PDA

View Full Version : what do u think god or satan looks like


fattybluetit
06-29-2004, 04:59 AM
.

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 05:07 AM
IF god or satan exist (which they don't, I'm just being hypothetical), I doubt that they would have any definite physical properties.

Gravegirl666
06-29-2004, 05:09 AM
satan looks like.....Jake Gyllenhall *daydreams* and god looks like...james earl jones

MrShape
06-29-2004, 05:22 AM
Maybe like this.

friday13thfan
06-29-2004, 06:22 AM
they have no shape they can look how ever they want

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 06:31 AM
God:
http://www.csps.minx.co.uk/epiimgs/411/god1.gif

Satan:
http://slashinter.net/si/b/03/0304171203.jpg

carnage
06-29-2004, 06:31 AM
Ray Charles is GOD.

If God is love, and love is blind, then Ray Charles is god.

Martha Stewart IS Satan....

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 06:33 AM
What do you mean "Looks Like"?

carnage
06-29-2004, 06:37 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
What do you mean "Looks Like"?

LMAO...good point....will change that

friday13thfan
06-29-2004, 06:43 AM
ok if they do look like something and i mean if.

god= jacke chan

satan= michael jackson

ShankS
06-29-2004, 08:23 AM
cant satan take on any form?

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 08:32 AM
Any form but cabbage. I'm not sure why.....

orangestar
06-29-2004, 08:32 AM
non-existant I suppose.

but If I have to choose than I agree with Vod's first post.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 08:34 AM
Life is so much more fun and interesting if the battle between good and evil is fought by cartoon characters.

I think it is symbolic of religion in general :)

orangestar
06-29-2004, 09:00 AM
aahhh feel the symbolism.:o

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 09:04 AM
I think the battle of religion should be fought with squirt cheese. Squirt cheese being squirted by guys in those hats with the super long feather bobbing behind it.

friday13thfan
06-29-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by ShankS
cant satan take on any form?

yes

bwind22
06-29-2004, 09:38 AM
I believe that both God and Satan could take on any form they wanted. God is omnipotent, which means his power is completely limitless. Satan is a fallen angel, and while not quite omnipotent, he certainly could take on any form he wanted too.

On a related note...


Here is the answer to the age old addage of...

'Could God make a rock so heavy that he couldn't lift it?'

The answer is 'If he wanted to.'

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 09:42 AM
Nah, that's not a good answer. There really IS no answer to that question ... it was formulated to show the logical contradiction inherent in the idea of a being possessing omnipotence. If God wanted to create a rock so large he couldn't lift it, then it shows that he is limited in his power ... by the fact that he would be unable to lift the rock.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 09:48 AM
Without turning this into a religious debate on the existance of God, I respectfully disagree.

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Without turning this into a religious debate on the existance of God, I respectfully disagree.

Ok.

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
IF god or satan exist (which they don't, I'm just being hypothetical), I doubt that they would have any definite physical properties.

Exactly.

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Without turning this into a religious debate on the existance of God, I respectfully disagree.

But that makes no sense at all. He is omnipotent. He can do anything, which means that it would be completely impossible to create a rock that he couldn't lift. Unless he didn't WANT to lift the rock, then that would be a case of not wanting to, instead of not being able to.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 10:35 AM
That's basically what it's saying.

'Could God make a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it?'
'If he wanted to.'

He could make a very heavy rock. (One so heavy that no one on Earth could ever lift it.) But if he wanted to, he could lift it. If he wanted to make it too heavy for himself to lift, he could do that too. He's God, he can do whatever wants, including bending the rules a bit.

It kind of boils down to this....


Q: Could God make a rock so heavy that he couldn't lift it?
A: Yes.

Q: Could God lift that same rock a millisecond later if he wanted to?
A: Yes.

Being omnipotent, he could do whatever he wanted to do with the rock.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
But that makes no sense at all. He is omnipotent. He can do anything, which means that it would be completely impossible to create a rock that he couldn't lift. Unless he didn't WANT to lift the rock, then that would be a case of not wanting to, instead of not being able to.

That's why the answer to the question is....

Originally posted by bwind22
The answer is 'If he wanted to.'

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 10:38 AM
Omnipotence does not grant the ability to make contradictions not contradict.

Even being "All Powerful" has to have some limits. If we say that there are no absolues, at all, then we cant know anything. and if we cant knowanything, then we cant know that god is omnipotent.

Which kind of kills the whole discussion.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 10:52 AM
In my opinion, it is egotistical to assume that there is no being greater than us.

Most people believe in either 'creation' or 'evolution' via the big bang.

Those that believe in 'creation' have it simple. They are willing to accept/believe that there is a God and that God created them.

Those that believe in 'evolution' don't believe that. They believe that life started on Earth due to a cosmic occurance ('The Big Bang') that led to microscopic forms of life forming in the oceans. After millions of years, here we are.

Let me pose these questions to the 'evolution' people...

"Where did Earth come from?"
(I mean before 'the big bang', where did our planet come from?)

"What created the 'Bang'?"
(If you don't know, just say what you believe.)

"Do you really believe that the existence of life on this entire planet (from the blades of grass, to the microscopic organisms in the sea, to the dinosaurs, to you), as well as the existence of this planet itself, is all one big biological accident?"

(If you really do think that, then I feel sorry for you. How depressing it must be to have that outlook on things.)

Vampenguin
06-29-2004, 10:56 AM
Wheres Zodiac when ya need him.....this convo needs to be killed.

meetthecreeper
06-29-2004, 11:04 AM
God, at least one of them anyway

meetthecreeper
06-29-2004, 11:05 AM
Satan

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
In my opinion, it is egotistical to assume that there is no being greater than us.

Most people believe in either 'creation' or 'evolution' via the big bang.

Those that believe in 'creation' have it simple. They are willing to accept/believe that there is a God and that God created them.

Those that believe in 'evolution' don't believe that. They believe that life started on Earth due to a cosmic occurance ('The Big Bang') that led to microscopic forms of life forming in the oceans. After millions of years, here we are.

Let me pose these questions to the 'evolution' people...

"Where did Earth come from?"
(I mean before 'the big bang', where did our planet come from?)

"What created the 'Bang'?"
(If you don't know, just say what you believe.)

"Do you really believe that the existence of life on this entire planet (from the blades of grass, to the microscopic organisms in the sea, to the dinosaurs, to you), as well as the existence of this planet itself, is all one big biological accident?"

(If you really do think that, then I feel sorry for you. How depressing it must be to have that outlook on things.)

No one knows, egotism comes in thinking that, without proof, you have the answer. (read: God)

We are closer than ever to finding out what caused the "Bang". Current scientific understanding seems to indicate that there was, in fact, something before the bang. If it is so hard to comprehend all matter always having been here, how is the concept of an eternal being so much easier to believe?

Our viewpoint is not depressing, just different. I, personally, find it depressing that people will simply accept what is told to them without looking for the answers themselves. if you dont take the bible, koran, or whatever religious text as pure gospel "this is how it happened", then i applaud your open-mindedness. If you think what is written is how it happened, i have some oceanside property in Arizona i would like to sell you.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:08 AM
I notice you didn't answer a single one of the questions I posed...

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
In my opinion, it is egotistical to assume that there is no being greater than us.

Most people believe in either 'creation' or 'evolution' via the big bang.

Those that believe in 'creation' have it simple. They are willing to accept/believe that there is a God and that God created them.

Those that believe in 'evolution' don't believe that. They believe that life started on Earth due to a cosmic occurance ('The Big Bang') that led to microscopic forms of life forming in the oceans. After millions of years, here we are.

Let me pose these questions to the 'evolution' people...

"Where did Earth come from?"
(I mean before 'the big bang', where did our planet come from?)

"What created the 'Bang'?"
(If you don't know, just say what you believe.)

"Do you really believe that the existence of life on this entire planet (from the blades of grass, to the microscopic organisms in the sea, to the dinosaurs, to you), as well as the existence of this planet itself, is all one big biological accident?"

(If you really do think that, then I feel sorry for you. How depressing it must be to have that outlook on things.)

The first two questions are the same. The earth is a by-product of the big bang.

The big bang was caused by a concentration of gravity at one center point (at the time, the only point) that attracted all the matter around it. This matter was basically just energy in all of it's forms. This turned the mass into a giant star, bigger than is humanly imaginable. When the star reached critical mass, it exploded because it couldn't stand it's own gravitational forces.

I do believe that there are much greater beings out there than us. However, that does not make them "Gods". To think that such a highly advanced being would even want to associate with savages such as us is the egotistical part, let alone help us/create such flawed beings.

Edit: Oops, I forgot the last part too.
Yes, life is one big accident. Sometimes I feel like nothing but a big fucking chimp that can use tools and talk.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
I notice you didn't answer a single one of the questions I posed...

Actually, i answered them in detail. if you dont happen to like the answers, just say so and move on.

"Where did Earth come from?"
No one knows

"What created the 'Bang'?"
We are closer than ever to finding out what caused the "Bang". Current scientific understanding seems to indicate that there was, in fact, something before the bang. (A more wordy "No one knows")

And, I apologise, i did forget to answer the last one:

Yes, it is an accident. oops.

Sorry if i come off a little pissy. I am not presenting any of this a absolute fact, just my world view, which, like yours, is shared by many others.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
No one knows, egotism comes in thinking that, without proof, you have the answer. (read: God)

You don't get actual 'proof', it's based on faith. I see proof every time I look outside. Or look in the mirror. Or look at someone else. We (as well as the entire world) wouldn't be here if we weren't created at some point in time.

Even if a 'bang' occured millions of years ago, what came before that? If you trace the roots of this arguement back to the source, you will inevitably reach a point where there was a being beyond human comprehension. Because before the 'bang', there must have been matter in the universe, otherwise there could have been no 'bang'. So, since there had to be matter, where'd it come from? You can call it whatever you want; God, Allah, Buddah, it doesn't really matter. You can even call it a cosmic spark. What it is, is a source of origin, the reason we are here.

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
You don't get actual 'proof', it's based on faith. I see proof every time I look outside. Or look in the mirror. Or look at someone else. We (as well as the entire world) wouldn't be here if we weren't created at some point in time.

Even if a 'bang' occured millions of years ago, what came before that? If you trace the roots of this arguement back to the source, you will inevitably reach a point where there was a being beyond human comprehension. Because before the 'bang', there must have been matter in the universe, otherwise there could have been no 'bang'. So, since there had to be matter, where'd it come from? You can call it whatever you want; God, Allah, Buddah, it doesn't really matter. You can even call it a cosmic spark. What it is, is a source of origin, the reason we are here.

What if there is no beginning? What if there has always been matter and life, and always will be?

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
The first two questions are the same. The earth is a by-product of the big bang.

The big bang was caused by a concentration of gravity at one center point (at the time, the only point) that attracted all the matter around it. This matter was basically just energy in all of it's forms. This turned the mass into a giant star, bigger than is humanly imaginable. When the star reached critical mass, it exploded because it couldn't stand it's own gravitational forces.

I do believe that there are much greater beings out there than us. However, that does not make them "Gods". To think that such a highly advanced being would even want to associate with savages such as us is the egotistical part, let alone help us/create such flawed beings.

Edit: Oops, I forgot the last part too.
Yes, life is one big accident. Sometimes I feel like nothing but a big fucking chimp that can use tools and talk.

Who created that mass that turned into the star?

I can see why you are depressed with an outlook like that.

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
You don't get actual 'proof', it's based on faith. I see proof every time I look outside. Or look in the mirror. Or look at someone else. We (as well as the entire world) wouldn't be here if we weren't created at some point in time.

Even if a 'bang' occured millions of years ago, what came before that? If you trace the roots of this arguement back to the source, you will inevitably reach a point where there was a being beyond human comprehension. Because before the 'bang', there must have been matter in the universe, otherwise there could have been no 'bang'. So, since there had to be matter, where'd it come from? You can call it whatever you want; God, Allah, Buddah, it doesn't really matter. You can even call it a cosmic spark. What it is, is a source of origin, the reason we are here.

