside the confines of space and time — and with the power to create things. So, by definition, to be a god is to transcend the confines of space and time, and to exist beyond the boundaries that define our existence. The gods, or God, do not respect the laws of nature that rule material and living things.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> But yes I see your point. This countries roots are in Christianity. I'm just saying we are no longer a Christian nation.



_*
- I'm just saying we are no longer a Christian nation.
*_

wrong sealy, we are hopefully no longer the 4th century version of the true 1st century enlightenment as a nation yet it is the original 1st century realization yet to be honored the nation continues to aspire including the proper rationalization of the Almighty and the purity of the Everlasting. - and as an epilogue, good riddance to that book.

the paradox is the missing link the 1st century represented in the evolution of humanity that is the inclusion of both secular and Spiritual as a harmonious Being through the proper Triumph to replicate the Everlasting while living on planet Earth, the true 1st century revelation.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 9, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I guess I was wrong


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 9, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> I guess I was wrong




... the US was never a christian nation.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



The U.S. was founded as a haven for persecuted Christians and has always been a Christian nation.  And because it was founded so that Christians would be able to worship as they chose without interference of the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Pope, those of other faiths or of no faith are also able to practice their religion or beliefs without interference and in peace so long as they did not violate the rights of others.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


The founders no doubt took into consideration the non believers. And let's not pretend all the founders were christians for example Christians today say no Christians owned slaves. A real christian wouldn't own another human. Christians never take credit for bad Christians. They always say "well he couldn't have been a real christian because Jesus said..." 

Or are you finally admitting that Christians owned slaves?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


If eventually 51% of us go Muslim will you say we are a Muslim nation? What will you say then?

So we are not a christian nation. That's insulting to the rest of us. The brainwashing is over. Gone are the days we assume everyone believes a god is real or exists.

Lots of atheists in America. Lots of Muslims too.

Do you know what Mormons believe? That's not Christianity. It's a spin-off


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 10, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



They were all Christian or adherents of Christian values.  None of the founders condoned slavery but yes, some of them did own slaves that were part of family plantations.  I haven't been able to find where they actually purchased slaves themselves and all believed slavery should be abolished.

Washington for instance freed all his slaves in his will but not during his lifetime as it was illegal in Virginia for him to do so.

Be careful about judging people more than 200 years ago by the culture and standards of the 21st century.  The Founders put the policy into place to gradually end the practice of slavery in the USA.  They prohibited the slave trade, i.e. bringing new slaves into the country, and they made sure that no new states forming out of U.S. territories would be slave states.   That was all they could do constitutionally, yet most of the slave states had ended slavery on their own by the Civil War.  Had there been no Civil War, those states would almost certainly have ended the practice on their own by the end of the 19th Century.

But yes, Christians owned slavery and it was also via the pressure and policies pushed by Christians that ended the practice.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 10, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> The U.S. was founded as a haven for persecuted Christians and has always been a Christian nation. And because it was founded so that Christians would be able to worship as they chose without interference of the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Pope, those of other faiths or of no faith are also able to practice their religion or beliefs without interference and in peace so long as they did not violate the rights of others.




... _for persecuted Christians_


"persecuted christians" translates to protestants, and were being persecuted because they were not considered christians by "christians" - they were the liberals of the time that simply cared to worship in their own way intuitively a rebellion against the 4th century christian bible.

political persecution and opportunity; owning land a new beginning were equally important to the early settlers - as religion.



History of religion in the United States - Wikipedia

_*Historians debate how influential Christianity was in the era of the American Revolution. Many of the founding fathers were active in a local church; some of them, such as Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington had Deist sentiments.


European Immigration to America: 1600's, 1700's, 1800's and 1900's ***

History of European Immigration to America: The French Immigrants
History of European Immigration to America: The Dutch Immigrants
History of European Immigration to America: The Swedish Immigrants
History of European Immigration to America: The German Immigrants
History of European Immigration to America: The Scottish Immigrants
History of European Immigration to America: The Scots-Irish Immigrants
History of European Immigration to America: The Irish Immigrants
History of Eastern European Immigration to America for kids: The Eastern European Immigrants
*_
many of the above were migration (some later) for opportunity with little regard for religion ...
_*
*_
if the US were a christian nation it would be written in the Constitution - instead and because of the diversity, the US in its Constitution is a secular nation in support of multi religious freedom as written in the 1st Amendment ...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


the first sentence of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution is the proof the US is not a christian nation but a secular one.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


And if there are atheists now there were atheists back then.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 11, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I know the religious history, but it is irrelevant to persecution of Christians here and now.  

And the 1st Amendment is precisely why we are a Christian nation but beholden to no particular doctrine or authority.  But anybody with any grounding in the founding documents knows that this nation was founded by Christians on Christian principles as a Christian nation.

And because it was,  people of all faiths and no faith have enjoyed the liberty to be who and what they are.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


So it was Christians who murdered indians and enslaved blacks?

It is true most Americans back then we're Christians but like today you under estimate how many non believers there were.

Just like today


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



And I think you are deliberately missing the point.  So there we are.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


No I concur your point is accurate.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

If there is a god I suspect I worship him like a human should. Like all humans I'm not perfect but lordy knows I try


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> But anybody with any grounding in the founding documents knows that this nation was founded by Christians on Christian principles as a Christian nation.




you can romanticize all you like a modern presumption for christianity (by christians) however at the time of its ratification the US Constitution purposely prohibits establishing a national religion and in keeping with the tenor of the Revolution made the United States a secular nation.

christianity's history of persecution including the relative time period was the essential reason and _means_ for its exclusion.








nothing religious in the Great Seal - even the ostentatious Pledge of Allegiance "Under God" and the Treasury "In God We Trust" - are generic references. ... too bad for you christian -

and why christians believe a country should be guided by their awful, forged 4th century bible is reason enough to prevent their ever amending the Constitution to fabricate it as they have the true Religion of the Almighty.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > But anybody with any grounding in the founding documents knows that this nation was founded by Christians on Christian principles as a Christian nation.
> ...


All I need to see is the divide between born agains and Catholics to realize why we can never officially be a christian nation. These two very large groups agree on very little.

And what does it mean to say we are a christian nation? It certainly doesn't mean we collectively agree Jesus is the Messiah. That alone means we are not


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


How can we be a christian nation when so many of us don't even believe a god exists? What about Jews who don't believe Jesus was the son of God? What about Muslims Hindu and budhist?

I can't agree. If this is my country too then this is not a christian nation that I happen to live in.

We may have been founded by Christians and we may be majority christian nation but no court of law convicts me of breaking any christian crimes


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


I suspect some of the founders were atheists and the founders that were religious understood not everyone believes as they do. So they all agreed on common ground. Thou shall not kill. Agreed. Against the law. Thou shall not cover the neighbors wife. 

One of the founders must have been shagging his neighbors wife.

Thou shall not lie. The founders were politicians. They lied.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



We are a Christian nation because we were founded by Christians who intended that we all be governed by Christian values for a population that was largely Christian.  They saw among those Christian values that the people themselves would govern and that there would be no requirements or punishment put on people of faith because of that faith by the central government.  The liberty to believe and worship as we choose was the centermost reason the first American colonies were established and is the reason that The United States, at the time it became the USA, was the only nation to guarantee religious liberty to all, Christian and any other.  Well over 90% of us believe in God in some respect.

We are a Christian nation because a large majority of Americans profess the Christian faith even as America respects and does not interfere with the faith or beliefs of those who are not Christian.  It's a good deal for everybody.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 11, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


And when 51% of us we will be a Muslim nation that respects all other religions.

Or we could just be a secular nation where you can worship or not.

We are not a christian nation. That's insulting to the rest of us. Just because someone believes in some version of God doesn't make them a christian.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> We are not a christian nation. That's insulting to the rest of us. Just because someone believes in some version of God doesn't make them a christian.




that's been their opinion since the late 4th century when they wrote their book in their own lightness irregardless its non validity or wherever they have lived and their history of repression since that time underscores their contempt for the true religion they so abandoned to forge their own.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Is Israel a Jewish nation even though 25 percent of its population is non Jewish?  Is it insulting to the Arabs and Christians who live there to call Israel a Jewish nation?

Are any of the 70 countries designated Islamic nations being insulting to the people within their populations who are not Islamic?

If you ask anybody to list the "Christian nations" in the world the list would include most or all of Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and several African countries.


sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



It is insulting to neither Christians nor Muslims or anybody else that is not Jewish that Israel is referred to as a Jewish nation even though 25% of the population is neither Jewish nor subscribes to that faith.

It is insulting to neither Christian nor Muslims or Jews or anybody else who is not Buddhist when Tibet is referred to as a Buddhist nation because most Tibetans subscribe to Buddhism.

India is the birthplace of four of the world's great religions but is now roughly 80% Hindu and if anybody was asked to name a Hindu nation, everybody would almost certainly name India.  And that is not insulting to people of other faiths or no faith who live there.

It is insulting to neither Christians or Jews or any other people that 70 nations of the world are referred to as Muslim nations, and I am pretty sure those of other faiths or no faith are not insulted when most of the nations of Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and many in Africa are referred to as Christian countries.

Well over 70% of Americans subscribe to some form of Christianity.  That makes us a Christian nation even though there is no official religion as there is no official religion in most of those other predominantly Christian nations.  When Christians are no longer a strong majority here, then we will no longer be a Christian nation.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 12, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



No, but Israel is a Jewish nation.  It literally is one.  Just like Iran is a Muslim nation.  America is not a Christian nation.  There is no such thing as a Christian nation, is there?  Can you name any other Christian nations?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 12, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Now I get what you are saying.  I agree.  But isn't that funny there is no countries that consider themselves a Christian country?

I found this interesting




Can you believe there are that many of us atheists in the world?  That's great!!!


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I think most citizens of most predominantly Christian nations would say their country is a Christian nation.  To say that does not imply that Christianity is the OFFICIAL religion.  The Founders were very careful to ensure that the USA would never have an OFFICIAL religion because then there would be constant war over which Christian denomination or sect would be the authority and there would always be the danger that if the Catholics or Presbyterians or whomever got the upper hand, they would impose their doctrine on all.  There can be no liberty when the people are punished for the beliefs they hold.

I think most Christian nations don't go out of their way to describe themselves that way because Christianity by its very nature is mostly inclusive and those embracing it understand that when they deny religious liberty to others, they put their own liberties at risk.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



And yet there are more Christians in the USA than there are Jews in Israel.  Most of the Palestinians--the people and their descendants who left Israel on the theory that the Arab aggressors would prevail and then they would return to a Jew free territory--were not allowed to return when the Jews won that battle.  Had that not been the case, then the Jews would likely be the minority in Israel now.

But you are right that Israel was created by the U.N. and designated as a safe haven for Jews in the wake of the Holocaust.  It was to be the first time that the Jewish people would be in charge of their own fate and destiny and would be allowed to be who and what they are with impunity since Pompey the Great conquered Jerusalem and made it part of the Roman Empire in 63 B.C.


----------



## james bond (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > tldr.  Wow, sealybobo.  Five-posts-in-a-row over secular humanism or the like.
> ...



I don't think a Pope and his fans is a narcissitic nor dangerous selfie.  He is male, but not an atheist.  Most atheists are male (fact).

However, we have the atheists types such as,

"Love ‘em or hate ‘em, selfies are harmless fun — right? Maybe not. According to new research, selfies can say a lot about your personality, and not in a good way.

In a recent Ohio State University study, men who posted more photos of themselves online scored higher in measures of narcissism and psychopathy.

The researchers asked 800 men between the ages of 18 and 40 to fill out an online questionnaire asking about their photo posting habits on social media. The survey included questions about how often they posted photos of themselves on social media, and about whether and how they edited photos before posting. The participants were also asked to fill out standard questionnaires measuring anti-social behaviors and self-objectification (the tendency to overly focus on one’s appearance).

The researchers found that posting more photos was correlated with both narcissism and psychopathy. Editing photos, however, was only associated with narcissism, and not psychopathy. Narcissism measures inflated self-image (often motivated by underlying insecurity), while psychopathy involves a lack of empathy and impulsive behavior.

“That makes sense because psychopathy is characterized by impulsivity,” the study’s lead author, Jesse Fox, said in a statement. “They are going to snap the photos and put them online right away. They want to see themselves. They don’t want to spend time editing.”

These findings don’t mean that men who post selfies are actually narcissists or psychopaths, it _does_ mean that they scored higher than others in these anti-social traits, although they were still within the normal range of behavior."

Study Links Selfies To Narcissism And Psychopathy
Study Links Selfies To Narcissism And Psychopathy | HuffPost

Dangerous Selfies
Dangerous selfies


----------



## james bond (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Christians owned slaves, but also fought the Civil War over it.  It was the racist Democrats and Darwinists who wanted to continue slavery.  You need to have, "Darwin Was A Racist" stamped upon your sloping forehead.



sealybobo said:


> I guess I was wrong



As I've been saying all along.  Atheists are usually wrong.  This will come back to bite you in the arse later.


----------



## james bond (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Too many lies in your previous posts, sealybobo.  Will just have to let you live your life of lies.

We are still a Christian nation and that's why liberals are becoming brainwashed into atheism.  Their atheism will lead to Communism.  Thus, good people are buying guns and ammo in record numbers to battle the coming purge.  Look at what the Chinese Communists did to the Christians and their church over there.  Second, it's about winning the creation vs evolution battle.  Third, it would be a battle of idealism of Jews vs Muslims over the Middle East and oil.  Where Russia and China falls is how their networks end up in vying for the above.  Maybe the fourth is the final battle of Armageddon which has been prophecized.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I never do selfies unless I need to.  Like I meet someone on craigslist and she wants to see a pic before she will meet me.  Or I am posting a profile on POF


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


What lies?  If you spotted them point them out.  Number them and I'll address them all.  Or forever just live in your world of delusion.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



So conservative mother fuckers today flying those confederate flags in their trucks are liberals?   Didn't Jesus teach you not to lie?


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> We are still a Christian nation ...




you mimic your forged bible by believing something is true by writing it on a piece of paper.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Whether it was Democrats who were racist back then is irrelevent to who and what people are now.  Yes, most of the southerners were Democrat but not all were racist. 

President Lincoln was Republican and ordered the abolishment of slavery in the southern states via executive fiat, but he was also seriously racist.  Further his  Proclamation did not apply to Delaware, Missouri, Maryland, and Kentucky, all slave states but all chose to remain loyal to the Union.

Most of the northern slave states abolished slavery before the end of the war but Delaware and Missouri did so only upon ratification of the 13th Amendment in 1865.

But to judge their culture by the standards of our culture is not fair.  And to point to how people were THEN as illustrative of how people are now is just silly.

On the other hand, to extrapolate those Confederate battle flags into something racist is also very wrong.  While yes, some did fight to retain the slave economy, thousands upon thousands of Confederate soldiers neither owned slaves nor condoned the practice.  They were fighting for the right of self determination and not to defend slavery.  And that battle flag was theirs too.  These days, I would feel safe in saying 99% of those displaying that battle flag are not in the least racist.

And again, most of the change that came about to the ending of slavery and other social changes came from pressure from the Christian community both here in America and in Europe.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 12, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I think around here any white guys flying the confederate flag are probably showing off their blatant racism. But I'm here in Michigan in white country. Howell, mi is right next door and hq for the klan. Those guys are Christians too.

You've had some great posts. Thanks for sharing


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 12, 2017)

.
those in the South that did not have slaves were not for the civil war, that war like the division in the country today was conducted by a vocal, adherent minority - the reason after its conclusion the Southern majority had no inkling for the future to "rise again".


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



There are going to be racists here and there everywhere.  But I think you might be selling your neighbors a bit short there.  And I have had very VERY little contact with the Klan in my increasingly long lifetime, but every time I have seen 'their' flag displayed, it has been the American stars and stripes flag.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 13, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> those in the South that did not have slaves were not for the civil war, that war like the division in the country today was conducted by a vocal, adherent minority - the reason after its conclusion the Southern majority had no inkling for the future to "rise again".



You are correct that there were some in the South who did not want war just as there were some in the North who sympathized with the Confederacy.  But enough people in the south began to prepare for secession not over slavery but over what they considered oppressive taxation.  And Lincoln knew it and the government had guaranteed that slavery would not be interfered with in those states in which it was legal if the states remained loyal to the union.

Once the war began however, patriotic sentiment took over and the die was cast.  Those in the south who did not support the Confederacy mostly moved north and fought or supported the Union.  And some in the North moved south and fought with the Confederacy.  Though Lincoln thought slavery to be morally wrong, he was not an abolitionist.  But once the war started he proclaimed emancipation of slaves only in those states that had seceded to urge more black people to flee north.  The intention was to undermine the South while providing more manpower for the North.

And yes the majority of the people in both the Union and Confederacy were Christian, but Christians are just as patriotic as anybody else.  It is a certain fact that Christians have been on both sides of all great issues facing our nation.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 13, 2017)

.
those in the south who did not find justification for slave ownership in the 4th century christian bible and set it aside were those that chose to fight against the barbaric and racial practice, those same that supported slavery are those that chose the KKK in support of their errant cause afterwards. - they are not this country, the slave owners, yet their portrayal as a majority deleteriously enhanced their roles in the events before and after the 1860's "civil" war and continue to languish in the public sector to this day.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 13, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> those in the south who did not find justification for slave ownership in the 4th century christian bible and set it aside were those that chose to fight against the barbaric and racial practice, those same that supported slavery are those that chose the KKK in support of their errant cause afterwards. - they are not this country, the slave owners, yet their portrayal as a majority deleteriously enhanced their roles in the events before and after the 1860's "civil" war and continue to languish in the public sector to this day.



Your opinion is noted.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> Though Lincoln thought slavery to be morally wrong, he was not an abolitionist. But once the war started he proclaimed emancipation of slaves only in those states that had seceded to urge more black people to flee north. The intention was to undermine the South while providing more manpower for the North.




The Emancipation Proclamation 1863 < Abraham Lincoln < Presidents < American History From Revolution To Reconstruction and beyond
_*
It did not apply to slaves in border states fighting on the Union side; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already under Union control.*_


thanks, what a surprise - so much for abraham lincoln, must have been a 4th centurier ...




Foxfyre said:


> And yes the majority of the people in both the Union and Confederacy were Christian, but Christians are just as patriotic as anybody else. It is a certain fact that Christians have been on _*both sides*_ of all great issues facing our nation.



how really can that be ... even today that is not really true, I'm not being antagonistic but the history of christianity since the 4th century is basically a straight line of selfishness and oppression against everyone but their own as bonds "good folks" and their insatiable, guns and ammo mentality. that (their) "majority" did not write the US Constitution and are noticeably left out of it - ergo, their resentment and the tap dance that has ensued since its ratification.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 13, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I get it.  You have contempt for the Christian faith.  You have made that abundantly clear.  And therefore, I suspect you have blinders on and refuse to see what has been done that is good, noble, and impressive in the name of Christianity.

Those 'selfish' Christians are the ones who pushed for an end to slavery and for women's suffrage.  Those 'selfish' Christians are the ones who longed for liberty and self governance and gave us the great nation called The United States of America.

Those 'selfish' Christians even now are primarily the ones running the homeless shelters, soup kitchens, thrift shops, relief efforts in countries all around the world, ministries to the disabled, orphanages, leper colonies, and working among some of the world's most poor and desperate people.

So we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


Foxfyre said:


> You have contempt for the Christian faith. You have made that abundantly clear.




you have proven to be disingenuous in the past, as you well know I distinguish the difference between the 1st century events and the reactionary duplicity of 4th century christianity -

there is a question to be answered, - were the events of the 1st century conciliatory to "slavery" et-all or was that time an awakening from servitude as an embellishment for the individuals worth as a Free Spirit and for self determination ... the fact alone without recuse of the past proves the 4th century bible is not a work of "religion" but a political manuscript to perpetuate the very elements of the 1st century it serves to disavow.


_*"No one comes to the Father except through me."*_


if as you say you oppose those practices, past and present why are they not removed from your book as the above where in the 4th century they were included, as forgeries - some would rather correct the past than read and live a deceitful fallacy.


----------



## james bond (Jun 13, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> I get it.  You have contempt for the Christian faith.  You have made that abundantly clear.  And therefore, I suspect you have blinders on and refuse to see what has been done that is good, noble, and impressive in the name of Christianity.



Sealybobo is the one with contempt (see panel #1).  BW is the one without a brain (panel #3).


----------



## james bond (Jun 13, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> What lies?  If you spotted them point them out.  Number them and I'll address them all.  Or forever just live in your world of delusion.



I'd have to number every sentence then.

It'll be easier if I just explained it to you.

This explains why atheism is actually stupid, and requires as much faith, if not much more, to be an atheist.

All atheists posit what’s called a universal negative. A universal negative requires absolute knowledge (omniscience) whereas a universal positive may not require that.

For instance, let’s say I am in a building with 4 rooms, and I have only been in 1 room. In order to say that every room is empty, I would have to have knowledge of all 4 rooms. I would need to know the entirety of what I am claiming to know.

However, to state the opposite, that the building is *not* empty, I would at the very least only need to know about one room.

So, in essence, any time an atheist claims that there is absolutely no God, they are claiming absolute and full knowledge of the universe (omniscience). If they are not claiming absolute knowledge, than they are going off of faith, but in fact, since they could never EVER know for sure that universal negative, then they are requiring much more faith than a person who claims there is a God (because finding out if there is a God may not require absolute knowledge).

But hey, I don’t need to say it, it was written quite a long time ago "the *fool* says in his heart ‘There is no God’" (Psalm 14:1)

There you go.  You are here.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jun 13, 2017)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > I get it.  You have contempt for the Christian faith.  You have made that abundantly clear.  And therefore, I suspect you have blinders on and refuse to see what has been done that is good, noble, and impressive in the name of Christianity.
> ...



Well, Sealy has been most civil in the debate and I respect that a lot.  BW seems to have a lot of anger, but oh well.  He hasn't been all that personally vindictive so I'll argue with anybody who can put up a competent civil argument.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 14, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> So, in essence, any time a theist claims that there is absolutely a God, they are claiming absolute and full knowledge of the universe (omniscience). If they are not claiming absolute knowledge, than they are going off of faith, but in fact, since they could never EVER know for sure that universal negative, then they are requiring much more faith than a person who claims there is not a God (because finding out if there is not God may not require absolute knowledge).




there is not a comparison between an atheist / theist that is not relative ... between a 4th century christian and the events of the 1st century is a diametric historical event, no matter how the christians believe they are the bearers of that truth they only deceive themselves at the expense of the true religion they purposely are misrepresenting. and at their inevitable demise.


----------



## james bond (Jun 15, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Heh.  I quote Psalm 14:1 for sealybobo and you reply.  The *fool* says in his heart ‘There is no God’" (Psalm 14:1).  It's like I called you direct when it wasn't meant for you.  That's karma.

However, my analogy still holds and destroys the atheists.

"I am in a building with 4 rooms, and I have only been in 1 room.  In order to say that every room is empty, I would have to have knowledge of all 4 rooms.  I would need to know the entirety of what I am claiming to know.

However, to state the opposite, that the building is *not* empty, I would at the very least only need to know about one room."

In Jesus' case, it was his sepulchre.


----------



## james bond (Jun 15, 2017)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Sealybobo has been the better debater and has been more civil, but recently he seems to have changed for the worse.  Just my opinion.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 15, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Heh. I quote Psalm 14:1 for sealybobo and you reply. The *fool* says in his heart ‘There is no God’" (Psalm 14:1). It's like I called you direct when it wasn't meant for you. That's karma.



I did not respond to your 14:1, dumbass - because only a child would find meaning where there is non.




james bond said:


> However, my analogy still holds and destroys the atheists.



as stated, the two positions are relative - unless the religion has a physical component, the genome of life, something that seemingly terrifies bond into namecalling.




james bond said:


> In Jesus' case, it was his sepulchre.




Exclusive: Christ's Burial Place Exposed for First Time in Centuries

_*An analysis of the original rock may enable them to better understand not only the original form of the tomb chamber, but also how it evolved as the focal point of veneration since it was first identified by Helena, mother of the Roman emperor Constantine, in A.D. 326.*_

what a shock, the burial site was discovered by "Helena" in 326 AD (4th century) - jeapeers, does anyone wonder how Helena figured that one out ... and no one noted its location during the time it should have meant something.


anyway, sealy claims to be an agnostic atheist that covers your silly soliloquy.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 15, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> ... and has been more civil




for those who are religious ...






its a long struggle against forged religious bigotry against _free spirited_ "folks" that will never conform to their written selfserving manuscript. 


civil is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 15, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> those in the South that did not have slaves were not for the civil war, that war like the division in the country today was conducted by a vocal, adherent minority - the reason after its conclusion the Southern majority had no inkling for the future to "rise again".


I was impressed to hear southern Baptist condemn the alt right, which clearly exists, and is racist. If it weren't southern Baptist wouldn't condemn them


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 17, 2017)

How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?




james bond said:


> However, my analogy still holds and destroys the atheists.
> 
> "I am in a building with 4 rooms, and I have only been in 1 room. In order to say that every room is empty, I would have to have knowledge of all 4 rooms. I would need to know the entirety of what I am claiming to know.
> 
> However, to state the opposite, that the building is *not* empty, I would at the very least only need to know about one room."



that's true for either presumption - each room would have to be occupied till the exception is found which is the same for if either of the extreme views were to be verified.



the fact is neither extreme view has any more validity than the other when there is no physical evidence to support either position. that is the case presently for religion where no physical proof of any kind exists for any claims pertaining to either view and are only supportable through personalized non verifiable publication as christianity created in their 4th century bible.

the point is christianity is no more a religion than a similar book written by an atheist for the same purpose as being any less a religion than the claim made by christians. and are rightfully designated as political documents without definition than works of religion.

the 1st century was not the work of any single person but an awakening by all the participants to define their own purpose and that of humanity, whether a deity exists or not is irrelevant to the actual goal that still remains an unresolved issue.





sealybobo said:


> I was impressed to hear southern Baptist condemn the alt right, which clearly exists, and is racist. If it weren't southern Baptist wouldn't condemn them




Southern Baptist Convention Votes To Condemn White Supremacy
_
The Southern Baptist Convention voted to formally "denounce and repudiate" white nationalism and the alt-right movement at the church's annual meeting Wednesday, but only after the denomination's leadership was criticized for initially bypassing the proposal._

true dedication, for sure ...   .


there is no degree of belief physical proof would not eliminate.

_


_


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 17, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you're saying there were southern Baptist who only reluctently went along


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 17, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?
> ...


. 
Reading the article Will help you ...


----------



## RWS (Jun 18, 2017)

As I have always said, there is no true religion. Nobody knows the truth yet, because they're not dead yet. Anyone who says they know the truth, is trying to sell you something...

In the meantime, all we can do, is disprove the lies, so that we can try to reach the truth without killing each other first.

And try to promote human harmony, instead of religious hatred.


----------



## Penelope (Jun 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Lets expand on that, white Protestant elites owned slaves.  The KKK , were protestants.


----------



## james bond (Jun 18, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The Christians have the advantage in knowing one room, i.e. that one with God in it, exists.  While the atheists have to keep searching.


----------



## james bond (Jun 18, 2017)

RWS said:


> As I have always said, there is no true religion. Nobody knows the truth yet, because they're not dead yet. Anyone who says they know the truth, is trying to sell you something...
> 
> In the meantime, all we can do, is disprove the lies, so that we can try to reach the truth without killing each other first.
> 
> And try to promote human harmony, instead of religious hatred.



Christianity, many religions and I were promoting happiness as a way for humans to share.  The biggest problem people cannot solve is selfishness.  It can lead us to war and all kinds of bad things.  Atheists have nothing to promote or generally promote "public obscenities, decadence, narcissism, hypocrisy, rampant drug use, extramarital sex leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted disease, abortion, lawlessness and the promotion of the homosexual agenda. Such values have a very negative influence on the life of individuals, and very often lead to death."  It's Hollywood values.


----------



## james bond (Jun 18, 2017)

Penelope said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



>>Lets expand on that, white Protestant elites owned slaves. The KKK , were protestants.<<

It was the Democrats who kept the Civil War going due to not wanting to give up slavery.  The KKK were exclusively Democrats (and the Democrats still have the KKK and racists in their party).  Liberals support Darwinism and Darwin was racist.  His theories led to eugenics and social Darwinism which caused the Holocaust and black genocide.

I watched a good movie recently on slavery in the US -- Lincoln (2012) by Steven Spielberg.


----------



## Penelope (Jun 19, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> I guess I was wrong



As I've been saying all along.  Atheists are usually wrong.  This will come back to bite you in the arse later.[/QUOTE]



> Lets expand on that, white Protestant elites owned slaves.  The KKK , were protestants





> >>Lets expand on that, white Protestant elites owned slaves. The KKK , were protestants.<<
> 
> It was the Democrats who kept the Civil War going due to not wanting to give up slavery.  The KKK were exclusively Democrats (and the Democrats still have the KKK and racists in their party).  Liberals support Darwinism and Darwin was racist.  His theories led to eugenics and social Darwinism which caused the Holocaust and black genocide.
> 
> I watched a good movie recently on slavery in the US -- Lincoln (2012) by Steven Spielberg.



Well the parties changed a few times, but it was really a southern and northern thing.   The KKK were southern whites who developed after the civil war , taking the law into their own hands, for fear of blacks and upset over the freedom of blacks. The KKK in the roaring 20's was southern and were Protestants who could not stand the progression of civil rights, women voting, drinking and cultural changes, which led to prohibition.  It was also anti Jews and RC's.   Then the next KKK against civil rights.

Yes Darwin was a great scientist.  Even back in the Greek days they knew we came from water.  Eugenics was nothing new, just got a name and became an issue in Britain and the US.   The elites practice it today and have forever. The elites marry the elites (usually) and well they hang out in the same crowd. Poor marry poor because they hang out together.  What came from Darwin's work came the study of genetics, although it existed before, but he expanded on it. Everything comes from previous generations. There is no one person who makes a scientific discovery, but its all based on previous studies.

Yes WWII was  a world war, over 65 million died. It was a holocaust of many nationalities.

I have not seen that movie but yes I do like era movies.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > As I have always said, there is no true religion. Nobody knows the truth yet, because they're not dead yet. Anyone who says they know the truth, is trying to sell you something...
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Christianity, many religions and I were promoting happiness as a way for humans to share. The biggest problem people cannot solve is selfishness. It can lead us to war and all kinds of bad things.









  .
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





unlike their forged 4th century bible there is a recorded history for the desert religions from their beginnings to the present day that dispels any myth for an authenticity as religions and demonstrates their duplicity as political manuscripts for their adherents personal gain.


----------



## RWS (Jun 20, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > As I have always said, there is no true religion. Nobody knows the truth yet, because they're not dead yet. Anyone who says they know the truth, is trying to sell you something...
> ...


Are you serious?

Those acts have been committed throughout human history, And they were rampant way before the influx of atheism came around, and that's because people are getting smarter and getting sick of the atrocities and stupidities, and “Unfathomable pinhead-ery” (Fargo quote  ). They are part of every human culture prior to ours. And it is very usually the religious lot that commit these acts. And then hide behind their religion in later generations, and deny their transgressions.

Those values are how Christianity and other religions came to take power in the first place!

And now you're blaming it on the atheists?

Geez.... Religious rulers are the most selfish of all people. They take your money, they take your lives, and when you die fighting for them, they maybe give you a blessing. That is your reward for being a follower of their religion. No heaven, no 72 virgins, no hall full of beer and food...

Nobody has come back after dying as a martyr to say any religion is true. It is the most selfish idea ever created, solely to benefit the rulers that sent the believers to die for their cause.


----------



## james bond (Jun 21, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



If those acts have been committed through history, then tell the liberals to quit whining about those things and brace themselves up so they have a code of ethics or morality in their lives instead of being degenerates.  What part of God destroyed all of humankind do you not understand?  Then in addition to atheist claims that they are about nothing, quit trying to palm off liberal socialism on the government.  Instead, why don't you learn to support yourself?  We do not need the seeds of communism being sown by the atheists.  Basically, get a job, work hard and make something of yourself.  They maybe people will pay attention to what you have to say instead of the nothingness of atheists.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> If those acts have been committed through history, then tell the liberals to quit whining about those things and brace themselves up so they have a code of ethics or morality in their lives instead of being degenerates.










the gal above needs no sermon from someone like you bond, there is no cure for those with their hatred against innocence that chose to live as Free Spirits, free from trappings as the awful 4th century christian bible.


----------



## james bond (Jun 21, 2017)

Merry Christmas!!!


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> Merry Christmas!!!


.


james bond said:


> Merry Christmas!!!




“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.


you missed bond, fraud is a sin ... not Jesus though you nailed that Free Spirit to a cross then made his legacy your own that's the shot in the film clip of you hitting your target.


----------



## RWS (Jun 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I have no idea what you were trying to say in that paragraph...

All I can get is that you think atheists want socialism and don't want to get a job or work hard...

First of all, Socialism sucks. Nobody wants to work hard and try to be better in a society that doesn't recognize your efforts. Atheists don't want to live their lives in an assembly line and live like slaves. I don't know where you get that idea. Just because Socialism doesn't allow/recognize supernatural religion (since they want you to believe in the State above all else, because it is based on forms of Christianity), does not mean that atheists are socialists. I totally don't understand that connection...

It sounds like stupid Americana to me. Atheists just don't believe the crap that religions have been trying to convince us is real for the past 4000 years. We have our own ideas, and we're not willing to kill or subjugate others to promote our ideas. It's not a money/power-making enterprise like OT religions are.

All we do is point out the hatred and bitterness religious followers have towards people of other religions, and of their own, and how they need to conquer them and seize their power and wealth. And the followers think they do this in the name of "God", when they're just following orders from a human ruler.

When you can step outside of the box of religious frenzy, you can see the reality that we are trying to point out. And you religious perverts are going to cause a war to end all wars, just because your Santa Claus religion is different than your enemy's.

When we can all realize that we are puppets being drawn to battle for something that is not true or important, maybe we can start fixing things around here.

Have your personal faith, believe whatever you like. Just don't think that you are superior, or follow someone who tells you that they are superior. Because nobody knows who is right/wrong, or semi-right/wrong in matters of faith. Enjoy your faith. Leave others alone. Pretty simple fix, if people would be smart enough to do it globally. Instead we have groups pounding us over the head about how their religion is right, and how we have to join them and contribute money.


----------



## james bond (Jun 23, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



First, I'm saying that you have no have no identifiable pov.  That makes your posts hard to read and understand.  It's full of contradictions and not that interesting.  Even BreezeWood, who is mentally incompetent, has an identifiable pov of an asylum dweller stuck between the 1st and 4th century.  He thinks macroevolution is represented by metamorphosis.  Show him your picture, BW.  Even in his looney state, he attacks the Bible and subscribes to evolution no matter how bizarre it is.   

Second, let's review what I said about atheism.

1.  Atheism leads to Communism.  Karl Marx said, "Communism begins from the outset with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism, indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction."1  He also said, "Religion is the opium of the people."2

 1. Marx, Karl.  Private Proerty and Communism, 1844
 2. Marx, Karl. 1976.  Introduction to A contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right.  Marx-Engels Collected Works, vol. 3. New York.

As an example for today, we have Bernie Sanders who ran for POTUS as a liberal socialist and is a communist.

http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/dont-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders-hes-a-diehard-communist/

 2.  Atheists claim to have nothing to promote except for the destruction of religion, especially Christianity.  This is part of the abstraction that Marx discusses.

 3.  Atheists actually promote Hollywood values of "public obscenities, decadence, narcissism, hypocrisy, rampant drug use, extramarital sex leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted disease, abortion, lawlessness and the promotion of the homosexual agenda.  Such values have a very negative influence on the life of individuals, and very often lead to death."  More abstraction.

What are "Hollywood values?"
What are 'Hollywood values'?

Hollywood values out of touch, poll says
Hollywood values out of touch, poll says

Thus, I have described what atheism is and can back it up while you're just a hodgepodge of incoherent mess.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jun 23, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> He thinks macroevolution is represented by metamorphosis.










bonds argument was to demonstrate a physical link from one being to another where in nature there needs not be a physical link but a cumulative spiritual mechanism developed over time that transitions from one being to another without a physical pattern of transitional "missing links". the end process occurs as one single event, as demonstrated above from a land creature to an avian. -

Spirituality guides the progression of evolution whether revealed by physical properties or not.





james bond said:


> he attacks the Bible and subscribes to evolution no matter how bizarre it is.



to the first century and beyond there exists only one spoken true religion of the Almighty - The Triumph of Good vs Evil. individually and collectively for the Final Judgement all beings will be one or the other. -

whether or not, theist or atheist their complexion will be the same.


----------



## RWS (Jun 24, 2017)

james bond said:


> First, I'm saying that you have no have no identifiable pov. That makes your posts hard to read and understand. It's full of contradictions and not that interesting.



I only speak truth, logic, and common sense, and value morality and ethics no matter what your beliefs. Which is maybe why we both have a problem understanding each other's posts.

Almost like two different languages...


----------



## RWS (Jun 24, 2017)

james bond said:


> Second, let's review what I said about atheism.
> 
> 1. Atheism leads to Communism. Karl Marx said, "Communism begins from the outset with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism, indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction."1 He also said, "Religion is the opium of the people."2
> 
> ...



Atheism does not lead to communism. Communism is an ideal that has never been achieved due to human greed. Karl Marx was not a god, he was a human. His book is not scripture, it is an ideal he sought, and it actually isn't that bad. It's pretty good, except for the fact that it can never happen.

What Socialists did was say that it takes X amount of years of Socialism in order to get to Communism, which is total BS. Those varying X amount of years usually exceed the expected life-span of the current ruler, who doesn't want to give up power. So it's lasted for over a hundred years. And nobody wants to give up their power, so the followers must continue to suffer. And the Utopia can never be reached during life.

Socialism is the same as Christianity and other OT religions.

They tell us what to do, tell us what to wear, tell us what to think, tell us what to want... They tell us when and with who we can have sex, and who is ok to kill and enslave. They tell us what we can and cannot eat, and when we can or cannot eat them. They tell us that we have to live our lives suffering for the sins of others. And that we have to contribute to God in terms of money and loyalty, and our lives, in order to get to Utopia, once we die. Our earthly life is simply a punishment to atone for our sins. Once done, and all boxes have been checked, and we're dead, then we get Utopia! Maybe...

Sound familiar?


----------



## james bond (Jun 25, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > First, I'm saying that you have no have no identifiable pov. That makes your posts hard to read and understand. It's full of contradictions and not that interesting.
> ...



smh.  Even your truth, logic and common sense has no identifiable pov.  And you morality and ethics are prolly Hollywood values.


----------



## james bond (Jun 25, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Second, let's review what I said about atheism.
> ...



>>Atheism does not lead to communism.<<

You are out of touch.  I've read Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin and it's happening here on USMB and in the US.  What's the big news in the US?  Russia and finding the Democrats behind it.  How it starts is atheism as an abstraction.  It's attacking Christianity in the US now.  And the Communists in China are destorying churches, so that Christians there have to hide.  I'm tired of discussing things with posters who do not read links and start spewing lies.  Isn't lying to the people part of Communism?  Yes it is.

In China, a church-state showdown of biblical proportions  
In China, a church-state showdown of biblical proportions

Trump Continues to Turn the Tables on the Obama Administration Regarding Russia Narrative
Trump Continues to Turn the Tables on the Obama Administration Regarding Russia Narrative

Sketchy firm behind Trump dossier is stalling investigators
http://nypost.com/2017/06/24/inside-the-shadowy-intelligence-firm-behind-the-trump-dossier/[/QUOTE]


----------



## RWS (Jun 27, 2017)

Breaking news... Russia and China are not Communist countries. Communism has never existed.

From Business Dictionary's definition of Communism



> Economic and social system in which all (or nearly all) property and resources are collectively owned by a classless society and not by individual citizens. Based on the 1848 publication 'Communist Manifesto' by two German political philosophers, Karl Marx (1818-1883) and his close associate Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), it envisaged common ownership of all land and capital and withering away of the coercive power of the state. In such a society, social relations were to be regulated on the fairest of all principles: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Differences between manual and intellectual labor and between rural and urban life were to disappear, opening up the way for unlimited development of human potential.
> 
> In view of the above, there has never been a truly communist state although the Soviet Union of the past and China, Cuba, and North Korea of today stake their claims. See also Marxism and Socialism.
> 
> Read more: How has this term impacted your life?


----------



## RWS (Jun 27, 2017)

What is your definition of Communism? Russian and Chinese people?


----------



## james bond (Jun 29, 2017)

RWS said:


> What is your definition of Communism? Russian and Chinese people?



>>Russia and China are not Communist countries. Communism has never existed.<<

You blew it already with your previous answer.  It's no wonder you're lonely.


----------



## RWS (Jul 1, 2017)

Not at all, just pointing out that peeps like you view Russians or Orientals, or Cubans, and just assume them to be supposed "Communists", even though that never existed.

It's stupid "Americana", and it makes you look silly... And a bunch of you here do it.

Call the dictatorships what they are, not this stupidity instilled in your brain about Communism.


----------



## james bond (Jul 8, 2017)

RWS said:


> Not at all, just pointing out that peeps like you view Russians or Orientals, or Cubans, and just assume them to be supposed "Communists", even though that never existed.
> 
> It's stupid "Americana", and it makes you look silly... And a bunch of you here do it.
> 
> Call the dictatorships what they are, not this stupidity instilled in your brain about Communism.



More ignorant opinions from a nobody.  You have no recognizede pov and aren't even American.  What you are is an internet atheist.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > Not at all, just pointing out that peeps like you view Russians or Orientals, or Cubans, and just assume them to be supposed "Communists", even though that never existed.
> ...


.


james bond said:


> More ignorant opinions from a nobody.




and what is the person that could worship an unverified 4th century political document masquerading as a religion be that is possibly of any value to an evolving species seeking remission to the Everlasting by "conquering" evil. -

the very evil that is meant to be conquered.


