Catholics Don't Exemplify Christianity...

[defcon4]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Phenomena perceived yesterday as magic, became the science of today….

 

[Liminal]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Phenomena perceived yesterday as magic, became the science of today….

A constant process. Much of what is scientific fact today will certainly be nonsense in the future.

 

[aris2chat]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Phenomena perceived yesterday as magic, became the science of today….

A constant process. Much of what is scientific fact today will certainly be nonsense in the future.

there is a difference between theory and fact.

 

[Liminal]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Phenomena perceived yesterday as magic, became the science of today….

A constant process. Much of what is scientific fact today will certainly be nonsense in the future.

there is a difference between theory and fact.

Not in the minds of most people. The theory of an expanding universe is generally accepted as a fact now......isn't it?

 

[aris2chat]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Phenomena perceived yesterday as magic, became the science of today….

A constant process. Much of what is scientific fact today will certainly be nonsense in the future.

there is a difference between theory and fact.

Not in the minds of most people. The theory of an expanding universe is generally accepted as a fact now......isn't it?

fact, the farther away a galaxy is the faster it is moving away from us
theory, the universe is expanding.

theory is supported by fact, at least till more facts are known,such as in the universe moves in waves back and forth, the universe both expands and contracts.

Theory on it's own might be logical but till it can be proven, even as a mathematically possibility, it is not fact.
It might be logical to some, based on limited knowledge or science, that there is some design or creation trigger but that does not prove a god of the bible as that force or only god that exists now or ever. We have scientific evidence of the 'god particle' but not of god or that the god particle is in any way related to god of the bible.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

Phenomena perceived yesterday as magic, became the science of today….

Thank you. And that is why we don't believe in the magic of yesterday. Well, the more intelligent ones don't.

Why must you ruin your own argument this way?

 

[defcon4]

I really cannot say anything to that. You left me speechless… I thought it was clear what said.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

You might consider changing your avatar, Newt.

"Isaac Newton saw a monotheistic God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation".- wikipedia

His observation of nature caused him to break with religious orthodoxy, but further strengthened his experience of the Divine.

He was perhaps the most intelligent and rational person of his time, yet immersed himself in the sacred and eternal. He wrote extensive religious tracts.
"In his posthumously-published Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John, Newton expressed his belief that Bible prophecy would not be understood "until the time of the end", and that even then "none of the wicked shall understand"." -wikipedia

Newton never created a false dichotomy where a person could be either rational or a believer in "magic", as you put it. And incidentally, he was way to smart to engage in the type of political partisanship that is the norm on USMB.
As he said, "We build too many walls and not enough bridges."

"We account the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy. I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatever." - Ike Newton

 

[BluePhantom]

Holy shit! Is this really the best they can do? Are all atheists this dull and slow witted?

Well you are not exactly lighting the thread on fire with displays of unrivaled genius, dude. I already took one person apart for being an arrogant, disrespectful, know it all, douchebag. Showing some respect would serve you well and keep me off your tail. Just a suggestion

 

[Disir]

Holy shit! Is this really the best they can do? Are all atheists this dull and slow witted?

Well you are not exactly lighting the thread on fire with displays of unrivaled genius, dude. I already took one person apart for being an arrogant, know it all, douchebag. Showing some respect would serve you well and keep me off your tail. Just a suggestion

No you didn't. You jumped into a conversation that was initiated as an attack on Catholicism and you had not one wit of a problem with that. When you saw someone start shit back you cried.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

You might consider changing your avatar, Newt.

"Isaac Newton saw a monotheistic God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation".- wikipedia

His observation of nature caused him to break with religious orthodoxy, but further strengthened his experience of the Divine.

He was perhaps the most intelligent and rational person of his time, yet immersed himself in the sacred and eternal. He wrote extensive religious tracts.
"In his posthumously-published Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John, Newton expressed his belief that Bible prophecy would not be understood "until the time of the end", and that even then "none of the wicked shall understand"." -wikipedia

Newton never created a false dichotomy where a person could be either rational or a believer in "magic", as you put it. And incidentally, he was way to smart to engage in the type of political partisanship that is the norm on USMB.
As he said, "We build too many walls and not enough bridges."

"We account the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy. I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatever." - Ike Newton

There were many scientists the last 400 years or so that proclaimed a belief in 'god'. Some were deists. It doesn't matter, they were skeptical enough of magic to study physical reality and propose what was actually happening. And you can't compare the norms of today to the norms of then. The church pretty much ran roughshod over the globe up until even 100 years ago.

It is the blind belief in 'gods' and magic and the rejection of reality when it collides with those beliefs that I am against.

Science doesn't create anything. It merely turns on the light so we can see what has always been there.

 

[BluePhantom]

Holy shit! Is this really the best they can do? Are all atheists this dull and slow witted?

Well you are not exactly lighting the thread on fire with displays of unrivaled genius, dude. I already took one person apart for being an arrogant, know it all, douchebag. Showing some respect would serve you well and keep me off your tail. Just a suggestion

No you didn't. You jumped into a conversation that was initiated as an attack on Catholicism and you had not one wit of a problem with that. When you saw someone start shit back you cried.

I cried? I laughed a lot at your insipid and truculent statements. And it was you that started shit with Trinity, not the other way around. I think I said a couple times that Catholicism should not be attacked, didn't I? I think I said that Catholicism was "part of the club", didn't I? I think I defended Catholicism pretty well actually.

But then you got all self-righteous and disrespectful and started saying shit that wasn't even close to reality, suggested that people learn their history when you were totally wrong on your historical suggestions, and then started trying to establish your superior intelligence by talking about stoicism and Neo-Platonism which has absolutely nothing to do with the historical point you were professing. In other words you were trying to bluff your way out of your erroneous statements by using terms and phrases that you hoped no one would understand and they would simply cede the point. The problem is...I understand them and can see through the bullshit and the deception and I know exactly what you were attempting to do.