Edit: doh.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
What if there is no beginning? What if there has always been matter and life, and always will be?

Well, what created the spark that set off the big bang then?

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Who created that mass that turned into the star?

I can see why you are depressed with an outlook like that.

No one did. What if it has always just been there?

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:21 AM
Hey do you guys remember like an hour ago when I said I didn't want to turn this into a religious debate?



Yeah, sorry about that.


:p

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Well, what created the spark that set off the big bang then?

Nothing did. As the matter was gathering to create the giant mass that eventually became a star, it gained more and more gravitational force (basic physics lesson: the more mass an object has, the more gravitational force it has). When the mass hit a certain point, it became unstable and created a star. When the star gained more and more mass, it became unstable and exploded.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
In my opinion, it is egotistical to assume that there is no being greater than us.

Most people believe in either 'creation' or 'evolution' via the big bang.

Those that believe in 'creation' have it simple. They are willing to accept/believe that there is a God and that God created them.

Those that believe in 'evolution' don't believe that. They believe that life started on Earth due to a cosmic occurance ('The Big Bang') that led to microscopic forms of life forming in the oceans. After millions of years, here we are.

Let me pose these questions to the 'evolution' people...

"Where did Earth come from?"
(I mean before 'the big bang', where did our planet come from?)

"What created the 'Bang'?"
(If you don't know, just say what you believe.)

"Do you really believe that the existence of life on this entire planet (from the blades of grass, to the microscopic organisms in the sea, to the dinosaurs, to you), as well as the existence of this planet itself, is all one big biological accident?"

(If you really do think that, then I feel sorry for you. How depressing it must be to have that outlook on things.)


I dont believe in any higher being. Sorry to dissapoint you, but my outlook is exactly that. Our existence is one big lucky (for us) biological accident. I do believe there is life on other planets somewhere. Just thinking about how BIG outer space is just freakes me out. Anything could be out there. Remember the end of Men in Black where the giant aliens were playing marbles with the milky way? That could happen theoretically I guess.

There's no proof of the 'creation' theory, but we have actually proof of evolution, and I am a scientificallly minded person. So I have to go with the proof.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:22 AM
It was something, i will grant you that, but i do not assign a persona or a belief system to it. There may very well be a God. If so, he deals with everyone in his own way. I think not believing inhim without proof will fall pretty far behind child molestation and beheading innocent civilians, so i am content with my outlook of the unisverse, until i see something a little more convicing than "existance". There are plenty of good explanations where god doesnt enter the equation.

Sorry to anyone this bothers, but i have always equeated faith with ignorance. Why ask questions when someone has already told you answers you are comfortable with?

That would be fine, if it wasnt put to bad use soo often. Think for yourself, ask questions, look for answers (not just in 1 book...), and if you come back to God in the end, so be it. That is your answer.

Different beliefs, different destinations....

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
It was something, i will grant you that, but i do not assign a persona or a belief system to it. There may very well be a God. If so, he deals with everyone in his own way. I think not believing inhim without proof will fall pretty far behind child molestation and beheading innocent civilians, so i am content with my outlook of the unisverse, until i see something a little more convicing than "existance". There are plenty of good explanations where god doesnt enter the equation.

Sorry to anyone this bothers, but i have always equeated faith with ignorance. Why ask questions when someone has already told you answers you are comfortable with?

That would be fine, if it wasnt put to bad use soo often. Think for yourself, ask questions, look for answers (not just in 1 book...), and if you come back to God in the end, so be it. That is your answer.

Different beliefs, different destinations....


Amen brother.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:27 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
No one did. What if it has always just been there?

So, what you're saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that you think our universe has always existed, since before the beginning of time even though there was no matter in it?

Wouldn't that just be empty space?

How could worlds form from nothing?

Remember that matter never increases or decreases, only chages forms and density.

So, let's say that the universe has always been here in human terms. There is no time to God, so it's entirely possible that even though the universe seems to have existed forever to us, it is nothing more than a blip on the radar for a being that is not bound by the constraints of our human time.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:30 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
Nothing did. As the matter was gathering to create the giant mass that eventually became a star, it gained more and more gravitational force (basic physics lesson: the more mass an object has, the more gravitational force it has). When the mass hit a certain point, it became unstable and created a star. When the star gained more and more mass, it became unstable and exploded.

You're missing the point.

Where did that matter come from?

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
You're missing the point.

Where did that matter come from?

We don't know. I certainly don't believe some omnipotent being created it (especially seeing as the bible dates history back a mere 10,000 years, and we have scientific proof that the Earth alone is nearly 4 billion years old).

Coincidence? Most likely.
Created by some mystical white guy with a beard wearing a sheet? Probably not.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:36 AM
Why must it always come back to some being?

For one thing, there are many layers of complexity here.

Matter is made up of energy, so matter may not be able to be destroyed, but it can be converted.

We exist in one dimension. There is more than satisfactory proof that other dimansions exist. Maybe there WAS absolutely nothing, but a leak was made that caused energy and/or matter to find it's way into our dimension.

There are types of matter we have yet to discover, other types we have yet to study. The rules change with scale. impossibilities on our scale are regular on a quantum scale, and at larger scales.

There is plenty beyond human comprehension. To me, the easy way out is to say someone had to do it. it is a dark, scary, lonely way to look at everything if you dont accept that there is a big brother out there taking care of us and everything else.

But to me, it is very freeing. I knwo I am a good person, because i am a good person. I dont have some fear that i will burn in hell if i do something wrong, i just believe in right and wrong. It is possible to be non-religious and still be moral.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
It was something, i will grant you that, but i do not assign a persona or a belief system to it. There may very well be a God. If so, he deals with everyone in his own way....

{Large percent of post edited out by bwind22.}

Different beliefs, different destinations....

Good points. It seems to me like you may be the only one seeing what I'm saying here. I'm not trying to force anyone into any religious beliefs, and to be completely honest I have never seen any actual scientific proof that God exists either.

To me, God is a being far beyond our scope of comprehension. He is not bound by any of the rules we know and that alone, makes it a very hard thing to comprehend. I've studied several of the world's religions (a hobby I took up in college) and arrived at the conclusion that there is one similarity in almost every one of them. There is a higher power. That's it. There's something greater than us that is responsible for us (or at least created the universe as we know it). It doesn't really matter what human label you put on it.

newb
06-29-2004, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher


Created by some mystical white guy with a beard wearing a sheet? Probably not.

GANDALF the WHITE?

sorry.....continue with your serious philosophical talk. I'm going back to the Monty Python thread.............NI

jay o2 waster
06-29-2004, 11:41 AM
I don't belive in either

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:41 AM
"But to me, it is very freeing. I knwo I am a good person, because i am a good person. I dont have some fear that i will burn in hell if i do something wrong, i just believe in right and wrong. It is possible to be non-religious and still be moral."

EXACTLY!!!!

I don't understand why people think that you're a bad person if you don't believe in God. My morals and beliefs are much stronger than those of many, many religious people I know. It's a crutch, a tool that people use so they don't feel so lonely. I can't base my life on lies and half truths, sorry.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
We don't know. I certainly don't believe some omnipotent being created it (especially seeing as the bible dates history back a mere 10,000 years, and we have scientific proof that the Earth alone is nearly 4 billion years old).

Coincidence? Most likely.
Created by some mystical white guy with a beard wearing a sheet? Probably not.

Well, the matter had to come from some where right? So when you figure it out, let me know what you come up with.

The Bible dates human history. It is common knowledge that our planet has been around for millions of years. I don't think anyone that reads/believes in the Bible would try to tell you that the dinosaurs were here 5000 years ago.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
"But to me, it is very freeing. I knwo I am a good person, because i am a good person. I dont have some fear that i will burn in hell if i do something wrong, i just believe in right and wrong. It is possible to be non-religious and still be moral."

EXACTLY!!!!

I don't understand why people think that you're a bad person if you don't believe in God. My morals and beliefs are much stronger than those of many, many religious people I know. It's a crutch, a tool that people use so they don't feel so lonely. I can't base my life on lies and half truths, sorry.


to quote you: EXACTLY!! Not having religion does not mean I am a bad person. There are milllions of ways that the earth COULD have been created, I just happen to disagree with a lot of the world on one way.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Well, the matter had to come from some where right? So when you figure it out, let me know what you come up with.

The Bible dates human history. It is common knowledge that our planet has been around for millions of years. I don't think anyone that reads/believes in the Bible would try to tell you that the dinosaurs were here 5000 years ago.

What do you mean dates human history?

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:46 AM
I have always thought the fact that so many cultures have a "higher power" was similar to why so many cultures have their own versions of vampires and werewolves, not to mention man-beasts.

Humans have the tendancy to rationalize things in a very similar way, no matter where you are on earth. how many old religions had a thunder god? A sun god? how similar were they, culture to culture?

Just because everyone believes that unicorns are white, doesnt mean they are, if you catch my drift.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
But to me, it is very freeing. I knwo I am a good person, because i am a good person. I dont have some fear that i will burn in hell if i do something wrong, i just believe in right and wrong. It is possible to be non-religious and still be moral.

I couldn't agree more! Some of the best people I know are 100% atheist. And then you have Catholic priests molesting little kids.

So you are 100% right about that! Being religious doesn't mean you are a good person and being non-religious doesn't mean you are a bad one.

Anyways... I got to get going. Good discussion guys! I hope I didn't piss anyone off too much. I have taken the stance that we will all have to agree to disagree.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
I have always thought the fact that so many cultures have a "higher power" was similar to why so many cultures have their own versions of vampires and werewolves, not to mention man-beasts.

Humans have the tendancy to rationalize things in a very similar way, no matter where you are on earth. how many old religions had a thunder god? A sun god? how similar were they, culture to culture?

Just because everyone believes that unicorns are white, doesnt mean they are, if you catch my drift.


One of the first things I noticed on my path to Atheism is how the Greeks, Romans, Christians, Buddhists, etc. All believe(d) in such different things. Who is so arrogant to say that their religion is "the right one". Who the fuck knows which is right? I just took the easy path and said none of them are right, at least not for me.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by orangestar
What do you mean dates human history?

The amount of time human beings have been around as opposed to the amount of time the world has been around.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
The Bible dates human history. It is common knowledge that our planet has been around for millions of years. I don't think anyone that reads/believes in the Bible would try to tell you that the dinosaurs were here 5000 years ago.

You would be surprised.....

The bible, in my opinion, is partially a historical text, and partially an attempt at moral guidance. the #1 problem i have with it is that it was written by people. thatfact alone makes it unreliable. No one is 100% objective in their representation of anything. Imagine if the bible was written by an ancient Michael Moore? He would be lying, per se, but he certainly wouldnt be giving you the whole story.

And then on top of that, you have new testament and old testament. How can you rewrite the story of everything?

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
You would be surprised.....

The bible, in my opinion, is partially a historical text, and partially an attempt at moral guidance. the #1 problem i have with it is that it was written by people. thatfact alone makes it unreliable. No one is 100% objective in their representation of anything. Imagine if the bible was written by an ancient Michael Moore? He would be lying, per se, but he certainly wouldnt be giving you the whole story.

And then on top of that, you have new testament and old testament. How can you rewrite the story of everything?
EXACTLY!!

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Good points. It seems to me like you may be the only one seeing what I'm saying here. I'm not trying to force anyone into any religious beliefs, and to be completely honest I have never seen any actual scientific proof that God exists either.

To me, God is a being far beyond our scope of comprehension. He is not bound by any of the rules we know and that alone, makes it a very hard thing to comprehend. I've studied several of the world's religions (a hobby I took up in college) and arrived at the conclusion that there is one similarity in almost every one of them. There is a higher power. That's it. There's something greater than us that is responsible for us (or at least created the universe as we know it). It doesn't really matter what human label you put on it.

I don't mean to bash you, that's not the point of this.