----------



## percysunshine (Jul 8, 2017)

.
It would be kind of depressing to be a Btheist or a Ctheist.


----------



## james bond (Jul 8, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> the very evil that is meant to be conquered.



First, it's the atheists who are evil.  The Bible says so.

"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers.  For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness?  Or what fellowship has light with darkness?" 2 Corinthians 6:14

"Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God.  Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11

Second, just what do you mean by conquered?


----------



## james bond (Jul 8, 2017)

*Will this kill the believers or non-believers?*

"Amid a growing *'swarm' of over earthquakes (now over 1000)*, and Montana's largest quake ever, *scientists are growing increasingly concerned* that the so-called 'super-volcano' at the heart of Yellowstone National Park could be building towards a Category 7 eruption.* So what is a 'super-volcano' and what does its explosion mean for life on earth? NatGeo explains...*"

Under Yellowstone
Under Yellowstone — National Geographic Magazine


----------



## james bond (Jul 9, 2017)

Of course, the believers keep an eye out for potential catastrophes.  They're the ones who think that earth was formed more from catastrophes than minute changes over millions and billions years of time (uniformitarianism).  It's difficult to predict if this will indeed happen, but it is an area of concern.  Better to be prepared just in case.


----------



## RWS (Jul 9, 2017)

You have no need for preparedness, since you believe in God, and await Heaven. 

Wouldn't Heaven be the way to go?

Or are you unsure?


----------



## RWS (Jul 9, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > Not at all, just pointing out that peeps like you view Russians or Orientals, or Cubans, and just assume them to be supposed "Communists", even though that never existed.
> ...


My POV is well-defined. What you are is a religious shrill, promoting your apocalyptic prophecy...

What benefit do you get from it? Are you getting paid?


----------



## WheelieAddict (Jul 9, 2017)

Chose "other" because Deist isn't listed.


----------



## Bonzi (Jul 9, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...



*Weak Theist:*  I've see sawed back and forth between a few of these... I believe but not as the mainstream believers.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 9, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > the very evil that is meant to be conquered.
> ...


.


james bond said:


> "Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?" 2 Corinthians 6:14
> 
> "Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11



both of the above are forgeries ....

* is everyone derived from Antiquity including precepts of the desert religions that are not christians - unbelievers -




james bond said:


> Second, just what do you mean by conquered?



can there be the same god that in a flood vanquishes who is evil that then later gives those same people (christian jews moslem) a different course than what the earlier souls were killed for ... the contradiction excludes the god from being the same.

the great Flood, however described is the religion of the Almighty - The Triumph of Good vs Evil - the same contradiction for christians that they may survive in evil through their makebelieve savior (4th century forgery) that spells their doom - 

there is only one avenue to be Judged when the Spirit frees itself by conquering either Good or evil is the only reason to be informed which was accomplished before Admission is granted to the Everlasting.


----------



## james bond (Jul 14, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



Ha ha.  I'm a paid message board poster while you have nothing.


----------



## james bond (Jul 14, 2017)

RWS said:


> You have no need for preparedness, since you believe in God, and await Heaven.
> 
> Wouldn't Heaven be the way to go?
> 
> Or are you unsure?



One has to be prepared.  This is one of the things God gave us and not to Communists like you.  Hey, be thankful you got a pov now.


----------



## james bond (Jul 14, 2017)

WheelieAddict said:


> Chose "other" because Deist isn't listed.



I threw that in because Dawkins doesn't know the other possible religions out there.  To be fair, it's difficult to know.


----------



## james bond (Jul 14, 2017)

Bonzi said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> ...



Do you believe in the spirit?  That is, we are more than just a body and brain?  For example, the mind is spiritual and controls you entire body, including the brain.  The people who believe in the brain think one possibility is the mind is the output of the brain.  Western medicine would think the latter and that's one of reasons they treat illness with pills.


----------



## james bond (Jul 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



This is so wack.  I'm sure your spiritually perfect body will be destroyed in the next life.  Just think of it as "your" evolution.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> This is so wack. I'm sure your spiritually perfect body will be destroyed in the next life. Just think of it as "your" evolution.



are you afraid to respond bond there are plenty of christians like you that bury their heads when their fantasy is made to prove itself ...



> _- That this night, before the cock crows, you shall deny me three times ..._




no one is going to hurt you, give it shot - Ha Ha


_** is everyone derived from Antiquity including precepts of the desert religions that are not christians - unbelievers *_

_*can there be the same god that in a flood vanquishes who is evil that then later gives those same people (christian jews moslem) a different course than what the earlier souls were killed for ... the contradiction excludes the god from being the same.
*_

try a response there is a reason this is referred to as a forum.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 15, 2017)

*.



			Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.
		
Click to expand...


*
above is another (selfserving) forgery added to the 4th century christian bible, can it be that anyone deserving immortality including admission to the Everlasting could not be responsible for their actions - 

where is the clause in christianity for an individual that accomplishes admission to the Everlasting without the need for "their" religion but their own volition ... "knowing what they are doing"


christians say those things, slavery - female servitude etc. were allowed back then - (that is not the truth and was / is never acceptable as the very reason for religion) - that was included in their book by the _male_factors and has been "their" history of oppression not that of the true religion they purposely overshadowed by their book. - 

there is no remorse within any of the desert religions for their past deeds that would make them worthy of their goal for admission to the Everlasting - they are all fraught with fraud and deception.


----------



## RWS (Jul 16, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > You have no need for preparedness, since you believe in God, and await Heaven.
> ...



God gave you the need to prepared for the Rapture. By believing in Jesus.

Not to be prepared for human-caused apocalypses.

In the case of a God-created apocalypse, you should be ready to meet God. And your faith will get you to your utopia. Supposedly...

In the case of human-created apocalypse, you should be prepared.

However, if man creates the apoc, then God created it as well. And you will still meet your maker. No need for preparedness. God never said you must prepare by storing food and water, in order to meet Him.

The only reason you would prepare for life after the apoc, is that you don't believe in your religion. You're not sure...So you're weighing the risks...

And you know that religious fanatics are going to create an apocalypse that your Santa Claus religion will not save you from.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 17, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...


You have to pay for the priest to come give you a blessing. My dad gives a lot to the church. The priest came for one grave and didn't even look at my dad and give him the sign of the cross


----------



## james bond (Jul 18, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



What I said is not fantasy.  We aren't talking about the "scientific" fantasy of evolution like you imagine in your teeny brain like metamorphosis.  The Bible is non-fiction and what has been prophecized.  The past prophecies have come true.

And Peter did deny Jesus three times while you have denied him countless times.

What's weird is you need to have your fantasy prove itself when it cannot.  This is laughable and the Christians here have enjoyed myself plenty of times at your expense.


----------



## james bond (Jul 18, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



Ha ha.  Now your going to preach rapture?

>>God gave you the need to prepared for the Rapture. By believing in Jesus.<<

This is already wrong.  Your first sentence is wrong.

As for God-created apocalypse vs human-caused apocalypse, there will be no comparison.  

My guess and opinion is if you live to 2060, then you will find out the experience first-hand.


----------



## james bond (Jul 18, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Is you Dad Catholic?


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> And Peter did deny Jesus three times while you have denied him countless times.




not the mortal, the 4th century book, yes.

the difference being their disciple did not crucify them, those were the ones that emerged in the late 4th century and wrote the christian bible where their injustice continues to this day. -

how do we know, by the Triumph of Good not being included in their book ... on any page.


----------



## RWS (Jul 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



If you believe in Christianity, then Jesus will save you from the Rapture. So there is no need to prepare, besides prayers and donations.

And you have an end-date for humanity, somewhere around 2060? Wow...

How's that going for the things you're selling?


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...


Greek Orthodox


----------



## hobelim (Jul 19, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


 Whats the difference? 

If a person is taught to believe that they are a worthless piece of shit they accept being treated that way....


----------



## james bond (Jul 21, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I'm assuming your dad got shabby treatment because my pastor shakes my hand after service whether I gave at the coffer or not.  He's thankful that I showed up for service.  I don't think I "have" to pay for my pastor to pray for a positive outcome for me, but it's usually custom  Can you explain why your dad got poor treatment?


----------



## james bond (Jul 21, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



I'm not selling anything.  It seems to be you're the one trying to sell your uneducated feces because you think Jesus will save me from the Rapture and no need to prepare, besides prayers and donations.  How crass and stupid AF to think this way.

I'm just assuming you're a colossal nincompoop who does not understand nor try to understand.  Nothing to be concerned about except having to buy a new pair of shoes after stepping on your face.


----------



## james bond (Jul 21, 2017)

STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.

Americans flocking to larger churches?

The Amazon Effect: Worshippers Flocking to Larger Churches | HuffPost

BTW F Jeff Bezos.


----------



## RWS (Jul 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Why would you have an end-date of 2060, if you're not selling something?

Or promoting someone who is selling something?


----------



## RWS (Jul 21, 2017)

What should people do if they're worried about the world ending in 2060?


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 21, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> BTW F Jeff Bezos.







BreezeWood said:


> the difference being their disciple did not crucify them, those were the ones that emerged in the late 4th century and wrote the christian bible where their injustice continues to this day. -




that's you bond, your book of hatred. guns and ammo - is 2060 the Triumph of Good vs Evil, it wont work for you as long as a single good person (Noah) is still alive, after that its all yours.


----------



## james bond (Jul 22, 2017)

RWS said:


> What should people do if they're worried about the world ending in 2060?



Each person has to find the answers out for themselves.

It's just my opinion based on what I write in the last paragraph of this post.  It is prophecized that the Antichrist (the beast) will come into power and will sign a covenant with Israel for seven years (Daniel 9:27) during a period called the "tribulation."  During the tribulation, there will be terrible wars, famines, plagues, and natural disasters. God will be pouring out His wrath against sin, evil, and wickedness. The tribulation will include the appearance of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse, and the seven seal, trumpet, and bowl judgments.

About halfway through the seven years, the Antichrist will break the peace covenant with Israel and make war against it. The Antichrist will commit “the abomination of desolation” and set up an image of himself to be worshipped in the Jerusalem temple (Danie 9:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-10), which will have been rebuilt. The second half of the tribulation is known as “the great tribulation” (Revelation 7:14) and “the time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7).

At the end of the seven-year tribulation, the Antichrist will launch a final attack on Jerusalem, culminating in the battle of Armageddon.  Jesus Christ will return, destroy the Antichrist and his armies, and cast them into the lake of fire (Revelation 19:11-21).  Christ will then bind Satan in the Abyss for 1000 years and He will rule His earthly kingdom for this thousand-year period (Revelation 20;1-6).

My thinking is Biblical prophecies do not predict when something will happen, but they leave clues as to what will happen before that time as listed above.  Some charismatic world leader is to appear.  The other sign will be a great famine the likes of which we have never seen before.

As for prognosticators, the two most successful ones has been Nostradamus and our current Bruce Bueno de Mesquita who uses his own software based on mathematical analysis and gaming theory, to make predictions.  He has been contracted to work with the CIA and has been trying to predict if Iran will get the bomb and, if so, what effect it will have.  Professor Bueno de Mesquita doesn't think China will continue to be the richest nation although they will be involved in WW III.  I first heard the end times will happen in our lifetimes from a young JW.  Many JW think the world will end in this lifetime.  I'm not sure where they get this.  Compared to what the Bible says, future prognostications have been more in the way of entertainment but on serious matters.  It would be similar to astrology compared to astronomy.


----------



## james bond (Jul 22, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



You are going off your rocker like most liberals.  The world isn't going to end by global warming.  We won't be living on Mars or other planets or asteroids.  We won't find aliens.  We didn't start by evolutionary thinking.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> You are going off your rocker like most liberals. The world isn't going to end by global warming. We won't be living on Mars or other planets or asteroids. We won't find aliens. We didn't start by evolutionary thinking.




_*We didn't start by evolutionary thinking ...







*_
wrong bond, a being began to think that has led Flora and Fauna to where they are today_* ...






*_

of course some think differently than others whatever thinking is that is not physiological. and most likely liberal for what has been successful not the course of deadheads and extinction as christians.


----------



## james bond (Jul 22, 2017)

As soon as I posted, "The world won't end from global warming", we get this beaut.

Lefty loon non-science guy Bill Nye says old people must die in order to advance climate change hoax.

I, for one, will be waiting for Bill Nye to age out sooner than later.  What an idiotic putz he is.  He could be worse than BW which takes a lot to do.

The lefty loon non-science guy told the LA Times.

"It just sounds like people are scared. It just sounds like people are afraid. And the people who are afraid in general — with due respect, and I am now one of them — are older. Climate change deniers, by way of example, are older. It’s generational. So we’re just going to have to wait for those people to “age out,” as they say. “Age out” is a euphemism for “die.” But it’ll happen, I guarantee you — that’ll happen."

Lefty Loon Bill "The Non-Science Guy" Nye Says 'Old People Must Die' To Advance Climate Change Hoax Agenda • Now The End Begins


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 24, 2017)

james bond said:


> As soon as I posted, "The world won't end from global warming", we get this beaut.
> 
> Lefty loon non-science guy Bill Nye says old people must die in order to advance climate change hoax.
> 
> ...


.
well, if no one else will challenge the above provocative post someone should ...


what bond wrote:


james bond said:


> Lefty loon non-science guy Bill Nye says old people must die in order to advance climate change hoax.




what Nye wrote:


james bond said:


> It just sounds like people are scared ... Climate change deniers, by way of example, are older ... So we’re just going to have to wait for those people to “age out,” as they say. “Age out” is a euphemism for “die.” But it’ll happen, I guarantee you — that’ll happen."




fact vs fictional misrepresentation ....


again, the christian root uses deception to dissuade an honest debate concerning the future events for Garden Earth - its very viability not dissimilar to their own concoction they created in the 4th century to perpetrate their own agenda and used for that purpose in present time dilemmas. and the natural consequences of evolutionary _change_.

yes, they the deniers if by chance are reduced in number through attrition, dying their contribution to the genome of life will be altered enough to eventually producing new more liberal, truthful generations that eventually will put to rest not just global warming as a myth but the root cause for all impediments for remission to the Everlasting, the quality standards of life presently being suppressed by the desert religions and their _purposeful _reactionary components. the christian bible.


let bond reap what he reads, giving future generations hope than their certain path into the dark abyss of the deniers.


----------



## james bond (Jul 27, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > As soon as I posted, "The world won't end from global warming", we get this beaut.
> ...



No one has died out from climate change, but Bill Nye needs to die out early and I'll be rooting for that.  Maybe in a painful AF way such as starvation or falling into a geyser or volcano.  He deserves it.











Of course, he could die of embarrassment for being wrong, but this hasn't stopped him before.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 27, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> No one has died out from climate change, but Bill Nye needs to die out early and I'll be rooting for that.




two thoughts on the above, the first, climate change is problematic and bond knows that - the second, does anyone know who Bill Nye is, good luck and if the fundamentalist hate him he can't be all bad.



if the argument against evolution is an argument against change, mankind being a flawless specimen built by a creator their argument is as faulty as their 4th century book. which makes sense when taken at face value and their purposeful deceptions.


----------



## james bond (Jul 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>climate change is problematic<<

The problem is libbies have bought into climate change as "science" and think humans are causing the end of the world.  No such thing.  Liberals want to blame it on man, so they can control man or other liberals.

Bill Nye is a fake scientist.  He's an engineer and lied about fossil layers being neatly stacked and separated and incredulously claimed that one cannot find a single fossil which is in the wrong layer during his debate with Ken Ham.  That's total BS.

Atheist is wrong again
Fact Check: Did Bill Nye Tell A Huge Lie About The Fossil Layers?

And you, as another atheist, are wrong, too.  The argument is against climate change.  We are not flawless, but not ones to cause the end of the world even though we have acquired great destructive power.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> And you, as another atheist, are wrong, too. The argument is against climate change. We are not flawless, but not ones to cause the end of the world even though we have acquired great destructive power.



_*
We are not flawless ...*_



> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.




the above forgery is where I decide to stop reading the 4th century desert book, I saw early where the destructive history of that religion's performance is ceded. I may miss the deep wisdom of its pages but ultimately the forgeries make that work a book of evil ... I see no where else that Jesus is christ but from the spoken religion _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” _someone that was chosen by the Almighty for his goodness inspite of their flaws. those unwilling to work to modify the desert religions to correctly lead to the True path to the Everlasting are the one's repeating the history of the irreligious. bond is the true atheist.


_*... and let them have dominion over*_


it is humanity that has built the A-Bomb that can destroy Garden Earth that has been already used and humanity that built a nuclear reactor on an ocean beach that is seeping radioactive water into the worlds ocean's ... the other species on earth will never do what mankind is already capable of and is their glory before the Almighty and the reason for the extinction of mankind if such is the final Judgement.


----------



## james bond (Jul 29, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > And you, as another atheist, are wrong, too. The argument is against climate change. We are not flawless, but not ones to cause the end of the world even though we have acquired great destructive power.
> ...



>>it is humanity that has built the A-Bomb that can destroy Garden Earth that has been already used and humanity that built a nuclear reactor on an ocean beach that is seeping radioactive water into the worlds ocean's ... the other species on earth will never do what mankind is already capable of and is their glory before the Almighty and the reason for the extinction of mankind if such is the final Judgement<<

Nobody cares what you worry about.  Just put me down like Al E. Neuman, "What me, worry?"


----------



## james bond (Jul 29, 2017)

Let us continue about the idiot fake scientist and loser (will be $60K lighter in the bank account) Bill Nye and his latest escapade.  He keeps challenging the righteous climate change deniers and falling for their bets.  It's up to $60K now.  What a rube.

"Meteorologist Joe Bastardi wrote in a scathing opinion piece  late last year that the educator, who regularly speaks about man-made climate change, “is not a man of science” but “an actor.”

Bastardi challenged Nye to not only show a link between atmospheric CO2 levels and temperature, but also forecast where global temperatures are headed over the next five years. “Put up or shut up,” the WeatherBELL Analytics chief forecaster said to Nye in the largely overlooked article in The Patriot Post."

Bill Nye Challenges Climate Change Denier With $20,000 Bet | HuffPost


----------



## RWS (Jul 29, 2017)

I would like to see the Battle of the Bastardi.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jul 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Nobody cares what you worry about. Just put me down like Al E. Neuman, "What me, worry?"




you're not alone bond, why interrupt someone's fun and merriment ... .


----------



## james bond (Jul 29, 2017)

Bill Nye has been on this climate change vs cc denier since 2016.  What a nutjobber.

He does not even know what climate change is.  It's not the change in weather.

Here's what the No Science Guy said against CNN's meteorologist.  Meteorology is a science while what Bill Nye does is not.

He was on CNN to talk about the severe flooding in Louisiana, where at least 13 people were killed and 60,000 homes damaged.

"“For us, on my side of this, this is a result of climate change,” Nye told anchor Chris Cuomo. “It’s only going to get worse.”"

Bill Nye Rips CNN For Having 'Climate Change Denier Meteorologist' | HuffPost

I'd be glad to set up a Bill Nye death watch.


----------



## Tresha91203 (Jul 29, 2017)

MarathonMike said:


> Of those choices, De Facto Theist.



Same


----------



## Pogo (Jul 30, 2017)

james bond said:


> Bill Nye has been on this climate change vs cc denier since 2016.  What a nutjobber.
> 
> He does not even know what climate change is.  It's not the change in weather.
> 
> ...



So that I don't waste my time, give me a hint --- are any of your posts actually _on the topic _here?

This one doesn't even make a point anyway.  What are you, a bandwidth sponge?


----------



## Toro (Jul 30, 2017)

I'm 68.2% theist, 19.6% atheist and 12.2% something else I can't remember.


----------



## james bond (Aug 1, 2017)

Pogo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Bill Nye has been on this climate change vs cc denier since 2016.  What a nutjobber.
> ...



Bill Nye is a strong atheist and claims climate change (global warming) is science.  It seems there is a strong correlation between atheism and no science.


----------



## RWS (Aug 2, 2017)

He's a "Boss" sock. Bond is the more religious-spouting sock. Boss tries to go more on science. They're the same person and eventually converge on their ideas.

They just attack different threads.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 2, 2017)

james bond said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Bill Nye is a strong atheist and claims climate change (global warming) is science.




what about the concrete jungle, christian ... no warming there.







right up your alley, the book of greed and indifference no science required for a scripturalist.


----------



## james bond (Aug 3, 2017)

RWS said:


> He's a "Boss" sock. Bond is the more religious-spouting sock. Boss tries to go more on science. They're the same person and eventually converge on their ideas.
> 
> They just attack different threads.



And you're a boring sock puppet.  Just what is a "Boss" sock anyway when he was destroyed on Fox News?


Even on CNN, he was schooled.


I rather listen to what this guy has to say.  A real scientist.  Not a fake one that the liberals and atheists like to promote.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 3, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > He's a "Boss" sock. Bond is the more religious-spouting sock. Boss tries to go more on science. They're the same person and eventually converge on their ideas.
> ...


.


james bond said:


> A real scientist.




as opposed to the phony 4th century christian bible masquerading as a religion ... 








the christian licks the asphalt before evening prayer, Flora is their enemy.


----------



## james bond (Aug 4, 2017)

Here's another complaint about what this thread has turned into.  It's trying to be turned into a thread for the the "Alt-Left" atheists.

Thus, Bill Nye, atheist, gets destroyed here.  The alt-left atheists claim facts and believe in science, but it's fake science, i.e. it's not even science.  They do not even know what facts are.  Their spokesperson Bill Nye isn't even a scientist.  Neither is Al Gore ha ha.

The truth about global warming is in my post #105.  Watch video #3 to see and hear what the Nobel Laureate in Physics, Professor Ivar Giaever, has to say.  He has the low down.

We'll be talking more about fake science in the near future.  It's no wonder when alt-left atheists discover the truth or when they realize they are wrong, they go bonkers.


----------



## james bond (Aug 8, 2017)

More evidence for God and the Bible, and atheists are wrong again.

"Archaeologists may have found the lost Roman city where three apostles of Jesus Christ lived.

A team found a Roman-style bathhouse on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee in Israel that could be a remnant of Julias, the city that Peter, Andrew and Philip called home,  Haaretz reported. The bathhouse, uncovered at a site called el-Araj in the Bethsaida nature reserve, suggests that there was once a city in that location, as opposed to just a fishing village, which backs up information from the first-century Jewish historian  Josephus Flavius — he wrote that the Jewish monarch King Philip Herod, son of Herod the Great, turned the Bethsaida fishing village into a Roman city."

Archaeologists Find Ancient City Where Jesus Christ’s Apostles Were Born


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 10, 2017)

james bond said:


> More evidence for God and the Bible, and atheists are wrong again.
> 
> "Archaeologists may have found the lost Roman city where three apostles of Jesus Christ lived.




the fundies do not know where even Jesus was buried till supposedly "Catherine" found the place just before writing their 4th century forgery .  and now "archeologist" say they may have found the residence for 3 of the original "apostles" ... and they claim that is proof of their "God" over atheism.


again, .   for bond and his 4th century bible.


----------



## james bond (Aug 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > More evidence for God and the Bible, and atheists are wrong again.
> ...








Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin.  Atheism is a sin.  What it means is hell awaits you and I have my Christian victory cigar vs atheists ready to smoke.  Your pain is my pleasure as pain and pleasure seem to be opposite sides of the the same coin.  I would be working to make sure that evolution is correct if I were an atheist.  Even Christians should make sure that evolution is correct or wrong before making statements or judgments.  Maybe you'll be my atheist victory cigar for the next life.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 10, 2017)

james bond said:


> Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin. Atheism is a sin. What it means is hell awaits you and I have my Christian victory cigar vs atheists ready to smoke. Your pain is my pleasure as pain and pleasure seem to be opposite sides of the the same coin. I would be working to make sure that evolution is correct if I were an atheist. Even Christians should make sure that evolution is correct or wrong before making statements or judgments. Maybe you'll be my atheist victory cigar for the next life.





james bond said:


> Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin. Atheism is a sin. What it means is hell awaits you and I have my Christian victory cigar vs atheists ready to smoke.



_*
Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin.
*_


> _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” - - _ “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?




the spoken religion began long before what you have written and will last long after you have passed. without a copy yours is lost forever.

you've been smoking since the late 4th century bond your clouded mind is catching up with you the forgeries have left you at a dead end. time for you to reap what you have sown.


----------



## RWS (Aug 11, 2017)

He's crazy Breeze. He is a religious zealot. There's no changing his mind. If he had his way, he would instantly kill us for disagreeing. 

His own words curse him and his religion, and make him the equivalent of a jihad proponent. 

Nothing will change his mind. Just have to make sure he never has any weapons or makes any threats online.


----------



## james bond (Aug 14, 2017)

RWS said:


> He's crazy Breeze. He is a religious zealot. There's no changing his mind. If he had his way, he would instantly kill us for disagreeing.
> 
> His own words curse him and his religion, and make him the equivalent of a jihad proponent.
> 
> Nothing will change his mind. Just have to make sure he never has any weapons or makes any threats online.



Ha ha.  I'm not the religious zealot.  You are.  There's no changing your mind despite the evidence.  The only faith you have is "no God" with absolutely no evidence for it.  The scientific evidence is for God.  Moreover, you believe I would instantly kill you for disagreeing.  Now, why would I do that?  That's crazy.  It's against the law, for one to kill another human, you loon.

His own words curse him and his religion, and make him the equivalent of a jihad proponent.

>>Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin. Atheism is a sin. What it means is hell awaits you and I have my Christian victory cigar vs atheists ready to smoke. Your pain is my pleasure as pain and pleasure seem to be opposite sides of the the same coin. I would be working to make sure that evolution is correct if I were an atheist. Even Christians should make sure that evolution is correct or wrong before making statements or judgments. Maybe you'll be my atheist victory cigar for the next life.<<

Just where did I say that?  It means you will receive what is coming to you in the next life.  You only live twice.  All religions believe in a second life or there is some kind of judgment for this one except atheism.  There has to be some kind of judgment for this life besides man-made or else there is no justice.  It's not just about what one can get away with.

Second, aren't you judging me?  I said nothing of the kind, but that is how you judged me.  God made us like him, so this is further evidence that you will be judged and made to pay for your sins.  It's in the best selling book in the history of human kind.  Are you going to be my human victory cigar, too?  He who laughs last, laughs best.  Ha ha.

God made a negative warning of not eating from the Tree of Knowledge to Adam and Eve and they failed.  This time, he made a positive warning of John 3:16 and so far, you have failed.


----------



## james bond (Aug 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin. Atheism is a sin. What it means is hell awaits you and I have my Christian victory cigar vs atheists ready to smoke. Your pain is my pleasure as pain and pleasure seem to be opposite sides of the the same coin. I would be working to make sure that evolution is correct if I were an atheist. Even Christians should make sure that evolution is correct or wrong before making statements or judgments. Maybe you'll be my atheist victory cigar for the next life.
> ...



>>Calling the Bible forgery and such is a sin. Atheism is a sin. What it means is hell awaits you and I have my Christian victory cigar vs atheists ready to smoke. Your pain is my pleasure as pain and pleasure seem to be opposite sides of the the same coin. I would be working to make sure that evolution is correct if I were an atheist. Even Christians should make sure that evolution is correct or wrong before making statements or judgments. Maybe you'll be my atheist victory cigar for the next life.<<

It's not my mind that is clouded.  I see things clearly and this is what is written to be in store for you.  Now, I can't describe exactly what happens although others have.   Hell won't be a pleasant destination with the gnashing of teeth and all.  These guys have the scholars who studied it.

"*Question: "What does hell look like? How hot is hell?"

Answer: * We cannot know exactly what hell looks like or how hot it will be. But Scripture does use some descriptive language of hell, and that gives us an idea of what hell will be like. It is sure to be a place of torment, which the Bible often pictures as fiery. For the purposes of this article, the terms _hell_ and _lake of fire_ are used interchangeably.

Some interpreters take the Bible’s descriptions of hell to be symbolic, because some of the descriptions are difficult to reconcile with each other. For example, picturing hell as both fire (Matthew 25:41) and outer darkness (Matthew 8:12) seems paradoxical. Of course, the God of the impossible can do anything, including make dark fire. So, the descriptions could be literal. Even if the language describing hell is symbolic, the place itself is real—and the reality will no doubt be worse than the symbols.

The scriptural descriptions of hell are meant to emphasize the torment and suffering that will be experienced by those sent there. The “fire” may picture the wrath of God that is experienced by unbelievers in hell, whereas the “outer darkness” may picture the alienation from God’s love, mercy, and grace. Whether the vivid language is symbolic or literal, we can be assured that hell is a terrible, terrifying place. Possibly the most terrifying aspect of hell is its duration. The suffering is eternal. It has no end. For us, here and now, the concept of hell should drive us to the cross of Christ. It is only by repentance and faith in Christ that we can be saved from the wrath to come.

Here are some of the passages that describe hell:

Matthew 25:41, “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.’”

Matthew 8:12, “But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

2 Thessalonians 1:6–9, “God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.”

Revelation 20:10, 15, “And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. . . . Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.”

Romans 2:8, “But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.”

Matthew 25:30, “And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

Hell, although we do not know exactly what it will look like, will be a place of unending suffering and torment from which there will be no escape. Therefore, now is the day of salvation. Now is the day for all to repent and believe the gospel. Now is the day for us to proclaim the good news that Christ has come to save sinners who trust in Him for forgiveness. Those who look to Christ now will be saved from the wrath to come (1 Thessalonians 1:9–10)."

What does hell look like? How hot is hell?


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Now is the day for us to proclaim the good news that Christ has come to save sinners ...





that may have been the pity Jesus sought to relive and were the events of the 1st century only to became entangled in the sinners web culminating in their crucifixion both Jesus and the times something 4th century biblicist know well how to accomplish. as bond.

there is no escaping the religion of the Almighty, the Triumph of Good vs Evil where the Final Judgement will not be a salvation for sinners.

there is no mention than that those of the Great Flood simply perished there is no hell in the spoken religion simply extinction for failure to accomplish the goal set from the beginning differently but the same as the previous outcome. no third strike, two strikes and your out.


----------



## RWS (Aug 15, 2017)

If we believe in your religion, Bond, we have eternal life after we die??

What do i need to do to sign up?

Because if you're right, I'd love eternal life in heaven rather than this shit. I don't need no virgins, a well-versed woman would be enough to keep me happy. I'd be willing to do whatever you want, if you're promising eternal life in heaven after i die.

Can you guarantee it? If I decide to bend the knee and devote my life and death for your cause?

And what if it ends up being a crock of shit? How do I let the living people know not to follow the same route?


----------



## james bond (Aug 15, 2017)

RWS said:


> If we believe in your religion, Bond, we have eternal life after we die??
> 
> What do i need to do to sign up?
> 
> ...



First, I'm not the one to guarantee it.  It's Jesus.

You don't have to sign up for anything, but many followers end up developing a deeper interest and joining a church group.

>>And what if it ends up being a crock of shit? How do I let the living people know not to follow the same route?<<

Then again, your last sentence doesn't make you seem sincere as one who has true interest in being saved.  Why don't you watch my Ben Piershale video on youtube or at least get your mindset into more of an agnostic position and try later?  Don't worry.  Failure isn't fatal.


----------



## james bond (Aug 15, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>there is no mention than that those of the Great Flood simply perished there is no hell in the spoken religion simply extinction for failure to accomplish the goal set from the beginning differently but the same as the previous outcome. no third strike, two strikes and your out.<<

It's one strike and you're out.

As for the great flood, you must be talking about the fake upcoming one that liberal and atheist scientists keep talking about due to global warming.  No one needs to be saved from that.  That isn't catastrophism, and isn't it interesting that atheist scientists are stealing from the Christian scientists again?

"God sent the Flood as a judgment on mankind’s wickedness. But it wasn’t only human beings who died. Most of the animals were also swept away. Genesis 6:7 states, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.” Why did God destroy animal life in the Flood, since they were not guilty of sin?

First, it should be noted that God did not destroy _all_ animal life. Two of every kind of unclean animal were placed on the ark, and seven of every clean animal (Genesis 7:1-4). In addition, sea life was not harmed. The destruction included land animals and birds.

God had a plan to recreate. Just as God had created human and animal life in the beginning of time, so now He would recreate human and animal life. Genesis 8 closes with the animals leaving the ark at the beginning a new world. They went with the command to go forth and multiply (Genesis 8:17).

We can assume that, in some way, animal life had become corrupted along with human life. Genesis 6:13 states, “I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence through them.” The phrase “all flesh” is used throughout the narrative to include both human and animal life. How was animal life corrupted? This is not explained. Some have suggested the use of animals in sinful, pagan sacrifices as the reason. Others have considered that the violence filling the earth was due, in part, to animals (this would correspond with the theory of large dinosaurs being destroyed by the Flood). Regardless of how the animals became corrupted, God viewed them as part of creation that needed to be recreated."

Why did God also destroy animals in the Flood (Genesis 6-8)?


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 16, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> "God sent the Flood as a judgment on mankind’s wickedness. But it wasn’t only human beings who died.




there we go again, the 4th century religion (christanity) is for "sinners" (only) and we can assume this is a sin within the sin of their religion ... I'm being serious, the spoken religion has no caveat for no.s of other beings killed and that is (one of) the sins in genesis that grants humanity "domain" over other beings where later those same (other) beings have registry with sinning the same as humanity.  as I have said all along, the spoken religion, all _Beings_ are created the same with the same aspiration to accomplish Admission to the Everlasting - by the Almighty.

Parable of Noah: when the last person (that species) of either Good vs Evil perishes, those remaining (all being the same in Triumph) will be those that are granted the Final Judgement. - Noah would have been the last to die of one or the other (good) with their death the parable would have been completed - since those remaining would have all been destroyed by the Almighty anyway, They decided to destroy them before Noah's death giving humanity one more chance, a second Strike - but that's it no Strike 3.




james bond said:


> there is no mention than that those of the Great Flood simply perished





even in the sinners book as far as I am aware does not send those people to the burning furnace those sinners so admire, hell . ... if not them then just maybe the sinners (christians) of today may be given the same non event for their insanity to be sinners but I am not sure they do not and will not pay for their crimes they commit to other beings, including Global Warming (unjust deforestation) as those without sin would have nothing to worry about.


----------



## james bond (Aug 16, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I said it before, but the Bible is for everybody.  It's not just pointing out the sinners, but you're sinning by disbelief and what I perceive as being selfish or self-centered.  It's an attitude of I can't be bothered by a book or a book of mythology when it isn't the case.  Some do not even bother to read science books even though they represent themselves as relying on science and rational thinking.  They take the easy way out and criticize God or the Christians.

Next, we continue to talk past each other.  Believe me, I am trying but communication is a two-way street.

Again, wackos like Bill Nye, Al Gore, you and countless liberals believe in global warming and that we'll all die due to it.  It's one of the reasons why you want an escape plan to Mars or some other planet that you can colonize.  The evidence is there for the global flood that destroyed all, but you won't open your eyes and see it.  You won't accept it as science and instead want to foist the lie of global warming and that it's human activity at fault.  Instead of a world catastrophe that has already happened, you continue to foist the belief that it is going to happen in the near future.  Isn't that stealing that which you call a myth from the Bible?


----------



## LittleNipper (Aug 16, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...





james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I knew there was a reason I liked James --- James Bond!


----------



## james bond (Aug 17, 2017)

If there is a global warming global flood, then solution is to build a large ark and take a male and female animal of each kind.  However, even if you build the ark, there would be too many atheists and liberals that would show up and the ark would probably sink.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 17, 2017)

james bond said:


> If there is a global warming global flood, then solution is to build a large ark and take a male and female animal of each kind.  However, even if you build the ark, there would be too many atheists and liberals that would show up and the ark would probably sink.


.


james bond said:


> ... there would be too many atheists and liberals



no, the idea is your own that would be your problem ... not to mention there will still be land mass even without any iceshield, you do not know why there is the rainbow, Idolator.





james bond said:


> I said it before, but the Bible is for everybody. It's not just pointing out the sinners, but you're sinning by disbelief and what I perceive as being selfish or self-centered.



_*
It's not just pointing out the sinners*_


again, you do not understand your own religion, the forgeries claim everyone, all humanity are sinners without means for redress ... so anything you say is a sin, anything you read is a sin every moment of your life is sinfull.

_*
... but you're sinning by disbelief and what I perceive as being selfish or self-centered.

*_
I will point out to you again, I stopped reading your book of sins within the first page or two I realized what it was.



> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.



I got this far, the above is a forgery and a sin you and the other sinners on the otherhand kept reading and became what that path throughout history is testament too and your religion proclaims that you are all sinners.

I committed no nonredeemable sins and have stopped and have redeemed what I have in the past and live now without sin, you only kid yourself believing you will be admitted into the Everlasting as a sinner, why would they want you.

the 4th century book must be rewritten or abandoned the same for what they call the old testament they are all corrupt. they are from the spoken religion and that means is the same to correct them using the Garden correcting them before Earth is destroyed and all is lost.


----------



## LittleNipper (Aug 17, 2017)

james bond said:


> If there is a global warming global flood, then solution is to build a large ark and take a male and female animal of each kind.  However, even if you build the ark, there would be too many atheists and liberals that would show up and the ark would probably sink.


Heck, they showed up in Noah's day only the heckle Noah! I'm sure liberals and the atheists of today are no different.


----------



## LittleNipper (Aug 17, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > If there is a global warming global flood, then solution is to build a large ark and take a male and female animal of each kind.  However, even if you build the ark, there would be too many atheists and liberals that would show up and the ark would probably sink.
> ...


Sorry, but if one breaks even one small Law, one has broken them all. GOD demands total PERFECTION and only Christ/Messiah provides that. Disregard the Messiah you disrespect GOD and HIS ONLY means of Salvation through HIM and not your halfhearted attempts.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 17, 2017)

LittleNipper said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


LittleNipper said:


> Sorry, but if one breaks even one small Law, one has broken them all. GOD demands total PERFECTION and only Christ/Messiah provides that. Disregard the Messiah you disrespect GOD and HIS ONLY means of Salvation through HIM and not your halfhearted attempts.




you are a sinner that worships a religion of sin, christianity everything you say is sinful it is you that have abandoned the Almighty for your false and Idolatrous late 4th century religion.


----------



## james bond (Aug 17, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > If there is a global warming global flood, then solution is to build a large ark and take a male and female animal of each kind.  However, even if you build the ark, there would be too many atheists and liberals that would show up and the ark would probably sink.
> ...



>>
_*It's not just pointing out the sinners*_


again, you do not understand your own religion, the forgeries claim everyone, all humanity are sinners without means for redress ... so anything you say is a sin, anything you read is a sin every moment of your life is sinfull.<<

I'm referring to what the Bible states, so it's not a question about interpreting Christianity.  And how do you proclaim to understand it when you haven't even walked a mile in a Christian's shoes?

How can you proclaim to understand when you didn't even read the most sold book in the entire world?

>>I will point out to you again, I stopped reading your book of sins within the first page or two I realized what it was.<<

On top of that, you claim it to be a book full of sins.  How warped and wrong is that view of the truth? 

>>I committed no nonredeemable sins and have stopped and have redeemed what I have in the past and live now without sin, you only kid yourself believing you will be admitted into the Everlasting as a sinner, why would they want you.<<

You cannot judge yourself.  It would be pretty ridiculous even in our own current world to be one's own judge.  This should signal to you how wrong your thinking is and how far astray your thinking has lead you.  Your Savior will be the one to be the judge, jury and executioner for the one life.

On top of all this, you want to rewrite the Bible.  How sick is that?  The Bible has not changed and cannot change.  It's the evolution "religious" beliefs that keeps on changing.  Truth does not change.  It stands the test of time.

Maybe you'll hear james bond's last laugh (or is it Emperor Palpatine's?)  when you are given the final verdict.


----------



## Votto (Aug 17, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.




I reckon that makes me a dumb, dumb cuz I believe in God.

BTW:  do you know the difference between an atheist and an agnostic?


An atheist has gonads.


----------



## james bond (Aug 17, 2017)

LittleNipper said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > If there is a global warming global flood, then solution is to build a large ark and take a male and female animal of each kind.  However, even if you build the ark, there would be too many atheists and liberals that would show up and the ark would probably sink.
> ...



To be honest, we know they don't like the ark concept.  What they're willing to accept is a one way trip to Mars though and they'll prolly take a few animals along, but not two of each kind.  Just as well.  I suspect they'll die trying.  I'm not aware of any prophecies that humans will end up colonizing another planet.  Maybe the moon, but I'm not sure we'll be able to "colonize" it.


----------



## RWS (Aug 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > If we believe in your religion, Bond, we have eternal life after we die??
> ...



The point is, what if I commit to your religion, and then when I die... the supernatural stuff and utopia stuff doesn't happen? And I'm just dead....

I would have committed my life and my wealth to support something that wasn't true, filling the pockets of some other assholes, that are trying to fool everyone else too. And I wouldn't be able to come back to tell you all about my epic fail, and warn you for the future.

Sounds sweet for a person looking for donations and making money!

Doesn't sound sweet for people who question bullshit.

I don't want to join your religion, but I do want to audit the donations, to see where the money really goes.


----------



## RWS (Aug 18, 2017)

Christians donate BILLIONS of dollars a year to the Church.

Yet people are starving and dying in many countries, they need support, but the Church says it still needs MORE money to help them...

It's a lot of people, i don't doubt that huge sums are necessary to help them. But I do doubt what the Church uses it's donations for, and I don't think it all goes to the needy. I think a lot of it goes to the "greedy".


----------



## james bond (Aug 18, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



>>The point is, what if I commit to your religion, and then when I die... the supernatural stuff and utopia stuff doesn't happen? And I'm just dead...<<

Oh, I understand your point.  All too well, I'm afraid.  You start talking about God and in a flash you're talking about religion.

The point is you do not get it, nor are qualified to get it, i.e. God, his kingdom, his power, his glory.  I guess not everyone will get it, at least the way they want it.  Many will fall by the wayside just like they did the first judgment with Noah's Flood.  This doesn't mean that you can't change, but no one else can do it for you.  Only you.