So get off it. If you had any real honesty or even the smallest set of balls you would simply say "ok I spoke a little too generally and was not totally accurate with my statement" and we could move on...but you are insisting on trying to defend an indefensible point by throwing Ignantius out and insisting on the most extreme late date for the writing of Acts and all that shit. Like any of that has anything at all to do with the accuracy of your statement. But hey whatever....knock yourself out. I can do this all week.

 

[aris2chat]

Atheists and fundamentalists are just the flip sides of the same coin of stupid.

LOL Not even close.

One believes in a supernatural being that uses magic. No evidence is needed, it is a mental creation.

The other doesn't believe in any supernatural being, and there is no magic in the real physical world. There is physics and chemistry. Reality is based on evidence.

You cannot equate the two on any level.

You might consider changing your avatar, Newt.

"Isaac Newton saw a monotheistic God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation".- wikipedia

His observation of nature caused him to break with religious orthodoxy, but further strengthened his experience of the Divine.

He was perhaps the most intelligent and rational person of his time, yet immersed himself in the sacred and eternal. He wrote extensive religious tracts.
"In his posthumously-published Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John, Newton expressed his belief that Bible prophecy would not be understood "until the time of the end", and that even then "none of the wicked shall understand"." -wikipedia

Newton never created a false dichotomy where a person could be either rational or a believer in "magic", as you put it. And incidentally, he was way to smart to engage in the type of political partisanship that is the norm on USMB.
As he said, "We build too many walls and not enough bridges."

"We account the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy. I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatever." - Ike Newton

There were many scientists the last 400 years or so that proclaimed a belief in 'god'. Some were deists. It doesn't matter, they were skeptical enough of magic to study physical reality and propose what was actually happening. And you can't compare the norms of today to the norms of then. The church pretty much ran roughshod over the globe up until even 100 years ago.

It is the blind belief in 'gods' and magic and the rejection of reality when it collides with those beliefs that I am against.

Science doesn't create anything. It merely turns on the light so we can see what has always been there.

Newton believed in a creator god and also studied the occult and alchemist science as well as engaging in dissection

no search for knowledge was out of bounds.

 

[Liminal]

And the search for knowledge continues. Unfortunately the progress of wisdom hasn't quite kept pace with the accumulation of knowledge.

 

[Liminal]

Holy shit! Is this really the best they can do? Are all atheists this dull and slow witted?

Well you are not exactly lighting the thread on fire with displays of unrivaled genius, dude. I already took one person apart for being an arrogant, disrespectful, know it all, douchebag. Showing some respect would serve you well and keep me off your tail. Just a suggestion

Took someone apart? I'm sure you think so. With that in mind I would like to suggest to you that there don't seem to be any good reasons for me to treat you with respect.. You're just another internet dummy.

 

[Disir]

Ok look. Let's me apply some simple logic here. If a Christian is someone who believes that Jesus was the Messiah and believes in the physical resurrection of Jesus, then the first Christians were Mary Magdalene and the disciples. So the earliest form of Christianity was what Peter and the rest were teaching right after the crucifixion

Why do you want to do that? You're making assumptions here that this is fact. It is not. You don't have a historical Jesus to begin with.

Are you trying to tell me that what they were teaching was Greco-Roman stoicism? You are out of your mind. What they were teaching and what the Catholic Church taught were totally different. The Catholic point of view was accepted by Constantine because it was a highly Romanized for of Christianity. You think Peter was out there teaching a Roman view of Jesus?

Again, you're making the assumption that a Peter taught anything. You're also making the assumption that people would have been isolated. Fisherman or no. It's the primary reason that I said to pick up a book. An actual history book.

And ask yourself the following: What was the larger community? Who ruled the land? Who ruled the land before that? What was the language de joure? What did they do for cash? What would have been a tourist destination and/or cosmopolitan city? Who had libraries? What kind of schools were there? And what about the law? What did they eat? Where did they go? How did they live? What was ghetto? How did they travel?

I cried? I laughed a lot at your insipid and truculent statements. And it was you that started shit with Trinity, not the other way around. I think I said a couple times that Catholicism should not be attacked, didn't I? I think I said that Catholicism was "part of the club", didn't I? I think I defended Catholicism pretty well actually.

Yep. You cried. You said, "Don't hurt the sock". The one that learned everything there is to know about Catholicism via her ex husband (she's dealt with those people before) and a few Roseanne Roseannadanna questions with a priest.

But then you got all self-righteous and disrespectful and started saying shit that wasn't even close to reality, suggested that people learn their history when you were totally wrong on your historical suggestions, and then started trying to establish your superior intelligence by talking about stoicism and Neo-Platonism which has absolutely nothing to do with the historical point you were professing. In other words you were trying to bluff your way out of your erroneous statements by using terms and phrases that you hoped no one would understand and they would simply cede the point. The problem is...I understand them and can see through the bullshit and the deception and I know exactly what you were attempting to do.

Yep. You are one smrt cookie. Nooo getting one over you. That's for sure. Pikachu know everything.

The Ecole Initiative Stocisim

Hellenistic Judaism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Disir]

'Night.

 

[defcon4]

It is the blind belief in 'gods' and magic and the rejection of reality when it collides with those beliefs that I am against.

Maybe you have problem with your perception of magic:

 

[Blackrook]

Christianity is under attack and persecuted all over the world. In these times, Christians should come together and help each other, rather than prolong disputes on issues that no longer make much difference. If we don't hang together, we shall hang separately.

 

[Liminal]

Christian fundamentalists aren't Christians, they only think they are.