Has it ever occurred to you that the reason that a higher power exists in all cultures is the need for a belief system to constrain and force you into having a set of morals, and also because of peoples need for something more than they can see or feel. They know that there has to be something more, and they define it as a Godhead, a powerful figure, a being that has absolute control. Back when religions were first created, human comprehension and knowledge couldn't even BEGIN to approach the level that it's at right now. They basically saw this "something more" as a father (or mother, in some cultures) figure that was watching constantly and would punish them for any "bad" deeds that they did. Most of the reason religions like that came into existence was because in ancient tribes, the "shaman" needed a way to control his tribe, so he did it through fear. They played on peoples fears and fantasies. Granted, this was only at the beginning of religion. As time went on and people evolved, their belief systems did as well, and along came the peaceful religions such as Buddhism. While peaceful now, they are still a derivative of what was merely a control mechanism.

I have also studied religion for a long time, as you may be able to tell. I don't see a higher power being out there. It just doesn't make any sense. What does make sense is religion based on fear and power.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
I don't mean to bash you, that's not the point of this.

Has it ever occurred to you that the reason that a higher power exists in all cultures is the need for a belief system to constrain and force you into having a set of morals, and also because of peoples need for something more than they can see or feel. They know that there has to be something more, and they define it as a Godhead, a powerful figure, a being that has absolute control. Back when religions were first created, human comprehension and knowledge couldn't even BEGIN to approach the level that it's at right now. They basically saw this "something more" as a father (or mother, in some cultures) figure that was watching constantly and would punish them for any "bad" deeds that they did. Most of the reason religions like that came into existence was because in ancient tribes, the "shaman" needed a way to control his tribe, so he did it through fear. They played on peoples fears and fantasies. Granted, this was only at the beginning of religion. As time went on and people evolved, their belief systems did as well, and along came the peaceful religions such as Buddhism. While peaceful now, they are still a derivative of what was merely a control mechanism.

I have also studied religion for a long time, as you may be able to tell. I don't see a higher power being out there. It just doesn't make any sense. What does make sense is religion based on fear and power.


Right, which Is why I dont understand why such a high percentage of the world is that religious. To fight wars and lose your life over something like that.... I dont know. Just seems pointless. I guess religion is a huge part of a lot of peoples lives.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
You would be surprised.....

The bible, in my opinion, is partially a historical text, and partially an attempt at moral guidance. the #1 problem i have with it is that it was written by people. thatfact alone makes it unreliable. No one is 100% objective in their representation of anything. Imagine if the bible was written by an ancient Michael Moore? He would be lying, per se, but he certainly wouldnt be giving you the whole story.

And then on top of that, you have new testament and old testament. How can you rewrite the story of everything?

You haven't read it then. The New Testament and Old Testament are different. It is not like a 'remake'.

The Old Testament is mostly a list of names. (Zacariah, brother of Judiah, son of Maximillion, etc...) And the New Testament deals with the life and times of Jesus Christ.

It was written by human beings, and you are right to say that makes it fallible. (I like your Michael Moore reference, that was funny.) But the majority of the humans who wrote it, actually knew Jesus quite well, so there should be some truth in there.

It is a good historical reference as well as a good set of moral guidelines.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 11:59 AM
Right Bwind, it is a great set of moral guidelines. But thats not how people take it. The Michael Moore reference makes a lot of sense really, maybe its all true, but embellished.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by orangestar
One of the first things I noticed on my path to Atheism is how the Greeks, Romans, Christians, Buddhists, etc. All believe(d) in such different things. Who is so arrogant to say that their religion is "the right one". Who the fuck knows which is right? I just took the easy path and said none of them are right, at least not for me.

I'll couple this with bwind's comment about the preists. Here is my #1 problem with the Catholic Church (sorry if you are Catholic, feel free to hate me):
Catholacism was started in the Holy Roman Empire, by Constantine.

Constantine was not Christian to begin with. he didnt believe in it one bit.

But, His mother was. And one day, she told him that he would die if he did not convert. So he did. And he spent an ridiculous amount of money building churches and ornate edifaces to jesus and god. and he made everyone under him convert.

So Catholacism came to be because a heretic was afraid that he would die if he didnt start praying to god.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 12:03 PM
A quick interjection roght here. All three of you impress me (bwind, orangestar, ege). not one of youhas resorted to name calling or saying thisgs like "Well, you are just stupid, shut up".

:) a round of applause for all involved :)

That Genesis and Revelations thing sounds a lot like embellishment, but that is just me.

newb
06-29-2004, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by Vodstok
A quick interjection roght here. All three of you impress me (bwind, orangestar, ege). not one of youhas resorted to name calling or saying thisgs like "Well, you are just stupid, shut up".

:) a round of applause for all involved :)

That Genesis and Revelations thing sounds a lot like embellishment, but that is just me.

WHAT?!?....my Gandalf referance didn't mean anything. Well, you are just stupid,shut up.

Egekrusher
06-29-2004, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by Vodstok
A quick interjection roght here. All three of you impress me (bwind, orangestar, ege). not one of youhas resorted to name calling or saying thisgs like "Well, you are just stupid, shut up".

:) a round of applause for all involved :)

That Genesis and Revelations thing sounds a lot like embellishment, but that is just me.

I rather enjoy a good, logical argument. I rarely get them. As you said, most people just say "I'm better than you, my beliefs are better, and YOU'RE STUPID!!!".

I've leave that to the cavemen, thanks.

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by newb
WHAT?!?....my Gandalf referance didn't mean anything. Well, you are just stupid,shut up.

ooo, careful newb, I may start using offensive language... ;)

Just kidding :)

bwind22
06-29-2004, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by Vodstok
I'll couple this with bwind's comment about the preists. Here is my #1 problem with the Catholic Church (sorry if you are Catholic, feel free to hate me):
Catholacism was started in the Holy Roman Empire, by Constantine.

Constantine was not Christian to begin with. he didnt believe in it one bit.

But, His mother was. And one day, she told him that he would die if he did not convert. So he did. And he spent an ridiculous amount of money building churches and ornate edifaces to jesus and god. and he made everyone under him convert.

So Catholacism came to be because a heretic was afraid that he would die if he didnt start praying to god.

That is not correct. The Catholic Church was founded directly by Jesus Christ at the last supper. He broke bread and gave wine to his disciples and then told them to go and spread his word. His 12 apostles (or disciples, same thing) became the first 11 Catholic priests. (Judas killed himself after betraying Jesus.) Constantine had nothing to do with the birth of Catholicism.

I agree with you about this being a well spoken, mature discussion as opposed to the typical name calling that ensues when someone feels like they aren't being agreed with. :D

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 12:20 PM
Maybe i was misinformed, but the apostles started christianity, not catholacism, to the best of my knowledge. But i digress, religion always took a back seat in my studies.

orangestar
06-29-2004, 12:26 PM
(I feel like such an ignorant little teenager but...) Can someone explain the differences between Catholocism and Christianity? All I know is Catholic priests can only be men, and must be celibate....right? Or is that both? :confused:

bwind22
06-29-2004, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Vodstok
Maybe i was misinformed, but the apostles started christianity, not catholacism, to the best of my knowledge. But i digress, religion always took a back seat in my studies.

They started Catholicism.

bwind22
06-29-2004, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
(I feel like such an ignorant little teenager but...) Can someone explain the differences between Catholocism and Christianity? All I know is Catholic priests can only be men, and must be celibate....right? Or is that both? :confused:

Catholicism is a specific religion within Christianity. (Christians are tied by a belief in the same God as well as following the Bible.) There are other more minor differences that seperate the religions from each other...
Other Christian religions are Lutheran, Baptist, etc...

Catholic priests can only be men and they are supposed to remain celibate. (Obviously, not all of them do. That makes them a bad Catholic priest.)

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by bwind22
They started Catholicism.

Color me surprised. :)

newb
06-29-2004, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Vodstok
ooo, careful newb, I may start using offensive language... ;)

Just kidding :)

Twats that you say, I cunt hear you. oooooooBLASPHEMER!

Vodstok
06-29-2004, 12:39 PM
"and as a BLASPHEMAR, you are sentenced to be stoned to death."

"Look, my wife had cooked a lovely piece of fish, and all I said was 'That piece of Halibut was good enough for Jehovah'"

"Blasphemar!"

*clunk*

"OWWwww! Come off it, we haven't started yet!"

"Alright, who threw that?!"

"She did!She did!She did! uh , He did! He did...."


*scowls* "Are there any women here?"

"No. No. No. No. No."

friday13thfan
06-29-2004, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by meetthecreeper
Satan

that is correct sir

bwind22
06-29-2004, 01:53 PM
When will Hillary Clinton remove herself from the public eye?

We can only hope that it will be soon. Unfortunately, I see her running for President some day, (If she wins, kill me please.) so I suppose we are stuck with her for a minimum of 4 years.

friday13thfan
06-29-2004, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by bwind22
When will Hillary Clinton remove herself from the public eye?

We can only hope that it will be soon. Unfortunately, I see her running for President some day, (If she wins, kill me please.) so I suppose we are stuck with her for a minimum of 4 years.


(in tune to santa clause is coming to town)

you beter watch out

i think she is a guy

im not really sure

but something ain't right

hilary clinton is coming to town

orangestar
06-29-2004, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by bwind22
When will Hillary Clinton remove herself from the public eye?

We can only hope that it will be soon. Unfortunately, I see her running for President some day, (If she wins, kill me please.) so I suppose we are stuck with her for a minimum of 4 years.

aww but I love the Clintons. I just want a female president in my lifetime. Hilary will do.

kpropain
06-29-2004, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
aww but I love the Clintons. I just want a female president in my lifetime. Hilary will do.

Oh dear god NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!! !!!!!!!!!!!

The country would surely cease to exist as we know it if she was president....

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 03:35 PM
Damn it! I KNEW this was going to turn into a philosophical debate on the existence of god! I just knew it! And I wanted to participate, too!

Fortunately, the other atheists in here pretty much covered it. I still want to add my two cents, nonetheless.

"Where did the Earth come from?" The answer given by Ege was quite good. The earth was actually a ball of molten magma shortly after the formation of the sun, and according to astronomers, the moon was formed when a hurtling object hit the Earth and tore away a chunk. The magma cooled, the surface hardened and released gasses that formed our atmosphere. And take it from there, because this is beside the point. Bwind wants to know where the matter came from.

I am comfortable in saying "I don't know." I am also more comfortable in believing that matter has always been, than that some sentient being created it. Before the age of reason and the scientific revolution, people habitually ascribed answers to the unknown by chalking it up to god or gods. Rain is caused by god. Earthquakes are caused by god. That erupting volcano is caused by god. People need answers, and this was an easy way to get them. In this age, people are STILL attributing the unknown to god. The "unknown", in this day and age, being: "What happened AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF EVERYTHING?" and "What happens after death?" Science has pretty much answered everything else, so these things are where many people run to in defense of god.

In my studies of religion, I've noticed this trend: As religions were born, they became more people-friendly. People would follow whichever religion gave them the most hope. As a species, we are the only animals on this planet that realize our own mortality, and at the same time, possess that evolutionary desire to survive. We want to survive and live, but we know we are going to die. Hence, over time, we've developed these mythologies to help us cope with this gigantic conflict. For example: for a long time, Hinduism was the thing. We never die! We are just reincarnated over and over again, our new forms depending on our karma. But, people were not satisfied with that ... they wanted something to escape this cycle of death and rebirth ... and so, when Christianity came along with it's idea of "Paradise for eternity", it became quite popular (except, of course, with the powerful people of the currently established religions). That is a total example, and very cut-and-dried for the sake of brevity. My point: If cats knew they were going to die (in a way other than instinct), I'm quite sure you would see little shrines to some "Great Cat in the Sky" in litter boxes around the world. And what's better than Paradise for eternity? How about SEX for eternity!!! And ultimate, Godlike power!!! (Oh ... well, that's actually the Mormons. A very new religion, and one that still follows my pattern of "give the people what they want").

Now for the atheists: How do you know what is right and what is wrong? Who's to say morality is nothing more than individual opinion, and nobody's ideas of morality are more right or wrong than another's? (I actually spent the entire summer arguing this idea with an "Ethical monotheist" last year. It's a tough question to answer, if you take God out of the equation.)