Second, what you're doing is talking about your own religion of atheism.  You probably only mentioned God in order to express and hawk your religion.  I get it.  It's what lowly internet atheists do.

Third, hell may not be too bad.  I dunno.  My view is similar to Dante's fictional view that it is comprised of different levels.







I think people left on New Earth can get help, so there's hope for them.  The underworld will be vast.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 18, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> How can you proclaim to understand when you didn't even read the most sold book in the entire world?



I read as far as the first forgery -


> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.



and with trepidation for the history of your religion -






I chose not to read further, there is no reason to have to read your book the Spoken religion of the Almighty is readily available and is the origin of the christian bible they have misconstrued.





james bond said:


> You cannot judge yourself. It would be pretty ridiculous even in our own current world to be one's own judge. This should signal to you how wrong your thinking is and how far astray your thinking has lead you. Your Savior will be the one to be the judge, jury and executioner for the one life.





> _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” - - _ “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?



the spoken religion say's otherwise.





james bond said:


> On top of all this, you want to rewrite the Bible. How sick is that? The Bible has not changed and cannot change. It's the evolution "religious" beliefs that keeps on changing. Truth does not change. It stands the test of time.








the above is what the christian bible has brought to humanity, no less Idolatrous than those of the Great Flood the problem is you are ruining life for all beings not just yourselves.


----------



## LittleNipper (Aug 18, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> LittleNipper said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


Are you saying that you are superior to me? Are you saying that you never lied --- ever? Are you saying that you never cheated at anything? Are you saying you never made fun of anyone? Are you saying you never took anything that was not yours? Are you saying you never talked about anyone? So you never talked back to your parents? Are you saying you never used the Lord's name in vain? You never got drunk? 

If you died tonight, why should GOD allow you into heaven? What would you say?  Tell me, I really what to understand your logic!  Do you even believe in GOD?


----------



## james bond (Aug 19, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>the above is what the christian bible has brought to humanity, no less Idolatrous than those of the Great Flood the problem is you are ruining life for all beings not just yourselves<<

If the earth is going to flood again due to global warming, then isn't it better to live in a high rise, at least above the sixth floor ha ha?

>>I read as far as the first forgery -<<

>>and with trepidation for the history of your religion -<<

The atheist's equivalent of the Good Book would be Darwin's book.  However, most of his theories have fallen by the wayside.  ToE hasn't really come through for you.  If it did, then we could all use it instead of it turning into the racist Eugenics and Nazism.  Weren't the evolution of social Darwinism, Eugenics and Nazi people marching for it in Charlottesville?  Why is it that one cannot prove evolution happens?  Your science does not bring forth true conclusions.  How can the earth be 4.6 billion years old when it's still young and should be the same age as the universe?  Use radiocarbon dating instead of radiometric dating and then you'll get a young earth.

From Dante's map of hell, I got you going to the sixth level or heresy level.  It states, "Heretics and false teachers locked in burning stone coffins."  Does that sound fair to you?  And why are there naked women with green hair watching over you ha ha?


----------



## RWS (Aug 19, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I am a spiritual person. I think there are things we don't understand yet. I believe in the teachings of Jesus, as we're told, I just don't believe he is a supernatural being. I don't believe in your religion. I think you've been hoodwinked from birth. 

And you're trying to hoodwink others. 

It's ok. You can let go, and join the rest of us, and you'll still go to heaven as long as you're a good person. If it exists.

However, the way you roll, you're not a good person and you're pushing your religion upon us, and judging us when we decline. 

Which means you wouldn't go to heaven, based on the latest papal decrees.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 19, 2017)

LittleNipper said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > LittleNipper said:
> ...


.


LittleNipper said:


> Are you saying that you are superior to me? Are you saying that you never lied --- ever? Are you saying that you never cheated at anything? Are you saying you never made fun of anyone? Are you saying you never took anything that was not yours? Are you saying you never talked about anyone? So you never talked back to your parents? Are you saying you never used the Lord's name in vain? You never got drunk?



no, I do not partake in your spirits ... what is your "born again" never had a chance for the voluntary, a
very sadistic parent (alcoholic) but have done so through struggle and will live out my life as a non sinner and would perish first than to do otherwise.





LittleNipper said:


> If you died tonight, why should GOD allow you into heaven? What would you say? Tell me, I really what to understand your logic! Do you even believe in GOD?



I'll clue you in one last time, the spoken Religion of the Almighty has only five words for the True religion: The Triumph of Good vs Evil. if you are Triumphant, only then will you even be Judged, if properly triumphant Admission to the Everlasting will be granted - after apprenticeship, I hope to be an engineer for the gnome of life and figure out what happened to make someone like you and bond. possible.


----------



## james bond (Aug 19, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



>>I am a spiritual person. I think there are things we don't understand yet. I believe in the teachings of Jesus, as we're told, I just don't believe he is a supernatural being. I don't believe in your religion. I think you've been hoodwinked from birth.

And you're trying to hoodwink others.

It's ok. You can let go, and join the rest of us, and you'll still go to heaven as long as you're a good person. If it exists.

However, the way you roll, you're not a good person and you're pushing your religion upon us, and judging us when we decline.

Which means you wouldn't go to heaven, based on the latest papal decrees<<

You keep changing the subject to the point of making no sense at all.  Only you have to account for your life and actions.  Today, you claim to believe in the teachings of Jesus, but don't believe in a supernatural being and don't believe in Jesus' religion.  This is why you're a nowhere man who is a nobody ha ha, and why people treat you like the rube you are.  Being a bigger nowhere man would be perfect for you in the next life.  You won't have a spiritually perfect body.  I got you pegged as a "Word falsifier who suffers from fevers and headaches" according to Dante's inferno.  It's one of the levels in the lower depths, but doesn't sound as bad as the burning stone coffin.


----------



## RWS (Aug 20, 2017)

james bond said:


> RWS said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Many other people also say great things on how to follow your life, and help others do the same. It's not just Jesus. And his words were given to us hundreds of years after he died. But still, I love the ideal of "Jesus", and others, that state how we should be kind people and help others rather than turn to greed and "Me Me Me" mentality. 

So I live my life the way I think a good person should. I don't need a god to do it. It pains me when I see people insist that you have to worship a god, or you're doomed to "hell" if not. That's the people causing all the problems in the world...


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 20, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> If the earth is going to flood again due to global warming, then isn't it better to live in a high rise, at least above the sixth floor ha ha?





BreezeWood said:


> including Global Warming (unjust deforestation) ...




tell us high rise -






how life will be without oxygen in your penthouse ....





james bond said:


> From Dante's map of hell, I got you going to the sixth level or heresy level. It states, "Heretics and false teachers locked in burning stone coffins." Does that sound fair to you? And why are there naked women with green hair watching over you ha ha?



where in your 4th century book does a forgery say Jesus said it is required to read your book ... what etchings are there by the Almighty that who you admire, moses did not destroy for the content they like you disagreed with. your 10 commandments are perhaps the worst forgeries of all time.
_*


why are there naked women with green hair watching over you ha ha ...*_

those levels are not for after you die, bond they are for when you have a physiology to find your way out of them and are set to be unwittingly fallen into - is that a sin, not always. do people find their ways out, yes but not by reading a book, they have to be accomplished by the being theirself.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Aug 20, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



So what happens if I'M right, but I commit to YOUR religious beliefs?

Talk about something not sounding very sweet.

Exactly why do you want to audit donations?  Is any of that money yours?  If not, why is it any of your business who gives what?  Have you always been a nosy little bastard eaten by envy over what you perceive others to have, or is this a recent thing?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Aug 20, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



It pains you to see people believing something different from you?  Why?  Are you that wobbly in your beliefs that you can't tolerate the existence of disagreement?

Given that more people have been slaughtered by those professing hostility toward religion than have ever been slaughtered by all religions combined, I'd say the real issue is your mistaken belief that "all the problems in the world" are defined as "lots of people don't agree with me!"


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Aug 20, 2017)

RWS said:


> Christians donate BILLIONS of dollars a year to the Church.
> 
> Yet people are starving and dying in many countries, they need support, but the Church says it still needs MORE money to help them...
> 
> It's a lot of people, i don't doubt that huge sums are necessary to help them. But I do doubt what the Church uses it's donations for, and I don't think it all goes to the needy. I think a lot of it goes to the "greedy".



Couple of questions, just to clarify.

1)  Are any of those billions of dollars yours?

2)  Is it any of your damned business what the people who DO own that money do with it?

3)  How much of YOUR money have you given to the starving and dying?

4)  Wouldn't your energy be better spent in trying to help the starving and dying you claim to care about, rather than ranting and raving about how other people aren't doing it, apparently with absolutely no hard information on the issue?


----------



## RWS (Aug 21, 2017)

Well, yes, I do donate money, I just don't do it at the church much anymore. But I actually do go once or twice a year, and I do donate at that time as well. I also donate time and services to help the homeless throughout the year. I do it because I care about people. Not because of a religion. 

So to answer your questions, in order... 

So what happens if you're right, and you commit to my religious beliefs? Well, first, I don't have a religious belief. I'm just saying to stop killing and judging others over your religious belief. But if you are right, and there is a heaven that judges people based on "goodness", then you will be accepted, just as I will. And we'll hang out together and have some beers once in a while! However, if your heaven demands that I adhere to your religion in order to be accepted, then I don't want to be part of your heaven. And I'll send you happy texts from hell... 

Why do I want to audit donations? Because I don't think all of your money goes to help the needy. Because it doesn't take that much money, as is donated, to help the needy people in the world. A huge part of it, is lining people's pockets, and making churches prettier in order to garner new believers/donators. About 40% of what is donated actually goes to charities. You can do 100% by doing it yourself. If the church gave 80% (because I understand they need 20% for maintenance and food/clothing for clergy), they would double their help. However, they never want to eliminate need in a particular area. They need to keep the need, in order to feed the greed. Vatican assets are at about $8.5 billion. So the questions we need to ask, is who is profiting from the excess? And where does that extra 40% go? Wouldn't you rather have 100% go to help people around you?

I didn't say that it pains me that other people believe something different than me, I said that it pains me when I see people that INSIST that I have to follow your god, or face damnation. You are wrong, if you do that. 

1 and 2, Yes and No (unless they're using it to fund fundamentalists).

3. I don't keep count, but I'd estimate about 2k per year, but not to the church. And I'm actively involved in helping the community in other ways as well.

4. What? I'm not ranting and raving. The guy that is promoting religious bullshit is ranting and raving. He's a fundie, and thinks that he is better than everyone else because he believes in that religion. He believes he deserves heaven for following the mantra, and that everyone else should roast in hell if they don't. 

I highly disagree with that sentiment...


----------



## james bond (Aug 22, 2017)

RWS said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > RWS said:
> ...



Again, you keep making up things as you go along, which I have said makes you a nowhere man and a nobody.  Just review what you wanted earlier and your statements and arguments now.  Did you think you were fooling me?  No.  I can see clearly through you.  What we have established is the humans are flawed due to Adam and Eve's original sin.  Christians and the religious recognize this.  Nobody is perfect.  We are selfish creatures.  We lie, cheat, steal and break the Ten Commandments.  I recognized this early on.  All of this cause problems in our lives which atheists fail to admit because they want to continue living their miserable and immoral lives.  This is what you claim is your spiritual and good person life.  Bah.  It's a lie for which you will get fevers and headaches if Dante was correct .  Seriously though, this is key.  If you don't believe me, then believe in William Lane Craig below dealing with an atheist's concerns.  Furthermore, atheists will want to become Communists later as we shall see.  This is already happening in American society.  It's just more lies spewing out of the mouths of atheists.  I speak the truth while you are filled with lies and deceptions in your head.  It's part of the core for the lowly and low intelligent internet atheists.  They can't think for themselves, nor can they think.  They just repeat what their liberal masters tell them to say.  It's no wonder libs and atheists go bonkers when they find the contradictions in their worldview.

So, good luck with your wrong and askew beliefs and hope you find the right path instead of fevers and headaches.

William Lane Craig and one atheist's fear of hell
Will God’s Judgement Be More Tolerable for Atheists than for Young Earth Creationists? | Reasonable Faith

Definition of atheism
Definition of atheism | Reasonable Faith

His answers for atheists book
Answers For Atheists | Reasonable Faith

>>The guy that is promoting religious bullshit is ranting and raving. He's a fundie, and thinks that he is better than everyone else because he believes in that religion. He believes he deserves heaven for following the mantra, and that everyone else should roast in hell if they don't.<<

I'm not ranting and raving.  I'm very calm and speak the truth.  It sounds like you're the one upset and ranting and raving.  What happened to your peaceful, spiritual "religion?"  It didn't take much for you to become angry and fall off the tracks.


----------



## james bond (Aug 22, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



Well, if I die from lack of oxygen due to global warming, then I die.  I won't worry about human made CO2.  It's part of breathing out ha ha.

>>where in your 4th century book does a forgery say Jesus said it is required to read your book<<

More BW delusions.  It takes a little FAITH to read the Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth book.  Those who don't miss out since we aren't presented with the Tree of Knowledge this time.

>>those levels are not for after you die, bond they are for when you have a physiology to find your way out of them and are set to be unwittingly fallen into - is that a sin, not always. do people find their ways out, yes but not by reading a book, they have to be accomplished by the being theirself.<<

Dante's Inferno is fiction, but I don't think he's far off with his map of hell.  There may be variations from other religions such as reincarnation and the like.  What if you come back to life as a cockroach and continue to return as pest like creatures?  That would be hellish, too.


----------



## RWS (Aug 23, 2017)

James Bond, where do you think I will go after i die? Heaven, or Hell?


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> More BW delusions. It takes a little FAITH to read the Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth book. Those who don't miss out since we aren't presented with the Tree of Knowledge this time.





james bond said:


> The atheist's equivalent of the Good Book would be Darwin's book.





you've never explained why ToE from any publication would be atheistic, is it the lack of fear for an unknown ... you're a madman in many respects it is your influence as you mentioned Charlottsville that blinds not just yourself but others from the Tree of Knowledge, your book. the other publications are alive yours is dead.

you and moses removed the Environmental Protection Agency as the 11th commandment, that was your last laugh. good luck.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Aug 23, 2017)

The "christians" always end up like this ... 

Always fighting over who is the better christian, always yelling at each other that_ "My god is better than your god"_. 

Its idiotic but hey, their god(s) must be so proud.


----------



## james bond (Aug 23, 2017)

RWS said:


> James Bond, where do you think I will go after i die? Heaven, or Hell?



This is a leading question and no answer will satisfy you, but I'll do my best.  The correct answer is I don't know because I do not know what will happen between now and time of your end of this life.  As in The Terminator movie, the future is not set.  Some of it is predetermined or predestined, but with free will, the final destination can be changed.  By predestination, I mean you did not get to choose your parents or whether you were born with a disability or talent.  It's not that your future is determined already.

However, I can give an educated guess from your way of thinking and not accepting what Christians are telling you.  This would apply to everyone else, too.  I would have to go with thumbs down.  The same as most would eat from the Tree of Knowledge if God provided a negative test.  A heinous test of John 3:16 came from a criminal who was facing life in prison and afterward committed suicide.  Aaron Hernandez became a famous football player and infamous murderer during his lifetime.  Will he get another chance on Earth because he believed?  I doubt it, but I'm not the judge.  Another example would be Roger Ebert of movie review fame.  He died not being a believer and his wife was Christian.  I would think he ended up in a place like limbo which is still part of hell.  Obviously, this is just my opinion from what I know.

Finally, I have come to think the only way to convince ALL atheists that God exists is through pain and suffering.  I do not know any other proof that is more effective than this in convincing someone who will not accept any other evidence.


----------



## james bond (Aug 23, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>you've never explained why ToE from any publication would be atheistic, is it the lack of fear for an unknown ... you're a madman in many respects it is your influence as you mentioned Charlottsville that blinds not just yourself but others from the Tree of Knowledge, your book. the other publications are alive yours is dead.

you and moses removed the Environmental Protection Agency as the 11th commandment, that was your last laugh. good luck.<<

wut?


----------



## james bond (Aug 23, 2017)

Luddly Neddite said:


> The "christians" always end up like this ...
> 
> Always fighting over who is the better christian, always yelling at each other that_ "My god is better than your god"_.
> 
> Its idiotic but hey, their god(s) must be so proud.



>>Always fighting over who is the better christian, always yelling at each other that_ "My god is better than your god"_.

Its idiotic but hey, their god(s) must be so proud.<<

We weren't talking about this, but hell is real.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Aug 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...


First post in this thread.

As a scientist I cannot deny the possibility of a God, just not your God as I usually tell people. So I voted de-facto athiest. I was born a southern baptist with ministers on mom's side, so I was brain-washed before I ever could think. I now call myself a reformed southern baptist, VERY reformed and did that at a very young age. God is in my language and cannot be removed. Like "Oh God" and also assorted cuss words.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Aug 23, 2017)

RWS said:


> James Bond, where do you think I will go after i die? Heaven, or Hell?


Several things here.

According to Revelations, no one goes anywhere. Nevertheless you are a long time worm food. The dead will rise during the Rapture and Judgement occurs then. That is after 1000 years of rule by the Anti-Christ.

Enough of the Bible.

Now firstly I have serious problems with a jealous God demanding worship. He is God and doesn't need it. He sounds like man, ie man invented God.

If we assume a true God, you will go to heaven (which is the earth, by the way, not outer space nor the clouds, according to the Bible) just for being a good boy or girl. You do not need to believe in nothing.

Hitler's death bed conversions, ie Christianity's get outta jail free card, won't save you.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 23, 2017)

RWS said:


> James Bond, where do you think I will go after i die? Heaven, or Hell?


.
generic answer -

setting your Spirit free is done before you die as the goal otherwise that may end up figuratively in the coffin with your bones ... or ashes.


----------



## BreezeWood (Aug 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> wut?





> EarthLink  - Politics
> _*
> Energy Dept: Government should ease rules on power plants *_
> 
> The Energy Department report also heaped blame on environmental regulations. It said that the largest number of coal plant retirements occurred in 2015, the deadline for operators to install new pollution-control equipment.




cry us a river christian.


----------



## james bond (Aug 24, 2017)

I got better fish to fry, so watched Ben-Hur (1959), a film based on Lew Wallace's novel of seeing the real life Jesus through fictional character Judah Ben-Hur's eye.  I cried a few times at the end.  I was watching it on my notebook at the library and a man sitting adjacent to me was looking, but I didn't care.  He must've been wondering what I was watching.  It was touching to me because both my mother and sister are gone and Jesus gave Judah Ben-Hur life and heart.  He ended up taking away his sword. The story is different because it doesn't focus on the Bible and make it Biblical true tale.  I recommend the movie to all and will have to read the novel.  What's coincidental is he is another JB that has come into my life.

The Real Story of Ben-Hur's 'Tale of the Christ'
The Real Story of Ben-Hur's 'Tale of the Christ'


----------



## james bond (Aug 25, 2017)

So, what happened to turn agnostics and some believers into non-believers?  I think it started with challenging Noah's Ark and the great flood.  Charles Lyell, an atheist, used his knowledge of geology, and with the help of others such as his pupil, Charles Darwin, and fellow atheist, James Hutton, turned the scientific world against the Bible and Noah's Flood with uniformitarianism vs catastrophism and evloution vs Genesis.  Suddenly, people had "science" to help them go wrong.  Even racist beliefs of Charles Darwin was turned into social Darwinism, Nazism, Planned Parenthood and the rise of today's communist Antifa.  The Biblical prophecies are coming true.


----------



## james bond (Aug 30, 2017)

Here's something else I discovered about Bill Nye.  He's an eugenicist guy.  These people are in the Democratic party, but hidden.

Bill Nye The Eugenics Guy: Maybe We Should Penalize People With "Extra Kids"


----------



## sealybobo (Aug 31, 2017)

james bond said:


> Here's something else I discovered about Bill Nye.  He's an eugenicist guy.  These people are in the Democratic party, but hidden.
> 
> Bill Nye The Eugenics Guy: Maybe We Should Penalize People With "Extra Kids"


Well if a woman can't afford to feed helself and she has 5 kids do you want to reward her?


----------



## james bond (Aug 31, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Here's something else I discovered about Bill Nye.  He's an eugenicist guy.  These people are in the Democratic party, but hidden.
> ...



You should ask the liberals and atheists this important question because they provide extra money and programs for kids, welfare, food stamps, low/no taxes, including illegal aliens and the like.  Two illegals sneak in and have their child in the US and suddenly we have a new citizen with rights.  All part of the communist plot.  Fack Bill Nye and your hypocritical arse.

Can you imagine what would happen if a conservative rep or Senator said this?







Yet, Obama's science advisor was a Population Bomber in 1970s. Stands to reason that Nye would see merits of forced sterilization in the name of *fake* global warming. *It's Eugenics all over again thanks to racist Charles Darwin!  Bill Nye = Frances Galton!*


----------



## sealybobo (Aug 31, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


You're a nut.


----------



## james bond (Aug 31, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I'm right.  You have no words to even reply.

Climate change is a religion to you atheists and Bill Nye.


----------



## sealybobo (Aug 31, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



How would you reply to a nut.


----------



## james bond (Aug 31, 2017)

Trying to get one's point across to a nutjob liberal and atheist is usualy futile.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Aug 31, 2017)

james bond said:


> So, what happened to turn agnostics and some believers into non-believers?



Mostly it was religion's declaring war on science and forcing thinking people to make a decision.

I didn't leave Christianity, Christianity left me!



> I think it started with challenging Noah's Ark and the great flood.  Charles Lyell, an atheist, used his knowledge of geology, and with the help of others such as his pupil, Charles Darwin, and fellow atheist, James Hutton, turned the scientific world against the Bible and Noah's Flood with uniformitarianism vs catastrophism and evloution vs Genesis.  Suddenly, people had "science" to help them go wrong.  Even racist beliefs of Charles Darwin was turned into social Darwinism, Nazism, Planned Parenthood and the rise of today's communist Antifa.  The Biblical prophecies are coming true.


To get technical, you have to understand the world that gave rise to western civilization. There WAS a flood and we think we have geological evidence for it. All old myths, religions, etc talk about the flood & to them, it was world wide in their tiny world. The flood is another example of Christianity stealing from previous religions & myths.

Hurricane Harvey would have been considered a great flood in olden times & you know how stories get bigger when handed down orally.

Flood myth - Wikipedia

Darwin was no more of a racist than any other of his time (which was a LOT). Racists perverted his science to further white supremacy.

Did Charles Darwin believe in racial inequality?


----------



## james bond (Aug 31, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > So, what happened to turn agnostics and some believers into non-believers?
> ...



You don't believe in global warming do you?  It was only a couple decades ago liberals were afraid of global cooling and the ice age and they were trying to scare us with that.

>>I didn't leave Christianity, Christianity left me!<<

Oh no.  Jesus would not leave you.  He does not change.  Will I get a decent answer to my question?  I'm afraid not because the liberal and atheist heathens have been filling your head with feces.

>>Hurricane Harvey would have been considered a great flood in olden times & you know how stories get bigger when handed down orally.<<

We know today that Hurricane Harvey is a hurricane and not a flood.  It brought great waters upon us, but it does not compare to the great Noah's Flood.  Noah's Flood did not just come from the sky about, but waters from the ground below.

>>Flood myth - Wikipedia<<

Wikipedia?  That is a BSing heathen website, sir.  No, no, no.  A better encyclopedia would be Britannica, but since you chose Wikipedia, then let's straighten you out with some Conservapedia.  Don't be fooled by damned a-hole atheists' lies.  Don't let them make you a monkey.  Blacks think that any reference of them descending from apes is racist.  Of course, it is.  You're a human who descended from humans.  And monkeys and apes are apes that descended from earlier apes.  Never the twain shall meet.  Feed some good science in your brain.  Not fake ones as purported by fake scientist Bill Nye.

Great Flood - Conservapedia

From your own article you posted, "As attitudes to race became harsher, sympathies for black people in the Americas more scant, and the fate of "savages" a matter of indifference, Darwin's own sympathies were blunted by the prevailing fatalism. Starkly displaying his own readiness to apply his ideas to society, he observed in The Descent of Man that "the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world".

Though he hoped that man would by then have reached a "more civilised state ... even than the Caucasian," he expressed no hope that extermination might be prevented by the kind of moral and political pressure that had by then achieved the prohibition of slavery in the US. It was simply inevitable. Nature would take its course.

In this passage, widely quoted by opponents of evolutionary theory, Darwin suggests that the break between "man and his nearest allies" will be widened through the extinction of the great apes, leaving a gap between the more civilised man "and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla". No doubt about it: he regards Africans and Australians as closer than Europeans to the apes. This, he implies, is a natural condition that will frustrate any cultural efforts to mitigate it."

Darwin showed his true side in his follow up book, The Descent of Man.  He even changed parts of Origin of Species by including "survival of the fittest" in his chapters.  We all know that "survial of the fittest" was used by social Darwinists and their racism.  It even led to Eugenics and the extermination of Jews by Hitler.  Hitler was greatly influenced by Darwin's book and then Eugenics.

The Descent of Man - Conservapedia


----------



## james bond (Sep 1, 2017)

Wikipedia.  Gads, what is the world coming to?  I just USE it for sports, entertainment and the links it provides.  I never donate to the liberal, atheist, immoral and sanctimonious dumb basturds.  I even change stuff on there just to irritate and annoy the liberals.  But Google.  That company is different and legit.  It needs to be regulated like a public utility.

Should Google Be Regulated Like A Utility?


----------



## james bond (Sep 1, 2017)

sealybobo, my final post for now on that ignoramus Bill Nye.  He is not a scientist and does not know what he is talking about.  The description fits you, too.

"*William Sanford Nye* (born November 27, 1955; generally known as *Bill Nye* or *Bill Nye the Science Guy*) is an engineer and television personality known for his children's television series _Bill Nye the Science Guy_, a Disney show which was broadcast on PBS in the 1990s, winning several Emmy Awards. Videos of the show are often used in public schools.[1] He wears a signature bow tie during public appearances.[2] He has a degree in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University, and has received several honorary doctorates.

He is a "science popularizer", that is, one who writes or lectures about scientific topics for the lay public. In this regard he is similar to such past and contemporary popularizers as Humphrey Davy, Michael Faraday, Arthur Eddington, Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan, and Neil deGrasse Tyson. Some of these people were/are notable scientists in their own right; Mr. Nye is not.

In 2010, he was given the Humanist of the Year award from the American Humanist Association.[3][4] He identifies as an agnostic.

Like many other non-Christians, Nye borrows from a Christian worldview on issues such as ethics.[5]

Mr. Nye's views on various matters relating to science are similar to those of most scientists—he accepts the reality of global climate change, he accepts macroevolution, and he accepts "old Earth" cosmology.

Nye believes that "science is political."[6]

His mother was probably a codebreaker during the Second World War.[7]

Perhaps because of the way he has dealt with his fame, Mr. Nye sometimes exhibits bad judgment in making statements out of his known field of expertise, or says things in an overly theatrical way, that may seem silly when viewed as purely scientific statements. He has recently developed an exaggerated and flamboyant speaking style, to a degree that many traditional scientists may find distasteful."

Bill Nye - Conservapedia


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 2, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> I never donate to the liberal, atheist, immoral and sanctimonious dumb basturds. I even change stuff on there just to irritate and annoy the liberals.




howabout rewriting something worthwhile that would benefit the poor soul surly suffering for the forgery they deceivingly included in the fallacious 4th century christian bible -



> “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.




you write in derision above bond perhaps you just can not get beyond yourself to right a wrong where it would be beneficial for humanity and not just "in their face", christian.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 2, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo, my final post for now on that ignoramus Bill Nye.  He is not a scientist and does not know what he is talking about.  The description fits you, too.
> 
> "*William Sanford Nye* (born November 27, 1955; generally known as *Bill Nye* or *Bill Nye the Science Guy*) is an engineer and television personality known for his children's television series _Bill Nye the Science Guy_, a Disney show which was broadcast on PBS in the 1990s, winning several Emmy Awards. Videos of the show are often used in public schools.[1] He wears a signature bow tie during public appearances.[2] He has a degree in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University, and has received several honorary doctorates.
> 
> ...



_and he accepts "old Earth" cosmology._

OMG are you a YEC?

LOL


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 3, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo, my final post for now on that ignoramus Bill Nye.  He is not a scientist and does not know what he is talking about.  The description fits you, too.
> ...


Today I was in church for a one year memorial. Couple of thoughts. I did consider that before Moses people contemplated how we got here and people considered that something must have put us here.

Well I'm still there. Before religion lied and said god visited we all believed their may be a creator. And I don't mind giving it thanks but religions are ridiculous. Clearly just believing wasn't enough to start a religion they had to make up stories.

Priest was calling himself the gardener and how it's his fault if the garden goes bad. Wait! Isn't god the Gardiner?

Oh yeah, then the priest starts saying god sent his son to us to show how much he loved us and we killed him. You mean god didn't know that was going to happen? This is something I think is a great example of double talk where one time they say he was sent as a sacrifice and then he's trying to say gods initial intension was to send his son to teach love. Gimme a break


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 3, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


sealybobo said:


> Clearly just believing wasn't enough to start a religion they had to make up stories.










chose wisely, grasshopper the made up stories have a way of leading down dark tunnels ... in fact just look at those who end up "believing" them.


----------



## james bond (Sep 4, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo, my final post for now on that ignoramus Bill Nye.  He is not a scientist and does not know what he is talking about.  The description fits you, too.
> ...



>>OMG are you a YEC?<<

YEC the one truth and follows what the Bible says.

Bill Nye is wrong again like those commie atheists are usually wrong.  Nothing funny about burning up, Bill.  And why criticize Rev. Joel Osteen when he opened up his megachurch for the flood victims?  Bill Nye did jack diddly and all just gave complaints about Harvey being caused by global warming.  Such malarkey.

YEC means don't be on the lookout for a global warming flood, but fire.


----------



## james bond (Sep 4, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



This isn't addressed to me, but I'm glad you were in church.  What's important with Moses is what he did.  Even more important is what happened with Jesus afterward.  He save Moses.and us.  Yet, it sounds strange to me that you're still considering "something" must have put us here.  That's hilarious.  Not god.  And you're thinking this in church, yet.  smh.

Next, you're saying religion lied.  You're saying the Bible or God lied.  Instead, why don't you look at lying Bill Nye.  Why do you think I keep bringing him up?  Truth is simple, but he makes it complex and the internet atheists follow him thinking it's science.  They must not be able to comprehend he isn't a scientist.

>>Priest was calling himself the gardener and how it's his fault if the garden goes bad. Wait! Isn't god the Gardiner<<

I wasn't there, so can you expound on what you mean by the priest calling himself the gardener.  What garden was he tending?  His own?  Yours?  Mine?  I have my own gardener, so he prolly didn't mean mine.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 4, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Actually I think the Bible is full of claims that Jesus was sent specifically to be crucified for our original sin (That WE did not commit!)

So my question becomes, why was Judas a bad guy for doing what he was told by God to do?

Now here's the weird part. Since we have been saved from original sin by the cross, why do women still suffer pain during childbirth?

Sounds like a double-cross to me


----------



## james bond (Sep 4, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



>>Clearly just believing wasn't enough to start a religion they had to make up stories.<<

Just what part is the story?  None of it was made up.  Evolution was made up by Hutton, Lyell and Darwin.  God created natural selection.  The earth being 4.5 billions of years old was made up by geologist Clair Patterson in 1956.  I've said it many times before.  I've studied evolution and the Bible.  You know none of this.  You believe in fairy tales ha ha.


----------



## james bond (Sep 4, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



No need to keep rewriting like the atheist scientists.  

I'm not about righting a wrong.  Only you can do that with the crazy and nutty stories you believe as science.  That's why I keep bringing up Bill Nye.  You are way below Bill Nye as you're wrong about much more.  He doesn't keep bringing up the Bible like he's read it and understands it.  OTOH, it's there practically every time you post.


----------



## james bond (Sep 4, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



>>
Actually I think the Bible is full of claims that Jesus was sent specifically to be crucified for our original sin (That WE did not commit!)

So my question becomes, why was Judas a bad guy for doing what he was told by God to do?

Now here's the weird part. Since we have been saved from original sin by the cross, why do women still suffer pain during childbirth?

Sounds like a double-cross to me<<

Claims?  As in science?  You are wrong.  The Bible isn't a science book, but science does back up the Bible.

Why do atheists and their scientists go so wrong?

>>why do women still suffer pain during childbirth?

Sounds like a double-cross to me<<

Huh?  You're all over the place.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


So if Jesus was sent to die why did my priest tell the bullshit story about how God sent his son to preach the word of love and we killed him? As if god was hoping we would do the right thing. This story is all over the place. 

It's a book of parables and allegories. Based on a lie. Moses and Jesus


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...


We were the vegetables in his garden.

Anyways, Jesus wasn't son of God and Moses didn't talk to God. That's most important. Not the messages or moral to the story. First I need to know did Jonah really live three days in the whale? Jesus said he did. Do you believe that? How about lazeris? 

The Bible is full of things that didn't happen


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> No need to keep rewriting like the atheist scientists.



link.

your books recorded history is enough reason to start completely over again maybe you could learn something from the atheists than just condemning them.




james bond said:


> I'm not about righting a wrong.



that's obvious, crucifying someone seems a daily event for your type.




james bond said:


> He doesn't keep bringing up the Bible like he's read it and understands it. OTOH, it's there practically every time you post.



I read that book to the first forgery, page one unlike you I had the presence of mind and perspective of history to set it down. the spoken religion from which that book originates and can be compared by those not so corrupt is more than adequate, the religion itself is only five words long anything else is in your case nothing but mirrors and deceit.




> “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.



that forgery is well known with or without having read it. representing the 1st century requires so egregious an error to be corrected and is part and parcel why this forum exists.


----------



## MaryL (Sep 4, 2017)

Were is god right now? Why would someone hide if they created the  universe? Hello, god if you are there, you  have my number. Hello?  Damn I got nothing, no dial tone, nothing.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 4, 2017)

MaryL said:


> Were is god right now? Why would someone hide if they created the  universe? Hello, god if you are there, you  have my number. Hello?  Damn I got nothing, no dial tone, nothing.


And whenever I go to church the priest is telling impossible stories and no one even questions these stories. 

And he is not telling us these are allegories. He's telling us matter of fact. But come here and theists admit it.

Christianity is just as ridiculous as the rest

How dare we ask for proof right? No! How dare he tell me fairytales and provide no proof and then say the only way to heaven is you have to believe the unbelievable


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.
> 
> Americans flocking to larger churches?
> 
> ...


Just like people don't go to Mom and pop shops they go to superstores.

Eventually metro Detroit won't have enough Greeks to have 7 greek Orthodox churches they'll have one big one


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 4, 2017)

I love it that these mayo eating mofos are going out and spending their disposable income on expensive toys not necessities. Means the economy is good. Thanks Obama for scaring these jackoffs into stimulating the economy


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 4, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > They say atheism is dangerous? Look at the holy war we're in now. Only belief in God can make a suicide bomber. They believe they are doing what God wants.
> ...


I can't get over the fact I don't believe. You can't fake it.


----------



## ding (Sep 4, 2017)

MaryL said:


> Were is god right now? Why would someone hide if they created the  universe? Hello, god if you are there, you  have my number. Hello?  Damn I got nothing, no dial tone, nothing.


Maybe you didn't make the cut.


----------



## hobelim (Sep 5, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Its a good thing that you can't fake it. You don't believe because you don't understand what the stories are teaching. I don't believe that the story of the creation is a true story of the creation of the universe or solar system by God either, but thats not what the story is about anyway..I don't believe that biologically dead people came out of their graves,  ever, even though I do believe that the stories about the dead coming out of their graves in the first century are absolutely true.


When the teaching and the hidden subject about rising from the dead is understood there is no problem believing,  especially if you can't fake it and it happens to you.


Comprehension is a choice, something one must deliberately strive for to attain.


If you look and look and keep on looking for hidden meaning in scripture that conforms to and is confirmed by reality you will find it.


If you don't look you will surely find nothing....


"The kingdom of Heaven is like hidden treasure lying *buried in a field*. The man who found it, *buried it again*."

can you dig it?


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 5, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Oh it's a story book? 

What do you mean you don't and do believe dead people did come from the grave?


----------



## hobelim (Sep 5, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...





I do not believe that the subject of the resurrection is or ever was about the biologically dead resuming a former physical existence.

The resurrection of the dead  is about entry into a new existence, a  transformation from confusion to comprehension as dramatic as passing from darkness to light, blindness to sight, death to life.

Jesus being raised as an observant Jew was no different than you being raised Greek orthodox in that it was an accident of birth.

Jesus rose from the dead by leaving the  whitewashed tomb of irrational religious beliefs and degrading religious practices which is exactly what happened to you when you walked out of the tomb of irrational religious beliefs and degrading religious practices...

Do you believe in your own story?

When Jesus emerged from the Jordan river after being baptized by John, "the heavens opened up to him."


You are still under the water..time to come up for some air.


Wouldn't it be a terrible shame if you escaped from the tomb only to dig your own grave?


----------



## edthecynic (Sep 5, 2017)




----------



## sealybobo (Sep 5, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


If even 1% of me believed your religion was real but since not, I'll leave you with this. It'd be a darn shame if you came out and found Islam was the truth.

But since not even 1% of you believes that you're ok with that right?


----------



## MaryL (Sep 5, 2017)

ding said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Were is god right now? Why would someone hide if they created the  universe? Hello, god if you are there, you  have my number. Hello?  Damn I got nothing, no dial tone, nothing.
> ...


Yeah, that's possible I am an pretty evil person. I hate violence, am a vegetarian (most of the time) and for the most part try to live and let live. God  must have  it out for innocent people. Or, it's all just random chaos.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 5, 2017)

MaryL said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...


.
who really do not make the cut are the 4th century crucifiers who pretend they have, christians. big surprise for them just like during the Great Flood.


* Jesus is going to save them ...  .


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 5, 2017)

.
the evidence continues ...




> EarthLink  - U.S. News
> 
> _*Lee descendant resigns as pastor over racial justice comment*_
> 
> ...



_*He said some church members were uncomfortable with his remarks praising the Black Lives Matter movement during the Aug. 27 MTV Video Music Awards.*_


... and those people "Bethany United Church of Christ" refer to themselves as Theists, they are nothing but centuries old criminals.


----------



## MaryL (Sep 5, 2017)

Religion to me, is a difficult thing to understand. There's the social component (probably the most important) that acts like a glue to hold communities together, that I understand, so I can't condemn religion on those grounds. I understand that Religious groups  give aid to the poor and aid in disasters, and  their actions have to be recognized. But the core concept of  this belief in a central supreme being, and then  to add to that, that THEY   and only THEY comprehend and KNOW what  the will of God is, seems pretentious and silly, and that's the part I can't wrap my mind around.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 5, 2017)

MaryL said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



Ding's an asshole but because he believes a stupid story he feels like he has made the cut.  I got news for you, he has not made the cut.  There is no cut.  When he dies he is worm dirt too.  

The only benefit he gets is the feeling/hope that one day he's going to be in a heaven.  You and I don't buy that so as much as we would like there to be a heaven, there aint one.  Sorry DingBAT.


----------



## james bond (Sep 6, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.
> ...



>>Just like people don't go to Mom and pop shops they go to superstores.<<

I still go to mom and pop stores if they're good and convenient.  I like to support local businesses, but go to Wal Mart, Costco and superstores for the low prices.  You can't just go by price and I don't.  I don't have a megachurch where I live, but they would have to be good down deep with a good pastor if people and I are going to go.  But at least, they represent organizations that help out in time of need such as with Hurricane Harvey.  It's not always a straightforward decision, but I recognize and appreciate the strength in numbers.


----------



## james bond (Sep 6, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



>>There is no cut.  When he dies he is worm dirt too. <<

And what evidence do you have that Jesus didn't die to save us?  Since you're so certain of the truth.


----------



## james bond (Sep 6, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



>>Actually I think the Bible is full of claims that Jesus was sent specifically to be crucified for our original sin (That WE did not commit!)<<

It's evidence that the sins were committed and that we are not perfect.  One of the problems that humans have is that they're selfish.  If someone wrongs us, then we want revenge.  We do not obey the law or rules all the time, but if someone else violates the law against us, then we want them prosecuted.  Many atheists think like you.  They make up their own rules or thinking and expect God to follow.  Adam and Eve were perfect.  We admire perfection and strive to be perfect.  We make note of perfection whether in beauty, complexity, world records and so on.  We know that the Lake of Fire will destroy your perfect spiritual self in the next life.  What we do not know is what this entails.


----------



## james bond (Sep 6, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



So if Jesus was sent to die why did my priest tell the bullshit story about how God sent his son to preach the word of love and we killed him? As if god was hoping we would do the right thing. This story is all over the place.

It's a book of parables and allegories. Based on a lie. Moses and Jesus

You do not have the proper understanding of the Bible.  I mentioned Ben-Hur (1959).  Maybe you should read up on the author and how his writing the story, albeit fictional account of a true story, influenced him.  One start is the link I posted.  As for Moses, there is the The Ten Commandments movie.  I'm not as familiar with his story.

Why are these "parables and allegories" a lie?  How do you know it's a lie?  There are many who claim this, and their claims are investigated and found to be disproven or lack merit.  Today, we have those who write scientific arguments and the like, and their claims are also rebutted.

Sadly, I see lack of evidence on the atheist's claims.  They to seem to make things up or base it on wrong science and think they are right.  I think if one investigates these people who make the counter claims, one will find that they are wrong.  One of the things about the Bible is that it cannot change, so if any of these counter claims against hold merit, then the stories would have been destroyed long ago as false instead of individual claims of disbelief.

The bottom line is one has to answer the questions whether this life is all there is and all there will be for themselves?  Also, whether one will be judged for their actions in the current life.  If someone is lucky enough to avoid punishment for their sins such as murder, thievery or false witnesses (lies) against their fellow human and get away with it, then there is no justice in this life.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 6, 2017)

.


sealybobo said:


> So if Jesus was sent to die why did my priest tell the bullshit story about how God sent his son to preach the word of love and we killed him?





james bond said:


> You do not have the proper understanding of the Bible.




to attest Jesus exists without the bible as in the above spoken, fluent religious discourse provides the true understanding through time the events of past history inclusive the differences that may arise. and as those events left unrecorded who are biblicist to say otherwise. there is no doubt Jesus represented the spoken religion over any other means. the means over time to determine the unknown, proper conclusion.




james bond said:


> One of the things about the Bible is that it cannot change, so if any of these counter claims against hold merit, then the stories would have been destroyed long ago as false instead of individual claims of disbelief.



_*
then the stories would have been destroyed long ago as false instead of individual claims of disbelief.
*_
the bible has been changing since it was first introduced and always for the better. where is it etched in stone a bible was ever meant to be written or one is necessary or supersedes the spoken religion over time not from Jesus for one. if nothing else, Jesus represented in the 1st century life as a Free Spirit.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 6, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



It is evidence that God is not perfect. You claim he made humans with flaws on purpose? Such a God does not deserve to be worshiped.



> One of the problems that humans have is that they're selfish.  If someone wrongs us, then we want revenge.



That is exactly why we made God in our image. God has the sin of original selfishness. God has the sin of original revenge.



> We do not obey the law or rules all the time, but if someone else violates the law against us, then we want them prosecuted.



Yep, that's God.



> Many atheists think like you.  They make up their own rules or thinking and expect God to follow.



Do I/we now? Your God tell you this nonsense?



> Adam and Eve were perfect.



You just contradicted yourself in the same post.

_It's evidence that the sins were committed and that we are not perfect_



> We admire perfection and strive to be perfect.  We make note of perfection whether in beauty, complexity, world records and so on.  We know that the Lake of Fire will destroy your perfect spiritual self in the next life.  What we do not know is what this entails.



Any God with a lake of fire shirley does not deserve to be worshiped. That is the definition of EVIL.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 6, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> ...


What was your number on the scale?


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


That's right. No justice. When the wolves kill the coyote for being in their territory there is no justice for the coyote and no hell for the wolves.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



"It's evidence that the sins were committed"

We really need to have a talk about what constitutes 'evidence' and what does not.


----------



## hobelim (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...





I do not belong to any religion. I just told you that I do not believe the same things that you do not believe and for the same reasons. The only difference is that I found deeper meaning hidden in those fantastical stories like a priceless treasure.

You can't say that its not there. I have shown it to you.  You can't say that you heard it all before. No one has.

What religion teaches that the drink my  blood ritual is a curse spread throughout the Roman empire deliberately to "smite the nations"? What religion teaches that kosher law is not about food? What religion teaches that Jesus healing the blind was a healing of perception not sight? What Christian, Jew or Muslim even knows that the dispute between Jesus and the religious authorities was about what was the only right way to understand and comply with divine Law that leads to eternal life here and now? What religion teaches that Jesus appeared to his disciples in dreams after the crucifixion?

Who has ever said anything like any of that ever before?

You really need to pay closer attention.


----------



## james bond (Sep 7, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



I think you're asking sealybobo whom I think started out as an agnostic, but has gone the other way.  I was indoctrinated as Catholic, but rebelled around 13 years old and became agnostic-weak theist.  I probably became weak-defacto theist around college age.  I even studied evolution from the college I went to and believed in it so that made me weaker.  Now, I'm a strong theist since starting to read the Bible, understand it better and compared what it said versus what evolution said around 2012.  The history has not been about "science," but of politics and atheist vs religious beliefs.

How about you?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


I was asking Breezewood. I was a "De Facto Atheist"... So, 6?


----------



## james bond (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



>>That's right. No justice. When the wolves kill the coyote for being in their territory there is no justice for the coyote and no hell for the wolves.<<

I don't think it happens like that.  What usually happens is that we, i.e. the majority, are punished for the sins of the few.  Isn't this true everywhere?  Isn't this the big deal with original sin?  It may be different in one area to another, but the laws are usually written this way by humans.  This is evidence that God thinks like humans and his laws follow the ones we make.  Our justice is his justice, so there is evidence for some kind of final judgment.


----------



## james bond (Sep 7, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



My bad.  Ha ha since it's Breezewood.  With him, it doesn't matter what he is as you'll find out once you post with him a couple of times.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 7, 2017)

He's a 1.  But they don't exist, as I learned earlier in this thread.  Therefore, Breezewood does not exist.  BreezeWood, I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news: you are a bot.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 7, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


I think the Lord will forgive me in fact he may even reward my intelligence. I mean our intelligence because you agree with me


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



"Agnostic atheist"

I feel like that is redundant, personally, though accurate in distinguishing itself from gnostic atheism. Atheism is the 'de facto' view. Belief in God is not accepted. That's not the same as saying, "There can be no gods".

So I think that we only need a qualifier when identifying gnostic atheism. It's a special case of atheism, like a square is a special case of a rectangle. We don't need to call rectangles, "not square rectangles" AND call squares, squares. We can just call squares, squares.


----------



## james bond (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that.  Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times.  I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God.  However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering.  If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



You are then a De Facto Atheist. Was this your poll answer?


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 7, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I took it before so I don't remember.

But why am I not agnostic? I said there could be a creator. I just don't buy organized religions. Lots of people here don't buy any religions but they believe in God or a creator. I believe there could be but it's also possible there isn't. Since it's never appeared and we don't ever see it I don't believe if it does exists that it thinks about us or cares. That means it too is scientifically explainable. It too must have been created.



And do you think god exists beyond our little universe or is this the only universe? So you put god in a box?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



I think you are agnostic. I think atheism IS agnostic, by definition.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 7, 2017)

.
the Apex of Knowledge, Triumph of Good vs Evil are both supplements for freeing one's Spirit otherwise the individuals destiny is not their own and the reason for their bible ... good luck with that especially soaked in a crucifixion. or at least write a book that makes sense. all beings being the same.


----------



## hobelim (Sep 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...




You don't need to be forgiven. Not believing what the stories are not about is not a  sin.

To discover what the stories are actually about,  take another closer look.

Remember what Jesus said? One must humble himself like a little child to enter the kingdom of heaven..

Take his advice mr smarty pants.

Read scripture again as if you were a little child knowing the stories are like fairy tales teaching something hidden that is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Then, if you have the intelligence,  you will indeed be rewarded beyond anything that you have ever imagined in your wildest dreams....Not in some distant future and not after you die, but in the very day that you do it.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 8, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Oh I get the messages in the stories


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 8, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


I've tried explaining that to others. An atheist doesn't know there is no God just like there are no theists who know there is. Both just believe.

So then everyone's agnostic?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



No, those who believe there is a god are Gnostic, and those who believe there is no god are gnostic.


----------



## hobelim (Sep 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



If that was true you wouldn't be trashing it all as superstitious nonsense.

I will tell you a little secret.

Some things, like understanding a foreign language,   just can't be faked.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Wow man, that's deep


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 8, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


You mean like televangelists?


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 8, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...



The more I look into it the more confident I am my conclusions are right. 

But I do admit that complex life is probably very rare. And I can see that intelligent life is even more rare. To have the moon, the way we are tilted just right, just the right distance from the sun, no dinosaurs, the entire story of the universe and how it led to humans. Truly amazing. I don't mind giving all that thanks. Whatever did it. Thanks.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



But, something being "rare" in our huge universe can still mean it has happened billions of times.  Also, don't fall into the trap of the math of Hoyle's fallacy, by which the probability of ANY event can be reduced to approach zero. To further that point, while conditions exactly like we experience may be required to produce life exactly as it exists here on Earth, there is no reason to believe life cannot form and evolve under very different conditions.  When scientists speak of "the requirement of liquid water for life", they really mean, "life as we understand it".  This is not an error, but rather a way to use resources more efficiently.  If we just look for any life, anywhere, we probably wouldn't recognize it if we found it.  It makes more sense to devote our resources to looking for life as we already understand it.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 8, 2017)

It may be that we are the first complex life too. Maybe it takes 13 billion years for the Lord's seed to sprout. More to come. 

But if you never learned science and just read Genesis you would think the world was created in 7 days. Literally because they didn't know the science back then.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 8, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...



Well we know that life in our solar system, at least complex, doesn't happen on any of the other planets that aren't in the habitable zone.

And for another planet to have a moon that protects them like ours does us.

I don't disagree I believe other complex life exists. But now what about intelligent life? So many things could have happened and humans wouldn't be here. And we (Trump and Kim Jung) could kill ourselves tomorrow then if another species discovered earth they'd see no intelligent life. Maybe dolphins.

I think other intelligent life exists but how rare.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 8, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


But again, mention the exact conditions required for us. Different conditions could simply arise to different species or even fundamental building blocks of life. Wehn we search for planets in the habitable zone or for planets with water, we are intentionally and arbitrarily confining our search to "life as we know it", which is a smart allocation of resources. This doesn't come with a tcit implication that we reject othertypes of life as possible.

And life here evolved under the conditions which existed. The life we see here is exactly what we should have expected, given those conditions.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



If it helps to provide any clarification or perspective, I was taught that "original sin" doesn't refer to a specific act, by us or by Adam and Eve.  It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.  THAT is why we end up bearing the brunt of original sin.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 8, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



What a despicable, evil idea that is.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Leaving aside the ironic humor of you hubristically presuming to label the word of God as "evil", why do you find that despicable and evil?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 8, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


You are wise to leave that aside, as your authoritative declaration that it is "the word of god" represents your OWN hubris.  Don't get cute with me without getting your ducks in a row, first. 

Secondly, it presupposes that we do and should carry the burden of past transgressions, which is ridiculous and evil.  It also assumes "we are all sinners", which is an evil starting point, given that -- no doubt -- what constitutes a "sin" and what does not are both subjective to your authoritative hubris, or to that of whatever charismatic charlatan is the next to come down the pipe.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Your valuation of my wisdom = I'm sorry, did you say something?

Moving right along . . . It's truly amazing how you came to a conclusion regarding my point that not only bears no resemblance to what I said, but actually is diametrically opposed to what I said.  I can only assume that you read the first half of my first sentence, and then rushed right on to saying what you wanted to say about the subject, irregardless of any pretense at conversation.

I'd suggest you thank God for straw men, since you're hopeless against live opponents, but I'm sure that such a suggestion would outrage you.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 8, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


I commented ion the idea of original sin, and on the face value of your comments on what it means. I stand by my comments. The idea is idiotic, it's evil, and only those who value dogma dictated  to them over reason would buy such a stupid idea. If you take personal offense at my criticism of a terrible idea, then your next step should be to examine why you have internalized this idea. Here's a hint: it may be because the only support of it you could ever present is, "Because I say so".

My "hubris" at calling "god's word", evil...please...
The only hubris present in this discussion is in the shaman who thinks he can declare something to be "God's word".


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 8, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Your God created man with #1 goal to commit sin against the Creator and you worship him for this massive failure?


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 8, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


What free will? Follow me or burn in hell


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 8, 2017)

.


Cecilie1200 said:


> It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.




their 4th century book they worship is the only sin they will ever have to make to exclude themselves from the Everlasting forever. they just want to bring everyone with them.

self survival is a test, minor deviations are correctable the takeoff can occur for anyone.


----------



## hobelim (Sep 9, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...




Be as confident as you like when you say that you understand the teachings of scripture out of one side of your mouth while trashing it all as superstitious nonsense out of the other side of your mouth.

You still sound just as irrational and confused as the believers that you enjoy deriding for being irrational and confused..

You escaped from a tomb only to build your own prison..



You really need to go back to the drawing board.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 9, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...


Maybe Thor was the right God or juju. Or Mohammad or Joe Smith or Moses. I've studied enough to know your religion is no different than the rest. So I'm not interested in studying any of them more

I say you haven't looked into Hindu enough. If you did you'd be a devout Hindu. You just happen to be born on this side of the world.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol.  Thanks for sharing.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 10, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.




always willing to help a sinner ...


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Given that you don't believe in sin, I can't imagine what level of help you think you could offer, unless it's how to be as amoral as you are.  I'll let you know if I ever want that.

I'm always amused by people arrogant enough to believe they can teach others to practice beliefs they themselves don't share.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 10, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Given that you don't believe in sin, I can't imagine what level of help you think you could offer, unless it's how to be as amoral as you are. I'll let you know if I ever want that.





Cecilie1200 said:


> It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.



evil (sin) exists as that does occur the process to maturity is not a specific predisposition as you believe it exists, sin though a state may in some form exist for some individuals of various degrees but not sin by religion. your 4th century religion remaining primitive would be referred to as a misdirected predisposition dictated through print.




Cecilie1200 said:


> I'm always amused by people arrogant enough to believe they can teach others to practice beliefs they themselves don't share.



it is you who believes you share the thoughts of the 1st century, nothing could be further from the truth.


----------



## james bond (Sep 11, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Do you see that I am right?  I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past.  I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence.  That path will not lead you to God or truth.  For example, the earth  and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

So what did God say how old the earth actually is?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 11, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth.  Water is not wet, and down is up.  we're ALL mad, here.  You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 11, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Really?


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 11, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I know right? Let's humor him


----------



## james bond (Sep 12, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Yes, I'm witty and can do sarcasm but unfortunately we will not know the answer to this question.  The age of the earth will not be revealed as God has stated in the Bible.  Thus, we can only argue the method of how one comes up with their answer.  I would use radiocarbon dating or other estimates which YEC scientists have put forth* while atheist scientists will use radiometric dating.

* - The 10 Best Evidences from Science that Confirm a Young Earth


----------



## james bond (Sep 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



>>I know right? Let's humor him<<

Ha ha, but my retort is the one who laughs last, laughs best.  You'll hear my Joker laugh after seeing who was right in the end.  OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care.  There will be no consciousness.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Sorry but those are 10 very bad/weak arguments.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



I looked up radocarbon dating.  Lots of flaws with that method.  Ironically nuclear testing and coal/oil have ruined the results.  Very unreliable.  Yet that's what you use.

More recently, accelerator mass spectrometry has become the method of choice

Any addition of carbon to a sample of a different age will cause the measured date to be inaccurate. Contamination with modern carbon causes a sample to appear to be younger than it really is

What????  So you are using a bad method buddy.

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14
C to be measurable. 

Do you understand what that means?  That means your method is only good for measuring a young earth.  It's completely ineffective measuring things older than 50,000 years.  Did you know that?  Of course you did not.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Radiocarbon dating works, but you have to be very careful. It also only works for a few thousand years for dating actual history of man. The error rate is too large for older samples. The half-life of carbon 14 is only 6k years


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 12, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



Do you think James looked into it that deep?  I doubt it.  I think his preacher told him what to say and he said it.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I actually went to the link he posted. I laughed! LOL


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 12, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...


One of his pieces of evidence was that there isn't a lot of sand on the ocean floor.  Gimme a break!!!


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


The Age of the Earth - Ocean Floor Sediment as a Creationist Clock: Jason Tentinger

CD220:  Amount of sediments in the ocean

Questioning Answers In Genesis: "Best evidences for a young Earth": Snelling and the ocean-sediment flux


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


That's a lie.  Scientists use all forms of dating, depending on what they are dating.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 12, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


"OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care. "

You should care now.  You have a limited time here, and you are wasting it on magical nonsense and looking ahead to an afterlife that does not exist.  You should care about that possibility.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 12, 2017)

.
bond has no burden and uses their fraudulent religion to insure that weight of life's perils is maintained on the less fortunate remains as they have for centuries, relentlessly to curry for themselves their lives of leisure. 

accusing (all) those not willing to bend to their dogma as atheist in hopes forever to silence their greatest fear, the Free Spirit.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 12, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


I love it when they ask what if we are wrong. What if they're wrong? Maybe Mormons or jehovas are right


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 12, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Apparently, if they find out they are wrong while still in this life, they will all degenerate into immoral savages, pillaging and raping.  Just ask 'em.  They'll tell you that there is no morality without gods.  Many will say this is why atheists can't and don't have "true morality".  Maybe we should all just nod and agree with their  gods -- all of them! -- to save ourselves from the potential genocidal marauding of wayward, godless religious people......


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 12, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


You know who bug me? Big game hunters who claim to be moral or religious. How do you kill a lion for sport and think you are a moral person? That's something I'd never do and I don't think a god is watching me.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Radiocarbon dating is fine for living matter that died.  It is a trusted, quite adequate and scientifically acceptable.  The founder received a Nobel Prize in Chemistry.  What awards did yours receive?  

If the earth and universe is young as per the Bible, then it would be an scientifically acceptable method to date all the carbon-based life forms such as dinosaurs.  We know that dinosaurs are young because they still have their soft tissue.

>>It's completely ineffective measuring things older than 50,000 years.  Did you know that?  Of course you did not.<<

Of course, with a scientific brain like mine, I knew that, but before we go any further with the science, this could be my iconic role in the next life.  

If I was the JB in the movies, then the last thing you see in life will be as follows...


Yet, we do not know what will happen after we die and in the next life.  The period before the transition is one of great mystery and could be quite a scary ride for the atheists.  Those that you believed and got your information from will the ones who guide you.  Right before you go past the point of no return, I'll be the guy who says, "Hey mister, you're on fire."


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



It works for all living matter for a young earth.

What about radiometric dating?  Don't you think the atheist scientists who swear by this method should be careful, too.  They could be off by as 4.5 billion years.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



They're based on science.  Real science.  Christians created modern science to pay homage to God, so why they have to make up a fake science?

I realize science isn't your bag, but now you've been led to believe in a fake science and regurgitate the words of the wrong atheist scientists.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


We use the radiometric technique that is most accurate for the assumed time span. That is determined by the half-life of the isotope. We might start with one method and then go WTF, we were not even close with our original guess. Then we use a different  isotope.

We also use other methods ~ Dating | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program

The best ages use more than one technique and they need to agree.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



If you went to my link, then you would know that soft tissue in fossilized dinosaur bones would and should not exist.  The soft tissue would have dried up if they were billions of years old.  Yet, they're still soft.  See for yourself in the vid below.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



No one is questioning the decay and half-life of the isotope.  What is being challenged using radiometric dating are the assumptions made of the earth and universe during the beginning of time.

The various isotope dating methods rely upon several assumptions. They are:


Known amounts of daughter isotope (usually zero) at start.
No gain or loss of parent or daughter isotopes by any means other than radioactive decay (closed system).
A constant decay rate.[3]
People like Clair Patterson and Neil DeGrasse Tyson are basing the findings the earth is billions of years old on wrong assumptions.  Atheists and their scientists are usually wrong.  The Smithsonian is an institution that has been taken over by these atheist scientists.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


Dinosaur Shocker      |     Science | Smithsonian

Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained

One very rare fossil mechanism

<yawn>


----------



## MarkDuffy (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


LOL, yes science has basic assumptions that are taken to be true on faith until they no longer explain the observations. Then we invent a new faith.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



You gullible innocent schmucks.

Fossils can be so much more than dried out, mineralized bones. Researchers have found entire creatures exquisitely preserved in amber, dinosaur eggshells, and even the fossilized structure of a 515-million-year-old animal's nervous system.

But soft tissue has largely eluded scientists. Research over the last decade has suggested that proteins may be preserved in some fossils, which could revolutionize paleontology. But the only candidates came from the very end of the age of the dinosaurs, about 70 million years ago.

Paleontologists say they've found collagen, a protein found throughout all animal bodies,

"It wouldn't surprise me if this type of preservation is much more common than we might think," Stephen Brusatte, a paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh who was not involved in the research, writes in an email to the Monitor. "This realization could be a game-changer for paleontologists and will give us new ways to study dinosaurs that we never before imagined."

"Jurassic Park" fans shouldn't get too excited, though, Reisz says. Preserved organic material doesn't mean there is DNA in dinosaur bones that scientists could use to clone the beasts like they do in the fictive tale. DNA has a half-life of about 521 years, according to previous research, which means that an organism's DNA would be completely destroyed within 7 million years after its death.

How a 195-million-year-old dinosaur bone could still have soft tissue in it


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



You know Tyson really pisses you guys off you bring him up as much as Republicans bring up Soros.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



The woman in your article, Mary Schweitzer, is on our side ha ha.  Basically, the soft tissue shows that the earth is young.  But what really bothers the atheist scientists is that this shows evolution isn't true.  The evolutionists need billions of years for their mythical magic to happen, so it's why they and you believe it so hard.

More evidence is bent rock layers.  In many mountainous areas, rock layers thousands of feet thick have been bent and folded without fracturing. How can that happen if they were laid down separately over hundreds of millions of years and already hardened?  Check out Grand Canyon and you will see that the layers of rock are bent.  The answer is they were laid down very quickly and while soft they were bent into their present shape.  More evidence that the earth formed via catastrophism and not over time as claimed.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



Yeah, such as the age or the earth and universe keeps going up.  Or today, we have the wrong theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs.  This is ridiculous ha ha.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



>>You know Tyson really pisses you guys off you bring him up as much as Republicans bring up Soros.<<

Degrasse has been doing well for himself.  Probably better than Bill Nye as he actually is a scientist.  Yet, Tyson subscribes to fake science, fabricates quotes and embellishes stories.  I'll be sure to let you and everyone know when he gets his comeuppance.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Yet, we do not know what will happen after we die and in the next life.



surmounting the Apex of Knowledge including the Triumph of Good vs Evil is known as the religion of the Almighty and restrengthened in the 1st century the means to know beforehand ones destiny prior to their expiration. in fact the final Judgement will be for those _living_ who have either accomplished the goal together as one or the goal became forever lost.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

sealybobo, I found something you can do to take your mind off the problems you are having with atheism.  Alternative nostril breathing with yoga.  HRC uses to cope with her gigantic stinging loss to The Donald ha ha.  Even going to "church" to listen to last respects or seeing a friend marry has become a chore.

Close your eyes and breathe deep per nostril.

Hillary Clinton demonstrates 'alternate nostril breathing' during CNN interview


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



>>surmounting the Apex of Knowledge including the Triumph of Good vs Evil is known as the religion of the Almighty and restrengthened in the 1st century the means to know beforehand ones destiny prior to their expiration. in fact the final Judgement will be for those _living_ who have either accomplished the goal together as one or the goal became forever lost.<<

Keep studying the scriptures. Keep doing the things that build your faith in Jesus Christ.  Take the Bible quiz.

General Bible Knowledge Quiz


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> Keep studying the scriptures. Keep doing the things that build your faith in Jesus Christ. Take the Bible quiz.




are you to be taken seriously ...

as you well know I put the christian bible to the side after the first forgery pg.1, the spoken religion from those times lives today helped by the glancing blows of your 4th century book and would exist anyway one manner or another that is my choice for knowledge to reach the Everlasting. Jesus was not innocent and is not whatever is christ and laughable as the Almighty.


----------



## sealybobo (Sep 14, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I read a couple of scriptures and they are nice inspiring words.  I get it.  I would love to believe in the lord but unfortunately I don't.  I used to.  I used to think I had a personal relationship with him but then I realized I was talking to myself.

When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and when you pass through the rivers, they will not sweep over you. When you walk through the fire, you will not be burned; the flames will not set you ablaze.

That cop in Texas must have been an atheist.

http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/houston-police-officer-gets-trapped-in-flood-zone-drowns/

And I would love to see you try to walk through flames.


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Keep studying the scriptures. Keep doing the things that build your faith in Jesus Christ. Take the Bible quiz.
> ...



>>surmounting the Apex of Knowledge including the Triumph of Good vs Evil is known as the religion of the Almighty and restrengthened in the 1st century the means to know beforehand ones destiny prior to their expiration. in fact the final Judgement will be for those _living_ who have either accomplished the goal together as one or the goal became forever lost.<<

Lol, I didn't think you were serious.

>>Jesus was not innocent and is not whatever is christ and laughable as the Almighty.<<

Jesus was perfect.  How was he not innocent?  Why is he laughable as the Almighty?  Because of what happened to Jesus, these are some serious charges you are leveling.  As for laughing, I've always said that one who laughs last, laughs best.







Full story here
This Was Your Life


----------



## james bond (Sep 14, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>I read a couple of scriptures and they are nice inspiring words.  I get it.  I would love to believe in the lord but unfortunately I don't.<<

See, now we're seeing the real sealybobo which you hide from me.  You weren't this way before.  What happened?


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 15, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> Jesus was perfect. How was he not innocent? Why is he laughable as the Almighty? Because of what happened to Jesus, these are some serious charges you are leveling. As for laughing, I've always said that one who laughs last, laughs best.






> _“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” - - _ “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?



the above was spoken by Jesus in their final moments and is a passage of the spoken religion that would never have been included in your book otherwise had it not been spoken, speaks of its authenticity. innocents =/= good is proven by the rebellion of angels in your own text, we live in a carnivorous Garden, truth is tangential to circumstances. 


_*Why is he laughable as the Almighty?
*_
the creator of: The Entire Universe, lives on Earth for "33" years and ends up being crucified by a hysterical mob - the same mob that earlier was put to death, Noah is then allowed latter to do the same to the executioner, the Almighty .   - if nothing else the two events are an irreconcilable contradiction.

there is no physical proof from the time of the event by the individual involved or anyone else etched in stone  or another proof than an _unverified_ book written ~ 400 years latter that relied on political appeasement to be written. a nonreligious document.


_*I've always said that one who laughs last, laughs best ...
*_






your book's history you continue to overlook is the reason and proof of the fallibility of the christian bible, failure to bring to justice the crucifiers that live freely to this day and the implications of its brutality hopefully will not be the last laugh before humanities final Judgement.


----------



## james bond (Sep 21, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



>>_“Eli, Eli,_ _lema_ _sabachthani” - - _ “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

the above was spoken by Jesus in their final moments and is a passage of the spoken religion that would never have been included in your book otherwise had it not been spoken, speaks of its authenticity. innocents =/= good is proven by the rebellion of angels in your own text, we live in a carnivorous Garden, truth is tangential to circumstances.<<

It's included in the good book because it fulfills, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?  Why are you so far from saving me, from the words of my groaning?"  Psalm 22:1.  Haven't we thought this in those times when we have big troubles and longsuffering difficulties in life?  It was a fulfillment of a Biblical prophecy.

Another big reason is that which most are familiar with.  Jesus "died in our place, on our account, that He might bring us near to God. It was this, doubtless, that intensified His sufferings and part of why Jesus said, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It was the manifestation of God’s hatred of sin, in some unexplained way, that Jesus experienced in that terrible hour. The suffering He endured was due to us, and it is that suffering by which we can be saved from eternal death."

My personal view is that Jesus saw all the sins of the world flash before his eyes before dying.  It was more than what one mortal could bear.

As for the rest, you'll have to take it up with the Jesus himself because I'm not going argue with your askewness.


----------



## james bond (Sep 21, 2017)

I admit Christians have their nutjobbers like atheists Bill Nye and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, too.  This guy says the world will end this Saturday.

‘Researcher’ Says This Saturday Will be the End of the World

The chances are good that the world will not end this Saturday.  God won't tell us when the world will end, but it has been prophecized as such so there is no shortage of Christian doomsday prognosticators.

Bill Nye and Degrasse both think we will perish due to global warming.  What a bunch of hooey.  It won't be due to global warming causing flooding or due to inclement weather, but the world will be destroyed by fire according to Biblical prophecy.

This also means that we will not colonize other planets to escape the end.  Star Wars and other space movies showing us living on other planets are sci-fi.  Sorry, colonization of space with the help of Elon Musk's company won't happen in our lifetimes.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Haven't we thought this in those times when we have big troubles and longsuffering difficulties in life?



yes, until a person has passed that limit and realizes the simple futility of such a thought something that would be expected from Jesus were they the subject of the 4th century book. if not they were misled one way or another. 




james bond said:


> My personal view is that Jesus saw all the sins of the world flash before his eyes before dying. It was more than what one mortal could bear.



it's not that unbalanced to not notice the good as well or to dwell so much on one side and not so compelling as to have to die on a cross that the sinners themselves might resolve their own misdeeds themselves. it's been over 2000 years and humanity still exists, they even voted for Trump and are still here.




james bond said:


> As for the rest, you'll have to take it up with the Jesus himself because I'm not going argue with your askewness.



the recorded history of the 4th century book from that time to the present is the askewness that has no legitimate answer. when in that time has there been a period christianity stepped forward and resembled the will of the Almighty. when have they not been at war with free spirited individuals the same as Jesus. are you sure the reason for the crucifixion has been properly portrayed.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> I admit Christians have their nutjobbers like atheists Bill Nye and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, too.  This guy says the world will end this Saturday.
> 
> ‘Researcher’ Says This Saturday Will be the End of the World
> 
> ...


Get your goofy voodoo out of here.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 24, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



And once again, if I ever sustain a massive head injury and find myself wanting your opinions and guidance on my beliefs, I'll be sure to let you know.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 24, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> And once again, if I ever sustain a massive head injury and find myself wanting your opinions and guidance on my beliefs, I'll be sure to let you know.



honey, forget about me, delaying the inevitable would not be in your best interest seek help while there is time try another book than the 4th century forgeries that have lost for you your way in life there's always hope even for someone as lost as yourself. good luck.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 24, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



If I'm the one who's "lost", why are YOU the one desperately looking for attention, yapping at the heels of every religious thread you can find like a Chihuahua with bladder problems?


----------



## alang1216 (Sep 25, 2017)

De-facto Atheist: There may well be a intelligent creator but he is certainly NOT the God of the bible.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 25, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> If I'm the one who's "lost", why are YOU the one desperately looking for attention, yapping at the heels of every religious thread you can find like a Chihuahua with bladder problems?



"link" your response is disingenuous for this thread or anyother thread I have participated in ...

I try and reflect the religion of the Almighty, The Triumph of Good vs Evil enlivened by the 1st century the 4th century christian bible is a forgery that I do what I can to redirect the evil misrepresentation it has committed from that time to the present day. if you think believing a political document disguised as a religion is the way to live your life that's your issue not mine or your inability to conduct yourself accordingly.


----------



## james bond (Sep 28, 2017)

alang1216 said:


> De-facto Atheist: There may well be a intelligent creator but he is certainly NOT the God of the bible.



How do you know this?  To me, it's the God of the Bible.  I've read evolution and thought it countered what Genesis said, but after comparing both since 2012, Genesis seems correct and evolution in error.


----------



## james bond (Sep 28, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > I admit Christians have their nutjobbers like atheists Bill Nye and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, too.  This guy says the world will end this Saturday.
> ...



The end of the world is coming, and the atheists will burn that day, but not on this day.  This is the serious part.  No one will know that day.  One can only guess.  There are some intelligent people who think it will happen within our lifetime.  I didn't agree, but if you follow the two best prognosticators out there, Nostradamus and Dr. Bruce Benito de Mesquita, then it may be around 2060.  Thus, the prognosticators seem to think it will happen within our lifetimes, too.  I don't think the Bible gives a date.

>>Get your goofy voodoo out of here.<<

What about this goofy voodoo?  Check out the number one reason the atheists think the end will occur within our lifetimes in this vid.


EDIT:  As a Christian, my guess it will be a gamma ray burst, assuming the Trinity is part of the EMS in our world.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 28, 2017)

.
no religion required, the Triumph by all concerned will be the final day for Judgement.


----------



## james bond (Sep 29, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> no religion required, the Triumph by all concerned will be the final day for Judgement.



The final judgment will happen whether you believe in it or not or whether you are concerned about it or not.  Religion is required in order to share what God has stated to his people and what happened throughout history.  It also provides a place for worship, learn about one's spirit or spiritual side and to learn about humanity and the supernatural.  It also could refer to an institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices such as Buddhism which doesn't deal with the supernatural.  The basic belief of Christianity is to have such a system of beauty, complexity and the divine, we need the supernatural.  It doesn't just occur in the natural.


----------



## james bond (Sep 29, 2017)

IMHO, the Christian challenge to atheists to disprove God is to prove the Resurrection never happened, find alien life or colonize another planet.  We may not be able to colonize our own moon.  These things will disprove God's existence.


----------



## alang1216 (Sep 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > De-facto Atheist: There may well be a intelligent creator but he is certainly NOT the God of the bible.
> ...


I've studied the science of evolution and the theology of creationism.  There is exhaustive evidence for evolution and NO evidence for creationism.  But that is for another thread, I'll just say that everything evolves, including God.

If you think about it, everything we know about God comes 'from' God.  For example, outside of the Bible, there is no evidence for an afterlife.  In my life I've never encountered anything that was, undisputedly supernatural, no ghosts, no miracles, etc.  There is nothing in the Bible that was not common knowledge at the time.  No mention of the polar ice caps, Neptune, radioactivity, etc.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Sep 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> IMHO, the Christian challenge to atheists to disprove God is to prove the Resurrection never happened, find alien life or colonize another planet.  We may not be able to colonize our own moon.  These things will disprove God's existence.


None of those things would disprove the existence of gods.


----------



## BreezeWood (Sep 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> The final judgment will happen whether you believe in it or not or whether you are concerned about it or not.



my point was when it will happen - the christian bible claims no such knowledge, that is incorrect. the spoken parable of Noah when there is the Triumph of Good vs Evil by all concerned that are living will be the day for the final Judgement - which Triumph succeeded is the Judgement.

actually, the 1st century enlivenment -_ ended without a religion_.




james bond said:


> Religion is required in order to share what God has stated to his (their) people and what happened throughout history.



required is not correct, an atheist that Triumphs whether knowingly or not in the prescribed manor will be Judged accordingly to prosper in the Everlasting.





james bond said:


> It also provides a place for worship, learn about one's spirit or spiritual side and to learn about humanity and the supernatural.



history proves there is no one religion above all others, christianity is a political document disguised as a divine supernatural work that when tasked for verification provides no such proof - better to be truthful and open to correction than a history of salacious intrigue against those that would free their Spirit while they are alive.





james bond said:


> The basic belief of Christianity is to have such a system of beauty, complexity and the divine, we need the supernatural. It doesn't just occur in the natural.





> “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.



the above forgery is the basic "belief of christianity" that negates entirely the latter part of your sentence - _"to have such a system of beauty, complexity and the divine, we _need_ the supernatural" - _christianity is a barrier to the supernatural they have no way in their text to overcome by a submission to an unknown factor that requires having been discovered through their book. there is no such illusion in the spoken religion -  for verification that does not exist.


the final Triumph as prescribed by the parable of Noah, by the spoken religion would be required by _everyone_ living to be accomplished something the desert religions by their very existence fail in providing an avenue of inclusion for all that is their resultant failure within their own earliest writings.


----------



## alang1216 (Sep 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> IMHO, the Christian challenge to atheists to disprove God is to prove the Resurrection never happened, find alien life or colonize another planet.  We may not be able to colonize our own moon.  These things will disprove God's existence.


There is no way to disprove God, there is no way to prove God.  As for the Resurrection, it is not on atheists to disprove but on theists to prove.  Is there anyone alive today that has witnessed a resurrection?  If Jesus' was a one time thing, then obviously no one alive today can verify it.


----------



## james bond (Sep 30, 2017)

alang1216 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > alang1216 said:
> ...



Plenty of evidence for creation such as the chicken coming before the egg or oak tree before the acorn.  It's impossible for an egg or acorn to just happen even in a billion years as evolution claims.

As for finding evidence of God or the supernatural, as you put it, you have to have faith or believe he exists first.  It's different from a ghost which I don't believe in.


----------



## james bond (Sep 30, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > IMHO, the Christian challenge to atheists to disprove God is to prove the Resurrection never happened, find alien life or colonize another planet.  We may not be able to colonize our own moon.  These things will disprove God's existence.
> ...



To me, it would disprove the existence of God, but atheists won't be able to do it.


----------



## james bond (Sep 30, 2017)

alang1216 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > IMHO, the Christian challenge to atheists to disprove God is to prove the Resurrection never happened, find alien life or colonize another planet.  We may not be able to colonize our own moon.  These things will disprove God's existence.
> ...



I'm saying there is to me.  However, the atheists nor anyone else will be able to do it.

There isn't anyone alive today to witness the Resurrection, but plenty from the past.  Jesus will not be a one time thing.  He will come again and then his followers will be resurrected.


----------



## james bond (Sep 30, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>my point was when it will happen - the christian bible claims no such knowledge, that is incorrect. the spoken parable of Noah when there is the Triumph of Good vs Evil by all concerned that are living will be the day for the final Judgement - which Triumph succeeded is the Judgement.<<

Something I said has set you off.

I can only reply the above.  As I said, we do not know, but I can guess.  It's around 2060 based on what Nostradamus and Dr. Bruce.  Be on the lookout for someone around age 25 now who will become some charismatic world leader.


----------



## numan (Sep 30, 2017)

'
I am not an agnostic. I am a pure, convinced atheist.

I would not deny that a profoundly meaningful Spiritual Reality permeates existence. I strongly think, and even feel, that it does. But whatever it is, it is not a god.

I agree with what Bernard Shaw wrote about the poet and atheist Percy Bysshe Shelley, whose wonderful poetry is nevertheless filled with profound spiritual insight :

*"Shelley was an atheist....He never trifled with the word "God" : he knew that it meant a personal First Cause, Almighty Creator, and Supreme Judge and Ruler of the Universe, and that it did not mean anything else, never had meant anything else, and never whilst the English language lasted would mean anything else. Knowing perfectly well that there was no such person, he did not pretend that the question was an open one, or imply, by calling himself an Agnostic, that there might be such a person for all he knew to the contrary. He did know to the contrary; and he said so."*

The historic meaning of the word "god" is so limited, so crude, so permeated with the mental limitations, shallow spirituality and cruelty of Bronze Age barbarians that I think it should be regarded with horror and disgust. The word is so permeated and encrusted with the spiritual filth of the ages that I am sure that it cannot be rehabilitated -- it should be rejected as a broken toy of the mental infancy of the race.

I am quite willing that there be a word to indicate Spiritual Reality -- but not the word "god".
.


----------



## alang1216 (Oct 1, 2017)

james bond said:


> Plenty of evidence for creation such as the chicken coming before the egg or oak tree before the acorn.  It's impossible for an egg or acorn to just happen even in a billion years as evolution claims.



Except evolution claims no such thing.  You should understand something before you dismiss it.



james bond said:


> As for finding evidence of God or the supernatural, as you put it, you have to have faith or believe he exists first.  It's different from a ghost which I don't believe in.



So you're saying that if you changed your mind and believed in ghosts they would become real?  Would God cease to exist if you stopped believing in him?  What does faith have to do with reality?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 1, 2017)

james bond said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


That's not evidence for creation. We already know the egg came before the chicken. Like, hundreds of millions of years before the chicken. And plants came before seeds, while seeds came before trees. While you were sitting around guessing and philosophizing, scientists were busy answering those questions.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 1, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Atheists won't  disprove the ressurection? Haha....no shit they won't, because they won't even try. We already know that it is absurd and physically impossible. That's why you have to claim it is special magic. And no, nobody is going to waste one iota of time or energy to try to disprove "special happy magic". That's kind of the point of introducing magic in the first place.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 1, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> Plenty of evidence for creation such as the chicken coming before the egg or oak tree before the acorn. It's impossible for an egg or acorn to just happen even in a billion years as evolution claims.




the above is virtually illiterate ....

the various branches of beings are _distinguished_ through their offspring initiated by their particular reproductive mechanism developed exclusively over time explains why the initial life form is indistinguishable from the progression its initial purpose set in motion.

religious creationism according to bond above would have dogs producing chickens not having their own mechanism developed but randomly recreating anything that simply appears for no reason at all. the act itself initiating reproduction would not exist if creationism were the origin of life.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 1, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> As I said, we do not know, but I can guess.



the reason you do not know is because the authors of your 4th century book did not take into consideration the Triumph of Good as the final outcome. rendering everything else in your book as irrelevant.


----------



## james bond (Oct 2, 2017)

numan said:


> '
> I am not an agnostic. I am a pure, convinced atheist.
> 
> I would not deny that a profoundly meaningful Spiritual Reality permeates existence. I strongly think, and even feel, that it does. But whatever it is, it is not a god.
> ...



>>I would not deny that a profoundly meaningful Spiritual Reality permeates existence. I strongly think, and even feel, that it does. But whatever it is, it is not a god.<<

We each have a spirit within us.  Is that what you mean?  If a spirit exists within us, then the supernatural exists.  Why can't God exist as the supreme spirit?

Let's call it a life force for argument's sake.  We cannot bring back someone's life force once it has passed the point of no return.  Neither can we create this life force.  Yet, like you said it exists.  It's a complex system to create.  It didn't just happen.  There was some cause.


----------



## james bond (Oct 2, 2017)

alang1216 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Plenty of evidence for creation such as the chicken coming before the egg or oak tree before the acorn.  It's impossible for an egg or acorn to just happen even in a billion years as evolution claims.
> ...


----------



## james bond (Oct 3, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>the reason you do not know is because the authors of your 4th century book did not take into consideration the Triumph of Good as the final outcome. rendering everything else in your book as irrelevant.<<

The reason we do not know is part of the evidence for God.  He said he'll keep the beginning and end from us.  That's in the Bible and science backs up the Bible even though it's not a science book.  For example, we know that the universe started at a single point.  Yet, we do not know if time was ticking then.  Most people think it wasn't and time started at that point.  Everything else, we can discover for ourselves. 

Of course, you get the book wrong.  Consider that you do not read the book, nor interpret it correctly, but continue to bring it up or parts of it.  Final judgment is not like insurance where you can just be covered for liability.  You have to get the full coverage.

For s&g, tell us what you got from Triumph of God (or did you actually mean Good?), as the final outcome.  This is a biblical prophecy, so why does it render everything else in the book as irrelevant?  We also know what will happen if one studies it or ask the Bible scholars.  However, we do not know when it will occur.  2060 is my guess.  Maybe I'm motivated to it happening within our lifetimes because friends who seriously studied this think so and Nostradamus and Dr. Bruce has stuff on it.  I'll try to post a video of the end with Bible scholars explanations once we heard your ending.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 3, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> _they_ said _they'll_ keep the beginning and end from us.