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 03:39 PM
As for the rock thing, it's still a bogus answer.

"Can God create a rock too large for him to lift?"

"Yes."

"Then God is not all powerful."

"But a millisecond later, he would be able to lift it if he wanted to."

"Then God is not all powerful. For a millisecond, he was too weak to lift the rock. For a millisecond, the rock was greater than god."

orangestar
06-29-2004, 03:52 PM
You said that all so well Stingy. I agree with everything you said :)

Stingy Jack
06-29-2004, 04:51 PM
I just realized what the answer to the rock question was as given by Bwind: In essence, Bwind says that God can create a rock too heavy for him to lift if he temporarily limits his power.

But this answer, too, doesn't make a lot of sense. God has to temporarily limit his power in order to do something that he was UNABLE to do when he was all-powerful? That sounds quite shaky. What if we rephrase the question this way:

"Can god create a rock too heavy for him to lift WITHOUT limiting his own power?"

"No."

"Then god is not all-powerful."

The question was formulated, as I've said, to show that an all-powerful being cannot exist. It's a logical contradiction ... like a square circle. You dodged the answer by changing the nature of god ... by eliminating his omnipotence. Sure, he can do it ONLY IF he isn't all-powerful. But, that's not what the question proves. The question proves that there can be nothing that is all-powerful, or limitless.

fluffho
06-29-2004, 05:18 PM
i am satan.

therefore, satan looks like me

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 12:08 AM
That explains your allergic reaction to sunlight.

misterX
06-30-2004, 12:30 AM
ya you people are correct, and what about the jews? o boy.
and the big bang is a unproven myth and always will be, sorry to say, but if the universe began as they say, there would multiple "centres" (for the lack of a better word,) not just one. the one thing atheist often leave out when describbing either " the big bang' , which is now called the big expansion by some. (another thing the big bang theorist have been proved wrong about). or evolution. is the word 'THEORY" . because thats all they are. theories. But scienctist will always preach what they, think might have happen as a fact. rather than a theory. like the how the moon came to be. they don't know. because they have never witnessed a moon being formed or caught in a planets gravitaional pull. So they just theorieze and people will take that as matter of fact.and as far as the moon being formed because something big slammed into earth while it was a big ball of magma. didn't happen sorry.

misterX
06-30-2004, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
I just realized what the answer to the rock question was as given by Bwind: In essence, Bwind says that God can create a rock too heavy for him to lift if he temporarily limits his power.

But this answer, too, doesn't make a lot of sense. God has to temporarily limit his power in order to do something that he was UNABLE to do when he was all-powerful? That sounds quite shaky. What if we rephrase the question this way:

"Can god create a rock too heavy for him to lift WITHOUT limiting his own power?"

"No."

"Then god is not all-powerful."

The question was formulated, as I've said, to show that an all-powerful being cannot exist. It's a logical contradiction ... like a square circle. You dodged the answer by changing the nature of god ... by eliminating his omnipotence. Sure, he can do it ONLY IF he isn't all-powerful. But, that's not what the question proves. The question proves that there can be nothing that is all-powerful, or limitless.
can god create a rocl to heavy for him to lift? yes.
"DID" god create a rock to heavy for him to lift? no so he keeps his all powerful title

misterX
06-30-2004, 12:39 AM
and as for zwoti saying that people only believe in god, out of fear of death, well thats wrong as well. i wasn't allways a believer in god. and death held no fear for me( not saying i didnt care if ilived or died, but im just saying i accepted it as a natural thing that will happen to us all) and it wasn't fear of dying that made me turn to god either. and as far as humans being the only animal on earth. that knows its gonna die one day is false test have proven elephants are also aware that one day they will dieand as for his claim that we chose god because we get to live for enternity in perfect shape is also worng( probably ) because if as he /she claims he/she has studied religion, then he would know that noone knows what heaven is like.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 12:48 AM
Okay. First of all, a scientific "Theory" is different than the layman's "theory." In the language of science, a "Theory" is about as close to fact as you can get. An "hypothesis" (which is similar to the layman's term 'theory') is tested over and over and over again. When enough tests have been completed (and I mean MANY tests), and the results remain consistent with the hypothesis, only then does it become a scientific "Theory". Take the "Atomic Theory" as an example. A scientific theory isn't just a guess.

As far as the moon thing goes, here is a quote from my Astronomy text from college.

"Today, many astronomers favor a hybrid of the capture and fission themes. This idea -- often called the impacttheory -- postulates a collision by a large, Mars-sized object with a youthful and molten Earth. Such collisions may have been quite frequent in the early solar system (see Chapter 15). The collision presumed by the impact theory would have been more a glancing blow than a direct impact. The matter dislodged from our planet then assembled to form the Moon.
Computer simulations of such a catastrophic event show that most of the bits and pieces of splattered Earth could have coalesced into a stable orbit. Figure 8.27 shows some of the stages of one such simulation. If the Earth had already formed an iron core by the time the collision occurred, the Moon would indeed have ended up with a composition similar to the Earth's mantle. During the collision, any iron core in the impacting object itself would have been left behind in Earth, eventually to become part of the Earth's core. Thus both the Moon's overall similarity to that of the Earth's mantle and its lack of a dense central core are naturally explained. Over the past decade, planetary scientists have come to realize that collisions such as this probably played very important roles in the formation of all terrestrial planets".

That is from the text "Astronomy Today 2nd Edition" by Eric Chaisson and Steve McMillan (both of which hold doctorates in astronomy and astrophysics from Harvard.) Published by Prentice Hall in 1997 (ISBN 0-13-712382-5). Pages 189-190.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by misterX
and as for zwoti saying that people only believe in god, out of fear of death, well thats wrong as well. i wasn't allways a believer in god. and death held no fear for me( not saying i didnt care if ilived or died, but im just saying i accepted it as a natural thing that will happen to us all) and it wasn't fear of dying that made me turn to god either. and as far as humans being the only animal on earth. that knows its gonna die one day is false test have proven elephants are also aware that one day they will dieand as for his claim that we chose god because we get to live for enternity in perfect shape is also worng( probably ) because if as he /she claims he/she has studied religion, then he would know that noone knows what heaven is like.

Where is this test that PROVED elephants know that one day they will die? I mean "know" in the sense that human beings know. Not in some instinctual level. I gave you my source for the Moon thing, now you give yours. As far as heaven goes ... no. I don't know what it is like. I am drawing conclusions from the Bible. Eden was supposed to be heaven on earth, a nirvana, a paradise. True, I don't know if everything is perfect in heaven. And it probably isn't, seeing as god couldn't even get earth right.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 12:53 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Where is this test that PROVED elephants know that one day they will die? I mean "know" in the sense that human beings know. Not in some instinctual level. I gave you my source for the Moon thing, now you give yours. As far as heaven goes ... no. I don't know what it is like. I am drawing conclusions from the Bible. Eden was supposed to be heaven on earth, a nirvana, a paradise. True, I don't know if everything is perfect in heaven. And it probably isn't, seeing as god couldn't even get earth right.

He got Earth right. It was our free will that fucked us.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 12:56 AM
See, that's another thing. You use "free will". Of course, you can't say that you have "free will" if you also believe that god is omniscient. Because if god knows everything, your free will is out the window.

As far as getting earth right ... ummm ... I dunno. I mean, you say you look out the window and see proof of god in the trees, flowers, clouds, etc. That's all well and good. I look out the window and think: "If I was all-powerful, I could come up with something better than this."

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay. First of all, a scientific "Theory" is different than the layman's "theory." In the language of science, a "Theory" is about as close to fact as you can get. An "hypothesis" (which is similar to the layman's term 'theory') is tested over and over and over again. When enough tests have been completed (and I mean MANY tests), and the results remain consistent with the hypothesis, only then does it become a scientific "Theory". Take the "Atomic Theory" as an example. A scientific theory isn't just a guess.

As far as the moon thing goes, here is a quote from my Astronomy text from college.

"Today, many astronomers favor a hybrid of the capture and fission themes. This idea -- often called the impacttheory -- postulates a collision by a large, Mars-sized object with a youthful and molten Earth. Such collisions may have been quite frequent in the early solar system (see Chapter 15). The collision presumed by the impact theory would have been more a glancing blow than a direct impact. The matter dislodged from our planet then assembled to form the Moon.
Computer simulations of such a catastrophic event show that most of the bits and pieces of splattered Earth could have coalesced into a stable orbit. Figure 8.27 shows some of the stages of one such simulation. If the Earth had already formed an iron core by the time the collision occurred, the Moon would indeed have ended up with a composition similar to the Earth's mantle. During the collision, any iron core in the impacting object itself would have been left behind in Earth, eventually to become part of the Earth's core. Thus both the Moon's overall similarity to that of the Earth's mantle and its lack of a dense central core are naturally explained. Over the past decade, planetary scientists have come to realize that collisions such as this probably played very important roles in the formation of all terrestrial planets".

That is from the text "Astronomy Today 2nd Edition" by Eric Chaisson and Steve McMillan (both of which hold doctorates in astronomy and astrophysics from Harvard.) Published by Prentice Hall in 1997 (ISBN 0-13-712382-5). Pages 189-190.
no there is no difference between a scientific therot and a laymans theory, well the onlny diff being is that the layman is the only one with enough crediblity t oadmitt that he doesn't know what it is his theory is about and the scientist won't. or is just too arogant toadmitt that he could be, which in a lot of casesthey are.

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Where is this test that PROVED elephants know that one day they will die? I mean "know" in the sense that human beings know. Not in some instinctual level. I gave you my source for the Moon thing, now you give yours. As far as heaven goes ... no. I don't know what it is like. I am drawing conclusions from the Bible. Eden was supposed to be heaven on earth, a nirvana, a paradise. True, I don't know if everything is perfect in heaven. And it probably isn't, seeing as god couldn't even get earth right.
i shall look for it, and post it. and how do you know god didn't get the earth the way he wanted it? hmmm?

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by misterX
no there is no difference between a scientific therot and a laymans theory, well the onlny diff being is that the layman is the only one with enough crediblity t oadmitt that he doesn't know what it is his theory is about and the scientist won't. or is just too arogant toadmitt that he could be, which in a lot of casesthey are.

Okay, here's another quote. This time from a Biology text.

"Theory: A testable explanation of a broad range of related phenomena. In modern science, only explanations that have been extensively tested and can be relied upon with a very high degree of confidence are accorded the status of theory."

This is different than the dictionary term:

"the-o-ry n., pl. -ries: 1. a. Systematically organized knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, esp. a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena. b. Such knowledge or such a system of distinguished from experiment or practice. 2. Abstract reasoning; speculation. 3. An assumption or guess based on limited information or knowledge."

You are confusing the term as I use it in the first quote with the term in ascribed definition 3 in the second quote.

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
See, that's another thing. You use "free will". Of course, you can't say that you have "free will" if you also believe that god is omniscient. Because if god knows everything, your free will is out the window.

As far as getting earth right ... ummm ... I dunno. I mean, you say you look out the window and see proof of god in the trees, flowers, clouds, etc. That's all well and good. I look out the window and think: "If I was all-powerful, I could come up with something better than this."
how does god being "all-knowing" which is what omniscient means, Take away our freewill? yes he knows wha twe are about we to do, but does he stop us? no, thats why we have freewill. it would only be when he interfied and stopped us from doing something is when we lose our freewill. and 2. you saying that, you could do a better job, of you was all powerfull, then that isn't a argument as to why there isn't a god . its a argument as to why you don't like god
o and p.s
i seriously doubt you could do a better job than god. i mean, you're always complaing about how bad movies are these days. and you can't fix that, even though you could fix that little problem.
if you had the talent. (maybe thats another thing you hate or don't believe in god???????)

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:10 AM
Originally posted by misterX
i shall look for it, and post it. and how do you know god didn't get the earth the way he wanted it? hmmm?