> “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.




is this the origin of your quote ... the forgery has been brought to your attention before without a response. not attaining the knowledge provided by the 4th century bible - The _Triumph_ of Good vs Evil - does not negate the knowledge from existence but that your book is incomplete, renders hopelessness by both quotes that the Triumph as prescribed during antiquity does provide. attaining the knowledge then by the outcome is the greater value than reading an incomplete book.
_*

they said they'll keep the beginning and end from us.*_




james bond said:


> Of course, you get the book wrong. Consider that you do not read the book, nor interpret it correctly, but continue to bring it up or parts of it. Final judgment is not like insurance where you can just be covered for liability. You have to get the full coverage.





> And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.




the above forgery is where I set aside from reading your 4th century book that is not to say I avoid its presence only its unverified interpretation of the Almighty. the fractured truths within are public domain useful when realized without prejudice for everyone's appreciation.





james bond said:


> For s&g, tell us what you got from Triumph of God (or did you actually mean Good?), as the final outcome.



further display of ignorance by a christian, not knowing the Almighty is so by first therein conquering evil theirself to become as they claim - for attaining immortality through the Everlasting. not insurance but the pathway.





> numan: I would not deny that a profoundly meaningful Spiritual Reality permeates existence. I strongly think, and even feel, that it does. But whatever it is, it is not a god.



there is your match bond for who has read your book - is that the difference.




.


----------



## james bond (Oct 3, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...




Ha ha.

What you write is truly ridiculous because of your atheism religion.  It sounds mentally ill.  Atheism is a mental illness for you.  It leads others to Communism.

Let's review how the world is suppose to end according to the biblical prophecy.  You didn't believe it ended before with Noah's Flood, so I doubt the non-believers will be persuaded with a youtube.  He left little witnesses and this time he'll leave no witnesses.  It starts with a lil faith to be a witness...


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 3, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


"For example, we know that the universe started at a single point."

No... we only know it expanded rapidly.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 3, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Ha ha.



_*
The Final Battle ...

*_
for christians the word _Final_ will be their epitaph ... 

there's something else left out of your book have I mentioned it, The Apex of Knowledge required for the Triumph to be complete, sorry bond your lifetime will expire rereading your book to ever find it.


----------



## james bond (Oct 4, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Atheists are usually wrong and in this case you are.  I'm going with Stephen Hawking and what most atheists and Christian scientists agree on.


----------



## james bond (Oct 4, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Ha ha ha ha.  More s&g's due to your inane posts.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Ha ha ha ha. More s&g's due to your inane posts.





james bond said:


> Atheism is a _mental illness_ ...



really, and who reads a 4th century book that convinces them they are born as sinners, are unable to cure their infliction nor find any way to accomplish redemption on their own and must trust a person they have never met or have corroborating evidence for the books claims that was put to death over 2,000 years ago without a single shred of verification since that time, 400 years before the books creation to the present. 

good luck bond ...


----------



## james bond (Oct 4, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>really, and who reads a 4th century book that convinces them they are born as sinners, are unable to cure their infliction nor find any way to accomplish redemption on their own and must trust a person they have never met or have corroborating evidence for the books claims that was put to death over 2,000 years ago without a single shred of verification since that time, 400 years before the books creation to the present.

good luck bond ...<<

One doesn't need luck.  As I said, it just takes a little faith to get started.

Your interpretations of the Bible are so far off that there is no proper response.  There is plenty of evidence and I have provided them here.  The Bible isn't a science book, but science has backed it up.  Is it my problem if you choose not to comprehend and discover the truth for yourself?  Instead, you just continue on with your silly banter.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


"I'm going with Stephen Hawking and what most atheists and Christian scientists agree on."

Then you would agree with me. All, not just most, scientists, including Stephen Hawking, agree that all we know for sure is that the universe exapnded quickly, not that it started as a single point. In fact, they all agree that a singularity was not necessary. You are misrepresenting Stephen Hawking and all the scientists of the world. You really need to go read up.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 4, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Is it my problem if you choose not to comprehend and discover the truth for yourself?



that will never be discovered by reading a book, the goal is purity without sin the christian bible can not provide.


_*
and discover the truth for yourself ...*_


> “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.




- your (forgery) _religion_ in red contradicts your statement in bold.


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

Who said, "The gates of hell are paved with liberals?"  

"The phrase the “gates of hell” is translated in some versions as the “gates of Hades.” “Gates of hell” or “gates of Hades” is found only once in the entire Scriptures, in Matthew 16:18. In this passage, Jesus is referring to the building of His church: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

At that time Jesus had not yet established His church. In fact, this is the first instance of the word _church_ in the New Testament. The word _church_, as used by Jesus, is derived from the Greek _ekklasia_, which means the “called out” or “assembly.” In other words, the church that Jesus is referencing as His church is the assembly of people who have been called out of the world by the gospel of Christ.

Bible scholars debate the actual meaning of the phrase “and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” One of the better interpretations to the meaning of this phrase is as follows. In ancient times, the cities were surrounded by walls with gates, and in battles the gates of these cities would usually be the first place their enemies assaulted. This was because the protection of the city was determined by the strength or power of its gates.

As such, the “gates of hell” or “gates of Hades” means the power of Hades. The name “Hades” was originally the name of the god who presided over the realm of the dead and was often referred to as the “house of Hades.” It designated the place to which everyone who departs this life descends, regardless of their moral character. In the New Testament, Hades is the realm of the dead, and in this verse Hades or hell is represented as a mighty city with its gates representing its power.

Jesus refers here to His impending death. Though He would be crucified and buried, He would rise from the dead and build His church. Jesus is emphasizing the fact that the powers of death could not hold Him in. Not only would the church be established in spite of the powers of Hades or hell, but the church would thrive in spite of these powers. The church will never fail, though generation after generation succumbs to the power of physical death, yet other generations will arise to perpetuate the church. And it will continue until it has fulfilled its mission on earth as Jesus has commanded:

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:18–20).

It is clear that Jesus was declaring that death has no power to hold God's people captive. Its gates are not strong enough to overpower and keep imprisoned the church of God. The Lord has conquered death (Romans 8:2; Acts 2:24). And because “death no longer is master over Him” (Romans 6:9), it is no longer master over those who belong to Him.

Satan has the power of death, and he will always use that power to try to destroy the church of Christ. But we have this promise from Jesus that His church, the “called out” will prevail: “Yet a little while and the world will see me no more, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live” (John 14:19)."

What are the gates of hell?


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



>>Big game hunters who claim to be moral or religious. How do you kill a lion for sport and think you are a moral person? That's something I'd never do and I don't think a god is watching me.<<

Sorry, sealybobo.  I missed some great posts of yours due to being busy with my new project.  Many times, I avoid the PC or internet in order to get other work done.

It really depends on the danger of the hunter being killed and how difficult it is in my book.  That is, a big game hunter has to be very skilled, to be able to track and bag his quarry.  People who cheat the laws deserve to be killed such as that dentist who had a lion being kept in a zoo preserve flushed out into an open area and then shot and killed.  We can't kill this person, so we put it out on social media so he can be ridiculed and maybe end up losing his livelihood.

What you are exhibiting is what we inherited from God, and that is judging our fellow man.  We all have an innate sense of fairness and justice.  I try not judge unless I am forced to such as on a jury, when hiring someone or judging work performance.  It's too easy to judge someone by their cover and it is usually misleading.  Many times, I have to say to myself, don't judge, don't judge, don't judge.  This way, I can interact with this person or group without being already in a negative frame of mind and judge them more fairly if I need to.  Also, it helps keep a better attitude when interacting with these people or groups.  Jesus has the power to look in our hearts and judge immediately how honest and fair we were in our lives.  That's why he is the final judge, jury and executioner.  It's one of the reasons why I accept original sin.  No matter how charitable or philanthropic I am with my time and money, I still have my selfish self.  The times and situations where I helped myself get ahead.  It's not just one-upsmanship.

EDIT:  You also had an awesome post and link regarding socialism and sports.  I'll have to read and get back to you.


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

hobelim said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > hobelim said:
> ...



>>If that was true you wouldn't be trashing it all as superstitious nonsense.

I will tell you a little secret.

Some things, like understanding a foreign language,   just can't be faked.
If that was true you wouldn't be trashing it all as superstitious nonsense.<<

Very few people are agnostic even though they would not challenge theists, i.e. they are open minded enough to acknowledge the possible existence of God and then do something about it.  The key is to do something about like pray sincerely to God to reveal himself.  Might as well lump them into the atheist category since they see and evaluate but take no action.


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



>>Then you would agree with me. All, not just most, scientists, including Stephen Hawking, agree that all we know for sure is that the universe exapnded quickly, not that it started as a single point. In fact, they all agree that a singularity was not necessary. You are misrepresenting Stephen Hawking and all the scientists of the world. You really need to go read up.<<

I usually don't like to quote wiki, but in this case I'll use the liberal website for ease of use.  






The Big Bang theory, which states that the universe expanded from and was a singularity whose radius was zero, is widely accepted by physicists.

Cosmogony - Wikipedia.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


Miley Cyrus had a shaman tell her she's a good person because she feels for the lesser animals. I agree that's a great sign of a good person. If it were up to me all cows would be free range


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> hobelim said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


For years I prayed and at least tried to believe but like you said you can't fake it. Although I believe agnostics are faking their indecisiveness due to wishful thinking and cognitive dissonance and the fact we don't know


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


From literally the EXACT same Wikipedia page (that you clearly did not read):

"Physicists are undecided whether this means the universe began from a singularity, or that current knowledge is insufficient to describe the universe at that time."

"It is debated 'how closely' models based on general relativity alone can be used to extrapolate toward the singularity—certainly no closer than the end of the Planck epoch."


In exact agreement with what I said, and in contradiction to your claim.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 7, 2017)

from Space.com:

"
The Big Bang theory envisions the universe beginning from a singularity, a mathematical concept of infinite temperature and infinite density packed into a single point of space. But scientists don't think this is what actually happened.

"It wouldn't really be infinite," explained physicist Paul Steinhardt, director of the Princeton Center for Theoretical Science at Princeton University in Princeton, N.J., and another architect of inflation. "Infinity just means a mathematical breakdown. It's a statement that you shouldn?t have extrapolated your equations back that far because they just blew up in your face."


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 7, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


A decent discussion of the issue:

Did The Universe Really Begin With a Singularity?

"
I’ve talked over the years with many experts in “quantum gravity” _[the poorly understood but required blend of Einstein’s gravity and quantum physics, a blend that will be needed to explain extreme gravitational phenomena]_ and I’ve never spoken to one who  believed that the universe began with a real singularity. Why? Because


the singularity arises from using Einstein’s equations for gravity
but we know Einstein’s equations aren’t _sufficient_ — they aren’t able to describe certain extreme gravitational phenomena.
Specifically, when the density and heat become extremely large, quantum physics of gravity becomes important. _But Einstein’s equations ignore all these quantum effects._ So we already know that *in certain extreme conditions, Einstein’s equations simply don’t apply*. How could we then use those very same equations to conclude there’s a singularity at the beginning of the universe?

We can’t...."

"....Yet all over the media and all over the web, we can find articles, including ones published just after this week’s cosmic announcement of new evidence in favor of inflation, that state with great confidence that in the Big Bang Theory the universe started from a singularity. So I’m honestly very confused. *Who* is still telling the media and the public that the universe really started with a singularity, or that the modern Big Bang Theory says that it does? I’ve never heard an expert physicist say that. And with good reason: when singularities and other infinities have turned up in our equations in the past, those singularities disappeared when our equations, or our understanding of how to use our equations, improved...."

"...The modern Big Bang Theory really starts _after_ this period of ignorance, with a burst of inflation that creates a large expanding universe, and the end of inflation which allows for the creation of the heat of the Hot Big Bang.  The equations for the theory, as it currently stands, can be used to make predictions _even though_we don’t know the precise nature of our universe’s birth. Yes, a singularity often turns up in our equations when we extend them as far as they can go in the past; but a singularity of this sort is far from likely to be an aspect of nature, and instead should be interpreted as a sign of what we don’t yet understand."


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



More evidence for God as you are judging a person by their empathy towards lower animals.  God made man the caretaker of all the animals and all of this was fine until the day that Adam ate the forbidden fruit.  Afterward, he had trouble raising crops from the land and taking care of the animals wasn't as easy as before because they started eating each other due to lack of abundance.

As for Miley Cyrus, the public perception of her isn't the same as what she's like in real life.  This was told to me from someone who knows their family.  That said, who knows what goes on behind closed doors because she identifies herself as pansexual and has a male celeb fiancee.  Is it part of her act, or does her act bleed over into her real life?  Pansexuality and the rest came after the fall.  I think before that was sex between and man and a woman and no pain, i.e. labor, during childbirth.

https://www.quora.com/What-if-Adam-and-Eve-didnt-eat-the-apple-What-would-the-world-have-been-like


----------



## GreenBean (Oct 7, 2017)

One time Atheist  turned Agnostic turned 100% Theist.  The Multiverse demands the existence of a supreme intelligence which is the sum total of all the knowledge, experience and wisdom that ever has existed, ever can exist or ever will exist.  God has existed as each and every one of us and walked in our shoes  he / it is omnipotent which requires an infinite number of experiences to attain. Key Word Time / infinity.


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



I read and comprehended just fine.  Not sure about you.  

So you do not believe in singularity?  And what I said was I was going by Stephen Hawking representing the atheist's side and what most atheist and Christian scientists agree upon.  What do you have to back up your claim that the majority believe as you do?

How did the universe begin?
How did the universe begin?


----------



## james bond (Oct 7, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Ha ha.  Matt Strassler states, "The cause was a large amount of what is often called


“dark energy” (but it’s not energy, it’s energy and negative pressure in the right combination) or
the “cosmological constant” (Einstein’s [non]-blunder: but fortunately it wasn’t constant, or the universe would have inflated forever) or
“dark smooth tension” (which is correct but it’s kind of clunky-sounding and not any clearer.)
No one has show dark energy or dark matter even exists.

Here's what creation scientists say about dark energy and dark matter:

"*Dark energy* is one of two concepts (the other is dark matter) that Big Bang cosmologists and astrophysicists have invented to explain the most serious differences to date between astronomical observations of an expanding universe and their own expectations. It is "the most popular way to explain recent observations that the universe appears to be expanding at an accelerating rate";[1] Astronomers and cosmologists have been speculating on the nature of this dark energy for ten years.
*Contents*

1 The problem
2 The solution from creation science
3 Evolutionist/uniformitarian view
3.1 The dark energy concept
3.2 Nature of dark energy
3.3 Implications of dark energy

4 Criticisms of the dark energy concept
4.1 Creationist criticism
4.2 Secular criticism
4.3 A Competing Secular Explanation

5 Proposed investigations
6 References
7 See also
*The problem*

In 1998, the Supernova Cosmology Project observed 42 Type Ia supernovae, most of these from the ground, in an effort to measure the rate of deceleration of the expansion of the universe.[2] (Type Ia supernovae are objects of easily discernible brightness and thus are favorite objects for standardization of redshift and hence of the speed of expansion.) These supernovae were actually much dimmer than expected, a finding that indicated an _acceleration_ of expansion, not the deceleration that gravitational attraction would produce. A competing group, the High-Z Supernova Search Team, reported similar results from their observations of 14 other supernovae.[3] (The symbol _z_ stands for redshift in this context.) The findings of an accelerated universe came as a profound surprise to all interested observers and commentators.[4] More recent surveys have shown that the discrepancy persists.[5][6]

In conclusion dark energy is not been observed nor reproduced in a lab.[7]"


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 8, 2017)

GreenBean said:


> One time Atheist  turned Agnostic turned 100% Theist.  The Multiverse demands the existence of a supreme intelligence which is the sum total of all the knowledge, experience and wisdom that ever has existed, ever can exist or ever will exist. God has existed as each and every one of us and walked in our shoes  he / it is omnipotent which requires an infinite number of experiences to attain. Key Word Time / infinity.


.


GreenBean said:


> ...that ever has existed, ever can exist or ever will exist.



_*
God has existed as each and every one of us and walked in our shoes ...*_


from an atheist to a theist ... that's quite a leap (ever) it's not from a book is it. why _supreme_, you do not feel capable of being the same.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 8, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


You are not following. While scientists say the singularity is the rational extrapation of Einstein's equations backward in time, they know it is problematic to assert its existence on this basis, as those laws no longer would hold , past a certain point in time (traveling backwards). Scientists also cannot assert that a singularity was necessary.

So, physicists do not accept the belief in a singularity, though admit it may be the case that there was one.

It sesms to me that your main problem in comprehension here is not having a good grasp on how scientists describe what they know and do not know.

Dark matter and dark energy have not YET been shown to exist.

There is no such thing as a creation scientist. Haha, what is that, a Halloween costume?


----------



## GreenBean (Oct 8, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > One time Atheist  turned Agnostic turned 100% Theist.  The Multiverse demands the existence of a supreme intelligence which is the sum total of all the knowledge, experience and wisdom that ever has existed, ever can exist or ever will exist. God has existed as each and every one of us and walked in our shoes  he / it is omnipotent which requires an infinite number of experiences to attain. Key Word Time / infinity.
> ...


Have no idea what you're trying to say - kindly collect your thoughts and recompose that message in a coherent manner - sorry not meaning to be insulting but really ?!


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 8, 2017)

GreenBean said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


.


GreenBean said:


> Have no idea what you're trying to say





BreezeWood said:


> from an atheist to a theist ... that's quite a leap (ever) it's not from a book is it. why _supreme_, you do not feel capable of being the same.




thinking for yourself may be the problem, try a remedial course in self awareness, it could help ...


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 10, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


Excuse you.... I have seen several perfectly articulate posters make the same complaint to you. Let's face it... your posts are often incoherent word salads, because you are a snake oil salesman, trying to package a turd as a Cadillac.  So you think you beguile and regale people with your 20 point Scrabble words arranged into something barely resembling English, when this is just really a tactic of  assuring your own ability able to wriggle out of any meaning anyone gleans from your ungrammar.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 10, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


.
not in the least ...



GreenBean said:


> The Multiverse demands the existence of a supreme intelligence which is the sum total of all the knowledge, experience and wisdom ...



my own sentiment expressed several times, no need to read a book ...




GreenBean said:


> The Multiverse demands the existence of a supreme intelligence which is the sum total of all the knowledge, experience and wisdom that ever has existed, ever can exist or ever will exist.



I'm not a fatalist ... the Everlasting is just that, suffocation not allowed.



your one to speak, fort fun for who's a dead end what's your point -


----------



## james bond (Oct 10, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Ha ha ha ha.  Science isn't my problem, but yours.  Quit being a rube.  We have many creation scientists and Christian scientists invented modern science.

Could it be that Satan has filled your mind with fake science from atheist scientists to steer you away from the truth?  You are stuffed with it.  I mean a single point means the universe had a beginning and is evidence for God.  Yes, we are referring to Borde-Guth-Vilenkin singularity.

Honestly, the cr*p that atheist scientists come up with.  Can you hear them screaming in misery 24/7?

Again, science will back up the universe started from a single point and had a beginning.  Thus, God.

Take it from WLC instead of Degrasse.  He knows the low down.


----------



## james bond (Oct 10, 2017)

If there is one thing, I learned from Islam and that is to use the left hand for atheists.  It is the hand to wash away the cr*p.  If you had enough of atheist cr*p, then put up the left hand for them to stop.






The right hand is for the nourishment and to use for worshiping God.  Take nourishment with the right. 

The atheist prolly takes their nourishment with the left.  This would explain a lot in my opinion.


----------



## james bond (Oct 10, 2017)

Here's a perfectly good example of the lengths atheists and their scientists go through to disprove God.  It's stupid AF.  We all know the chicken came first or the oak tree before the acorn.

The Dinosaur Egg: That’s What Came Before the Chicken


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2017)

More evidence for God.  Supervolcano catastrophism happens rapidly.

Not a surprise for creation scientists and YEC
A Surprise From the Supervolcano Under Yellowstone


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 11, 2017)

james bond said:


> More evidence for God.  Supervolcano catastrophism happens rapidly.
> 
> Not a surprise for creation scientists and YEC
> A Surprise From the Supervolcano Under Yellowstone


.


james bond said:


> More evidence for God.




if so for the Almighty why do you continue to worship a forgery book that is detrimental to a Free Spirit and the Triumph as requested by the spoken religion of Antiquity ... I know the answer the same for centuries -




james bond said:


> The atheist prolly takes their nourishment with the left. This would explain a lot in my opinion.









bond is a double agent ... 4th century against the 1st, slavery against freedom.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Oct 11, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I didn't say "science was your problem"....?  What is wrong with you?  No, there is no such thing as a "creation scientist", there are only scientists who happen to be creationists, which is like a scientist who also happens to be a gardener.  get that weak attempt out of here.

The only "screaming" i hear is your own, as you bang your head against the wall yor whole life, wondering in hilarious ignorance why your impotent, ignorant rants have no bearing on any scientific topic, ever, anywhere.

Science does not back that up currently.  I explained why. Stop name dropping, as you are misrepresenting those scientists.  I don't think they would appreciate your lies about them and their life's work.


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > More evidence for God.  Supervolcano catastrophism happens rapidly.
> ...



>>if so for the Almighty why do you continue to worship a forgery book that is detrimental to a Free Spirit and the Triumph as requested by the spoken religion of Antiquity ... I know the answer the same for centuries -<<

First, a little faith goes a long way in discovering that God exists.  Second, there is the scientific evidence such as what I mentioned.  Third, I compared evolution and Genesis and found dinosaurs do not come from birds, the universe started to exist from a singularity, i.e. there was a cause and a single point, we didn't descend from a common ancestor ape (which is racist) and an adult chicken laid the first egg and an adult oak tree dropped the first acorn.  Furthermore, no aliens have been found anywhere and we can't just go live on another planet or even the moon.  The Grand Canyon was created very rapidly due to catastrophism instead of taking millions of years to form.

>>bond is a double agent ... 4th century against the 1st, slavery against freedom.<<

All it means is the Bible can't change while science and evolution keeps changing all the time.  The universe wasn't eternal.  It had a beginning.  The science keeps discovering that the Bible is true, such as dinosaurs aren't 240 million years old.  While Darwinism was responsible for scientific racism leading to Eugenics and the Holocaust and Planned Parenthood genocide.  The survival of the fittest spouted by evolution, i.e. those best able to pass along their genes, is wrong.  It's those who can adapt to change the best are the ones to survive, and lo and behold, the Bible teaches us about changing.  Isn't it odd that evolution itself keeps changing, but isn't changing us for the better?  While the Bible does not change, but yet it teaches us how to keep changing and managing change so we can continue existing until the end comes.  Jesus taught us that the truth will set us free.  This is the real freedom.

Change
What Does the Bible Say About Change?

Freedom
What Does the Bible Say About Freedom?


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 13, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> First, a little faith goes a long way in discovering that God exists.



there is consensus, faith is required for a tangible result a state of purity attained by triumph. where an Almighty resides whether found or not, residence of the Everlasting. faith is hope for the disenfranchised, for bond it is a cudgel used over the head of the Free Spirit denying them their Spiritual freedom a false faith as a book of forgeries personifying their personal glorification not that of the Almighty.





james bond said:


> While the Bible does not change, but yet it teaches us how to keep changing and managing change so we can continue existing until the end comes.



that is a lie their book was published 398 ad late 4th century as a political document they disguise as a religion its deep wisdom distorted by their selfishness and blind injustice as recorded from that time to the present.





bond disregards the forgeries of their book to continue their crusade against the 1st century events and those meanings as a Free Spirit that will for those people never be realized.

to what end, theirs or the Almighty's that is the true crusade.


----------



## james bond (Oct 14, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I really think that Satan has fooled you into thinking like you do.  Remember that he's a wily trickster and he persuaded Adam and Eve to disobey God's one rule to show they were loyal to God and worshiped his greatness.  While I've said to all the atheists is that a little faith goes a long way in proving God exists.  Maybe the lack of faith goes a long way in not believing God exists through the power of Satan.  You question how could a snake talk, but it didn't talk.  Satan was using the snake while he was the one talking.  Isn't this similar to how Satan has convinced atheists to want proof of God first?

Look at this moron's reasoning.






The answer is in the Bible and has been prophecized.


----------



## james bond (Oct 14, 2017)

Degrasse said something stupid, as usual.  He said Jack from Titanic should have tried harder to live.  He died freezing to death to save Rose (Kate Winslet).  The world would be a better place if Degrasse froze.

This is what he said...
“Whether or not he could’ve been successful, I would’ve tried more than once. You try once. ‘Oh, this is not gonna work. I will just freeze to death in the water.’ No, excuse me. No!” the famed astrophysicist, 59, told the Huffington Post in an interview published Wednesday. “The survival instinct is way stronger than that in everybody, especially in that character. He’s a survivor, right? He gets through. He gets by.”

He added, “And I’ll tell you this, if that character was Matt Damon from ‘The Martian,’ he would’ve made an outboard motor and saved everybody. This is how science can help you!”

https://pagesix.com/2017/10/05/neil...rom-titanic-should-have-tried-harder-to-live/


*"James Cameron* was less than convinced, though. It had to happen in the script, he said, even if his scientific thesis was proven wrong.

"Actually, it's not a question of room, it's a question of buoyancy," Cameron told IGN recently. "When Jack puts Rose on the raft, then he tries to get on the raft. He's not an idiot, he doesn't want to die. And the raft sinks and kind of flips. So it's clear that there's only enough buoyancy available for one person. So he makes a decision to let her be that person instead of taking them both down.""

Titanic: James Cameron explains why Jack couldn't climb on the raft with Rose | Daily Mail Online

It still would be tough to get aboard the plank, so that it would not flip over, but it's possible if it weren't freezing conditions.  It would take some tries and balance and a partner with better survival skills than Rose.

So, if Jack could have added some buoyancy to the wooden plank using Rose's life vest, then he could've been saved.  There you go.

Thus, pick a fellow Christian woman who prolly has better survival skills and is willing to share in order for both to survive.


----------



## james bond (Oct 14, 2017)

A bit strange (actually, a lot strange), but God had a message for sealybobo.  For some reason, he wanted me to point him to his "worldliness." 

The following comes from this story.

“The Pope said the Lord asks us be watchful in order not to enter into temptation.  This is why a Christians have to be awake, watchful and careful like a sentinel.  Jesus was not narrating a parable but was stating a truth, i.e when the unclean spirit comes out of a man, he roams about in abandoned places looking for refuge and not finding any, decides to return to where he came from, where the freed man lives.  Hence the demon decides to bring in "seven other spirits worse than him.”  Pope Francis emphasized the word “worse”, saying it has much force in the passage because the demons enter quietly.

 “The devil slowly changes our criteria to lead us to worldliness. It camouflages our way of acting, which we hardly notice. And so, the man, freed from the demon, becomes a bad man, a man burdened by worldliness. And that's exactly what the devil wants – worldliness, the Pope stressed.”

Adding,

“It means stopping for a while to examine my life, whether I am a Christian, whether I educate my children, whether my life is Christian or worldly?” And one understands this, as Paul points out, by looking at Christ crucified.  One understands where worldliness lies and is destroyed before the Lord's cross.  The Crucifix saves us from the charms and seductions that lead us to worldliness.”

I can't find the original article anymore, but it's similar to the following link.
Pope Francis Warns of "Seduction of Worldliness"

I'm not sure how an article meant for Catholics relates to him nor I'm not sure how I even read an article on Pope Francis.  He isn't my favorite Pope.  

To me, I can get the gist of the Pope's message in that I shouldn't focus on politics and even sports (or other worldly matters) and forget about God.  I wasn't there when God created the world, nor was I there when he destroyed the world.  I shouldn't forget about God.  I suppose it means that all of this happened in the past and it led to today and what happened to me today.  I was able to meet with a friend and he gave me something I needed (which I wasn't expecting).  It just happened similar to my prayers being answered.  For that I am grateful to God.


----------



## james bond (Oct 16, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...












Stanley Hotel where The Shining was shot

Here's one for you BW.  Of course, you don't believe in ghosts.  I don't either, but don't have an explanation for this except light tricks or photoshop.  There's supposedly a second ghost going up the other stairs, too.  Its blurred, too.  The photographer claims there is the tour guide and another person going down the stairs.  The last one appears to be a reflection if you ask me.  He's making a case for ghosts, so it's better to disregard what he's stating, but there isn't a good explanation.  

'Ghosts' Caught On Camera At Famed Stanley Hotel In Colorado | HuffPost


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 16, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> He's making a case for ghosts, so it's better to disregard what he's stating, but there isn't a good explanation.



_*He's making a case for ghosts ... so it's better to disregard what he's stating*_

must not be the holy ghost, you do not make it easy to figure you out bond ... that would be true of Jesus the person, is that a freudian slip, certainly they were not (christ) only made up that way deceivingly by a 4th century book - to tell the true story would not have led to century's of persecution.




> After Las Vegas massacre, 'bump stock' is hot item at U.S. gun shops
> 
> *After Las Vegas massacre, 'bump stock' is hot item at U.S. gun shops*
> 
> Sales of bump stocks surged in the days following the attack, because gun owners feared they would be banned.




its not gun owners, those out hording the weapons of mass destruction are everyone of them christians, they have no souls to speak of.


----------



## james bond (Oct 21, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



>>must not be the holy ghost, you do not make it easy to figure you out bond ... that would be true of Jesus the person, is that a freudian slip, certainly they were not (christ) only made up that way deceivingly by a 4th century book - to tell the true story would not have led to century's of persecution.<<

*One of things revealed to me is that atheists are not atheists because of Satan.  Sure, Satan may play a part, but he's a cunning trickster.  He may put words in your mouth, but it's still you who speaks them.  It's all up to the atheist.  The atheist is an atheist because of their decision.  This will become important later. *

*Anyway, it's not the Holy Ghost, BW, but the Stanley ghost.  I suspect it's a well done illusion if the photo hasn't been photoshopped as the FBI expert states.  I think the photographer wants you to believe it's real and buy whatever he's selling.  $200 for a photo of a real ghost at the Stanley Hotel just in time for Halloween.*

>>After Las Vegas massacre, 'bump stock' is hot item at U.S. gun shops

*After Las Vegas massacre, 'bump stock' is hot item at U.S. gun shops*

Sales of bump stocks surged in the days following the attack, because gun owners feared they would be banned.<<

*It seems to me that libbies are the best salespeople for guns, gun parts and components.  Wasn't your cowardly leader Obumba the top gun salesperson of all time?*


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> It seems to me that libbies are the best salespeople for guns, gun parts and components. Wasn't your cowardly leader Obumba the top gun salesperson of all time?





BreezeWood said:


> its not gun owners, those out hording the weapons of mass destruction are everyone of them christians, they have no souls to speak of.



_*Obumba ...*_

Obumba must still be fresh in your mind, call him libbie all you want we know the truth christian your a racist, him taking your guns must have been unbearable for you.




james bond said:


> One of things revealed to me is that atheists are not atheists because of Satan.


that's because they, atheists are not evil in comparison to those that read the satanic forgeries, the 4th century christian bible who then condemn those that see the truth in not worshiping its evil. 

* it"s not just atheist that see the truth in regards to that terrible book.




james bond said:


> He may put words in your mouth, but it's still you who speaks them. It's all up to the atheist. The atheist is an atheist because of their decision. This will become important later.


_*This will become important later.*_

it will be their salvation compared to you. no matter what you believe that book represents its history reveals the awfulness of its scriptures.


not sure where the introduction of atheism comes from, particularly that I do not believe it is specific to the 4th century book whats more without the book atheism would not necessarily thrive any more than with it - must be more to do with atheist preventing the bible from being read in public schools, etc. the fresh air for zombies must not be good for their health.


----------



## james bond (Oct 22, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



*Ha ha.  I can laugh now because we have DJT in office.  Since you're offended by "Obumba," what Marxist Barry Sotero did was destroy our Constitutional Republic.  He also help create two left coasts and progressive politicians whose only interests are to create a Marxist and Communist state.  Didn't I say atheism leads to Communism from the beginning, you commie.  Our food manufacturing system has become third world thanks to progressive thinking and no religion.  We do not want to become a Communist Republic like China or Russia.  This was what that traitor Commie Barry wanted to do.  He wanted to become the Messiah.  I'm not the racist here.  You're the one who thinks our ancestors were apes.  It's scientific racism.*

Atheism also leads to hell.  As I said, this will become important later.

*There can be no salvation unless one reads and learns from the Scripture and finds out what the truth is.  The truth has been altered by those who want no God.*


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> He wanted to become the Messiah. I'm not the racist here. You're the one who thinks our ancestors were apes. It's scientific racism.



laughing will not solve your underlying irredeemable problem, bond - not even a messiah _would_ bother to save you.
_*

You're the one who thinks our ancestors were apes.*_

there was an original template that all beings evolved from if that makes you feel better. as a racist believing genesis and how you elevate yourself above all others have you found sapiens living with the dinosaurs to prove your point ... no but that's not an issue for the self deluded they just make up forgeries to explain the fallacy as they have their written scriptures.




james bond said:


> you commie.





james bond said:


> There can be no salvation unless one reads and learns from the Scripture and finds out what the truth is. The truth has been altered by those who want no God.



truth can not be altered, christian the history of your religion is a good example.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Oct 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> Here's a perfectly good example of the lengths atheists and their scientists go through to disprove God.  It's stupid AF.  We all know the chicken came first or the oak tree before the acorn.
> 
> The Dinosaur Egg: That’s What Came Before the Chicken


_We all know the chicken came first_

LOL, there is no cure for brain damage

Thinking people know the egg came first.

Tell me about the very first chicken. Did it come from an egg?


----------



## Meriweather (Oct 22, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> Thinking people know the egg came first.
> 
> Tell me about the very first chicken. Did it come from an egg?



Logical people remember that cellular life came first--and that an egg is a cell.  Therefore, relying on this logic, it appears the answer to the riddle should be the egg came first.


----------



## james bond (Oct 22, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Here's a perfectly good example of the lengths atheists and their scientists go through to disprove God.  It's stupid AF.  We all know the chicken came first or the oak tree before the acorn.
> ...



LOL.  Think, man instead of walking thru life acting brain damaged.  The creation scientists understand the chicken came first because the egg is too complex to have just happened by itself.  The first chicken was created by our creator, God.  Everything that God created was an adult.  What's the only creature that God created who was an infant?


----------



## james bond (Oct 22, 2017)

Meriweather said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > Thinking people know the egg came first.
> ...



This is fake science logic.  You can't create complex life forms from cells.  This is the BS atheist scientists want you to believe.  One can't even create a flower from simple plants.  We can make hybrids or modify that which already exists, but we can't create new life forms.  Only God can do that.  More proof God exists.


----------



## MarkDuffy (Oct 22, 2017)

Meriweather said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > Thinking people know the egg came first.
> ...


and that the chicken's immediate ancestor layed eggs.


----------



## james bond (Oct 22, 2017)

Back to the Stanley Hotel.  I do not have an explanation for this.  Of course, the atheists won't believe because it's the supernatural.  Christians believe in angels and demons, but there's argument over ghosts.  One can clearly see a figure of a woman and child once they blow up the embedded photo.  I'm beginning to think the photographer wasn't out just to make money for himself.  We have unrelated expert people and companies who have examined the photos.  Any altered or Photoshopped images would have been discovered.

Paranormal investigator sees something else in Stanley Hotel picture


----------



## MarkDuffy (Oct 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> MarkDuffy said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


LOL, seriously

You do not need to give up your creator God to agree with evolution.

That you claim that a very busy God has to keep on creating every day that a new species appears is NOT in the Bible.

Evolution occurs AFTER creation.

_Everything that God created was an adult._

hahahaha


----------



## james bond (Oct 22, 2017)

MarkDuffy said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > MarkDuffy said:
> ...



>>You do not need to give up your creator God to agree with evolution<<

Who's agreeing with evolution?  Are you so brain damaged to not be able to read and comprehend?  Are you worse than BreezeWood ha ha?

I went to a prominent liberal university that promotes evolution.  I've read their evo website and agreed at one time.  However, after reading Genesis and the Bible, I've come to think that the Bible is correct.  Science backs it up.  Just study how the evos took over in the 1800s with the wrong science.  It's scientific racism in some facets.

>>That you claim that a very busy God has to keep on creating every day that a new species appears is NOT in the Bible.

Evolution occurs AFTER creation.<<

Talk about not understanding or misunderstanding science.  LOL.  Evolution does not happen every day.  Evolution doesn't happen at all.  What you are referring to is natural selection and creation scientist, Edwin Blyth, discovered it first in 1835.  Darwin did not credit Blyth appropriately and we know the reason why.  He was going against his Christian religion and siding with the atheist, Charles Lyell.

>>hahahaha<<

You have a penchant for lol'ing at other as a form of condescension or mockery.  However, the jokes on you as the one who laughs last laughs best.  Ha ha ha ha.


----------



## james bond (Oct 22, 2017)

I can't believe people pay $75 and up to listen to Neil DeGrasse Tyson ha ha.

*Why can't he just admit there are no aliens because God only created humans and animals as listed in Genesis?*

*Considering the title of your talk, what is your actual media diet?*

I rarely ever read anything on paper. It's all Internet, and it's mostly whatever comes to me. I constantly have people sending me links, "Have you seen this?" or tagging me on Twitter saying, "What do you think of this?" It's a highly useful tool to find out what everyone cares about. I have a duty and obligation to be fluent in all the science that is triggering public interest.

There's a debate among those searching for extra-terrestrial intelligence. One side says we shouldn't call attention to ourselves in the universe, because if advanced aliens find us, they'll probably kill us in an interstellar, Columbus-discovering-America situation. The other side says, send a signal out there, maybe aliens can help us solve global warming or cure cancer. Where do you side?

Our planet's return address was given out on a plaque on the Pioneer spacecraft, in glyphs, in case it was intercepted by extraterrestrial life. So I'm intrigued there are people who would celebrate giving out our planetary address, and they're the same people who would never give their email address to another human. As for those who fear aliens sucking our brains out, I'm equally intrigued that they would assume advanced aliens would treat us the way we treat one another. What an indictment that is of humans, that you think aliens would do that to us. On a side note, aliens could be so advanced that we offer nothing of interest to them. When you walk down the road, do you say, "What is that worm thinking about?" No, you just keep walking. Maybe we haven't heard from them because we're not as important as we think we are. 

*Why doesn't he give credit to God?*

*When I look at the Hubble Deep Field image, this small piece of sky with 10,000 galaxies in it, and about 100 billion stars in each of those galaxies, it overwhelms me. I actually find it unsettling. Ever felt that way? *

I've not felt that. I wonder what it derives from? When I look at the night sky, I see stars manufacturing elements that make life, and that we are not just figuratively, but literally, stardust. I see connectivity to the cosmos, and that's a profound spiritual awareness of our place in the universe. I think maybe it's because you're coming to it with the wrong attitude. You might need an attitude adjustment. If you think, 'my world is big,' you're going to realize it's actually small, and that could give you existential angst. But if you have no prior assumption, in fact, start by thinking, 'we're really small, let's see how small,' I think you'll say wow, this universe is beautiful and diverse.

*Homemade moon pies are the best.*

*Candy: Milky Way versus Moon Pie?*

Milky Way. I remember Moon Pies being good as a kid, but as an adult you realize they're kinda dry.

*Save $75 and up and ignore this cretin.*


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> I can't believe people pay $75 and up to listen to Neil DeGrasse Tyson ha ha.
> 
> *Why can't he just admit there are no aliens because God only created humans and animals as listed in Genesis?*
> 
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Why can't he just admit there are no aliens because God only created humans and animals _as listed in Genesi_s?



_*
Why can't he just admit ...*_


- because forgeries are not to be taken seriously and are dangerous when placed in the wrong hands.


----------



## james bond (Oct 23, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> *JB:  Why can't he just admit there are no aliens because God only created humans and animals as listed in Genesis?*
> 
> 
> - because forgeries are not to be taken seriously and are dangerous when placed in the wrong hands.



The science is that there is no evidence of aliens while there is plenty of evidence for God.  Creation science has the *fine tuning theory* discovered by atheist scientists.  The atheists and their scientists claim because of the large number of stars and planets that there is a good chance of alien life.  That is the *logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum and fallacy of assumption*.  

Heh.  But, you have no idea what regular people are talking about.


----------



## james bond (Oct 23, 2017)

Creation science shows cavefish is wonder of God's work and not evolution.






The cavefish going from a seeing fish to a blind fish is not caused by evolution, but by a complex epigenetic process.  Thus, it's more evidence for God than evolution.

"How do fish with normal eyes in well-lit surface-water environments transform into blind cavefish, and should this loss of structures and functionality really be labeled evolution? The sophisticated mechanism involved in this transformation has dismayed biologists who hoped this would somehow showcase evolution. New results deflate such hopes, and point to a more accurate and creation-friendly model of radical blind cavefish changes.

As it turns out, the repression of eye development in cavefish is simply part of an overall strategy to conserve energy in dark and nutrient-deficient caves. In blind cavefish, eye development gets repressed and chemical, pressure, and touch sense organs get enhanced. Manufacturing and maintaining eyes and the visual centers of the brain requires and consumes large amounts of resources and energy. This drain on metabolic resources in a cave environment is alleviated when the eyes are inhibited from developing in young fish embryos.

Scientists had their first inkling that eye loss in cavefish was part of a sophisticated adaptive innate system with the discovery that the low-conductivity of cave water inhibited a protein called HSP90 while fish embryos were developing in their eggs.1 ICR scientist Brian Thomas discussed this novel discovery in a 2013 news article.2 However, this was only one piece in the puzzle of understanding the complicated developmental process of fish switching from being sighted to blind.