Maybe he did get it the way he wanted. All I'm saying is that if I had god's power, I could do a lot better.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
See, that's another thing. You use "free will". Of course, you can't say that you have "free will" if you also believe that god is omniscient. Because if god knows everything, your free will is out the window.

As far as getting earth right ... ummm ... I dunno. I mean, you say you look out the window and see proof of god in the trees, flowers, clouds, etc. That's all well and good. I look out the window and think: "If I was all-powerful, I could come up with something better than this."

It is quite possible to believe in God without believing in predestination. God gave man free will. That means we can do as we like. God, being omnipotent, knows/always knew/always will know what we would end up deciding because to him, time does not exist. He sees the dawn of man, the end of time and everything in between in the very same blink of an eye.

Right now I could type an 'X' or a 'Y' in the next line down. I can choose either one I want because I have free will. God knows what I will wind up choosing with my own free will because he sees all of time at once because to an omnipotent being, time does not exist.

'Z'.

Ooops, with my own free will, I chose to put down a letter that was not even one of the options. You know what? God knew that's what I would do, but it was still my choice what letter to type.


As for you thinking you could create a better world... Well, I would say that's a bit blasphemous, but since you are atheist, that probably wouldn't matter to you. So let me jusy ask how your world would be better.

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:16 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay, here's another quote. This time from a Biology text.

"Theory: A testable explanation of a broad range of related phenomena. In modern science, only explanations that have been extensively tested and can be relied upon with a very high degree of confidence are accorded the status of theory."

This is different than the dictionary term:

"the-o-ry n., pl. -ries: 1. a. Systematically organized knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, esp. a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena. b. Such knowledge or such a system of distinguished from experiment or practice. 2. Abstract reasoning; speculation. 3. An assumption or guess based on limited information or knowledge."

You are confusing the term as I use it in the first quote with the term in ascribed definition 3 in the second quote.
still don't see the word "fact", just a lot of assuptions, predictions, reasonings and speculation. so really really all that says is that we think this is right, but we're aren't certain.

Freddy Krueger.
06-30-2004, 01:17 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
True, I don't know if everything is perfect in heaven. And it probably isn't, seeing as god couldn't even get earth right. God is perfection itself. God makes no mistakes. As for Lucifer, it would be quite natural to assume that a spirit being so grossly evil would also look evil. The popular perceptions of Satan are usually either that of a sinister-looking individual in all-black clothing, or a comic character in a red suit with horns and a pitchfork, but The Bible describes Satan with "beauty" and "splendor." Satan appears righteous:

"For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is not strange if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness." (2 Corinthians 11:13-15 RSV)

There is much written in the Bible about Satan's change of behavior, but nothing about any change in appearance. He is the ultimate evil, and yet he appears attractive and righteous. The references to him as a "snake" or "serpent" refer more to his sneaking, slithering, underhanded personality than his actual visual appearance.

There, this should answer your question. And do tell me if it does.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:18 AM
Originally posted by misterX
how does god being "all-knowing" which is what omniscient means, Take away our freewill? yes he knows wha twe are about we to do, but does he stop us? no, thats why we have freewill. it would only be when he interfied and stopped us from doing something is when we lose our freewill. and 2. you saying that, you could do a better job, of you was all powerfull, then that isn't a argument as to why there isn't a god . its a argument as to why you don't like god
o and p.s
i seriously doubt you could do a better job than god. i mean, you're always complaing about how bad movies are these days. and you can't fix that, even though you could fix that little problem.
if you had the talent. (maybe thats another thing you hate or don't believe in god???????)

Man, if god knows all then he knew before you were born whether or not you were going to heaven or hell. And there is nothing you could do to change that. It's like, your entire life is written out for you in god's mind ... and you're just going through the motions like an automaton. You THINK you have free will, because you can't predict your future. But, if god told you everything you would do from here on out ... you would feel the loss of freedom then. The only difference is that YOU don't know. But god still does.

And I don't understand that last thing you said ... I couldn't do a better job than god because I can't fix the problem of all the terrible movies being made? No, I can't. Even if I made GREAT movies, people would still make terrible ones. Unless, I had god's power.

And I think you'll find that many members here believe I have enough talent to write a cheap horror film.

Here's my point on the "god's power" thing. If I was omnibenevolent (all good), and omnipotent, and cared about my creation (people), ONE thing I would change would be the needless sufferring of innocent people. I understand that people do bad things to other people, and it is their choice to do those things. But, I would at least make it so that they couldn't do those things to babies. I would put something in everyone's brains that made it painfully repulsive to even think about leaving an infant in a dumpster to die. But, that's just one thing. As Robert DeNiro said on "Inside the Actor's Studio" -- "If God exists, he has a lot of explaining to do."

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:18 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
It is quite possible to believe in God without believing in predestination. God gave man free will. That means we can do as we like. God, being omnipotent, knows/always knew/always will know what we would end up deciding because to him, time does not exist. He sees the dawn of man, the end of time and everything in between in the very same blink of an eye.

Right now I could type an 'X' or a 'Y' in the next line down. I can choose either one I want because I have free will. God knows what I will wind up choosing with my own free will because he sees all of time at once because to an omnipotent being, time does not exist.

'Z'.

Ooops, with my own free will, I chose to put down a letter that was not even one of the options. You know what? God knew that's what I would do, but it was still my choice what letter to type.


As for you thinking you could create a better world... Well, I would say that's a bit blasphemous, but since you are atheist, that probably wouldn't matter to you. So let me jusy ask how your world would be better.
you are so much better at explaining yourself than i am.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:20 AM
Originally posted by misterX
still don't see the word "fact", just a lot of assuptions, predictions, reasonings and speculation. so really really all that says is that we think this is right, but we're aren't certain.

I didn't say that scientific theory was "fact". I said it is "about as close to fact as you can get." This assumes that it is not actually a fact.

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Man, if god knows all then he knew before you were born whether or not you were going to heaven or hell. And there is nothing you could do to change that. It's like, your entire life is written out for you in god's mind ... and you're just going through the motions like an automaton. You THINK you have free will, because you can't predict your future. But, if god told you everything you would do from here on out ... you would feel the loss of freedom then. The only difference is that YOU don't know. But god still does.

And I don't understand that last thing you said ... I couldn't do a better job than god because I can't fix the problem of all the terrible movies being made? No, I can't. Even if I made GREAT movies, people would still make terrible ones. Unless, I had god's power.

And I think you'll find that many members here believe I have enough talent to write a cheap horror film.

Here's my point on the "god's power" thing. If I was omnibenevolent (all good), and omnipotent, and cared about my creation (people), ONE thing I would change would be the needless sufferring of innocent people. I understand that people do bad things to other people, and it is their choice to do those things. But, I would at least make it so that they couldn't do those things to babies. I would put something in everyone's brains that made it painfully repulsive to even think about leaving an infant in a dumpster to die. But, that's just one thing. As Robert DeNiro said on "Inside the Actor's Studio" -- "If God exists, he has a lot of explaining to do."
just because god knows what i am going to do, doesn't mean he controls what i am going to do. read bwinds post, he/she explains it a lot better than ido.

KRUGERKID13
06-30-2004, 01:21 AM
ill tell ya as soon as i find a mirror

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by Freddy Krueger.
God is perfection itself. God makes no mistakes. As for Lucifer, it would be quite natural to assume that a spirit being so grossly evil would also look evil. The popular perceptions of Satan are usually either that of a sinister-looking individual in all-black clothing, or a comic character in a red suit with horns and a pitchfork, but The Bible describes Satan with "beauty" and "splendor." Satan appears righteous:

"For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is not strange if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness." (2 Corinthians 11:13-15 RSV)

There is much written in the Bible about Satan's change of behavior, but nothing about any change in appearance. He is the ultimate evil, and yet he appears attractive and righteous. The references to him as a "snake" or "serpent" refer more to his sneaking, slithering, underhanded personality than his actual visual appearance.

There, this should answer your question. And do tell me if it does.
you're absolutly correct. ( well the bible is lol ) one of the reasons satan is the ultimate evil because of his beauty and splendor.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
But, I would at least make it so that they couldn't do those things to babies. I would put something in everyone's brains that made it painfully repulsive to even think about leaving an infant in a dumpster to die. But, that's just one thing. As Robert DeNiro said on "Inside the Actor's Studio" -- "If God exists, he has a lot of explaining to do."

So, if you were God, you would take away free will by putting something in our brains to control our actions?

No offense, but to me that doesn't sound like you'd be doing a better job.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by misterX
just because god knows what i am going to do, doesn't mean he controls what i am going to do. read bwinds post, he/she explains it a lot better than ido.

Okay, I read Bwind's post. I still say the same thing. God doesn't have to control you to take away your free will. He simply needs to know what you are going to do. Bwind typed the letter "Z". What if god told him beforehand that he was going to type the letter "Z". He wouldn't be able to stop it. He would HAVE to type the letter "Z"! But, God didn't control him. He just told him what he was going to do. Because god knows what he will do, he has no choice but to do what is in god's mind. No choice = no free will. He THOUGHT he had free will to type the letter "Z". But that was just an illusion. He was destined to type the letter "Z" since the day he was born. He could not have changed that.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:28 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
So, if you were God, you would take away free will by putting something in our brains to control our actions?

No offense, but to me that doesn't sound like you'd be doing a better job.

What difference would it make? Nobody has free will anyway! (At least, not with an omniscient god). And it seems to me that taking away the free will of a sadistic killer to spare the life of a child IS better. Or, do you disagree?

Freddy Krueger.
06-30-2004, 01:30 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Maybe he did get it the way he wanted. All I'm saying is that if I had god's power, I could do a lot better. No, no you couldn't. No one could. God IS perfection. God knows everything. From the smallest little secret to the biggest darkest secret. He knows the past, future, and present. Although some may think God made a mistake with the planet or something, it was NOT him. It was Satan. The wicked beast. He got some of the foolish ones and turned them bad. They got overwelmed with greed and selfishness. And God can't just stop it himself, it everything was gave to you you too will become selfish. He does stop it but not by himself. It is his believers that will help stop it. And you may not believe it but God did stop it. You may think that it was only those believers who stopped it but God is the one who got in those believes hearts and mad ethem stop it. But now days greed is overwelming everyone. The Bible even says that one day the world will end. And you shouldn't be scared of death, unless you know that you have commited horrible sins and will be sent to hell. Those who haven't commited sin and have a pure heart will be sent to heaven. They shouldn't dear death. In heaven you are never sad. Always ahppy. Never bored and never feel pain.

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:30 AM
but thats the whole point god didn't tell him to type z,
example. if you was sitting by the comp with a friend, and you told him you was going to type the letter z. And you did. Did your friend make you type that letter? he had full knowledge that you was going to. he knew all along that you was gonna type the letter z, but he still didn't make you type the letter z. you did.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:31 AM
By the way, I hope nobody is taking offense here. I really like to debate this topic, and I learn a lot each time I do. If I come across as aggressive, or asshole-ish, please forgive me. That's just the debate style I use.

KRUGERKID13
06-30-2004, 01:32 AM
wtf are yans talking about

bwind22
06-30-2004, 01:33 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay, I read Bwind's post. I still say the same thing. God doesn't have to control you to take away your free will. He simply needs to know what you are going to do. Bwind typed the letter "Z". What if god told him beforehand that he was going to type the letter "Z". He wouldn't be able to stop it. He would HAVE to type the letter "Z"! But, God didn't control him. He just told him what he was going to do. Because god knows what he will do, he has no choice but to do what is in god's mind. No choice = no free will. He THOUGHT he had free will to type the letter "Z". But that was just an illusion. He was destined to type the letter "Z" since the day he was born. He could not have changed that.

The thing is that God didn't tell me to. I didn't talk to him tonight. I picked what letter to type. Just because he knew what letter I would pick doesn't mean he influenced my decision in any way, he simply knew what I would choose with my free will.