*In a new research paper, scientists unveiled how another part of the eye-loss adaptation works directly on the eye genes of the cavefish in a complex epigenetic process.3 This involves altering the biochemistry of the DNA without actually changing the nucleotide sequence. One of the key control mechanisms for genes in animals, including fish, is the addition of chemical tags called methyl groups to the control regions of a gene. The addition or removal of these tags helps determine whether the gene is turned off or on—like putting a piece of tape over a light switch to keep someone from turning on the light. In blind cavefish, the control switches (promoters) of eye development genes are heavily methylated, effectively shutting them down so eyes don’t develop in cavefish embryos. This process involves highly sophisticated cellular machinery which is likely triggered by tracking environmental conditions in the water (e.g., low conductivity).*

*In textbook evolution, random mutations in DNA are thought to occasionally provide some adaptive benefit to the organism. Based on this mindset, it was originally believed that harmful mutations in cavefish eye genes knocked out their function and caused a lack of development for eyes in fish embryos. However, when scientists determined the DNA sequence of different eye development genes in cavefish and compared them to the DNA of normal surface dwelling fish, no mutations were found.3 This inconvenient fact, combined with additional data showing sophisticated physiological and epigenetic mechanisms are involved in eye loss for successful cave life, sinks the evolutionary explanation for this once-classic example of “evolution in action.”*

*Organisms do not adapt because they evolve, but because they were designed with innovative and clever innate systems to track and respond to environmental conditions.*

*The process of adaptation in organisms is being unveiled by both secular scientists and creation scientists. Creationists maintain this is driven by a collection of ingenious mechanisms with all the hallmarks of divinely engineered systems designed by an omnipotent and all-wise Creator rather than random evolutionary processes.4*"

Blind Cavefish Illuminate Divine Engineering | The Institute for Creation Research


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 25, 2017)

.
*Creation science shows cavefish is wonder of God's work and not evolution.*




> EarthLink  - Politics
> *
> Toxins in widespread use excluded from EPA chemical review
> *
> BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Spurred by the chemical industry, President Donald Trump's administration is retreating from a congressionally mandated review of some of the most dangerous chemicals in public use: millions of tons of asbestos, flame retardants and other toxins in homes, offices and industrial plants across the United States.




the above is the reality of *creation science*, christianity and the "conservative" flight from reality - for the sake of their own mitigated personal gain.


why such people are allowed free reign to use their awful religion to destroy Garden Earth will be the undoing of everyone alive - the true prophesy of Antiquity will be fulfilled in the worst possible way.


----------



## james bond (Oct 25, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> *Creation science shows cavefish is wonder of God's work and not evolution.*
> 
> 
> ...



I was talking about living creatures so you have FAILED once again.  I'll assume that creation science won another one.

Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.  *So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee?  Doesn't making more laws just stifle job creation which we need now?  This is why Obumba and the Dems are out of power now ha ha.*


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 25, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


james bond said:


> I was talking about living creatures so you have FAILED once again. I'll assume that creation science won another one.





> EarthLink  - U.S. News
> 
> *Study: More evidence links earthquakes to energy waste wells*
> 
> DENVER (AP) — Scientists say they have more evidence that an increase in earthquakes on the Colorado-New Mexico border since 2001 has been caused by wells that inject wastewater from oil and gas production back underground, similar to human-caused quakes in Oklahoma and other states.



*
Study: More evidence links earthquakes to energy waste wells*


they're on a role, winning another one - more job creation by the creation scientist ... their favorite word "wastewater" nothing there to worry about.




BreezeWood said:


> why such people are allowed free reign to use their awful religion to destroy Garden Earth will be the undoing of everyone alive - the true prophesy of Antiquity will be fulfilled in the worst possible way.



bond is delirious, the creation science / christian alliance is the furthest path to the Almighty there could possibly be.





james bond said:


> *Creationists maintain this is driven by a collection of ingenious mechanisms with all the hallmarks of divinely engineered systems designed by an omnipotent and all-wise Creator rather than random evolutionary processes.4*"





james bond said:


> Thus, it's more evidence for God than evolution.



they have abdicated any semblance of authority, rather than a mission of truth they foster the fallacies of their 4th century book as a peril to every living being on planet Earth.




james bond said:


> Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna. *So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee? Doesn't making more laws just stifle job creation which we need now? This is why Obumba and the Dems are out of power now ha ha.*




_*Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.*_

no, they are caused by phony science, creation science and their alliance with christianity ... you try and give academic credentials to people that do not deserve them it is you, christianity who own the EPA that is now the greatest proponent of pollution ever by knowing perfectly well the consequences of their actions.


----------



## james bond (Oct 27, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>JB:  I was talking about living creatures so you have FAILED once again.  I'll assume that creation science won another one.

Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.  *So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee?  Doesn't making more laws just stifle job creation which we need now?  This is why Obumba and the Dems are out of power now ha ha.*

BW: * Study: More evidence links earthquakes to energy waste wells*

DENVER (AP) — Scientists say they have more evidence that an increase in earthquakes on the Colorado-New Mexico border since 2001 has been caused by wells that inject wastewater from oil and gas production back underground, similar to human-caused quakes in Oklahoma and other states.<<

Ho hum.  More changing the subject because you can't answer or have no answer to my and creation scientists' tough questions.

Isn't talking about earthquakes what creation scientists have talking about all along?  They repeatedly stated that catastrophism changes the earth and not evolution.  Thus, due to Noah's Flood, the earth is relatively young and not billions of years old.  If you want to discuss what you brought up, then explain briefly in your own words what happens and the cause instead of providing a link no one will ever read?

>>JB:  _*Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.*_

BW:  no, they are caused by phony science, creation science and their alliance with christianity ... you try and give academic credentials to people that do not deserve them it is you, christianity who own the EPA that is now the greatest proponent of pollution ever by knowing perfectly well the consequences of their actions.<<

It isn't creation science that is the fake science.  The creationists invented modern science to honor God.  It's the evolutionists who have the fake science which I have started to point out repeatedly.  The EPA has always been the tool of those in power in the government.  Here's what's important to make America great again.  One, is to cut taxes on corporations.  Two, is to streamline new technology and developments, even if it means there is a cost to the environment.  Three, is to not build the wall (which does not appear to fit with what America represents) and have a pool of immigrant workers and "legal" immigrants.  Unfortunately, the fine line between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants has been eviscerated by Obumba and the Democrats so that it almost doesn't matter anymore.  I'm for sanctuary cities, as long as we can stem those who come into our country to commit criminal activity.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 27, 2017)

james bond said:


> Ho hum. More changing the subject because you can't answer or have no answer to my and creation scientists' tough questions.





> Orrin Hatch: Trump plans to shrink size of Utah national monuments - CNNPolitics
> 
> *Utah senator: Trump plans to shrink size of Utah national monuments*
> 
> ...



_*
it would make Trump the first president to shrink a national monument using the Antiquities Act ...*_


more creation (Ho hum) scientists / christian alliance / republicans shrinking our national monuments to quench among other vices their insatiable greed and disdain for Garden Earth they seem to think is theirs for the taking.




james bond said:


> The creationists invented modern science to honor God.



no bond the only thing they worship like yourself is a book of forgeries that disguises their true political persuasion of selfishness as a religion.




james bond said:


> Yet, I assume you bring up toxins _*because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.*_ *So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee? Doesn't making more laws just stifle job creation which we need now? This is why Obumba and the Dems are out of power now ha ha.*



*
So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee?*



BreezeWood said:


> no, they are caused by phony science, creation science and their alliance with christianity - you try and give academic credentials to people that do not deserve them ...



Flora and Fauna have nothing to do with global endangerment, that's you bond, your creation science / christian alliance as I had already responded. the same as the dreadful history of christianity from its beginning to the present time. you may disregard the past, candy coating the present but in the end those crimes by your own action will be yours as well.


----------



## james bond (Oct 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Ho hum. More changing the subject because you can't answer or have no answer to my and creation scientists' tough questions.
> ...



Mostly, you're repeating your same boring rhetoric over and over and avoid my questions.

>>JB:  Yet, I assume you bring up toxins _*because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.*_ *So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee? Doesn't making more laws just stifle job creation which we need now? This is why Obumba and the Dems are out of power now ha ha.*[/QUOTE]

*So how are these toxins going to cause the danger that you forsee?*

BW:  Flora and Fauna have nothing to do with global endangerment, that's you bond, your creation science / christian alliance as I had already responded. the same as the dreadful history of christianity from its beginning to the present time. you may disregard the past, candy coating the present but in the end those crimes by your own action will be yours as well.

Ha ha.  Flora and fauna cause toxins.  That's a well known fact.  Yet, you cannot explain why these and man-made toxins are going to cause global endangerment.  It was your claim, not mine.  What DJT, his people and I care about right now is getting the economy back on track.  We care about toxins, but not the way the wacky liberals care about global endangerment.  It's political correctness thinking and evo thinking.  It's scientific racism and all of it leads to Communism.  That's it, isn't it BW?


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 28, 2017)

james bond said:


> Mostly, you're repeating your same boring rhetoric over and over and avoid my questions.





james bond said:


> Ha ha. Flora and fauna cause toxins. That's a well known fact. Yet, you cannot explain why these and man-made toxins are going to cause global endangerment. It was your claim, not mine. What DJT, his people and I care about right now is getting the economy back on track. We care about toxins, but not the way the wacky liberals care about global endangerment. It's political correctness thinking and evo thinking. It's scientific racism and all of it leads to Communism. That's it, isn't it BW?



I have included links in my discussion on the subject of global endangerment ...




james bond said:


> Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.



where is the link for what you are alluding to - the links I have included are just a cross section of a multitude of ailments harbored by the creation scientist / christian alliance ...








> "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."



creation sceince / desert religion alliance, their interpretation of the above quote is nothing less than an indictment against humanity that will have no other fitting resolution than their condemnation and extinction.


Flora and Fauna have nothing to do with your poison bond, hundreds of million years and those that lived left Garden Earth as they found it ... then came along the desert religions and those that worship such awful religions and their scriptures as planet Earth became their victim with each of their mindless passing's.


----------



## james bond (Oct 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Mostly, you're repeating your same boring rhetoric over and over and avoid my questions.
> ...



>>BW:  I have included links in my discussion on the subject of global endangerment ...<<

You may have, but who reads them?  Can you provide something more than "global endangerment" which is a libbie code word.  Weren't you guys going to Mars because you believe we can't live on this planet?  The cons seem to think we can live here just fine without "global endangerment" by taking care of air and water pollution through the EPA and having conservation of natural resources programs.  Would you like links to these?

It's funny that you guys believe in evolution, but we have not been able to evolve to deal with CO2.  Plants thrive in the stuff.  Why can't some of us "evolve" so that they become more like plants *?  This would allow others to get more oxygen .  Where are the groks of this world?  Would you like to become a grok?

* Because evolution doesn't happen ha ha.

The young libbies seem to think we'll be able to beat death by turning into the walking dead instead of the boring -- dying and being resurrected into heaven that Christians call rapture.  Hee hee.

>>JB:  Yet, I assume you bring up toxins because they are caused by living creatures, flora or fauna.

BW:  where is the link for what you are alluding to - the links I have included are just a cross section of a multitude of ailments harbored by the creation scientist / christian alliance .<<

This is too basic for an article.  A toxicant is a toxin usually pesticide.  It's any chemical that can be of chemical or natural origin, capable of causing a deleterious effect on living organisms 1.  A toxin is a toxicant which is exclusively produced by living organism, flora or fauna, including bacteria 2.

1.  Cope, Gregory W.; Leidy, Ross B.; Hodgson, Ernest (2004). "5 - Classes of Toxicants: Use Classes". In Hodgson, Ernest. _A Textbook of Modern Toxicology_ (3rd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. p. 65. ISBN 0-471-26508-X.

2.  James, Robert C.; Roberts, Stephen M.; Willians, Philip L (2000). "1 General Principles of Toxicology". In James, Robert C.; Roberts, Stephen M.; Willians, Philip L. _Principles of Toxicology: Environmental and Industrial Applications_ (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. p. 5. ISBN 0-471-29321-0.

We have snakes that produce venom which is a toxin.  We have poisons so that if you eat a oidium fruit such as grapes or mangoes, then you die.  We also have poisonous mushrooms.  We have bacteria that produce a biological poison.

Examples of poisonous fruits and vegetables.  Surprise!  Top 10 Poisonous Fruits - Page 2 of 2

Holy guacamole!  Your ignorance is showing.  Speaking of which, didn't you learn anything from food poisoning at the liberal run Chipotle restaurant?  One of the causes was e coli which is produced from bacteria.  Another was a garden variety norovirus caused by a sick employee.  There you go.

Here's your link
AP News - Chipotle turnaround stalls as food scares continued


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> We have snakes that produce venom which is a toxin. We have poisons so that if you eat a oidium fruit such as grapes or mangoes, then you die. We also have poisonous mushrooms. We have bacteria that produce a biological poison.



who's We bond, those above are of their own accord and will justly answer as yourself to the Almighty and are from Their making as yourself. I though do not make poisons so am not worried for myself as surly you should be. 





BreezeWood said:


> Flora and Fauna have nothing to do with your poison bond, hundreds of million years and those that lived left Garden Earth as they found it ... then came along the desert religions and those that worship such awful religions and their scriptures as planet Earth became their victim with each of their mindless passing's.



_*nothing to do with your poison bond .. / .. (they) left Garden Earth as they found it*_

I'm sure in your own clever way you know Flora and Fauna are following the rules those that still exist, that will be the difference between them and the creation scientist / desert religion alliance that follows their own rules, forgeries - their self determined demise is everywhere to be seen ... the greater crime will be they are taking the Garden with them, good luck.


----------



## james bond (Oct 29, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > We have snakes that produce venom which is a toxin. We have poisons so that if you eat a oidium fruit such as grapes or mangoes, then you die. We also have poisonous mushrooms. We have bacteria that produce a biological poison.
> ...



>>who's We bond, those above are of their own accord and will justly answer as yourself to the Almighty and are from Their making as yourself. I though do not make poisons so am not worried for myself as surly you should be.<<

You make plenty of bacteria through you spouting feces ha ha.  We is the general public including you.  I'm not trying to trick you.

>>*nothing to do with your poison bond .. / .. (they) left Garden Earth as they found it*<<

It's not my poison.  And why you try to equate it with Christians is beyond me.  It's all part of nature and natural selection as described by creation science.


----------



## BreezeWood (Oct 29, 2017)

james bond said:


> And why you try to equate it with Christians is beyond me.




they are the guilty party - the worshipers of the desert religions.


After Las Vegas massacre, 'bump stock' is hot item at U.S. gun shops

EarthLink - Politics
*Toxins in widespread use excluded from EPA chemical review*

EarthLink - U.S. News
*Study: More evidence links earthquakes to energy waste wells*

Orrin Hatch: Trump plans to shrink size of Utah national monuments - CNNPolitics
*Utah senator: Trump plans to shrink size of Utah national monuments*


in just the last week


----------



## james bond (Oct 31, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > And why you try to equate it with Christians is beyond me.
> ...



And how you link them to Christians is beyond me nor anyone else.  Enjoy your life in the asylum.


----------



## BreezeWood (Nov 1, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> And how you link them to Christians is beyond me nor anyone else. Enjoy your life in the asylum.



you give yourself away bond, your bumpstock crowed are nothing more than russian loving traitors or to mention your ridiculous creation evolutionary 100 year old dinosaurs, it's funny you mention asylums siberia is just the place for an aspiring 4th century zealout. good luck.


----------



## james bond (Nov 3, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



It seems we'll have to add pedophilia to your Hollywood values.  Kevin Spacey and the abusers of Corey Feldman have to pay.  I would guess they are atheists like you.  Do you prefer men over women like KS, too?


----------



## BreezeWood (Nov 5, 2017)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> It seems we'll have to add pedophilia to your Hollywood values. Kevin Spacey and the abusers of Corey Feldman have to pay. I would guess they are atheists like you. Do you prefer men over women like KS, too?



really bond, you live in an awful place, 4th century christianity knows no bounds of ill repute, disguising its political persuasion as a religion ... again, good luck -




> Humans are the "dominant cause" of global warming, according to the latest U.S. government study
> 
> The CSSR notes that the past 115 years have been “the warmest in the history of modern civilization,” according to a recent report by _NPR_ who also obtained a copy of the report.



the sentence above is to give your loathing something to latch onto, NPR - public radio without your corporate sponsor must make your skin crawl in dispare.


the new report really does not do service to your sins -





what the desert religions are doing to Garden Earth is their crime, destroying the habitat for every other being for their own selfish reward - _your family values_ bond, the reason you live with your machinegun.



> "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."



there is no reason for a religious person to read further a book of lies and forgeries as the one above.


* you use ad hominem rather than debating your base cause.


----------



## james bond (Nov 6, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>Humans are the "dominant cause" of global warming, according to the latest U.S. government study.<<

What have you done today to cause less global warming, BreezeWood?  Do you buy more expensive detergent gasoline with more ethanol to have lower emissions, but lower fuel efficiency?   I haven't seen Al Gore and the liberal rich give up their big global warming toys, but he wants you to give up yours.  Isn't it hypocritical?  Do as I say and not do as I do?

Second, the NPR report is skewed in that it highlights the anomalies when if one looks at the changes in temperature over the entire latitude of the planet, then warming is miniscule.  It just goes to show that NPR is fixing the data to fit their beliefs about global warming. 

>>
there is no reason for a religious person to read further a book of lies and forgeries as the one above.

* you use ad hominem rather than debating your base cause.<<

Aren't you the one using ad hominems about me and Christians?  Furthermore, you haven't shown that the Bible is a book of lies and forgeries.  It is still the best selling non-fiction book of all time.


----------



## james bond (Nov 6, 2017)

I see the atheists were in the news again, BW.  Usually in a negative light.

*EXCLUSIVE: 'Creepy, crazy and weird': Former classmates say Texas gunman was an 'outcast' who 'preached his atheism' online before killing 26 in the state’s worst ever mass shooting*
Texas church shooter Devin Kelley was an 'outcast' | Daily Mail Online

And remember I told you atheism leads to communism?  JB is right again.






Antifa are atheists and they promote communism.

From my pal, Rico:
"These AntiFa [read: Communist] assholes have been around since the 1930's, so it's no surprise that the biggest Communist asshole living today [George Soros] is funding them.

It's 2017 and they _still_ are trying to overthrow the system, because, er...something.

- Stupid can be defined as being undeterred by almost a century of failure.

It's just not working out for them because sane people want life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and nothing to do with these clueless shmendriks."


----------



## BreezeWood (Nov 6, 2017)

james bond said:


> Aren't you the one using ad hominems about me and Christians? Furthermore, you haven't shown that the Bible is a book of lies and forgeries. It is still the best selling non-fiction book of all time.


.


james bond said:


> Aren't you the one using ad hominems about me and Christians?



no, that has been your trademark from the beginning. as for christians I have repeatedly referred to recorded history without rebuttal from you their _uninterrupted history of evil_ -





I'm sure you are a fan of re lee, the christian community worship him and his cause as they were all fighting for evil - deny it all you like. history is replete from the 4th century to present time with the same alliances by the desert religions against truly righteous causes.




james bond said:


> What have you done today to cause less global warming, BreezeWood?



EarthLink - Politics
*Toxins in widespread use excluded from EPA chemical review*

what I can do is vote for politicians that are the ones to pass legislation to make the difference possible - the christian / capitalist coalition do everything possible to continue the path of least resistance for pollution and global warming, and as I have pointed out the greatest concern of global destruction of livable habitat for all beings and not just for yourself bond, _family values_. yours alone while destroying the Garden you live in, the lie of genesis.




james bond said:


> Furthermore, you haven't shown that the Bible is a book of lies and forgeries. It is still the best selling non-fiction book of all time.



_“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.
_
I have displayed hundreds of them ..._
_
there are countless forgeries in all the desert religion "scriptures" the one above defines christianity in the most egregious terms - those books are dead as those that worship them by their tacit acceptance to selffullfilling forgeries passed to future generations to repeat their uninterrupted history of crime and persecution against the very people that know otherwise, free spirited beings - no book required, the falsely religious despise the most.


their books, the desert religions are meant to remain alive and progressively refined, they presently are confiscated by people that live in fear and dispare.


----------



## james bond (Nov 8, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Aren't you the one using ad hominems about me and Christians? Furthermore, you haven't shown that the Bible is a book of lies and forgeries. It is still the best selling non-fiction book of all time.
> ...



>>JC:  _“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.<<_

BreezeWood, I can believe you just threw away one of the key instructions.  You just sealed your fate with the second death.

Anyway, it's high time I leave you to your incessant ramblings that lead nowhere, but to some abyss in the recesses of your mind.

I shall leave you and the atheists here with more evidence of God.  We have discovered that *"we cannot go back in time."*  God made it this way in order for men to not be able to undo their original sin.  It's my belief the original sin will stay with us in this life and next.  It does not go away.  However, we can go forward in time.  Time travel is available today courtesy of Elon Musk.  You can take off in his space ship and then come back to some date in the future.  See his second to the last idea -- affordable time travel.

Elon Musk's 5 craziest tech ideas for the future | Trusted Reviews

God is great.  I leave you with hope for a better future.


----------



## james bond (Nov 11, 2017)

Funny that Neil Degrasse Tyson says that philosophy is useless when he's more about philosophy than real science.  What a buffoon.

NT:  “My concern here is that the philosophers believe they are actually asking deep questions about nature. And to the scientist it’s, what are you doing? Why are you concerning yourself with the meaning of meaning?”

The Faith-Based Science of Neil deGrasse Tyson—It Needs Correcting
The Faith-Based Science of Neil deGrasse Tyson—It Needs Correcting | HuffPost


----------



## james bond (Nov 22, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



>>C1200:  Mixing political or religious views with business is probably bad business practice, but that doesn't mean people should be stopped from doing so if that's their choice.  Freedom means the freedom to be stupid, if that's what floats one's boat.<<

Yes, this was one of the unwritten rules in all society, but today the liberal elite want to politicize everything.  I think this brand of politics is what we are dealing with today.  We are learning more about people who run our corporations and the way the founder of the company was.  Those beliefs form the foundation of a company and are still in place.

That said, I'll try and leave the politics out in my personal decisions.  However, when comparing two competing products from different companies, then it may factor in a decision such as Coke or Pepsi unless you're a Sealybobo.  What a nut jobber that guy turned out to be.

>>Won't shop at Target, because I don't like shopping somewhere I don't feel comfortable using the bathroom.<<

Yeah, that was a really BAD decision since it got publicized so much.  I cut down shopping at my local Target (not megastore) before that because they didn't have enough of basic products such as Tide when they put on a sale.  It usually ran out and you ended up buying another brand at regular price.  I guess libs get used to it as normal and "accept" the rain check.


----------



## BreezeWood (Nov 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> I guess libs get used to it as normal *and "accept" the rain check.*



*
... and "accept" the rain check.*

_
"We don't need a liberal person in there, a Democrat, Jones. I've looked at his record. It's terrible on crime. It's terrible on the border. It's terrible on military," Trump said. "I can tell you for a fact we do not need somebody who's going to be bad on crime, bad on borders, bad for the military, bad for the Second Amendment."

But the White House signaled on Monday that its position was shifting away from the mainstream of Republican leaders, as White House counselor Kellyanne Conway signaled the need for Moore's vote on tax reform was more important in the administration's calculation than the sexual misconduct allegations leveled against him._


your a sad case bond, the example above is the reality of blind obedience ...  actually believing what you are being told - to believe.


----------



## james bond (Nov 24, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



I can think for myself, thank you.  It's really you who has blind obedience -- *actually believing what you are being told - to believe*.  Isn't that what *Communism* all about?

Next thing you'll be telling me is, *"I rather be red than dead."*


----------



## james bond (Dec 21, 2017)

As for evolution vs creation, I read this article today where the life expectancy rate has gone down.  Shouldn't it be going up as humans evolve?  As usual, the evolution folks say it's drug abuse that is causing early deaths.  I would think drug use would be normal for evolutionists.  They would take the drugs that would make them live longer, but they're not.  Are there such pills?  What's the real explanation?  It could be that evolution doesn't happen.

Life expectancy in US down for second year in a row as opioid crisis deepens


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Dec 21, 2017)

james bond said:


> Shouldn't it be going up as humans evolve?



Not at all.  In fact, if left purely to natural selection, it should decrease.  As far as selfish genes are concerned, humans past viable breeding age are a drain on the local resources.

"As usual, the evolution folks say it's drug abuse that is causing early deaths."

As usual?  As compared to what historical examples?  What in the world are you talking about?  The fact that the opioid crisis is lowering life expectancy is not an "opinion" or a "gut feeling", it's a mathematical exercise.

Drug use is now "normal' for everyone, because people like longer lives.  Even religious people.  That's why they take antibiotics, too.  Opioid "use" isn't the problem, it's opioid "abuse" that is the problem.


----------



## BreezeWood (Dec 21, 2017)

.


james bond said:


> As for evolution vs creation ...



no such quandary exists unless it happens an individual has knowingly entrapped themselves into believing a 4th century, 10,000 pg. forged document is not a work of fiction.


----------



## james bond (Dec 22, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Shouldn't it be going up as humans evolve?
> ...



>>FFI:  Not at all.  In fact, if left purely to natural selection, it should decrease.<<

Many would disagree with you.  How do you explain a decrease due to natural selection?

Live Longer With Evolution? Evidence May Lie in Fruit Flies
Live Longer With Evolution? Evidence May Lie in Fruit Flies

Primal diet
Primal Wisdom: Natural Selection Favors Both Strength and Longevity in Humans

>>As usual?  As compared to what historical examples?  What in the world are you talking about?  The fact that the opioid crisis is lowering life expectancy is not an "opinion" or a "gut feeling", it's a mathematical exercise.<<

Sheesh.  I thought you would know more since you subscribe to evolution.  Even this creationist knows that drug use and ODing started to occur in the 1800s.  This is when commercialization and wide availability of certain drugs came into existence.  For example, Coca Cola contained cocaine for 10 cents per bottle.  Morphine and cocaine and other opiates were mass produced and sold and people became addicted (similar to today's opioids for pain relief; it's the #1 prescribed medicine).

>>Drug use is now "normal' for everyone, because people like longer lives.  Even religious people.  That's why they take antibiotics, too.  Opioid "use" isn't the problem, it's opioid "abuse" that is the problem.<<

Meh.  It's the wide availability of opioids that is the problem just like in the 1800s.  People get addicted and then comes the abuse.  What do you mean drug use is normal for everyone because they want to live longer lives?  What drug helps one to live longer lives?  Medical marijuana?

"The rise in overdose deaths is largely due to the proliferation of illicitly made fentanyl, a highly potent synthetic opioid, and fentanyl analogs."

I didn't expect you to know because DJT told us .

President Donald J. Trump is Taking Action on Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis | The White House


----------



## james bond (Dec 22, 2017)

Some liberals and atheists want to make all drugs legal including today's illegal drugs because they believe the illegality causes the problem.  This is playing into the "devil's" hand so to speak.  It would make all illegal drugs now more widely available.  We learned the availability and easy access that causes drug abuse in the 1800s.  I would favor legalizing marijuana if alcohol was made more illegal.  Alcohol is much more addictive and causes increased social problems.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Dec 22, 2017)

james bond said:


> Many would disagree with you. How do you explain a decrease due to natural selection?


Not a single scientist would disagree with me. To clarify, the human lifespan would not necessarily decrease due to natural selection, but due to the lack of scientific medicine. Natural pressures, like disease, would take our lifespans down to what they were before scientific medicine.


james bond said:


> What do you mean drug use is normal for everyone because they want to live longer lives?



Antibiotics are drugs. Insulin is a drug. Drug use is normal for everyone.

What makes you think I did not know about fentanyl? This isnt church, you don't get to just make shit up and get a pass.


----------



## james bond (Dec 23, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Many would disagree with you. How do you explain a decrease due to natural selection?
> ...



I didn't say you didn't know, but asked what you did know about fentanyl and other opioids?  Have you used them?  No judgment.


----------



## james bond (Dec 23, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Antibiotics are drugs. Insulin is a drug. Drug use is normal for everyone.



Normal is judgmental.  Let me replace it with common.  I guess we do not hear statements like drug use is normal because drug use usually refers to illegal drugs.  Aspirin use is common.  Taking antibiotics is common.  Using insulin isn't that common.

I would guess that most people do not take drugs to live longer.  I would think that diet and exercise are ways to longevity and not relying on drugs.  Maybe vitamin or other supplements could be helpful.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Dec 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


I have been prescribed opioids, yes. And I understand that fentanyl is a very deadly chemical in low doses, and it is used to provode a "kick" to opioid black market drugs. Why? What's your point?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Dec 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> Normal is judgmental.


Not in this case, it most certainly is not. In this case, it simply refers to the fact that it's an accepted and even demanded part of everyone's life, much as it is normal to get a driver's license, or normal to wear shoes. These things are more than "common"....one is usually expected to do these things. Just as you would be expected to medicate your sick child, lest he is rightfully taken from you.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Dec 23, 2017)

james bond said:


> Using insulin isn't that common.


Among diabetics? It is. We used to turn to faith healers and prayer...boy that failed spectacularly. Now we turn to scientifoc medicine, and the results have been spectacular.


----------



## james bond (Dec 24, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



I used to be an illegal drug user (weed, bennies, hash, coke, LSD, mescaline, opium, but no more).  Only do medical marijuana and Aleve ha ha.  Strange, but now I have trouble understanding why people use recreational drugs.  Anyway, fentanyl and other opioids are somewhat in-between hard drugs and recreational drugs because they're prescribed for pain.  So, what kind of high do they provide?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Dec 24, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> ...



Creation doesn't create a quandary with evolution.  Evolutionists create a quandary with creation by trying to make it do what it cannot, and free them from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization.


----------



## BreezeWood (Dec 24, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Creation doesn't create a quandary with evolution. Evolutionists create a quandary with creation by trying to make it do what it cannot, and free them from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization.




_*Evolutionists create a quandary with creation by trying to make it do what it cannot ...
*_
I'm unsure you have stated just what that is ... "what it cannot"


_*
... and free them from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization.
*_
I agree, evolution is required to explain its progression over time - "*from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization"* ...

evolution is dictated by the metaphysical axioms that span the universe unrestrained by any physical attributes as I just attributed in an adjacent thread -

... simply stating a belief is a metaphysical phenomena that is from a source not related to a particular celestial body or to any physical attribute but to a source that spans the entire universe embedded as a boundless thought process of each being that is responsible for its conclusion.

the metaphysical axioms are responsible for life on earth and the physiology created by it for a physical existence.

surly there must be an Almighty in the sense of there being a guidance from one stage to another in the progression of the genome of life reflected by the evolutionary changes that occur over time.


The Triumph of Good vs Evil, The Apex of Knowledge are metaphysical attributes necessary to be adhered to for life's progression to continue on the course set out by the emergence of the first life templet that began on earth.

at any rate, the 4th century forged document or any of the desert religions have failed in all respects for any proposition to be a source for any consideration whatsoever for any subject matter, for authenticity.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Dec 24, 2017)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


To the addict, not much. Once an person is addicted to opioids, the opioids are more used to get rid of the feeling of every cell in their body screaming out for opioids. Liken it to your urge to breath when underwater for too long, or to eat when you are starving.


----------



## james bond (Dec 26, 2017)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



It sounds highly physically addictive without much pleasure.


----------



## james bond (Dec 26, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>C:  Creation doesn't create a quandary with evolution. Evolutionists create a quandary with creation by trying to make it do what it cannot, and free them from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization.<<

Give it up BW.  Cecilie1200 hit the nail on the head.


----------



## BreezeWood (Dec 26, 2017)

.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Evolutionists create a quandary with creation by trying to make it do what it cannot, and free them from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization.





james bond said:


> Give it up BW. Cecilie1200 hit the nail on the head.




_*
what it cannot ... 






			BW: I'm unsure you have stated just what that is ... "what it cannot"
		
Click to expand...

*_


BreezeWood said:


> I agree, evolution is required to explain its progression over time - "*from any moral responsibility or requirements to civilization"* ... _*evolution is dictated by the metaphysical axioms*_ that span the universe unrestrained by any physical attributes ... surly there must be an Almighty in the sense of there being a guidance from one stage to another _*in the progression of the genome of life*_ reflected by the evolutionary changes that occur over time.





I gave a response bond if you have nothing more than pseudo ad hominem quips I suggest you spend more time reading your book of forgeries, better passing your empty time than bothering others.


----------



## james bond (Dec 28, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



I'll continue reading the good book as well millions of others and many more millions in the future.  Are you going to continue reading the book of scientific lies and racism known as Charles Darwin's Origin of Species and The Descent of Man?  I doubt many today will read those books.  They are quite obsolete.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Dec 30, 2017)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> 
> 
> Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Let me clarify.  Creationism doesn't require evolution to be false in order to work, but evolutionists require Creationism to be false in order to use it - evolution - to excuse the amoral behavior they wish to indulge.

Evolution and Creation can both be true and co-exist.  The problem Creationists have with evolution is not that it disproves our beliefs, because it can't.


----------



## BreezeWood (Dec 30, 2017)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Evolution and Creation can both be true and co-exist. The problem Creationists have with evolution is not that it disproves our beliefs, because it can't.



evolution is religion free ... "because it can't" is more an admission about yourself than fact.

_



			"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
		
Click to expand...

_
the above is as far as I got reading your book of forgeries, humanity is not the template of life on earth but only one avenue ... evolution is nothing more than a roadmap.


----------



## james bond (Jan 2, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



Evolution has natural selection and so does baraminology which is part of creation science.  Natural selection was first discovered by creation scientist Edward Blyth.  The other part of evolution that has come into vogue is genetic mutation or genetic modification.  Darwin was right about both of these subjects, but was wrong about his other hypothesis.  As for mutation, creation scientists stay away from it because they do not think it adds any new information to the genome and that mutation causes greater harm than good.


----------



## james bond (Jan 2, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> evolution is religion free ... "because it can't" is more an admission about yourself than fact.



Evolution is more religion than science.  Maybe science is a religion the way things have turned out.  Myself, I don't care what you want to call it as long as it leads to the discovery of truth and further enhances our knowledge of the world because God wanted it that way.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 6, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Evolution is not a religion (assuming you're not an insane leftist twit desperately trying to use it as an excuse), so of course it's religion-free.  But there's a difference between "not directly having religion involved" and "being diametrically opposed to religion".  It's not that, either.

And evolution's inability to disprove religion - precisely because it is NOT religiously related - IS a fact, and says nothing about me except that I'm exponentially more educated and informed than you are.

If anyone needed more proof, they need only look at your pathetic attempt to make a point by quoting the Bible with no understanding of what it means.

Yes, the Bible says God made everything.  If you'll notice - if you CAN notice - it says nothing about HOW He did it, just that he did.  There is nothing in the Bible that requires Christians to reject the possibility that evolution was a natural procedure put in place during the Creation.  And there's nothing about evolution that requires it to NOT have been.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 7, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > evolution is religion free ... "because it can't" is more an admission about yourself than fact.
> ...



I don't think evolution is a religion at all. I'm quite sure Darwin did not intend for it to be.  But I think there are those who make a religion of it and worship it to the point they do not allow themselves or others to question it in any way and/or allow themselves or others to consider any possibilities outside the science of evolution.  The Christian, the Jew, the Buddhist, and probably others all allow for the unknowable and the unknown within the realm of both science and religion.  And they know that evolution can coexist quite rationally and peacefully alongside other explanations and theories for how it all got from point A to here.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 8, 2018)

james bond said:


> It sounds highly physically addictive without much pleasure.


In a way, that's absolutely right.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 8, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Evolution and Creation can both be true and co-exist. The problem Creationists have with evolution is not that it disproves our beliefs, because it can't.


Absolutely right, they can both be true. And evolution is not meant to disprove creation. Just remember that creationism explains nothing, provides no useful predictions, and needs to stay out of the way of science. Keep these things in mind, and there will be no conflict.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 8, 2018)

james bond said:


> is more religion than science.


Utter bullshit. It is the most well-founded scientific theory in the history of mankind.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 8, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Evolution and Creation can both be true and co-exist. The problem Creationists have with evolution is not that it disproves our beliefs, because it can't.
> ...



Well, I disagree with the "explains nothing", but it's not really intended to predict anything.  As for science, I guess that depends on whether or not it's true.

Be that as it may, it's never been in the way of science.  It's only in the way of people who define "science" as "rejecting and silencing religion as having any validity in life".


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 9, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


I have never met one single person who defines science that way. Let me give you some free advice: when you have to invent people and events to whine about...you dont actually have anything to whine about.

And no, saying "God did it!" does not explain anything at all.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 9, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



You may not know anyone who ADMITS to defining science that way, but I guarantee that you know some who do it without realizing that's what they're doing.  Hell, there are people right here on this message board who do so.

Let me give you some free advice:  don't be gullible enough to take people's words at face value.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 9, 2018)

.


Cecilie1200 said:


> ... but I guarantee that you know some who do it without realizing that's what they're doing.



that's because not everyone is corrupt, the truth is its own guide christian the path to remission is a freed spirit.


* they've lost their copy of your book.


----------



## james bond (Jan 11, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Absolutely right, they can both be true. And evolution is not meant to disprove creation. Just remember that creationism explains nothing, provides no useful predictions, and needs to stay out of the way of science. Keep these things in mind, and there will be no conflict.



I would have to disagree.  Compared to creation science, both can't be true.  There isn't much overlap if any.  For example, in the Bible Jesus says life begat life.  In other words, it takes life already created by God to propagate further life.  Evolution says we evolved from common ancestors -- fish, tetrapod, ape, human and so on.  Another would be Noah's flood formed the earth versus evolutionary geologic layers.  The differences are greatest in paleontology, geology and zoology.  It's either atheist science of evolution or creation science.  There is only one truth.


----------



## james bond (Jan 11, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Evolution is a religion in the way that people believe it based on faith.  It's not about going to church on Sundays type religion.  It's based on faith in atheism and not so much on actual science or facts, reasoning and historical truths.  For example, geologic claims of Charles Lyell who was an atheist and wrote a book, Principles of Geology, in 1854, about his uniformitarianism hypothesis,  to counter Christian geological thinking of catastrophism during the time.  He also mentored and influenced his pupil Charles Darwin.  Thus, evolution was born from atheist roots and foundation and why it's the polar opposite of creation science.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 11, 2018)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I don't question your facts here and, assuming you are correct, your post is quite informative and thought provoking. I myself try to look at the issue with a different and simpler pragmaticism.  (Is that a word?)

The fact is science exists.  And I am quite confident that evolution is a valid science that studies how various life forms on Earth have evolved over time.  Where it becomes a religion these days, in my point of view, is when the Atheist or whomever refuses to acknowledge that evolution cannot answer all questions on how life forms evolved and/or rejects intelligent design as any possibility in the equation.  When they demand that Evolution be taught that way, I object as strenuously as I do when Evolution is not taught at all.

Atheists who attempt to use evolution as a means to discredit the possibility of some form of intelligent design, along with their quite absurd dogma that if science cannot prove there is a God, then there is no God, are absolutely inserting their own religion into the mix because they are certainly not being scientific.

The theist of course understands that if there is a God, then that God is the author of science along with everything else and there is no conflict.


----------



## james bond (Jan 11, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



>>F:  The fact is science exists.  And I am quite confident that evolution is a valid science that studies how various life forms on Earth have evolved over time.<<

Sorry, a bit long, but finally had time to write it.

Today, atheist science exists and that is what is taught in schools.  The scientific establishment has systematically eliminated the supernatural, the Bible, God, intelligent design as theories from science and schools by saying one is a religion while the other intelligent design isn't a valid science.  We could not be created in any way shape or form because the aforementioned can't be testable nor falsified.  When I went to school, this isn't the way I was taught science works.

I learned evolution through my Alma Mater's website evolution.berkeley.edu and thought this was what happened for a couple of decades.  A couple things got my attention.  First was the concept of an eternal universe or the Steady State Theory being rendered pseudoscience and it was replaced by the Big Bang Theory or the universe had a beginning.  Second, was the media always telling me how old things were in their "science" articles.  If the ages of the universe and earth were facts, then why keep telling me these things?  Why keep telling me dinosaurs became extinct 245 million years ago?  Facts are things we all know to be true and use them.  Third, I started to look at creation science and what they were saying because circa 2011, evolution wasn't panning out like I thought, e.g. Monarch butterflies were not gone from California due to global warming.  I remembered they hibernated and migrated for the winter.  To challenge evolutionary thinking was unquestionable because prestigious science institutions like The Smithsonian, Nature and Science, top universities, Encyclopedia Brittanica, top scientists from the 90s and today and so on all subscribed to it. 

Yet, what they were saying didn't pan out in biology such as coelacanth and the common ancestor theories of tiktaalik, tetrapods returning to the sea to become whales, birds descending from dinosaurs, and even the theory of how dinosaurs all became extinct due to volcanoes were challenged and changed.  It was like challenging the theories of the earth being the center of the universe or that Columbus discovered America.  The theories of Charles Darwin had been all proved wrong except for natural selection and genetic modification.  OTOH creation scientists based their theories on Genesis from the Bible and that we were created in 7 days and formation of the earth was based on Noah's Flood.  This was what people believed in the 1800s before uniformitarianism took over against catastrophism.  What they were saying didn't change.  Only that science provided further evidence for what they were saying.  On creation's side, there were famous scientists which I was studied in school like Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, Galileo Galilei, Blaise Pascal, Carolus Linnaeus, Michael Faraday, Samuel B. Morse, Louis Pasteur, Lord Kelvin, James Joule and others.  Sir Francis Bacon is the father of modern science.  I started to look at what they were saying and that was from the Bible.  What it said was incredulous like people lived to over 900 years old in the old days and we are descendants of Adam and Eve. 

Yet, if one looks at the evolutionary thinking and the origins of life, we see that the BBT started from compressed gases and invisible quantum particles from a single point.  This seemed just as incredulous.  The universe is just primed for life and that multiverses can pop into existence.  Life came from primordial soup after it was hit by lightening.  Well, that experiment didn't pan out in the 50s.  Where was this life?  Where were the parallel universes?  I read the Brief History of Time and its followup A Briefer History of Time from Stephen Hawkening during the 90s and early millenium.  Where were the multiverses and time machines?  How can something like that happen or work?  Even the theories of quantum mechanics went against the traditional physics of Newton.  It went against the laws of thermodynamics.  All these invisible particles were doing something, but we couldn't see them because they were too small.  All of the aforementioned were disavowed by creation science.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 11, 2018)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



In fact I don't want 'creation science' to be taught in schools as science because it isn't.  It is faith based and therefore not science as science is technically defined.  But I don't want any science teacher telling students that science has disproved all creation theories and/or any form of intelligent design because that would be incredibly erroneous as it has done no such thing.

And when the child from the fundamentalist church/family inquires of the Biblical six days to create the heavens and the Earth or a 6,000 year old Earth, I want the teacher to explain that most scientists believe the process took much longer and over a much longer period of time but they are discerning based on the best available information but they weren't there themselves.  The student will be required to know the information in the textbook and in the class lectures, but he/she can then compare what s/he learns in class with what s/he has been taught in Bible class and decide for himself or herself.   No public school should ever give the impression that a child's faith is inappropriate in school or that the child's God is unwelcome there.

When we return to that kind of teaching--the kind I in fact grew up with--we will have returned to teaching real science again, teaching students to think critically and thoughtfully about it so that they are actually educated instead of indoctrinated.  And that will be a very good thing.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 11, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


And I am convinced that you are actually Muslim.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 11, 2018)

james bond said:


> Compared to creation science, both can't be tru


There is no such thing as creation science. Period.


----------



## james bond (Jan 11, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



That is what I am saying.  Creation science is real science.  It was science before the 1800s and it is still a science now.  Public schools cannot teach religion, but it can creation science.  Creation science says there was a creator.  What that creator is/was is not explained.  It created adult humans, plants and animals.  Thus, it can explain origins of life and how they came to be today.  It explains complexity and beauty in life.  It explains mathematics found in nature.  It explains the earth's geology, paleontology, zoology and biology.  The worldview of evolution in that life wasn't created has led us down the wrong path from the beginning.  They have systematically eliminated creation science as religion or about the supernatural.  Today's science is atheist science as I have pointed out despite the breakthroughs it has made.  It's not science, but religion, too.  The atheist religion is where there is no creation, so it can't possibly have all the answers.  That is not how I was taught science works.  From that, I know science when I see it or read about it.  I also know about religion when I see it or read about it, too.

Here is a recent example.  Francis Crick.  Crick and his partner James Watson discovered the structure of the DNA molecule, i.e. double helix and the A-T and G-C model, and with Rosalind Franklin, Maurice Wilkins and host of others came up with the following information on DNA:  Around the same time, an older creation scientist Linus Pauling was working on the same type of project.  Crick and Watson hired his son, Peter Pauling, in order to hear about what his old man was up to.

-Carries information from one generation to the next by coding for traits
-Controls cell division & enables easy copying of DNA for other cells
-Directs the actions of the cell by telling it which proteins to make

Eventually, the work led to the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 or what's referred to as the periodic table of biology.

Crick's personal views on his work led him to think there was no God and that his work destroyed religion.  The same with Watson.  They believed that this all evolved from the cell.  The fiftieth anniversary of their discovery led to celebrations for the Human Genome Project completed at the same time in 2003.

"*No More Need For God? *
The celebrations have a dark side, however. Many atheistic evolutionists claim that the discovery of DNA’s structure is proof of evolution and a nail in God’s coffin. As they see it, the discovery of a “universal” molecular structure for storing and passing on information to offspring—shared by almost all forms of life1—allows scientists to find a _purely physical_ explanation for the origin and development of life on Earth, without any need for a Creator.

Indeed, both Crick and Watson have been outspoken in their belief that the discovery of DNA’s structure has helped overturn belief in the God of the Bible. Francis Crick has repeatedly said that he sees DNA as a confirmation of evolution, which discredits “the god hypothesis.”2 His co-discoverer, James Watson, says that our understanding of DNA has helped to debunk religious “myths from the past.”

Watson boldly told the London _Telegraph_ in a recent interview, “Every time you understand something, religion becomes less likely. Only with the discovery of the double helix and the ensuing genetic revolution have we had grounds for thinking that the powers held traditionally to be the exclusive property of the gods might one day be ours.”3

Many of the world’s leading scientists will hear this message today at a huge gathering of luminaries (including Watson himself) who traveled to Cambridge to praise the ongoing impact of Watson and Crick’s discovery.

The culmination of the day, after a series of speeches on molecular medicine, cancer, aging, etc., is a lecture titled “Genes and human nature” by Matt Ridley, author of the bestseller _Genome_. Ridley will speak about the broader implications of human genome research, and it is not hard to guess what he will say.

_Scientific American_ describes Ridley as “an avid proponent of the Darwinian view of the world, [who] perceives the genome not as a cookbook or a manual but as a quintessentially historical document—a three-billion-year memoir of our species from its beginnings in the primal ooze to the present day.”4

Around the world, believers in “goo-to-you” evolution, like Matt Ridley, are repeating the mantra that the human genome holds the key to unlocking the mystery of human nature and the evolution of life on Earth."

I'll stop here.  Certainly, it was a wonderful and important discovery that led to the double helix structure and ATGC models, and the Human Genome Project which produced the periodic table of biology.  However, what's troubling is Crick's and Watson's need to destroy creation science and the major Abrahamic religions.  No need to gloat like that when it wasn't the case.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 12, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



And I am convinced that your opinions are meaningless.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 12, 2018)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Absolutely right, they can both be true. And evolution is not meant to disprove creation. Just remember that creationism explains nothing, provides no useful predictions, and needs to stay out of the way of science. Keep these things in mind, and there will be no conflict.
> ...



For sure there is only one truth, and I am pretty darn sure no human has ever come up with the whole truth yet.  I suspect when all of us leave this Earthly life and have a chance to find out what was/is on the other side of that glass we now look through darkly, we are going to have a really good laugh at how much of what we thought we knew, we got wrong. 

I am a strong creationist.  And I believe in and teach evolution.  I can do that because I believe God is the author of evolution and also the inspiration behind the Creation stories.  But I do not personally take those stories absolutely literally as history as much as I take them as instruction of how we are to think about God and his creation. 

If evolution is valid--and I think most or at least much of it is--then God was the author of evolution along with all other science.  And his miracles may have been instantaneous and/or done over a very long period of time.  I think time is also a creation of God and He is not at all bound to the restrictions of time as we think of time.  I also think he knows a whole lot more about the dynamics of space, all that it contains, what it is exactly, and much more that would provide answers for questions we haven't even thought of yet.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 12, 2018)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


There is no such things as creation science. Period. It wasnt science then, and its not science now.

But go ahead and prove me wrong. Here is the idea to be tested:

"God made all this shit ."

Now, design and then describe your test of this idea. It must be repeatable, yield the same results for everyone, and -- most importantly -- be able to rule this idea out.

Very simple. The ball is in your court.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 12, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


What an odd response, when all I did was use the tactics you described on you. I guess you have a pretty low opinion of your own methods. Maybe you should change them.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 12, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



I think that we should add "Cecilie's methods" to the long, LONG list of things you utterly do not understand, since you didn't do anything I would ever do.


----------



## james bond (Jan 12, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Fair enough.  You're entitled to your worldview.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 12, 2018)

.


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> There is no such things as creation science. Period. It wasnt science then, and its not science now.




not when ruled by the overprivileged that worship their desert religions ... who, coincidentally are all members of the same political party of an equally disingenuous presence as their president purposefully at the expense of the real inheritors, the free spirits of the true religion of the Almighty.


----------



## james bond (Jan 12, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Easy peasy.

1. All this shit had a beginning and began to exist.
2. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
3. All this shit began to exist.
4. Therefore, all this shit has a cause.

God.

There you go.


----------



## james bond (Jan 12, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> There is no such things as creation science. Period. It wasnt science then, and its not science now.



Like I said, atheists and their scientists are usually wrong.  I just finished talking about a creation scientist in Dr. Linus Pauling and how he was robbed by atheist scientists Francis Crick and James Watson.  Others famous creation scientists are the father of the scientific method -- Sir Francis Bacon. Galileo Galilei, Leonardo da Vinci, Blaise Pascal, Sir Isaac Newton, Carolus Linnaeus, Samuel F. B. Morse, Michael Faraday, Charles Babbage, Lord Kelvin, James Joule, Gregor Mendel, Louis Pasteur and many more.

Some of the greatest breakthroughs in science are attributed to creation science.

It's tough to be wrong, but you'll get over it in this life.  The trick is to get over it in the next life.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 13, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Evolution and Creation can both be true and co-exist. The problem Creationists have with evolution is not that it disproves our beliefs, because it can't.
> ...



Will gently disagree that creationism explains nothing or provides no useful predictions.  Spinoza and Einstein who admired his theories both embraced a concept of some kind of cosmic intelligence guiding the process that could explain so much that evolution/natural selection cannot.  He did not believe in a personal God as the theist believes.  He said: “I believe in Spinoza’s God,” and went on to explain that as not a God who concerns himself with humankind but rather a lawful harmony of all that exists. He said:   “What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos.”

I like to think of Einstein's amazement and delight to find out that how much of his theories were right  and how close he got to God's truth before he was face to face with God and got the rest of the story.  

The Creation stories are not useful to teach science as they cannot be taken literally and also be squared with the science that we are pretty sure we know.  But if they are taken symbolically or metaphorically they fill in the blanks that evolution cannot.  What exists that we know exists, as well as that we have not yet discovered, is because God made it happen.  Many things are the way they are because they fit into a divine plan and/or because of sin that spoiled God's perfect creation.   And because there is some great purpose to it all, then prayer makes a difference, obedience to God (i.e. fitting into his greater purpose) makes things better, and we can enjoy confidence that there is a brighter future/existence for us.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 13, 2018)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


I know neither the bible nor the Koran can be right. You realy think god wants to be praised all day? He has got to be thinking shut the fuck up you brown noser suck ups! I already know what I did was cool!


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 13, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


You need to pay attention. You clearly said you knew peoples thoughts , regardless of what they actually say or do. I tookyour amazing advice to heart and used your awesome methods to discern that you are a secret, crazy Muslim, trying to infiltrate a good, Christian message board. I also realized you are big fan of Precious Moments figurines.

Are you now denouncing your own methods, professor?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 13, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> Spinoza and Einstein


You undermine your own point and support mine. The assumptions they made from the magical nonsense led them to incorrect conclusions and bad science. Seriously, what a perfect illustration of my point.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 13, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



No, dumbshit, I didn't.  I said, and will continue to say, that _words mean things_, and I'm fully capable of reading your words and discerning what they say about your thoughts, opinions, and attitudes.  That's WHAT THEY'RE FOR.

If you don't want to reveal your stupidity, don't talk.  In fact, that would be doing everyone else a tremendous favor.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 13, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Spinoza and Einstein
> ...



Sorry but I think their conclusions are spot on and their science was both precise and pretty wonderful.  I would argue basic theology with both but not their observations of creation science which should be apparent to anybody with an open mind and discerning spirit.  And they made their argument much more convincingly than any of the nay sayers have done so far.  But do have a pleasant evening.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 13, 2018)

.
creationist linger for a time past they never deserved from their literature unlike mythology who's pleasant past though never proven remains a meaningful respite for the complexities it served to define.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jan 13, 2018)

evenflow1969 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


I have no idea, I have not seen God yet.

You think God wants you to saw the heads off all unbelievers?


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 14, 2018)

Weatherman2020 said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Nope, I doubt he would give a shit!


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Jan 14, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> .
> creationist linger for a time past they never deserved from their literature unlike mythology who's pleasant past though never proven remains a meaningful respite for the complexities it served to define.



Oh, yeah, you're taking over the world with your theology of "Believe nothing, behave like an animal until you die and cease to exist".  That's totally going to appeal to the vast majority of humans.

Good luck with that.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 14, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


.


Cecilie1200 said:


> Oh, yeah, you're taking over the world with your theology of "Believe nothing, behave like an animal until you die and cease to exist". That's totally going to appeal to the vast majority of humans.
> 
> Good luck with that.




_*Good luck with that ...*_




are you related to bond ...

tell us serpent, where is the religion in your 10000 pg book.






Weatherman2020 said:


> I have no idea, I have not seen God yet.



surly you jest ...


.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 14, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


Your words:

"Let me give you some free advice: don't be gullible enough to take people's words at face value."

You typed this right after to claim to know what people are really thinking, despite what they actually say.

Using your methods, I have deduced that your are a fundamental Muslim who is also a polyamorous homosexual.

Are you now denouncing your own methods? Or are you saying they only work for YOU, but not for me?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 14, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> Sorry but I think their conclusions are spot on and their science was both precise and pretty wonderful


Then you clearly mkssed my point and/or have not read much about their work. When Einstein made empirical claims resulting from the beliefs you mention (but misrepresent), he was wrong and had to drop these claims.

So those beliefs led to incorrect assumptions and some bad science, as Einstein tried to force the mathematics to agree with the assumptions. Einstein admitted this....why can't you?


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jan 14, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...


You don't talk with God?
How sad.


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Jan 14, 2018)

evenflow1969 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > evenflow1969 said:
> ...


You don't think God cares babies are murdered?
Interesting. I know the left does not care.


----------



## evenflow1969 (Jan 14, 2018)

Weatherman2020 said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> > Weatherman2020 said:
> ...


Quite the leap in l;ogic there buddy!


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 14, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry but I think their conclusions are spot on and their science was both precise and pretty wonderful
> ...



I think we are arguing different things here.  What I am arguing and the context in which Einstein was arguing had nothing whatsoever to do with mathematical assumptions.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 14, 2018)

Weatherman2020 said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...


.


Weatherman2020 said:


> You don't talk with God?
> How sad.



no,

another serpent ... communication is through sight, seeing the Almighty is not hard to do.


----------



## james bond (Jan 15, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



It's good that you can empathize, if that's the correct word, with Einstein's amazement and delight and how close he got to God's truth.

However, I disagree with your closing paragraph in that creation stories are not useful to teach science.  They are to be taken literally.  I hope one day we can teach Genesis, but not as religion.  As I stated, the order has been reversed since the 1850s with Charles Lyell and his pupil Charles Darwin, with geology and uniformitarianism coming in to question creation geology and catastrophism.  Today, people believe what these atheists laid down as science.  Thus, the onset of evolution led people astray just like someone who hikes or backpacks and takes the wrong path early on his journey.  The truth remains with the Bible.  I studied evolution and when I had questions it could not answer, I finally looked at what creation scientists were saying and started to agree with them.  They answered more of my questions than evolution, Lyell or Darwin.  So, the Bible is to be taken literally and I am a young earth creationist.  I'm a computer scientist or engineer by trade so there isn't much conflict at work.  If I were a geologist, paleontologist, zoologist or a biologist, then I would have more difficulties.  I would probably have to hide my creation science and views if I were to continue working in those fields.  Have you heard of William Lane Craig?  I subscribe to most of his arguments, but I cannot see his side of evolution and old earth creation.  That's not the way God intended his word to be used.  How can it when there was no evolution back then?

If someone wanted to shake up my faith, then let them find alien life on another planet.  Let them colonize Mars or the moon.  Let them create gold, the divine element.  Let them create a blade of grass.  Even that guy Francis Crick, who co-founded the double helix and A-T and C-G models of DNA and said this proves there is no God, thought later in life that panspermia originated life on earth.  (Crick was roundly criticized for his beliefs as it was shown to be pseudoscience.)  Show me panspermia or anything else for the origin of life.  You see, I know one can't find an alien, colonize another planet or our own moon, create gold, i.e. create an atom, a blade of grass or show panspermia.  I know there are no multiverses, a way to travel back in time (I can show you how to travel forward in time though and we can do it today via Space-X), no egg before the chicken and more.  These are what I have come to think from the Bible and creation science.  There are just some things God would not allow such as we'll never know the beginning nor the end.  These things God said he'll keep to himself.  Is it any wonder that even a smart guy like Stephen Hawking, as smart as Einstein, ends up saying he wants to know the origin of the universe and why something is greater than nothing?


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


 
I'm sorry, but while I have complete faith that God was the creator of all that was, is, or will ever be, I simply cannot take the creation stories literally, nor would colonization of the moon or Mars or any other extraterrestrial place shake my faith in any way.  I simply can't logically square the creation of light on the first day, vegetation on the third day, and the sun and moon on the fourth day or that there was morning and evening before there was a sun.

I do not say this to shake your faith and have no problem with you or anybody else personally if you take the text literally and would never attempt to talk you out of it.  I say this as my own witness for those who cannot believe as you do that the Bible and science as we know it is not at all in conflict and one can know that and still be a devout Christian or person of faith. But if you take the creation stories literally, I believe God blesses your faith.  I would hope he also blesses mine.  As Jesus taught, it is not the purity of our theology and/or keeping our rules/laws that God cares about so much, but it is the content of our heart and character and our relationship with and obedience to God.

Having said that:

I believe the first chapter of Genesis, most likely one of the most recent manuscripts included in the Old Testament, was a theological statement to illustrate that God is the author/creator of all that exists and reigns supreme over everything.  I believe the second creation story beginning in Genesis 2, probably one of the oldest manuscripts included in the Old Testament, is an anthropological explanation of why things are the way they are; i.e. why humankind does not enjoy a perfect existence as sin spoiled God's perfect creation, why humans must work for what they have, why there is pain in child birth, how sin spread from the 'first couple' into the family, into the community, and into the whole world.

IMO, the entirety of the Bible is an affirmation of continuing cycles of creation, sin, judgment, redemption that is expressed in parable, allegory, metaphor, symbolism, poetry, wisdom sayings, history, prophecy, all.   The creation stories were written by men of faith, not men of science and if, from their limited perspective, they got details of the science wrong, they were spot on that science (among other things) is from and of God, and what God wrought, is good.

And as I have said more than once, I suspect when we meet Him face to face, we are going to be surprised at how much we got wrong here and how minuscule our understanding of anything is compared with all there is to know..


----------



## toobfreak (Jan 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.
> 
> 
> *Strong Theist:* I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
> ...




It all comes down to one simple fact:  Those that have never had a religious experience don't believe a God exists, while those that have, do.  People with profound spiritual experiences have no choice but to believe what they have seen and felt, while those who have never had any such experience usually, rather than simply deny it for themselves all too often declare that any such possibility is foolish.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 15, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> What I am arguing and the context in which Einstein was arguing had nothing whatsoever to do with mathematical assumptions.


You clearly tied these beliefs to their work, did you not? If not , then you are merely agreeing with me that there is no overlap, and one doea not inform the other
 If you ARE claiming that this belief informed Einstein's work, then I will once again have to point out that it did so to the detriment of his work.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 15, 2018)

toobfreak said:


> Those that have never had a religious experience don't believe a God exists, while those that have, do


What? Not true at all. Plenty of religious people were simply brainwashed as children and will be the first to admit they have never had any significant religiois experience. And many others had what they thought were religious experiences, only to later (after being educated on brain phenomena) realize that they simply had an altering of their consciousness due to a chemical event.


----------



## toobfreak (Jan 15, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > Those that have never had a religious experience don't believe a God exists, while those that have, do
> ...




Spoken from personal experience no doubt?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 15, 2018)

toobfreak said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > toobfreak said:
> ...


The personal experience of knowing a lot of people, yes.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 15, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > What I am arguing and the context in which Einstein was arguing had nothing whatsoever to do with mathematical assumptions.
> ...



No.  I didn't even mention their work, much less considered it, in relating their personal views about the wonder of the harmony of the universe and unwillingness to discount it all as pure chance.  I took that as their personal heartfelt views and did not connect it in any way with their work.  And I'm not agreeing with you on much, if anything, I'm afraid.  That isn't intended to be a criticism but I don't want to leave the impression I am agreeing with something that I am not.


----------



## ding (Jan 15, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


The Bible has several literary types; allegorical, historical, law, poetic, prophetic, epistle and proverbial. I'm sure others may add or subtract to this list, but this is a pretty good start. When trying to understand the meaning of passages it is helpful to understand which literary type one is reading and also to place or read the passage in the proper historical light.

Let's start with the tree of knowledge of good and evil and the fall from grace. Genesis is allegorical. It starts with the allegorical account of Creation. After every step God would say "and it was good." So basically everything God created was good. Which makes sense because things like evil, darkness and cold or not extant. They don't exist on their own. They exist as the absence of something else. Cold is the absence of heat. Darkness is the absence of light. And evil is the absence of good.

Man knows right from wrong, but when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong, he rationalizes that he didn't violate it. After Adam and Eve had sinned and realized they were naked, they hid when they heard God coming. They hid because they knew that they had done wrong. Then when God asked point blank if they had done it, they rationalized that it wasn't their fault. Adam, did you eat the apple? The woman you made gave it to me. Eve did you eat the apple? The serpent deceived me.

Man is the only animal capable of knowledge of good and evil. No other creature has this concept. Sure animals can have empathy, but not like man. Animals function on impulse and instinct. Man functions on these too, but in man's case he has the unique ability to override his impulses and instinct for the sake of good. That is free will. It's a choice. Everything is choice.

I don't believe that Genesis is implying that had Adam and Eve never committed the original sin, we would live in paradise forever. I believe Genesis is saying that man has the capacity to do good and evil. So then the question begs why did God create such a world. I believe that that is an artifact of life. In other words, I don't believe God had a choice. It is part and parcel of the extant nature of good. I know people will howl that I said God had no choice but the reality is there are things God can't do. For instance, God can't oppose Himself; He can't go against His own nature.

So there are two very interesting things which come out of free will. One is that evil has the effect of making good better. It's like salt and sugar. Salt makes sugar taste sweeter. We are told elsewhere that He uses all things for the good of those who love Him. Among other things the Jews discovered is that there is meaning in suffering. 07 Judaism

The other interesting thing is that good has no meaning unless there is evil. In other words, it is not virtuous if you are forced to be virtuous.

In closing, man prefers good over evil. We don't do evil for evil's sake. We do evil for the sake of our own good and when we do, we rationalize that we didn't do evil. But from these acts, goodness will arise and we will be stronger for it. It is a self compensating feature whose sole purpose is to propel consciousness to the next rung in the anthropological ladder.


----------



## ding (Jan 15, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


You are correct.  It isn't pure chance.  We live in a universe governed by laws.  Everything has unfolded according to the laws of nature.  Laws which existed before the creation of space and time.  Laws which governed the creation of space and time.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 15, 2018)

ding said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



An interesting if somewhat differing perspective from my own.  I don't quite agree that good and evil are the yin and yang of the Biblical message. but while I personally believe that the movie "Oh God", while not great theology, did present one important universal truth.  If both good and evil did not exist then there would be no reason to define either because neither would exist.  God said (in the movie) he never figured out how to make an up without a down, and in without an out, cold without hot, or good without bad--or something to that effect.


----------



## ding (Jan 15, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Here is MLK's take on it.

"...We must realize that God's power is not put forward to get certain things done, but to get them done in a certain way, and with certain results in the lives of those who do them. We can see this clearly in human illustrations. My purpose in doing a crossword puzzle is not to fill in certain words. I could fill them in easily by waiting for tomorrow morning's paper. Filling them in without the answers is harder but much more satisfying, for it calls out resourcefulness, ingenuity, and discipline which by the easier way would find no self expression.

Similarly, to borrow an illustration from William James, eleven men battle desperately on a field, risking falling and injury, using up a prodigious amount of energy, and when we ask why, we learn that it is to get an inflated, leather covered sphere called a football across a goal. But if that is all, why doesn't someone get up in the night and put it there? Football games are not played to get a ball across a goal, but to get it there under certain conditions, in a certain way, with certain results in the lives of those concerned. Power to get the ball across the goal is to be interpreted in terms of purposes and only makes sense in the light of those purposes. Action, then, which defeats purpose is weakness. Power is the ability to fulfill purpose. No one knows what it cost God to refrain from intervention when wicked men put his beloved Son to death. But the restraint was not weakness. The Cross became the power of God unto salvation..."

“Religion’s Answer to the Problem of Evil”


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 15, 2018)

ding said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



While I don't have any problem with your view of law as it relates to Creation, I am maybe a bit less convinced?  Perhaps in Einstein's and Spinoza's theory of some kind of cosmic intelligence, perhaps one consisting of the sum of all of its parts in the entire universe, the laws of nature and science would be unbending and unchanging.  But I think prayer can and does change things, that the promises of the Bible are not in vain though we likely misconstrue some of the meanings, that miracles happen.  So I guess while I respect the laws of math, of nature, of science, I suspect things could likely be a bit more fluid than we think?

Is the Bible passage in II Chronicles real?: "If my people, who are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

I like to think so.


----------



## ding (Jan 15, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


I believe in a personal God who for the most part leaves us to our own designs.  Just because I believe there are moral laws which naturally lead to success and a self compensating feature that provides feedback when we don't, that doesn't mean I believe His Spirit is not active here.  It is.  His Spirit is within each of us.  Some don't realize it and will only realize what they lost when they are granted their wish to be left alone.


----------



## james bond (Jan 17, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Fair enough, I'll take what you said to heart and it's fine with me that you believe what you do from your interpretation of the Bible.  The Bible is not a science book, but it's important that science backs up the Bible.  The first chapter of Genesis is key for me.  For the longest time, the universe was eternal and the Steady State Theory ruled our worldview.  That went out the window and the Big Bang Theory replaced it as the best theory.  That backs Genesis.

To practice science, I think that one has to keep the Bible.  It's a source in such a way to guide us as to what happened, but we have to use science and take it where it leads us in search of truth and knowledge.  Thus, we are descendants of Adam and Eve.  We came from adult creatures and not creation like they were.  What creation scientists can say God is my inspiration and the Bible is my guide. God won't reveal the beginning nor the end.  That said, the Bible doesn't provide all the details and is open to interpretation.  I think God wanted it that way.  He didn't want robots as he gave us free will.  He accepted the consequences and gave us a second chance through his son, Jesus Christ. 

As for the colonization and other stuff, I just want to state it's the FAILURE to colonize the moon, Mars or any other planet.  We're not going to be multi-planetary inhabitants.  We're not going to find alien life.  This may not be mainstream YEC, but it's what I come to think.  Thus, I won't be going to moon, Mars, asteroids or any other planetary objects.  I'm happy right here.  Maybe the most I'll do is go visit a space station in the near future .

I think you're right in that we'll be surprised.  Everything will be re-created again from scratch.  There are a lot of questions we have and I hope we get to experience all that is his kingdom, his glory, his power forever.  Amen.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 17, 2018)

james bond said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



I'm enjoying this philosophical discussion with you and some others who are contributing in a thoughtful and intelligent manner.

We once had occasion to have a young man for dinner who was a very pleasant fellow who was also a confirmed Atheist.  His theory was that the universe is eternal--the stuff has always been here--how it got here who knows or cares?--but it has been jostling around in space for all eternity and at this particular time in eternity is jostled itself into the Earth and structures of the universe that we know.  In an infinite amount of time it will all come apart and eventually be jostled into something else.  He equated it with putting all the different parts in a vacuum cleaner in a sack and shaking the sack.  If one has an infinite amount of time--gazillions and gazillions of years--those vacuum cleaner parts at some point would come together as a vacuum cleaner.

But from the Christian perspective, even if the young man's 'vacuum cleaner' theory was correct,  something had to make the parts and something had to shake the sack.

And if we go with the big bang theory, there still had to be something to go boom.  And something to light the fuse.

As the people of the Bible had no way to know or calculate or understand either, and had little understanding of what the sun, moon, stars, and other observable heavenly bodies were, their understanding that all that exists and all that is possible is from God was sufficient for them in their time.  And ours for that matter.

As for the fact that we have not yet colonized the moon or Mars, it has only been a little over 40 years that we have figured out how to even get there.  That isn't even an eyelash blink in the history of humankind, let alone the universe.

And if I was young and had no official responsibility to anyone other than myself, I would jump at a chance to go and be a part of whatever we humans choose to do in those places so long as the purpose was to do good and not evil.  And I do believe we will go to the moon again and to Mars when we figure out how to accomplish that.


----------



## ding (Jan 17, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


The Bible gets all the main points right.  I envision someone being shown how He did it and putting it into his own words the best he could. 

The Bible tells us Creation had a beginning.  That Creation was created in steps.  It has the correct order of the steps.  It tells us that we came from dust and will return to dust and that each of our hairs are numbered.  All things which science proves. 

I love science, and so does God, He created it and told us to use it to know Him. 



> 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
> 
> 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
> 
> 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator



Changing the subject, you may be interested in this. 

The first five books focus on the beginning of the nation of Israel; but the first 11 chapters of the Bible records the history that all nations have in common.  Which explains how the account of Genesis was recorded as symbols in the Chinese language 1500 years before Moses penned Genesis.  In fact, Genesis itself tells us how this was possible in the account of the Tower of Babel which was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization and is also captured as symbols in the written Chinese language.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 17, 2018)

.


james bond said:


> ... and it's fine with me that you believe what you do from your interpretation of the Bible.





ding said:


> The Bible gets all the main points right.





Foxfyre said:


> As the people of the Bible ... their understanding that all that exists and all that is possible is from God was sufficient for them in their time. And ours for that matter.





 .

 .



_*
As the people of the bible ...*_


the truth of the desert religions is indelibly written in the fabric of social injustice perpetrated by them throughout history and in the present time reflected through their errant religious dogma and associated political affiliations.


----------



## ding (Jan 17, 2018)

That was just as interesting as the other 89 times you told me that.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 17, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> I took that as their personal heartfelt views and did not connect it in any way with their work.



Okay.

But You did say that creationism could explain much that evolution cannot...that was absurd. And you misrepresent Einstein's view of god, as a lot of theists are fond of doing.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 17, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > I took that as their personal heartfelt views and did not connect it in any way with their work.
> ...



I don't think I am misrepresenting Einstein at all.  And of course creationism can speak to those things that evolution cannot.  Evolution actually covers only a small area of all the science there is to know while creationism in a sense covers it all.

I am also pretty sure Einstein was able to discuss these topics objectively and thoughtfully without being contentious, accusing anybody, or being insulting?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 17, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


Creationism explains nothing at all. Not sure where you are getting these goofy ideas. When to use magic as an "explanation", you havent actually explained anything. You have merely substituted one mystery for another. Creationism explains nothing and yields no useful predictions at all.

And yes, you misrepresent Einstein. But we'll agree to disagree...you guys lost that argument a million times. No need to rehash.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 17, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



I will agree to disagree not that you have offered much of any kind of argument on anything to disagree with other than telling me and others that we are wrong.  That doesn't get anybody many points in any debate.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 17, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


You havent done much but offer a stream of authoritative declarations. All completely faith based, of course.

What does creation explain that evolution does not, as far as the origin/diversity of species? You said it explains MORE than evolution does about this. Do reveal to us these divine revelations.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 17, 2018)

.
the same as their 10000 page document, a void from the 4th century for the enlightenment yet still alive from the 1st its content completely misrepresents.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 18, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Please do not put words in my mouth.  I did not say that creationism explains more than evolution does about origin of the species.  I said creationism explains things that evolution cannot.  And we have been explaining that for some pages now.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 18, 2018)

Foxfyre said:


> *I said creationism explains things that evolution cannot.*






Foxfyre said:


> As the people of the Bible had no way to know or calculate or understand either, and had little understanding of what the sun, moon, stars, and other observable heavenly bodies were, their understanding that all that exists and all that is possible is from God _*was sufficient for them in their time.*_





Foxfyre said:


> Please do not put words in my mouth. I did not say that creationism explains more than evolution does about origin of the species. I said creationism explains things that evolution cannot.



_*
from God - was sufficient for them in their time ...

*_
evolution may still remain a philosophical discussion at a modern level per that choice and would then remain at the level of creationism from that period in time to answer similarly the same questions with identical veracity as any other hypothetical conclusion without verifiable results.

neither address the metaphysical axioms that are the predominate determination for the resulant results that occur over time that are deliberately misconstrued by (both) that the desert religions use without clarification for their benefit, purposely at the expense of the true identity and determination for their existence.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jan 18, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > *I said creationism explains things that evolution cannot.*
> ...



I'm sorry but I read that several times and I still have no idea what you mean by that.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 18, 2018)

.


ding said:


> That was just as interesting as the other 89 times you told me that.




their non response is deafening ... but surly they understand their bible's scriptures to the letter.


----------



## james bond (Jan 21, 2018)

Not only can't BreezeWood keep track of what he said and to who, he can't explain evolutionary origins such as singularity and quantum fluctuations.  However, he deserves a chance to explain.  What is singularity BW?  Does singularity set up the environment for the Big Bang?


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 21, 2018)

.


james bond said:


> Not only can't BreezeWood keep track of what he said and to who, he can't explain evolutionary origins such as singularity and quantum fluctuations.  However, he deserves a chance to explain.  What is singularity BW?  Does singularity set up the environment for the Big Bang?



you are at best disingenuous ...  


BB is cyclical, singularity is the transition moment from energy to mass after recompaction ...



Foxfyre said:


> I'm sorry but I read that several times and I still have no idea what you mean by that.



there I saved you from having to type it.




james bond said:


> he can't explain evolutionary origins





BreezeWood said:


> evolution may still remain a philosophical discussion at a modern level per that choice and would then remain at the level of creationism from that period in time to answer similarly the same questions with identical veracity as any other hypothetical conclusion without verifiable results.



the serial killers can't read.

what it says is creationism does not answer differently than any other illusionary explanation and is no different than evolution - where the veracity of evolution removed.


evolution is driven by the metaphysical axioms translated through the genome of life.


----------



## james bond (Jan 22, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> you are at best disingenuous ...
> 
> 
> BB is cyclical, singularity is the transition moment from energy to mass after recompaction ...



I am at best ingenious, you mean.  Anyway, did you invest in bitcoin and held on?  You've lost your shirt today.  Oh well,  easy come, easy go, BW.

Wrong.  Singularity is very high temperature and very dense, close to infinite, environment or situation.  What you described were quantum fluctuations.



BreezeWood said:


> evolution may still remain a philosophical discussion at a modern level per that choice and would then remain at the level of creationism from that period in time to answer similarly the same questions with identical veracity as any other hypothetical conclusion without verifiable results.





BreezeWood said:


> the serial killers can't read.
> 
> what it says is creationism does not answer differently than any other illusionary explanation and is no different than evolution - where the veracity of evolution removed.
> 
> ...



Did you just say evolution is philosophy?  Ha ha.  I thought it was a religion.  It may as well be since you have "faith" in it.


----------



## james bond (Jan 22, 2018)

Here's the kicker though.  Stephen Hawking said sometime around 2010 that he wants to know why something is greater than nothing.  He's asking why there is a universe vs nothing.  He's asking why matter dominates over antimatter, and both matter and antimatter exist naturally.  Part of it is common sense and the other part is quantum mechanics.  Some think this is further evidence for God since antimatter does not dominate.  If it did, then we could have universes pop into existence and have multiverses.  However, this isn't the case.  Thus, people who think the universe came from "nothing" are wrong and do not have evidence to back up their hypotheses.  Matter annihilates antimatter, so they can't co-exist.  Yet, Hawking and other atheist scientists keep trying to come up with an explanation.  This was one of the biggest setbacks for atheist science.  Something greater than nothing holds for many other atheist hypotheses such as quantum physics vs Newtonian (classic) physics.  Or an evolutionary origin of the universe vs creation.  It's always something vs nothing.  We may as well admit that something is greater than nothing has held up since the millennium.  It has held up since the beginning.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> Did you just say evolution is philosophy? Ha ha. I thought it was a religion. It may as well be since you have "faith" in it.



_*since you have "faith" in it ...*_

no, that is what I said evolution would be if made relative to creationism. without veracity. how creationism can answer questions evolution with veracity could not according to the christian posts.

* without veracity what isn't answerable.




james bond said:


> Wrong. Singularity is very high temperature and very dense, close to infinite, environment or situation. What you described were quantum fluctuations.



singularity is the "moment" between energy and mass. the cyclical instant. the Sabbath - purity in completion.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Jan 23, 2018)

Evolution is eatablished fact, and one does not require any faith to believe it is the best explanation for all of the observations in biology. You faith types sure do slide seamlessly from trying to distinguish faith from other types of belief to calling everything faith. And back again. It's odd.


----------



## james bond (Jan 29, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> _*since you have "faith" in it ...*_
> 
> no, that is what I said evolution would be if made relative to creationism. without veracity. how creationism can answer questions evolution with veracity could not according to the christian posts.
> 
> * without veracity what isn't answerable.



Creationism has veracity in creation science.  



BreezeWood said:


> singularity is the "moment" between energy and mass. the cyclical instant. the Sabbath - purity in completion.



You had to change your answer because I was right (which makes your first answer wrong).

Yet, you're highlighting "moment" when it should be the moment where temperature and density is INFINITE.  This kind of infinite does not happen in our world since we do not divide by zero.  In math, division by zero is undefined.  For example, if one could divide by zero, then 12 times 0 = 144.  This can't happen.  The only way it can happen is there is a creator and the creator creates.  In this case, it would be 12 objects created to equal 144.  See how math proves the creator?

Veracity by mathematics is solid, BW.


----------



## james bond (Jan 29, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Evolution is eatablished fact, and one does not require any faith to believe it is the best explanation for all of the observations in biology. You faith types sure do slide seamlessly from trying to distinguish faith from other types of belief to calling everything faith. And back again. It's odd.



Again, if evolution is FACT, then we can all use it.  What part of evolution can I use?  Very little, if any.

Oh, you're referring to biology?  Even there, creation scientists and atheist scientists disagree on the rates of species change.  Creationists favor rapid change while evolutionists favor slow millions of years change.  Yet, we see much species change by natural selection within our lifetimes.  It does not take millions of years for it to happen.  So much for your evolution facts in biology.


----------



## BreezeWood (Jan 30, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > _*since you have "faith" in it ...*_
> ...


.


james bond said:


> In math, division by zero is undefined.



your such a smarty bond, but let me offer another clue - zero in mathematics occurs when mass in unison extends to its furthest trajectory from the point of singularity. without ever changing direction to further propel itself into the pending mass collision to create S/+2 ...




james bond said:


> This can't happen. The only way it can happen is there is a creator and the creator creates.



it can only happen if the Almighty believes the metaphysical axioms are to their liking - that leaves you out bond ...


----------



## james bond (Feb 1, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>BW:  your such a smarty bond, but let me offer another clue - zero in mathematics occurs when mass in unison extends to its furthest trajectory from the point of singularity. without ever changing direction to further propel itself into the pending mass collision to create S/+2 ...<<

Before we get to your statement, it is a FACT that humans cannot divide by zero because it is undefined.  Notice it did not give us ∞ and that only the creator can.  This means we can only have uncountable objects in the material world.  A man's got to know his limitations, BW.

Let's look at your statement.  What it sounds like you are saying is that we can get to zero when our cosmic expansion continues and then into some kind of mass collision.  That does not sound good at all, BW.  I'll bite.  With what mass is our mass going to collide with, BW, so we become zero?


----------



## BreezeWood (Feb 1, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> With what mass is our mass going to collide with, BW, so we become zero?



zero is when all matter in unison reaches the furthest point of their trajectory's finite angle derived from the point of expulsion after the moment of singularity ... at which time all matter then propels itself without changing direction back to its origin causing the mass recompaction that eventually causes all matter to convert back to energy and at the same final instance of completion recreate the expulsion that makes BB a cyclical event.

The Boomerang Theory - 

when a pitcher in outerspace tosses a curveball, the ball traveling at a finite angle will eventually return to its point of origin without ever changing direction. the motion of a boomerang. cyclical BB.


there is both zero and infinity bond, purity of the transition is all that is required and the prerequisite metaphysical axioms used to create life are inalterable by the providence of the everwatchful Almighty, gatekeeper of the Everlasting.


----------



## james bond (Feb 3, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



I think what you're talking about is the velocity which reaches zero at the apex.  The equation for this is a = dv/dt.  You would have to have velocity when dt = 0 and that would be a good trick as velocity would be zero.  One would have to create the velocity that you are referring to from nothing. 

Perhaps you mean at singularity, the velocity of an object would be spontaneous.  I can visualize that if temperature and density are very high, i.e. uncountable, but I can't visualize that if temperature and density are infinite which atheist science requires.  The assumption is the universe expands infinitely which I don't think it does.  Creation science claims there is a border to the universe.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 3, 2018)

james bond said:


> Again, if evolution is FACT, then we can all use it.


What a silly thing to say. How can you use fusion? How can you use gravity waves? 

Scientists "use" evolution all the time.


james bond said:


> while evolutionists favor slow millions of years change.



No. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that evolutionary change happens at all possible speeds.

And for the 100th time, there is no such thing as creation science. Second, what you said about creationists favoring "fast evolution" is absurd.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Feb 3, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Evolution is eatablished fact, and one does not require any faith to believe it is the best explanation for all of the observations in biology. You faith types sure do slide seamlessly from trying to distinguish faith from other types of belief to calling everything faith. And back again. It's odd.



No, evolution is NOT an established fact.  That is just what the uneducated think because they want to believe they're smarter than they are without taking the trouble to really know anything about the science they hope will free them from morality.

Evolution is a theory.  It has to be, since no one has actually been around long enough to have witnessed it.  Any scientist - a REAL one, not a shill - can and will tell you that there are still questions that have to be answered before evolution can be more than a theory.  For example, where are the missing links?  How did life come from non-living material?  How can evolution and natural selection produce complex organs and systems?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 3, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Evolution is eatablished fact, and one does not require any faith to believe it is the best explanation for all of the observations in biology. You faith types sure do slide seamlessly from trying to distinguish faith from other types of belief to calling everything faith. And back again. It's odd.
> ...