God does know who will end up in heaven and who will end up in hell, because like I said, to him there is no time. The day when you die and go to heaven or hell will seem like/actually be this exact second to God because, once again, we come back to the omnipotent being having no sense of time. He sees all of time at once, from beginning to end. That is how he knows what we will decide and where we will end up.

The choice is ours, he just knows what we'll pick.

KRUGERKID13
06-30-2004, 01:33 AM
oh now i understand

misterX
06-30-2004, 01:37 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
By the way, I hope nobody is taking offense here. I really like to debate this topic, and I learn a lot each time I do. If I come across as aggressive, or asshole-ish, please forgive me. That's just the debate style I use.
no offense, i use to go to yahoo atheist v christians all the time, because i like to debate this as well. and believe m, compared to them, you're being very repectful

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by misterX
but thats the whole point god didn't tell him to type z,
example. if you was sitting by the comp with a friend, and you told him you was going to type the letter z. And you did. Did your friend make you type that letter? he had full knowledge that you was going to. he knew all along that you was gonna type the letter z, but he still didn't make you type the letter z. you did.

Well, the difference here is that god supposedly knows with divine certainty. Which is different than the knowledge my friend has. Take these two scenarios:

Scenario 1:

You are born, you go through life, then one day as you are crossing the street you get hit by a car and die.

Scenario 2:

You are born, you go through life, then one day you get a message from god in a fortune cookie that says: "You will be hit by a car and die tomorrow while you are crossing the street."
You do everything you can to avoid the street. You stay home, watch TV ... then you fall asleep. You wake up in the middle of the road (sleepwalking?? You've never done that before!) and you get hit by a car and die.

The second scenario is almost the same as the first ... the only difference is you shared in god's knowledge for a brief time. But you were still unable to change your fate. (Assuming that god never lies, and is never wrong). If god knows your life, from beginning to end, then you are destined to live that life ... you cannot change it. The fact that you are ignorant of what god knows gives you the illusion that you have free will. But if you had god's knowledge of ONLY your life, that illusion would disappear. You would go through your life, knowing everything that would happen, being completely unable to change any of it.

Freddy Krueger.
06-30-2004, 01:39 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
What difference would it make? Nobody has free will anyway! (At least, not with an omniscient god). And it seems to me that taking away the free will of a sadistic killer to spare the life of a child IS better. Or, do you disagree? I disagree. EVERYONE and EVERYTHING has a meaning for life. I can't say what that meaning is but they do have it. If they are ment to die, they should. If I baby died inside a mother, it still had a reason for those days of being there. It the killer killed the child, then that was ment to happen. Even though it may be hard for some to accept the fact that a death of a child or love one (or anyone/any thing) was ment to happen, it was. Nothing just happens. Nothing was a mistake. Everyting that happens was ment to happen.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by Freddy Krueger.
I disagree. EVERYONE and EVERYTHING has a meaning for life. I can't say what that meaning is but they do have it. If they are ment to die, they should. If I baby died inside a mother, it still had a reason for those days of being there. It the killer killed the child, then that was ment to happen. Even though it may be hard for some to accept the fact that a death of a child or love one (or anyone/any thing) was ment to happen, it was. Nothing just happens. Nothing was a mistake. Everyting that happens was ment to happen.


Good point here. Suppose there is a purpose for everything, even the sufferring of infants. Maybe to teach us to love more? Who knows. I'll have to think about this some more.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
What difference would it make? Nobody has free will anyway! (At least, not with an omniscient god). And it seems to me that taking away the free will of a sadistic killer to spare the life of a child IS better. Or, do you disagree?

Actually, I do disagree. Here's why...

I believe that we do have free will. (Even with an omniscient God.) To take that away, even if it is something like what you used in your example, would be you inflicting your will on to others, which is a step backwards, in my opinion. You would be removing something that you don't agree with, and while it is admittedly something that very few people actually do agree with, it is still not for you to decide. Free will, my friend, free will.

How about if I don't agree with abortion. (Which is also, IMO, the killing of a child.) I could just implant everyone's brain and say no more abortion's for anyone. Would that be right for me to do? No. It's not up to me to decide what's best for everyone else, it's up to them to decide for themselves.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:47 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Actually, I do disagree. Here's why...

I believe that we do have free will. (Even with an omniscient God.) To take that away, even if it is something like what you used in your example, would be you inflicting your will on to others, which is a step backwards, in my opinion. You would be removing something that you don't agree with, and while it is admittedly something that very few people actually do agree with, it is still not for you to decide. Free will, my friend, free will.

How about if I don't agree with abortion. (Which is also, IMO, the killing of a child.) I could just implant everyone's brain and say no more abortion's for anyone. Would that be right for me to do? No. It's not up to me to decide what's best for everyone else, it's up to them to decide for themselves.

Okay. I concede that point. BUT: If I was god, I wouldn't give men nipples! And I wouldn't give them an appendix. That thing does nothing but get infected and threaten people's lives. :)

Freddy Krueger.
06-30-2004, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay. I concede that point. BUT: If I was god, I wouldn't give men nipples! And I wouldn't give them an appendix. That thing does nothing but get infected and threaten people's lives. :) I like this God.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 01:50 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Well, the difference here is that god supposedly knows with divine certainty. Which is different than the knowledge my friend has. Take these two scenarios:

Scenario 1:

You are born, you go through life, then one day as you are crossing the street you get hit by a car and die.

Scenario 2:

You are born, you go through life, then one day you get a message from god in a fortune cookie that says: "You will be hit by a car and die tomorrow while you are crossing the street."
You do everything you can to avoid the street. You stay home, watch TV ... then you fall asleep. You wake up in the middle of the road (sleepwalking?? You've never done that before!) and you get hit by a car and die.

The second scenario is almost the same as the first ... the only difference is you shared in god's knowledge for a brief time. But you were still unable to change your fate. (Assuming that god never lies, and is never wrong). If god knows your life, from beginning to end, then you are destined to live that life ... you cannot change it. The fact that you are ignorant of what god knows gives you the illusion that you have free will. But if you had god's knowledge of ONLY your life, that illusion would disappear. You would go through your life, knowing everything that would happen, being completely unable to change any of it.

Let me paraphrase what I get out of this... "If you had God's knowledge, then you would know your course of predestination."

Well, that's partially true. If you had God's view of the universe and complete absense of time, then yes, you would be able to see how things will end up for you, but once again, it will only be because you are seeing all of time at once.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:55 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Let me paraphrase what I get out of this... "If you had God's knowledge, then you would know your course of predestination."

Well, that's partially true. If you had God's view of the universe and complete absense of time, then yes, you would be able to see how things will end up for you, but once again, it will only be because you are seeing all of time at once.

Yes, you would know your course of predestination AND would be unable to change it. The difference, when it comes to free will, lies in what you know and what you don't know. It wouldn't feel like free will if you had god's knowledge of your life. But you don't, so it feels like you have the power of choice. But the idea is that the knoweldge is there! Only, you don't have it. God does. Here's the thing:

You say: "I have free will. Just because God knows the choices I will make, does not mean I still do not have the choice. Choice = free will."

I say: "You don't have free will. Because god knows the choices you will make, they aren't really choices at all ... you just think they are."

And I'm afraid we may have to leave it at that.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 01:56 AM
Alrighty y'all...

Good conversation/debate! But I'm tired, so I'm going to bed now.


P.S. LOL @ erasing men's nipples. Who needs 'em?

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 01:57 AM
Originally posted by bwind22
Alrighty y'all...

Good conversation/debate! But I'm tired, so I'm going to bed now.


P.S. LOL @ erasing men's nipples. Who needs 'em?

Well ... some guys like to pierce them. Go fig. Yes, great conversation. Thank you all! My daughter woke up with a nightmare in the middle of it, so now I need to put her back to bed. Good night!

bwind22
06-30-2004, 02:01 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
You say: "I have free will. Just because God knows the choices I will make, does not mean I still do not have the choice. Choice = free will."

I say: "You don't have free will. Because god knows the choices you will make, they aren't really choices at all ... you just think they are."

And I'm afraid we may have to leave it at that.

I say: We do have free will because we get to make our own decisions. God knows what we will choose because he can see all of time at once.

You say: Because God can see all of time at once and thereby knows our decisions, we really have no control over them and thereby, we have no free will, only a predestined course of actions.

I say: Just because God knows what we will choose doesn't make the decisions any less our own. He can just see the future as the present and is aware of what we will decide.

You say: If he knows what we will decide, then there is no free will.

I say: It's still free will because the decisions we make belong to us. He just sees the end result.

But, you're right, we should leave it at that. We could go around in circles all night pondering the mysteries of the universe, but I'm tired.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 04:56 AM
I know somebody out there is going to hate me for reviving this, but it is very interesting. And I Still applaud everyone for keeping it civil.

I have a quick question. If we accept that A. God exists and B. People have free will and C. God NEVER makes a mistake (which, personally, I think all of you put way too much pressure on the guy....if he is there.) How do we get Kind god/Wrathful god? If he knows we are going to make mistakes, knows that we will turn into what we have, why did Sodom and Gammora get destroyed?

He seemed awfully pissed off then, but he knew it was coming, he KNEW it wouldnt change. So why the anger? Also, if we accept the great Deluge as fact (i would like to see proof. i have seen evidence in PART of the world (i watch a Lot of Discovery channel), but certainly nothing world wide), why did God kill off all those people? He knew what decisions they would make, and how they would turn out, but was angry with them none the less.


maybe i am jumping to conclusions here, but the only reason i could see for someone getting angry over something like that, would be if they thought the people might change, or behave differently, but they didnt. However, that is naiveté, which is a flaw. Technically. And God is supposedly flawless.

Which brings up another point. Perhaps if there is a god "he" is near-omniscient, and near-omnipotent, but not quite. Maybe religious folks have a complex like a lot of kids do:

Dad is perfect, dad can do no wrong, dad could kill a dragon with a toothpick because he took karate once when he was a kid.

When in Reality, Dad can do a whole shitload of things, but dad isnt 100% infallible. He yelled at mom once, spanked you because you knocked over the paint can, and yelled at the dog for crapping in the yard, but he still loves you, he still works hard for you, and he would still do anything in his power for you.

Just a layman's theory, feel free to disagree, but even though i dont believe in him, that is how i think he would be if he turned out to be.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 07:19 AM
Actually, the guy who wrote "Why Bad Things Happen to Good People" finally ended up conceding this point. Eventually, his argument brought him to the revelation that god could not be perfect (i.e. "omnibenevolent, omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient".) A god that is all good, and all powerful, would not allow evil in the world. And yet, evil is. He could allow it, and choose to do nothing about it ... but then he is not omnibenevolent (in the true sense of the word), or maybe he doesn't allow it, but cannot do anything about it (in which case, he is not omnipotent).

And I agree with your point on the Good God/Wrathful God. I bring this up in these discussions as well. If we are talking about the Christian God, read Genesis 6:5-7.

6 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."
7 "And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; or it repenteth me that I have made them."

Now, why would god feel regret that he made man, particularly if he KNEW that man would turn out this way? And, after he destroys man, he comes to the realization that he may have made a mistake and acted out of anger. Read Genesis 8:21.

8 "And the Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every living thing, as I have done."

Here he says: "Oooo ... I shouldn't have done that. Man is evil by nature, and will not change no matter how many times I wipe him out. Well ... I don't do it again. And here's a rainbow to prove it." The rainbow he puts up a little later.

So, God feels regret TWICE! And admits to making a mistake. He can't be perfect. But, I still have a problem with him allowing some the evil he allows. It's like, if I made a robot, KNOWING that the robot would go on a murderous rampage as soon as I was done, but I made it anyway ... and then sent the robot to hell (or, utterly destroyed it because it did what I knew it would do when I made it) ... seems a little off-kilter. I should never have made the thing in the first place. If god knew I was going to hell before I was even born ... then spare me the sufferring and don't let me be born! Save us all the trouble. I would do that for a child I cared about.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 07:31 AM
And all of this comes back to one thing:

We "know" this from the Bible, the Bibkle was written by man, the same type of men who say "we can not know the mind of God", yet still want us to accept that they know at least more than we do....:rolleyes:

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 07:36 AM
As far as the flood goes ... Have you ever read "The Epic of Gilgamesh"? It is an epic poem that predates the Bible. In fact, it is the oldest work of literature that we have. In it, there is a flood myth that is VERY similar to the one detailed in the Bible. So, I'm beginning to think that there just may have been a flood at some point back then.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 07:49 AM
I watched something on the Discovery Channel once that pointed to an area around (I think) the dead sea, where they found evidence that it was once MUCH deeper, but there was a crack in the geologic dike that held back the water, and that the sea emptied in a massive "dam breaking". According to their studies, it would have had a massive impact on the entire region, which just so happens to be the part of the world that all of these tales come from.

If i can find moreinfo, i will post it. it was a very interesting parallel between the a "Bible story" and an actual event.

It also goes a long way to show how things can get blown up in the telling. But then again, if to you, the middle east is the world, and it gets flooded, then technically, the world was flooded.

If china was unaffected, it wouldnt matter, because you didnt even know it existed.

Egekrusher
06-30-2004, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by misterX
ya you people are correct, and what about the jews? o boy.
and the big bang is a unproven myth and always will be, sorry to say, but if the universe began as they say, there would multiple "centres" (for the lack of a better word,) not just one. the one thing atheist often leave out when describbing either " the big bang' , which is now called the big expansion by some. (another thing the big bang theorist have been proved wrong about). or evolution. is the word 'THEORY" . because thats all they are. theories. But scienctist will always preach what they, think might have happen as a fact. rather than a theory. like the how the moon came to be. they don't know. because they have never witnessed a moon being formed or caught in a planets gravitaional pull. So they just theorieze and people will take that as matter of fact.and as far as the moon being formed because something big slammed into earth while it was a big ball of magma. didn't happen sorry.

o_0

I don't know what that was, but it wasn't an argument. It was just you saying, "No, didn't happen that way, sorry".

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
o_0

I don't know what that was, but it wasn't an argument. It was just you saying, "No, didn't happen that way, sorry".

Yeah, i enjoy people who make "absolute" statements about thuings they couldnt possibly know....

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 08:38 AM
Yeah, that whole thing took place at like ... 3am this morning. It was horrible. I can't stand arguing with people who strut about thinking the knowledge they made up is real. Good thing I had the sources handy.

Egekrusher
06-30-2004, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by Freddy Krueger.
No, no you couldn't. No one could. God IS perfection. God knows everything. From the smallest little secret to the biggest darkest secret. He knows the past, future, and present. Although some may think God made a mistake with the planet or something, it was NOT him. It was Satan. The wicked beast. He got some of the foolish ones and turned them bad. They got overwelmed with greed and selfishness. And God can't just stop it himself, it everything was gave to you you too will become selfish. He does stop it but not by himself. It is his believers that will help stop it. And you may not believe it but God did stop it. You may think that it was only those believers who stopped it but God is the one who got in those believes hearts and mad ethem stop it. But now days greed is overwelming everyone. The Bible even says that one day the world will end. And you shouldn't be scared of death, unless you know that you have commited horrible sins and will be sent to hell. Those who haven't commited sin and have a pure heart will be sent to heaven. They shouldn't dear death. In heaven you are never sad. Always ahppy. Never bored and never feel pain.

If that is the case, why didn't God just get rid of Satan? Why does he let him exist at all, if he is truly good and pure? Why let something exist that you KNOW is going to cause pain and sufferring?

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 08:41 AM
Here is my concessionarry "layman's theory". It lets god exist, but allows for fallability. Sorry, Pobody's Nerfect, as the mug says.

Originally posted by Vodstok
I know somebody out there is going to hate me for reviving this, but it is very interesting. And I Still applaud everyone for keeping it civil.

I have a quick question. If we accept that A. God exists and B. People have free will and C. God NEVER makes a mistake (which, personally, I think all of you put way too much pressure on the guy....if he is there.) How do we get Kind god/Wrathful god? If he knows we are going to make mistakes, knows that we will turn into what we have, why did Sodom and Gammora get destroyed?

He seemed awfully pissed off then, but he knew it was coming, he KNEW it wouldnt change. So why the anger? Also, if we accept the great Deluge as fact (i would like to see proof. i have seen evidence in PART of the world (i watch a Lot of Discovery channel), but certainly nothing world wide), why did God kill off all those people? He knew what decisions they would make, and how they would turn out, but was angry with them none the less.


maybe i am jumping to conclusions here, but the only reason i could see for someone getting angry over something like that, would be if they thought the people might change, or behave differently, but they didnt. However, that is naiveté, which is a flaw. Technically. And God is supposedly flawless.

Which brings up another point. Perhaps if there is a god "he" is near-omniscient, and near-omnipotent, but not quite. Maybe religious folks have a complex like a lot of kids do:

Dad is perfect, dad can do no wrong, dad could kill a dragon with a toothpick because he took karate once when he was a kid.

When in Reality, Dad can do a whole shitload of things, but dad isnt 100% infallible. He yelled at mom once, spanked you because you knocked over the paint can, and yelled at the dog for crapping in the yard, but he still loves you, he still works hard for you, and he would still do anything in his power for you.

Just a layman's theory, feel free to disagree, but even though i dont believe in him, that is how i think he would be if he turned out to be.

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 08:44 AM
I think it's crazy how religious people are like atheists when it comes to science. They are quick to say that scientific explanations are myths ... despite the obvious piles of evidence. Yet, they believe whole-heartedly in something that has no evidence at all. It's like --- Hello? Did you get your definitions for "truth" and "myth" completely mixed up?

Egekrusher
06-30-2004, 08:51 AM
I know, I used to be Christian.. for six months. Mainly, I just wanted a chance to figure out what it was really all about. I really respect truly religious people, for they are some of the nicest and most moral people in the world. It's the ones that abuse it that you have to worry about.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 08:53 AM
Logic and proof are faith's enemies, and many (if not most) people with faith will agree with this. Faith erradicates the need for proof, which then becomes a burden that is swept aside.

Ned Flander put it best:
"Science is liek a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you the ending."

And Homer:
"Facts, Schmacts... Facts can be used to prove anything that is even remotely true...."

Egekrusher
06-30-2004, 08:55 AM
Here's another theory of mine that I actually kind of stole from Anne Rice's "Memnoch The Devil".

Basically, God is not this all-powerful being that we imagine him to be. He is another life form, beyond what we can perceive because of our physical and mental limitations. He is using the physical Universe (the one we know) as a laboratory experiment. He is trying to figure out how he came to exist. He is watching us evolve and grow, watching for the next evolutionary step that allows us to, for example, use telepathy or telekinesis or things of that nature. He is convinced that, at one point, he was actually a physical being at one point, and that he evolved into what he is today.

Trippy, huh? But it would make a hell of a lot more sense than current religious views.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
I know, I used to be Christian.. for six months. Mainly, I just wanted a chance to figure out what it was really all about. I really respect truly religious people, for they are some of the nicest and most moral people in the world. It's the ones that abuse it that you have to worry about.

It's funny, for truly good religious people, I have always felt a little sad that such good people required a crutch.

The funny thing is, they usually feel the same way, sort of. Like I live life with no hope or anything. i have tons of hope, for reachable things, and some for unreachable. I still buy lottery tickets :D

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
It's funny, for truly good religious people, I have always felt a little sad that such good people required a crutch.

The funny thing is, they usually feel the same way, sort of. Like I live life with no hope or anything. i have tons of hope, for reachable things, and some for unreachable. I still buy lottery tickets :D

Yeah, I hate having to explain to people that I am not depressed about my life ending. I like this explanation of life after death given by Socrates: "an eternal sleep, undisturbed even by dreams." Sounds pretty relaxing and comforting if you ask me. I would hate to have to spend eternity praising the Lord in heaven (I couldn't stand an hour of it on Sunday, growing up.) And, well ... Nobody wants to go to hell.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 09:08 AM
I started writing a story when i was 19 (I may finish it someday).

it starts at the beginning of Judgement Month. The time-tables got off a little, and there were too many people on Earth for the old "Doomsday" booking system to work, so it was going to take a month to process everyone.

The main character was Damien Triplesix, who had just recently found out he was the anti-christ.

All the people in the world were spereated int o 3 categories:

Those going to Heavan
Those going to Hell
Those going to Purgatory

Heaven was for good christians. When they ascended, they still got to do "good christian" things, like pray a lot and abstain from sex.
Purgatory was where the bad people went.

Hell, as according to hardcore "good" christians, was for everyone else. As lucifer explained it to Damien:
"Hell isnt a Punishment, it is for everyone who isnt christian. You dont honestly think we would punish Jews, Muslims and Athiests for being good people, but picking the wrong book, do you?"

All people were mmarked for their destinations. Hellbound grew horns, Heavenbound halos, and those going to purgatory turned black and white. There was much fighting caused by people who expected a halo, but got horns or b&w....

Stingy Jack
06-30-2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
I started writing a story when i was 19 (I may finish it someday).

it starts at the beginning of Judgement Month. The time-tables got off a little, and there were too many people on Earth for the old "Doomsday" booking system to work, so it was going to take a month to process everyone.

The main character was Damien Triplesix, who had just recently found out he was the anti-christ.

All the people in the world were spereated int o 3 categories:

Those going to Heavan
Those going to Hell
Those going to Purgatory

Heaven was for good christians. When they ascended, they still got to do "good christian" things, like pray a lot and abstain from sex.
Purgatory was where the bad people went.

Hell, as according to hardcore "good" christians, was for everyone else. As lucifer explained it to Damien:
"Hell isnt a Punishment, it is for everyone who isnt christian. You dont honestly think we would punish Jews, Muslims and Athiests for being good people, but picking the wrong book, do you?"

All people were mmarked for their destinations. Hellbound grew horns, Heavenbound halos, and those going to purgatory turned black and white. There was much fighting caused by people who expected a halo, but got horns or b&w....

Sounds interesting. But Purgatory is actually like a temporary hell. Those people will end up going to heaven after they have suffered long enough in Purgatory. Speaking of which ... I need to go to my "Deathwatch" thread and put what I think happened to Y Company in that film.

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 09:18 AM
That was the catch, they got it wrong :)

orangestar
06-30-2004, 12:06 PM
This is such an interesting thread.

I dont understand something though. So Hell isnt pits of fire and torture? If God isnt going to punish Jews and Muslims to eternal pain in hell, then what happens to them? And what happens to Atheists?

So many questions....

Vodstok
06-30-2004, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
This is such an interesting thread.

I dont understand something though. So Hell isnt pits of fire and torture? If God isnt going to punish Jews and Muslims to eternal pain in hell, then what happens to them? And what happens to Atheists?

So many questions....
Well, in hell, you do all kinds of NON-christian things. Listen to loud music, drink, fool around, shoot at annoying little rat-dogs that yip all night....

orangestar
06-30-2004, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Vodstok
Well, in hell, you do all kinds of NON-christian things. Listen to loud music, drink, fool around, shoot at annoying little rat-dogs that yip all night....

oh no, wouldnt want to live like that for eternity!

Egekrusher
06-30-2004, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
oh no, wouldnt want to live like that for eternity!

I'd rather live my afterlife in a Hell like that than live my afterlife in a Heaven based on submission and servitude.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 02:42 PM
You people have a slightly warped vision of heaven and hell.

Once you are in heaven, it isn't like you do nothing but pray and serve God all day long. Heaven is the place where you are rewarded for the good life you lead while you are on Earth. You would experience an eternity of the most pleasurable feelings imaginable. (Picture your best orgasm only a couple million times greater pleasurable feelings.)

As for Hell, you don't get to smoke weed and drink 40's all day while screwing numerous hoes in Hell either. It is an eternity of the most painful agony you can imagine. (Actually, you probably can't imagine the suffering. It's inconceivable to us.)

Stingy is right about Purgatory. That is where you would end up if you lead a pretty good life, but died with some sins on your soul. (Not major sins, for those you would go to Hell.) In purgatory, you experience the same suffering as Hell, however it is temporary and eventually you will end up being admitted into Heaven.