That's all completely wrong. "Scientific theory" is the highest status a scientifoc explanation can achieve. And the theory of evolution is the most well supported theory in the history of science. Nearly every scientist who knows anything about evolutionary theory would call it a fact that evolution is the explanation for the diversity of species we see today. And the ones who dont are anomalous.

You are also way off with your oddball "observational versus historical science" garbage lifted right from young earth creationist propaganda. Scientists dont draw or recognize such a distinction. No scientist would ever demand first hand observance of a phenomena as evvidence for its existence. That truly is utter garbage, and you discredit yourself to peddle it. No scientist would demand that we watch an alpha particle separate from an atomic nucleus in order to acvept as fact that it occurs. And , trust me, scientists accept aplha particle radiation  as FACT.


----------



## james bond (Feb 5, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Again, if evolution is FACT, then we can all use it.
> ...



You misunderstand.  It's not silly at all.  Not everyone can use evolution as a fact when they don't believe it.  We can't say humans came from fish nor humans came from apes.  It's just a theory.  Not a fact.

Everyone can use gravitational waves, not gravity waves.  Gravitational waves support the general theory of relativity.

Then you don't understand evolution while I do.  Evolution needed billions of years for it to become valid.

"In 1956 the American geologist Clair Patterson (left) announced that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old. Darwin had finally gotten the luxury of time he had craved."

Radiometric Dating: Clair Patterson

Creation science exists.  We have -- Creation Science Organizations and Ministries .  This just goes to show that atheists are usually wrong.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 5, 2018)

james bond said:


> It's just a theory. Not a fact.


Wrong, it's both a theory and a fact. I promise you that you embarrass yourself every time you say, "just a theory", when speaking about acientific theories. Do you not care that you are embarrassing and discrediting yourself?

There is no such thing as creation science. There is no creation science being published. What a shameless lie.

No you cannot "use" gravity waves, you oddball.


----------



## BreezeWood (Feb 6, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> One would have to create the velocity that you are referring to from nothing.



how's that, when all the matter in the universe is recompacted by the previous energy expulsion it then recreates by a new conversion to energy a renewed expulsion at the cyclical instant to recreate the trajectories from the spherical singularity of pure energy that will eventually bring all the recreated mass / matter back again to its origin at the same time for a renewed compaction. 




james bond said:


> I think what you're talking about is the velocity which reaches zero at the apex



at the apex of the trajectory is when all matter at the same time will cease traveling away from the origin of BB and will begin a mirror of the trajectory back to the origin without ever changing direction.




james bond said:


> Perhaps you mean at singularity, the velocity of an object would be spontaneous. I can visualize that if temperature and density are very high, i.e. uncountable, but I can't visualize that if temperature and density are infinite which atheist science requires.



_*but I can't visualize that if temperature and density are infinite which atheist science requires.
*_
I defer to your knowledge that exceeds mine for the above but I would believe the atheist are correct that both 0 and infinite are factors in the creation of the universe so much so if they are not accomplished the universe would not exist, there would not be the transfer at singularity of one to the other. the metaphysical axioms, purity are also required in its creation. what the Almighty refers to as a Sabbath. a perfect completion.
_*



*_


----------



## james bond (Feb 9, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > It's just a theory. Not a fact.
> ...



I'm not wrong.  You're wrong when you have to resort to ad hominem attacks because you're losing an argument.  Especially one near and dear to atheists' hearts such as evolution.  It just goes to show you got no class like Obama.

Moreover, facts are not theories and can be used by everyone such as, "We can travel into the future by a very fast rocket ship using Einstein's special theory of relativity (demonstrated in youtube below around 4:20).  However, one cannot time travel into the past is a theory.  Some people think we can travel into the past because they believe in parallel universes when there is absolutely no evidence.  However, creation scientists believe God will not allow people to travel into the past as they use the Bible to point out events occurring according to God’s timetable (Genesis 21:1; John 7:8; 1 Timothy 2:6).  This runs contrary to the idea of people changing historical events by traveling into the past.  Thus, no time travel back into the past and no parallel universes.  That's just science fiction.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2018)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Yes, evolution is fact. No, there is no such thing as "creation science".


----------



## james bond (Feb 9, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



>>BW:  how's that, when all the matter in the universe is recompacted by the previous energy expulsion it then recreates by a new conversion to energy a renewed expulsion at the cyclical instant to recreate the trajectories from the spherical singularity of pure energy that will eventually bring all the recreated mass / matter back again to its origin at the same time for a renewed compaction.<<

Again, you're referring to velocity and not energy with recompaction of the universe.  If the universe does not achieve escape velocity, then it will collapse due to the gravitational attraction of all its mass of matter.  This is called the Big Crunch.  However, BC is just one scenario unless there is another huge mass exerting an opposite attraction.  None is known at this time doing this.

Besides, one cannot have infinite expansion due to spherical singularity or any type of singularity.  One cannot have infinite temperature and density of singularity.  No such infinite objects can exist in the material world.  The math does not allow it unless there is a creator.  

OTOH, Creation scientists theorize that the universe and earth (same age) formed very rapidly, like one day by the creator, and is still thousands of years old instead of billions.  They do not have this problem with escape velocity such as with the BBT.


----------



## james bond (Feb 9, 2018)

Anyway, the study of religious brains goes to show that the religious have more going on in their frontal lobes than those who do not meditate or pray.  It kind of matches what happens here in this forum.

Neurotheology: This Is Your Brain On Religion


----------



## james bond (Feb 9, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



You are confused.  Before, you said it was fact and theory until I debunked it.  It's a theory until something better comes along to replace it like creation science.  One example is no one is worried about the universe collapsing into itself and everything including us are gone.  I suppose you're going to tell me that we have find a way to get to another universe by traveling through wormhole aBCxYZ.  That doesn't sound much like a fact to me.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 10, 2018)

james bond said:


> Anyway, the study of religious brains goes to show that the religious have more going on in their frontal lobes than those who do not meditate or pray


Excuse you, allow me to correct your statement, here. Those are not all "religious brains", as not all who meditate are religious. Nice try.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 10, 2018)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Evolution is both fact and scientific theory. You debunked nothing, nor has any "creation scientist" produced any science, ever. That is why evolution is still accepted as fact, and why the frauds calling themselves "creation scientists" reside in the blogosphere (and not academia or in scientific journals).

You seem to think that, if you squeeze your eyes real tight and repeat yourself over amd over and over, the silly bullshit you are peddling will become true. Sorry my man..open your eyes...evolution is still fact, and the creationists are still holding an empty bag.


----------



## BreezeWood (Feb 10, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Again, you're referring to velocity and not energy with recompaction of the universe.











the transfer of matter to energy is a proven fact bond, it represents a transition from one state to another where the metaphysical axioms are in compliance.

the above is representative of an existing environment, in space the expulsion is universal in all directions and from the sphere of singularity the resultant mass is expelled at a finite angle that eventually will return all its components back to their origin at the same time without ever changing directions.


unless you suffer from a mental disorder the boomerang theory is not something remotely difficult to understand, or rather not a mental disorder but an adherence to a forgery based 4th century mentality is the cause of your continued misrepresentation of the facts is the reason for sane people world wide to be leery of anyone pertaining to the desert religions.


----------



## james bond (Mar 9, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



What I've shown is atheists and atheist scientists are usually wrong.  Admit you were wrong or else you are lying.  We know creation science exists because they're the ones who invented modern science.  Sir Francis Bacon was a Christian who is credited as being the father of the scientific method.  The Christian church ruled science, but today the tables have been turned and atheist scientists with funding from large corporations and government have come into power.  This started in the 1850s with atheist Charles Lyell who eventually became Charles Darwin's mentor.

10 Major Accomplishments of Sir Francis Bacon | Learnodo Newtonic

Famous Scientists That Believe In God

Moreover, it is clear that you do not understand what science is because you use the word "fact."  While facts are important, there is very little in terms of facts that come out of science, i.e. the scientific method is not to discover facts.  (Here is a link on scientific facts and what I mean -- 118 Facts about Science ←FACTSlides→.  Notice one of the "facts" state scientists concluded the chicken came first.  Just as God created.)  Neither do they prove things.  Proof is in mathematics.  Science produces theories.  Thus, admit you were wrong and lied about evolution.


----------



## james bond (Mar 9, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



You just switched topics from the BBT to transfer of matter into energy and threw in a picture of an atom bomb.  What has any of it have to do with singularity?  First, the BBT isn't an explosion like a bomb, but an expansion.  I don't even think Hawking claims there was a loud bang.

Here's something to ponder.  The universe has been found to be flat.  The earth and planets are still spherical, but the universe is thin on one side, so it's shape is essentially flat.  If one reads the Bible, the universe is described as that of a scroll and can be folded up and that God stretches the universe like a curtain.  Thus, science has backed up what the Bible has said just like it backed up God stretching the universe like a curtain.

Flat universe
The universe is flat - official – Physics World

Expanding universe
Hubble Finds Universe Expanding Faster Than Expected

Space is like an invisible fabric 
The Fabric of the Cosmos — NOVA | PBS

This means that new, exciting things lie in our future as we ponder what the 4th dimension holds in store.  If the universe is like a scroll, then there exists another dimension over it.  Whether this consists of space and time, we do not know yet.  Creation scientists knew this before all of these discoveries, but hadn't found all the evidence until a few years ago.  I'm not saying they should get the credit though.  The credit should go to scientist(s) who did the work.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 9, 2018)

james bond said:


> What I've shown is atheists and atheist scientists are usually wrong.


You have shown no such thing, what an absurd, steaming pile of bullshit.

Furthermore, whether you believe in moronic zombie kings and invisible sky wizards, or if you are smart and do not believe in those childish things has NO bearing on science whatsoever. That is the point of science. Science is not like your goofy cult, where funny clothes and elaborate buildings determine the credibility of your conmen shamans.


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 9, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> You just switched topics from the BBT to transfer of matter into energy and threw in a picture of an atom bomb. What has any of it have to do with singularity?



_*
to transfer of matter into energy ...
*_

the explanation for how the BB is a cyclical event, from one singularity to the next.


----------



## james bond (Mar 10, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Stuff like that doesn't happen BreezeWood .  Where is the evidence that any of it happened?  How can invisible particles exist as matter when there was no materialism?  How can singularity exist without materialism?

With Genesis, I got God as my witness, the Bible, infinite temperature and density (division by zero) and ontological arguments.  God probably exists.in another dimension which we haven't found yet.





Graviton in flat universe escaping into 4th dimension


----------



## james bond (Mar 10, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > What I've shown is atheists and atheist scientists are usually wrong.
> ...



Fort Fun Indiana , you don't understand creation science, and atheist science isn't the only way to find truth and knowledge.  English history backs up Sir Francis Bacon's accomplishments and tells us he was Anglican and he believed there was a mind behind the universe.

And I've given you the fact that the adult chicken came first which backs up what the Bible says.  God created adult animals such as the chicken (hen and rooster) first in order to have the first fertilized egg.  How does your atheist science explain how Lucy's (australopithecus afarensis) ancestors evolved?  There is no Mr. Lucy.  Your atheist science has not explained how asexual animals became sexual.

What creation science, facts, reasoning and historical truths has done is show evidence for God.  That all of this has some kind of intelligence and design behind it (that's an observation and not a theory like ID).

And your last paragraph is so wrong.  If you're smart, then you would have faith in God.  Besides, you listen to fake scientists like Bill Nye.


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 10, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> God probably exists.in another dimension which we haven't found yet.



are you serious, good luck with that - I'm in no hast myself, just reaching the Everlasting is good enough not seeing the Almighty would be no obstacle to its fulfillment.




james bond said:


> Where is the evidence that any of it happened? How can invisible particles exist as matter when there was no materialism? How can singularity exist without materialism?



the evidence manifests itself when there is a conclusion, a purity referred to as a Sabbath when completed.


----------



## james bond (Mar 12, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > God probably exists.in another dimension which we haven't found yet.
> ...



CERN has tested to find the graviton and is continuing to do so.  What has been done to discover multiverses and wormholes?

Extra dimensions, gravitons, and tiny black holes | CERN



BreezeWood said:


> the evidence manifests itself when there is a conclusion, a purity referred to as a Sabbath when completed.



In other words, you got nothing.  Next.


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 12, 2018)

james bond said:


> Where is the evidence that any of it happened? How can invisible particles exist as matter when there was no materialism? How can singularity exist without materialism?





BreezeWood said:


> the evidence manifests itself when there is a conclusion, a purity referred to as a Sabbath when completed.





james bond said:


> In other words, you got nothing. Next. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1502213804818-0'); });



_*
Where is the evidence that any of it happened ... In other words, you got nothing.
*_
that is your issue christian, not mine. the universe exists and is conclusive from evidence, no such completion exits for the desert religions any more so than manufactured fairytales or presentations by fabricated bibles.


----------



## james bond (Mar 14, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Where is the evidence that any of it happened? How can invisible particles exist as matter when there was no materialism? How can singularity exist without materialism?
> ...



This is atheist science I am referring to which you have no understanding of either.  What I've been following is Professor Turok's explanation of the "cause" for the universe.  However, I can't readily explain his ten dimensions, so am sticking with gravitons and the 4th dimension.


----------



## expat_panama (Mar 14, 2018)

Mudda said:


> ...agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.


Lack of knowing something might not be the best indicator of thought.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 14, 2018)

expat_panama said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ...agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...


But admitting it IS. Saying you know god exists? Lie.


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 14, 2018)

.


james bond said:


> This is atheist science I am referring to which you have no understanding of either.




your ignorance is compelling, associating science with religion or should we refer it to as a sinners obsession.


----------



## expat_panama (Mar 15, 2018)

Mudda said:


> ...agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> expat_panama said:
> 
> 
> > Lack of knowing something might not be the best indicator of thought.
> ...


Not sure I got your input right but it sounds like we're considering whether saying "don't know" is evidence of thinking.  

Heck, I'll agree that it often is.  For example some say they believe the globe's warming because they've heard it from other real smart people (like that % of scientists others peg at 97 maybe).  Others say they don't _know_ if the globe's warming because they'd rather not just take someone's word for it and they'd rather see hard physical evidence of that actual _heat_ that's supposed to be there.  

So we agree, sometimes saying we don't know requires more thought than mere blind faith.  What I said was "not knowing" might not be the_ best _indicator of thinking.


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

expat_panama said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ...agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...



I didn't mean judgment, but observation.  What I said to BreezeWood was that he should know his own side's thinking, at least some of it.  For example, singularity isn't a easy concept to grasp if you haven't heard of it and do not have a science background.  That's probably why its proponents said a universe came from nothing.  Even the late Stephen Hawking, who I think best explained the Big Bang Theory, explained that he could not understand why there is something rather than nothing.  He said, "I want to know why the universe exists, why there is something greater than nothing."  It's common sense, but quantum mechanics goes beyond common sense.

Read more at: Stephen Hawking Quotes


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> It's common sense,


It is not "common sense", what a ridiculous thing to say. When religious people use this term, it's always a safe bet that "common sense" = "anything in agreement with the religiois person's religiois beliefs".


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

expat_panama said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > ...agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.
> ...



You're talking about two different things which didn't have anything to do what I said to BreezeWood.  I don't know is a choice.  Just like do nothing is a choice.  Each choice or path has their own consequences such as it becoming part of your worldview and thinking.

The other concept you mention is blind faith which I understand is a recent invention.  I think that is reserved for humans for another human.  To the contrary, faith in God, by its very definition, refers to a logical, robust, unwavering confidence in the truth.


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > It's common sense,
> ...



You're taking it out of context.  Has nothing to do with religion or the religious, but most people would agree.  Something is greater than nothing.  I got a $100 while you have nothing.  That's common sense.

However, if Stephen Hawking were still alive, and you said something is greater than nothing, then he may disagree.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> but most people would agree. Something is greater than nothing.


You need to structure your sentences more well in order to articulate your meaning, because this is not what your comments conveyed as "common sense". I accept your self-correction.


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > but most people would agree. Something is greater than nothing.
> ...



Call the grammar police.  This is why we have a forum.  One can answer questions and explain what they meant if it wasn't clear.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


That wasnt grammar, it was syntax. So, maybe we should call the syntax police AND the dictionary police. Also, people should not be expected to ask others what they mean. The meaning should be clear from the commemts. If it is not, then the commenter should clarify. 

By the way, I checked again.....not a shred of creation science has ever been produced.


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Who is we?  It is just you.  I should call the grammar police.  Moreover, I should call the creation science police.  The Waaah-ambulance is needed for you, too.

Seriously, you need better sources if you cannot find creation science.  Not only is it in the dictionary, it has many credible websites explaining it.  I recommend Answers in Genesis, Institute of Creation Research and CreationWiki.

Definition of CREATION SCIENCE

LMGTFY


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Dont regurgitate your propaganda links, crybaby. Post ONE instance of creation science, summed up in your own words, with a link to a summary pf the published , scientific article.

ONE. Let's hope your grasp of this bizarre fetish is better than your grasp of linguistics.

And...go!


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 15, 2018)

james bond said:


> Who is we?



never a substantive communication with bond, it is their inability to comprehend a finite angle of trajectory without changing course being a loop as the means for a cyclical BB, repetitious solidarities each a mirror image of the previous ... just refer to them as atheist to win their prize.


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



You don't understand, do you?  How can there be something in Nature or Science or any other valid atheist publication from a creation scientist?  For example, in what was there before the Big Bang question, there is no creation explanation because it is systematically rejected even though creation is a valid scientific explanation.


----------



## james bond (Mar 15, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Who is we?
> ...



I provided the fact that the chicken and rooster came before the egg.  Otherwise, please explain how a fertilized egg just came to be.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/31940392_The_chicken_came_first


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Mar 16, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > but most people would agree. Something is greater than nothing.
> ...



"More well"?

I think the word you were looking for was "better".


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 16, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> I provided the fact that the chicken and rooster came before the egg.





> *Article* in Nature 328(6130) · August 1987 with 4 Reads ...




can you do math bond, 4-1 = 3 : that is 3 other people read your article since 1987, 32 years ago ... and those 3 others including yourself are undoubtedly the last remaining flat earthers as well - birds of a feather flock together does say a lot about your mental state, do you ever read adult publications ....


----------



## james bond (Mar 16, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



  Stop.  You're presenting a strawman.  That's the data from ResearchGate, an archiver, reflecting views per year and not Nature.  Nature and Science are the most widely respected and read magazines in atheist science.  Now, please explain how one gets a fertilized egg with no chicken and rooster, but just an egg.


----------



## james bond (Mar 16, 2018)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 17, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> You're presenting a strawman.



your link does not provide the article you claim, no doubt it is creation science that was deemed unsuitable as a work of voodoo hysteria and deleted ...




james bond said:


> ... widely respected and read magazines in atheist science.



science is secular, it is you who demands to impose your will and forgeries onto others ...


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 17, 2018)

james bond said:


> How can there be something in Nature or Science or any other valid atheist publication from a creation scientist?


Haha, you betray your own bullshit. Science is science. Good science will be published even -- really, ESPECIALLY -- if it upends existing scientific theory. So I think you understand fully that this "creation science" of which you speak is not actually science. 
Face it: nobody attempts to publish that bullshit becuase it is bad science. I.e., NOT science.


----------



## james bond (Mar 19, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > How can there be something in Nature or Science or any other valid atheist publication from a creation scientist?
> ...



Meh.  You didn't answer my question at all, but just regurgitated malarkey as your answer.  Creation scientists have to peer review their own work.  It usually won't be reviewed by the Nature and Science crowd.  What you need to produce is credible evidence like that which I have to debunk humans evolving from apes as a common ancestor.  All you have is your opinions on what happens to get something published in Nature or Science which is wrong.

"What do the fossils of a bird and of a "hominid," separated by almost 225 million years on the evolutionary time scale, have in common? Technically, not much, but they both have powerfully rattled the cages of evolutionists, springing new leaks in a rotting theory, already threatening to founder in the Arctic seas of cold, hard scientific facts. The "hominid" is an alleged 1.8-million-year-old fossil of a creature called _Homo habilis_, discovered in the Olduvai Gorge of Tanzania by an expedition headed by Donald Johanson, Director of the Institute of Human Origins, University of California, Berkeley. Evolutionists have always maintained that _Homo habilis_ is intermediate between apes and man. The fossil bird was discovered in the "225-million-year-old" Dockum Formation near Post, Texas, by Sankar Chatterjee, a paleontologist at Texas Tech University. The article in _Nature_, a British science journal, announcing the discovery of the two fossilized birds 1 was headlined, "Fossil Bird Shakes Evolutionary Hypotheses," and the article in _Science_, an American science journal, discussing the discovery of the fossil "hominid" was entitled, "The Earliest 'Humans' Were More Like Apes." 2

Man (_Homo sapiens_) is the only living species within the family of man, the Hominidae. Creationists believe that _Homo sapiens_ is the only species that has ever existed within the Hominidae. Evolutionists, on the other hand, believe that sometime (estimates vary from four to 30 million years ago), man and apes shared a common ancestor. Somehow, they believe, this ancestral population gave rise to two evolutionary lines, one leading to modern apes and the other leading to modern man. Evolutionists include all of the hypothetical intermediates in the line that led from ape to man in the family Hominidae, and all such supposed intermediates are called "hominids."

Fossils of ape-like creatures, given the genus name of _Australopithecus_, have been found in Africa, including _A. africanus_ in South Africa by Raymond Dart, _A. bosei_ in East Africa by Louis Leakey, and _A. afarensis_ in Ethiopia by Donald Johanson. Louis Leakey discovered fossils of creatures in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania which he claimed were more "advanced" than the australopithecines—sufficiently advanced to place them in the same genus as man. He designated these creatures _Homo habilis_ ("handy man"), believing that they had formed primitive tools. 3 Many paleonanthropologists argue, however, that these creatures were simply variants of the australopithecines. It has long been maintained by most evolutionists that the australopithecines, although grossly ape-like, had teeth somewhat more man-like than those found in modern apes, and that they walked upright, essentially, in a human manner. They were thus supposedly on their way to becoming people, and are called "hominids." Some evolutionists, on the other hand, such as Lord Zuckerman and Charles Oxnard, strongly dispute this view, maintaining that the australopithecines did not walk upright in the human manner and were not intermediate between ape and man.4

The discovery of a more complete fossil skeleton of _Homo habilis_, although still quite fragmentary, considerably strengthens the contention of creation scientists that these creatures, while not the same as any one of the modern apes, were, nevertheless, simply apes, in no way related to man. The fossil remains were discovered by Tim White of the Johanson team and are described in a recent _Nature_ article. 5 Several important features of this creature took evolutionists by surprise. The first shock was its tiny stature. The fossil is of an adult female that stood only about three feet tall. This is as short, or shorter, than that of "Lucy," the alleged 3.8-million-year-old adult female, _A. afarensis_, discovered in Ethiopia by Johanson. Furthermore, the postcranial skeleton (that portion of the skeleton below the skull) was every bit as primitive, or ape-like, as that of "Lucy," who is supposedly two million years older than this allegedly 1.8-million-year-old adult female, _H. habilis_. Recovery of the remains of the arm of this _H. habilis_ fossil revealed the fact that, just as is true of apes, it had very long arms, with finger tips reaching almost down to the knees.

All of the species of _Australopithecus_ and _Homo habilis_ had long curved fingers and long curved toes. Creatures with such anatomical features use them for only one purpose—swinging from branch to branch in the trees. So much for the supposed human-like upright locomotion of _Homo habilis_ and _Australopithecus_, including "Lucy."

Hardly more than a year ago, Alan Walker, of Johns Hopkins University, and Richard Leakey, son of Louis and Mary Leakey and Director of the National Museums of Kenya, announced the discovery of the fossilized remains of a 12-year-old male on the western shore of Lake Turkana in Kenya. 6 Its height was 5'6", and Walker and Leakey estimated that if he had lived to adulthood, he would have been six feet tall, Walker declared that its postcranial skeleton was so similar to that of modern man he doubted whether an average pathologist could tell the difference. Furthermore, he said that when they placed the jaw on the skull, it looked similar to Neanderthal Man. In spite of the fact that Neanderthal Man is classified as fully human _Homo sapiens_, and that the postcranial skeleton of this 12-year-old male was essentially identical to that of modern man. Walker and Leakey classified him as _Homo erectus_, a sub-human species, rather than _Homo sapiens_. No doubt one of the major reasons for this is the fact that the fossil was dated at 1.6 million years, supposedly 1.5 million years older than _Homo sapiens_."

Startling Discoveries Support Creation

The bottom line is these fossils do not add up to evolution, but supports creation.  However, these findings were ignored by the Nature and Science crowd.  Thus, the BS of Lucy as the first ape-man continues.  Richard Leakey, a paleonanthropologist listed in the article, thinks Lucy is comprised of several species and not just australopithecus afarensis.


----------



## james bond (Mar 19, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > BreezeWood said:
> ...



Sure, according to Nature.  If you won't accept that due to not being able to retrieve the article, here's another one explaining how the British scientists came up with it.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/anie.201000679

The scientific method supports the creationist view as science backs up the Bible.

I did find there was a reply by Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Twitter about three years later to explain what happened.  Even Bill Nye chimes in.  There is no scientific method that supports the evolutionary view of a funky chicken that laid the first chicken egg, so Tyson and Nye have egg on his face as usual ha ha.

Neil deGrasse Tyson on Twitter

Internet atheist just eat the Twitter chicken poop up .


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 19, 2018)

james bond said:


> BreezeWood said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


.


james bond said:


> Sure, according to Nature. If you won't accept that due to not being able to retrieve the article ...



- is it possible to comment on a subject that is deliberately not made available .... 




> ... these simulations suggest a catalytic cycle that explains the role of ovocleidin‐17 in the first stages of eggshell formation



obviously, you haven't least a phony article supporting your claim, even for the illiterate one you have chosen - no wonder such people as Tyson and Nye fly so far above your head.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 19, 2018)

james bond said:


> You didn't answer my question at all,


I did answer your question. Pay attention, crybaby. Any of those publications could publish ANY good scinece from a creationist, because the quality of the science will have NOTHING to do with whether or not the author is a creationist or a freaking witch.

How are you not getting this?

By the way: there has never been one shred of "creation science" produced. Not one single study. That is why, despite your little two step and word salads, you will never, not EVER,produce a single example of this.


----------



## james bond (Mar 20, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > You didn't answer my question at all,
> ...



Facts are facts.  The chicken came before the egg.  We'll see who the crybaby is.  You'll be crying a river, but someone else will have to call the Whaaaambulance.  I'm not lifting a finger.

Today, we have the late Stephen Hawking releasing his Multiverse hypothesis.  How does a parallel universe even work?  One atheist commenter asked, "Is that the universe where I get laid?"  He rather live in another universe that this one.  You can't criticize me for that bundle of nonsense.  It's all atheist scientists trying to get over the fine tuning facts by claiming multiverses.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 20, 2018)

james bond said:


> The chicken came before the egg


100% incorrect. Eggs, then dinosaurs, then birds all evolved and existed long before the first chicken. Dude, seriously...how are you not embarrassed of yourself? You obviously know less than nothing about this topic.


james bond said:


> How does a parallel universe even work?



Wait, you mean you javent tried to look it up yourself? Of course you haven't, because you are a dishonest little charlatan who is not actually seeking any knowledge. You think your religion gives you all the answers, when it gives you not only NO actual knowledge, but actually gives you wrong answers. You're a dime a dozen, dude.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The chicken came before the egg
> ...



Stop lying.  I'm not dishonest, but am providing the facts.

The evidence is in and it is a FACT now that chicken came before the egg (due to coating on egg that can only be produced by hen ovaries).  Weirdos like Degrasse Tyson and Nilly Bye think there was a proto chicken.  Evos like to make up anything to get over.

The parallel universe doesn't work.  Let's say I decide to drive to San Francisco and you decide to drive to New York for vacation.  That's in our universe.  How does someone that is us living in another universe know what we decided?  What caused this parallel universe?  We know there aren't clones of us in this universe.  Even if there were, how would they know what we decided?  Then we have a case where these evolutionary thinking scientists state an infinite number of universes can exist.  It is impossible to have an infinite number of universes.

Moreover, these scientists are making up the multiverses because they discovered that fine tuning parameters, i.e. fine tuning FACTS, show that earth is the only planet fine tuned for life.  If they can show multiverses exist, then they can say that fine tuning parameters are not that special.  The multiverse theories takes science into the metaphysical just as quantum mechanics explanations of the BBT takes science into the metaphysical.  Isn't that where God resides -- the metaphysical?

This video explains it very well:


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> The evidence is in and it is a FACT now that chicken came before the egg (due to coating on egg that can only be produced by hen ovaries).


Sorry buddy...you get an "F". Clearly the egg appeared on this ppanet long before the chicken, with the first birds coming even later. Your little fact is only evidence that only chickens can produce chicken eggs. Hah, what a stupid post.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> How does someone that is us living in another universe know what we decided? What caused this parallel universe?


Bevause the universes split at every instant. Man, for someone who has strong opinions on the all worlds view, you certainly seem to know less than nothing about it! I suggest you not talk about it again, until you have made an honest effort to find answers to your questions.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > How does someone that is us living in another universe know what we decided? What caused this parallel universe?
> ...



First, there is no evidence of another universe.  And how does something know when to split our universe?  Is that the universe splitter CREATOR?  Or is the universe splitter DESIGNED with some intelligence behind it?  Obviously, it has to know when and how to split.  What about all the other decisions made daily?  Your answer sounds really DUMB.  Can you explain in detail without making sh*t up?


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The evidence is in and it is a FACT now that chicken came before the egg (due to coating on egg that can only be produced by hen ovaries).
> ...



The egg had to have a hen and a rooster or else it does not become fertilized.  An egg would just sit there until it was eaten or rotted.  You haven't even thought this through so I know you're being dishonest.


----------



## Likkmee (Mar 22, 2018)

Weatherman2020 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand how a person can claim to "know", one way or the other.
> ...


I used to, often. Now I have zero doubt. Nary an oz.....


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> Moreover, *these scientists* are making up the multiverses because they discovered that fine tuning parameters, i.e. fine tuning FACTS, show that earth is the only planet fine tuned for life.



_*... show that earth is the only planet fine tuned for life.
*_
that is your bias bond, show us the link otherwise where any legitimate scientist claims Earth alone in all the universe is the only repository capable of sustaining life.

physiology is a metaphysical substance that can appear anywhere in the universe and is not native to planet Earth that is proof of its existence elsewhere.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> First, there is no evidence of another universe.


Agreed... i never claimed it was true, much less did I claim it was true with 100% certainty.  Declarations of faith without evidence are for religious nutballs like you, not for evidence-based thinkers like me.

I was just explaining how the  idea works.  Which you would already know, if you would stop being so goddamned happily ignorant and lazy and look something up for yourself once in a while.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> The egg had to have a hen and a rooster or else it does not become fertilized.


 yeah... so?  

Look, before you answer, i want you to think about something:  

These are questions a teahcer might expect a child to ask.  Yes, anyone who knows ANYTHING about this topic can answer these questions.  Has it ONCE occurred to you that -- oh just maybe -- you are embarrassing yourself, and the reason everyone understands this and you don't is that you are either too stupid to understand it, or too ignorant to understand it?

i mean it ... seriously... I want you to think about this.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Moreover, *these scientists* are making up the multiverses because they discovered that fine tuning parameters, i.e. fine tuning FACTS, show that earth is the only planet fine tuned for life.
> ...



You missed it with your evo eyes.  I provided the evidence that there is no other planet in our solar system that is habitable and has life.  I know this because of probes.  Would you like to see the list?

>>BW:  physiology is a metaphysical substance that can appear anywhere in the universe and is not native to planet Earth that is proof of its existence elsewhere.<<

WRONG.  Physiology is part of biology and has nothing to with the metaphysical.  Speaking of which, fine tuning is found is biology, too.  The last part shows that Multiverses were made up to explain the fine tuning facts.

".. modern biology regards it as the product of Darwinian evolution, notably as driven by natural and sexual selection. Relatively recently, some researchers have claimed that some specific “fine-tuned” features of organisms cannot possibly be the outcomes of Darwinian evolutionary development alone and that interventions by some designer must be invoked to account for them. For example, Michael Behe (1996) claims that the so-called _flagellum_, a bacterial organ that enables motion, is _irreducibly complex_ in the sense that it cannot be the outcome of consecutive small-scale individual evolutionary steps, as they are allowed by standard, Darwinian, evolutionary theory. In a similar vein, William Dembski (1998) argues that some evolutionary steps hypothesized by Darwinian are so improbable that one what would not rationally expect them to occur even once in a volume the size of the visible universe. Behe and Dembski conclude that an intelligent designer likely intervened in the evolutionary course of events.

The overwhelming consensus in modern biology is that the challenges to Darwinian evolutionary theory brought forward by Behe, Dembski and others can be met. According to Kenneth Miller (1999), Behe’s arguments fail to establish that there are no plausible small-step evolutionary paths which have Behe’s allegedly “irreducibly complex” features as outcomes. For example, as Miller argues, there is in fact strong evidence for a Darwinian evolutionary history of the flagellum and its constituents (Miller 1999: 147–148).

*2. Does Fine-Tuning for Life Require a Response?*
Many researchers believe that the fine-tuning of the universe’s laws, constants, and boundary conditions for life calls for inferring the existence of a divine designer (see Section 3) or a multiverse—a vast collection of universes with differing laws, constants, and boundary conditions (see Section 4). The inference to a divine designer or a multiverse typically rests on the idea that, in view of the required fine-tuning, life-friendly conditions are in some sense highly _improbable_ if there is only one, un-designed, universe. It is controversial, however, whether this idea can coherently be fleshed out in terms of any philosophical account of probability."

Fine-Tuning (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> I provided the evidence that there is no other planet in our solar system that is habitable and has life.


No you didn't, goofball.  When such a tiny percentage of the evidence has been gathered, no rational person would think that absence of evidence is then evidence of absence. You are making a very childish mistake.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The egg had to have a hen and a rooster or else it does not become fertilized.
> ...



"Yeah, so?" is an admission that you didn't think it through and were dishonest.

Thus, you need to hold up this sign to your forehead and take a selfie.







After you have done so, then paste the selfie next to this 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 and post 

in order to share and knock some sense into you .


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > I provided the evidence that there is no other planet in our solar system that is habitable and has life.
> ...



Well, what planets are habitable in our solar system besides earth?  I can think of three and they're all questionable.  My evo website understands this and says that life is rare.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> "Yeah, so?" is an admission that you didn't think it through and were dishonest.


No, it literally means, "yeah ... so?", because your statement was just tossed out there and not used as a premise to form an argument.

Let's try again:

You said: "The egg had to have a hen and a rooster or else it does not become fertilized."

So again: "yeah... so?"  Your point?  Again... you might want to consider the idea that, oh just maybe, scientists thought of this and have answers to your questions.  Again, you are asking very childish questions and saying things that one would expect from someone who knows jack shit about wevolution.  You are a grown man, there is no excuse for your embarrassing ignorance.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> Well, what planets are habitable in our solar system besides earth?


Possibly, all of them.  We don't have much hope for "life as we know it" on most of them and their moons, but we aren't silly enough to believe that "life as we know it" is the only possible life.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > "Yeah, so?" is an admission that you didn't think it through and were dishonest.
> ...



"Yeah, so?" a second time means that you're too stupid to live according to Jerry Coyne, atheist biologist.  He has said that he's in favor of infanticide and euthanasia for the disabled.











Jerry Coyne, Infanticide, and the Evolution of Morality | Evolution News


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Yes, good, get it all out of your system, professor.

Now, let's try again:

You said: "The egg had to have a hen and a rooster or else it does not become fertilized."

...and?  Why are you pointing out this fact?


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Well, what planets are habitable in our solar system besides earth?
> ...



Yes, it probably is all of them.  The exoplanets are too far away.  They don't have enough water nor oxygen.  I'd want to see if there is some kind of microbe or living organism there first.  Carbon based life forms can't exist because there isn't enough carbon and we have no evidence of other types of life forms.  Fine tuning prevents carbon from forming.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



To show you are one of Jerry's kids.  C'mon, a hen can lay an egg, but that would be all she could do until she died and now you have no more eggs.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Mar 22, 2018)

james bond said:


> C'mon, a hen can lay an egg, but that would be all she could do until she died and now you have no more eggs.



...and?  Make your point.


----------



## james bond (Mar 22, 2018)

Likkmee said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...



Science doesn't work that way using 100% certainty.  That's mathematics.  Science is best theory.  Evolution is best theory.  The way to destroy evolution is for people to not believe in it anymore.  People believe in natural selection or speciation, but the difference between creation's vs evo's version is one is rapid while the other is slow.  Rapid will win out because we see those changes in months instead of years.

Public’s Views on Human Evolution 

The best argument for creation is the Bible.  It is God's Word and it is indestructible, so it is favored to win out over evolution.


----------



## Mac1958 (Mar 23, 2018)

james bond said:


> The best argument for creation is the Bible.  It is God's Word and it is indestructible, so it is favored to win out over evolution.


That's a total "the chicken or the egg" viewpoint.  Your assumption is that the God you believe in exists to create us in the first place.

Faith is fine, but it's not fact.  It's not indestructible.  If the God you believe in doesn't exist, then the Bible is nothing more than mythology.
.


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 23, 2018)

james bond said:


> >>BW: physiology is a metaphysical substance that can appear anywhere in the universe and is not native to planet Earth that is proof of its existence elsewhere.<<
> 
> WRONG. Physiology is part of biology and has nothing to with the metaphysical. Speaking of which, fine tuning is found is biology, too. The last part shows that Multiverses were made up to explain the fine tuning facts.



Merrian-Webster defines _physiology_ as: "[A] branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life _*or *_of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved."  _physiology_.


_*or: of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved.*_


you are not alone in ignorance pertaining physiology that constitutes the physical structure for life in the universe ... as a metaphysical substance that appears and disappears when life exists or is removed from it and is not native to planet Earth and will appear wherever in the universe life is physically sustainable.

in our solar system I agree there is no other planet where physiology is present to sustain life. 

_*
... and has nothing to with the metaphysical*_







life is the same for all beings no matter their physical nature. Fauna and Flora both evolve not physically but metaphysically, metamorphosis that shapes their physiology - not the other way around.


----------



## james bond (Mar 23, 2018)

Mac1958 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > The best argument for creation is the Bible.  It is God's Word and it is indestructible, so it is favored to win out over evolution.
> ...



The Bible is indestructible as well as faith in God.  People have died for it, and the Bible is the best selling non-fiction book on the planet of all time.  Check Guinness.  If evo were true, then Darwin's book would be right up there.  People have largely forgotten it since a lot of his theories in it were wrong.  

Speaking of chicken or the egg, it is a fact now that the chicken came first.  God created it.


----------



## james bond (Mar 23, 2018)

BreezeWood said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > >>BW: physiology is a metaphysical substance that can appear anywhere in the universe and is not native to planet Earth that is proof of its existence elsewhere.<<
> ...



We already discussed singularity for this universe.  It is metaphysical.  One cannot have infinite nor divide by zero.  Same with multiverses and how they are created.  Thus, today's atheist science is venturing into the metaphysical just as Dr. Craig's video stated.


----------



## Mac1958 (Mar 23, 2018)

james bond said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Your worldview, at its most fundamental, begins with the greatest and largest possible assumption.

The very most you can base this assumption on, is faith.  You cannot know, as certain as you feel you are.

I admit I don't know.  It seems to me that to think one knows, one way or the other, is a terrible display of ego.
.


----------



## james bond (Mar 24, 2018)

Mac1958 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...



What assumption?  One needs faith to believe in God and it changes everything.  It's evolution that has the more assumptions such as radiometric dating or change over millions/billions of years, common ancestor and tree of life.


----------



## Mac1958 (Mar 24, 2018)

james bond said:


> What assumption?


Your argument appears to be that God exists, and that God made us, because God says so, and so that's that.

So, in investigating where we came from, instead of starting at Square One of Ten, you're starting at Square Nine.

You have to assume that He is there to believe that, and such an assumption can only be based on faith, not fact.
.


----------



## james bond (Mar 24, 2018)

Mac1958 said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > What assumption?
> ...



I investigated both from the beginning.  The Bible has Genesis.  It wasn't long ago that scientists believed in an eternal universe.  Now, we know that it had a beginning.  The science backed up the Bible even though it's not a science book.

Evolution has fish that turned into a human because of 1) Billions and millions years of time, 2) Common ancestor and 3) Tree of life.  Genesis is more credible.  The science shows things happen rapidly, not billions and millions of years.  There is no universal common ancestry (idea that all living organisms are related due to the family tree of life).  The tree of life is more like a bush of life where there are different groups of living organisms.  Which science doesn't have any more reptiles?  Your pet lizard, chameleon, snake, etc. is now a dinosaur.


----------



## Mac1958 (Mar 24, 2018)

james bond said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Science and scientists and those of us who are interested in it all admit the same thing - we don't know, yet.  

I find the "Big Bang" theory nearly as unsatisfying as the Bible's account.  So, since there's nothing I can do about it, I'll just be patient.  Hopefully some better evidence will present itself.  If not, I'll just have to get over it.

Also, for all I know, there could actually be a Creator.  That does not mean that He or It is the benevolent, loving God of the Christian Bible.  In fact, I find that pretty hard to believe, too.  Humans have had many Gods over the millennia.  None of us know for sure.
.


----------



## BreezeWood (Mar 25, 2018)

james bond said:


> We already discussed singularity for this universe. It is metaphysical. One cannot have infinite nor divide by zero. Same with multiverses and how they are created.



_*One cannot have infinite nor divide by zero.
*_
that explains why all matter is expanding at a finite angle, does not change direction and will reconvene as a mirror image at the same time and location of origin where the expansion began. in the vacuum of space. only religions equate the event to something supernatural where a metaphysical, secular explanation does suffice. 

it is the latent and dishonest desire of christians, the desert religions through forgery to control the Free Spirit rather than allowing a true meaning for its existence to prevail, for some reason they fear the consequences they can not control - bond.


----------