Limbo was the place that the good souls who had died collected before Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, thereby allowing us to enter Heaven. Once Jesus died for the sins of man, those souls were admitted into Heaven.

Egekrusher
06-30-2004, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by bwind22
You people have a slightly warped vision of heaven and hell.

Once you are in heaven, it isn't like you do nothing but pray and serve God all day long. Heaven is the place where you are rewarded for the good life you lead while you are on Earth. You would experience an eternity of the most pleasurable feelings imaginable. (Picture your best orgasm only a couple million times greater pleasurable feelings.)

As for Hell, you don't get to smoke weed and drink 40's all day while screwing numerous hoes in Hell either. It is an eternity of the most painful agony you can imagine. (Actually, you probably can't imagine the suffering. It's inconceivable to us.)

Stingy is right about Purgatory. That is where you would end up if you lead a pretty good life, but died with some sins on your soul. (Not major sins, for those you would go to Hell.) In purgatory, you experience the same suffering as Hell, however it is temporary and eventually you will end up being admitted into Heaven.

Limbo was the place that the good souls who had died collected before Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, thereby allowing us to enter Heaven. Once Jesus died for the sins of man, those souls were admitted into Heaven.

Actually, we were discussing a story that Vodstok was writing.

bwind22
06-30-2004, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
I think it's crazy how religious people are like atheists when it comes to science. They are quick to say that scientific explanations are myths ... despite the obvious piles of evidence. Yet, they believe whole-heartedly in something that has no evidence at all. It's like --- Hello? Did you get your definitions for "truth" and "myth" completely mixed up?

I believe in both. Science is wonderful! It helps us to understand worldly things. What is the sun? Oh, it's a burning ball of gas. Where does rain come from? Ahh, condensation in the air. How come that fish at the bottom of the ocean has a light on it's head? Oh, that's evolution, oh okay.

I just happen to also believe that all of these wheels were set in motion by a being far greater than ourselves.

I do not believe that science has disproved the existance of God. (And I'm sure there's plenty of scientists out there trying to do it, too.) To believe in God, one must have faith. The faith to believe in something that they have never seen and that has never been proven to exist. It's a tough thing for a lot of people to do.

Since we were quoting the Bible earlier, I'll leave you with this quote...

After Jesus was crucified, he rose from the dead. Two of the apostles saw his empty tomb and ran back to tell the other apostles. One of the other apostles, Thomas, was completely skeptical and said that he wouldn't believe that Jesus had risen from the dead until he could put his finger through the nail holes in his hands and put his hand into the sword hole in his side. The next day, while the apostles were all having dinner in a locked room (They were being semi-persecuted for having associated with Jesus.) when out of nowhere, Jesus appeared. He spoke to Thomas and told him to go ahead and put his hands in his wounds. Thomas didn't even need to, he broke down and cried for doubting Jesus. Jesus told him...

"You believe because you have seen, but blessed are those who have not seen, yet still believe."

bwind22
06-30-2004, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
Actually, we were discussing a story that Vodstok was writing.

I know that. I read the thread. That was why I called it a 'slightly warped vision' and not flat out wrong. ;) I was just mentioning what Christianity believes.

bloodygurl02
06-30-2004, 08:56 PM
i would say god looks like this

misterX
07-01-2004, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
I'll couple this with bwind's comment about the preists. Here is my #1 problem with the Catholic Church (sorry if you are Catholic, feel free to hate me):
Catholacism was started in the Holy Roman Empire, by Constantine.

Constantine was not Christian to begin with. he didnt believe in it one bit.

But, His mother was. And one day, she told him that he would die if he did not convert. So he did. And he spent an ridiculous amount of money building churches and ornate edifaces to jesus and god. and he made everyone under him convert.

So Catholacism came to be because a heretic was afraid that he would die if he didnt start praying to god.
how wrong you are. sorry to act like i know it all, ubt hey! when ya do, ya do. it's true constantine wasn't born a christian. ut he didn't convert because of his mother at all. he converted after he had a dream on a eve of a major battle, in which he stood little hope of winning. but he had a dream where if he was to paint a cross on his soldeirs sheilds. victory would be his. so he did. and it was. then he converted. i know you will dismiss this, cause a man converting the most powerful empire the world has ever seen, because of a dream/ vision doesn't sound as exciting as a man converting cause he was crazy and his mummy made him do it, to a atheist :)

misterX
07-01-2004, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by Vodstok
Yeah, i enjoy people who make "absolute" statements about thuings they couldnt possibly know....
and you don't?

misterX
07-01-2004, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Yeah, that whole thing took place at like ... 3am this morning. It was horrible. I can't stand arguing with people who strut about thinking the knowledge they made up is real. Good thing I had the sources handy. well you need to renew your sources.

misterX
07-01-2004, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Well, the difference here is that god supposedly knows with divine certainty. Which is different than the knowledge my friend has. Take these two scenarios:

Scenario 1:

You are born, you go through life, then one day as you are crossing the street you get hit by a car and die.

Scenario 2:

You are born, you go through life, then one day you get a message from god in a fortune cookie that says: "You will be hit by a car and die tomorrow while you are crossing the street."
You do everything you can to avoid the street. You stay home, watch TV ... then you fall asleep. You wake up in the middle of the road (sleepwalking?? You've never done that before!) and you get hit by a car and die.

The second scenario is almost the same as the first ... the only difference is you shared in god's knowledge for a brief time. But you were still unable to change your fate. (Assuming that god never lies, and is never wrong). If god knows your life, from beginning to end, then you are destined to live that life ... you cannot change it. The fact that you are ignorant of what god knows gives you the illusion that you have free will. But if you had god's knowledge of ONLY your life, that illusion would disappear. You would go through your life, knowing everything that would happen, being completely unable to change any of it.
you're still wrong, you see the thing is god doesn't go around giving us meassages in fortune cookies. so scenario 2. is redundant really isn't it?

misterX
07-01-2004, 12:58 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
I'd rather live my afterlife in a Hell like that than live my afterlife in a Heaven based on submission and servitude. ya , you're right in hell, we'll be able to roam free far and wide doing what we want when we want. *rolls eyes*

misterX
07-01-2004, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
o_0

I don't know what that was, but it wasn't an argument. It was just you saying, "No, didn't happen that way, sorry". it wasn't meant to be a argument. i was stating a fact that i know is right.

misterX
07-01-2004, 01:08 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Yes, you would know your course of predestination AND would be unable to change it. The difference, when it comes to free will, lies in what you know and what you don't know. It wouldn't feel like free will if you had god's knowledge of your life. But you don't, so it feels like you have the power of choice. But the idea is that the knoweldge is there! Only, you don't have it. God does. Here's the thing:

You say: "I have free will. Just because God knows the choices I will make, does not mean I still do not have the choice. Choice = free will."

I say: "You don't have free will. Because god knows the choices you will make, they aren't really choices at all ... you just think they are."

And I'm afraid we may have to leave it at that.
how do you know we wouldn't be able to change it?

misterX
07-01-2004, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
I think it's crazy how religious people are like atheists when it comes to science. They are quick to say that scientific explanations are myths ... despite the obvious piles of evidence. Yet, they believe whole-heartedly in something that has no evidence at all. It's like --- Hello? Did you get your definitions for "truth" and "myth" completely mixed up?
O you're so right, there as never been any christian scientist.
and two if you're talking about me saying that the big bang is a myth well it is. there is no proof of it, thats why its called a theory. and of course there is no absolute evidence of god. thats why its called "faith". so ya ido know the diff between truth and myth. but do you know the diff between the meaning of fact and theory?

misterX
07-01-2004, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
I know, I used to be Christian.. for six months. Mainly, I just wanted a chance to figure out what it was really all about. I really respect truly religious people, for they are some of the nicest and most moral people in the world. It's the ones that abuse it that you have to worry about. LOL
How can you say "I used to be Christian.. for six months. Mainly, I just wanted a chance to figure out"? Did you say, " i'm going to be christian today to see what its like"? LOL it takes more than that to be a christian, jew, muslim or hindu. or what ever. faith is a lot more than just saying that you're one. more than going to church, or reading a bible

jay o2 waster
07-01-2004, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by misterX
LOL
How can you say "I used to be Christian.. for six months. Mainly, I just wanted a chance to figure out"? Did you say, " i'm going to be christian today to see what its like"? LOL it takes more than that to be a christian, jew, muslim or hindu. or what ever. faith is a lot more than just saying that you're one. more than going to church, or reading a bible
ShUt Up

misterX
07-01-2004, 03:55 AM
well well mister gay-0-washer and his power ranger bangle/wrist bands

Egekrusher
07-01-2004, 06:41 AM
Go away. Please.

Stingy Jack
07-01-2004, 07:33 AM
Well, MisterX just basically came back and spoke as if everything we had discussed didn't really happen. I gave him the definition of scientific "Theory", and I already said that, to a scientist, "Theory" is about as close to fact as you can get, without actually being a fact or a law. Scientific theories, if you'll go back to the definitions I provided (from textbooks and dictionaries, not my head) are hypotheses that have been extensively tested and relied upon with high degrees of confidence. It is more than a mere "guess", which you insist on using "theory" to mean. The layman uses the word "theory" in the same way he uses "guess". But that is not the way I am using it.

As far as the Big Bang goes, there is a LOT of evidence to support the theory ... which is why it is a scientific theory and not just a guess. One of the simplest bits of evidence is the fact that the matter we observe in space is moving away from us. By simple reasoning if you play the universe in reverse, the matter would move toward us, and ultimately converge at a common point. Something sent this matter hurtling outward ... this something we refer to as the Big Bang.

And how is it that you know for a fact that the moon was not formed by an object striking the Earth while it was in it's magma state? Sure, my source is five years old (and I'm not about to argue that that is not a significant amount of time for a scientific document to be outdated), but I listen to and read the news on a daily basis. I have yet to hear the announcement: "Astronomers have discovered the truth behind the formation of the moon." You know FOR A FACT that my source was wrong. So, how? Let's see if you really know the difference between fact and theory.

As far as us not being able to change our destiny because God already knows our future ... well, that's simple. Of course, we're talking about God, here, and I don't claim to understand the nature of something that doesn't exist, but I am working from a few assumptions about God's knowledge: 1) It is divine and perfect. What God knows to happen, WILL happen. It will not change. 2) If God told us what will happen, it will still not change. And I know God doesn't leave messages for us in fortune cookies. That was an hypothetical situation employed to show how we do not control our own fates (no free will). This idea is more dramatically shown in the case where "what if we KNOW our fate?" It doesn't matter. Still can't change it. Whether or know your fate or not does not change the idea that you cannot choose your own destiny. If you COULD change it, then that would mean that a) God's knowledge is not perfect. He didn't really know what your fate was to begin with, or b) he lied to you when he told you what your future held. But I was assuming that his knowledge IS perfect, and that he never lies.

fattybluetit
07-01-2004, 08:00 AM
i take my hat off and cheesy walls balls to you sir you really are the king of the long post

Stingy Jack
07-01-2004, 08:19 AM
Originally posted by fattybluetit
i take my hat off and cheesy walls balls to you sir you really are the king of the long post

LOL! Not Walls Balls again!!!

Stingy Jack
07-01-2004, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by misterX
how wrong you are. sorry to act like i know it all, ubt hey! when ya do, ya do.

Okay ... This sentence all by itself is my cue to stop debating with you. Anyone who has any education worth its salt never says that they know it all. Socrates said that the only reason the oracle stated he was the wisest man was because he knew that he knew nothing ... whereas everyone else thought they knew everything. All this does is show me that you are too ignorant to even realize that you are ignorant (just like we ALL are ignorant, to a certain extent.) You've already demonstrated that you're the type of guy who will be shown evidence that contradicts what he currently believed, and is too arrogant to change his belief in light of the evidence (I am referring to the "Moon" reference I posted.) You merely dismissed the evidence as "wrong", to keep from feeling/sounding stupid. When in actuality, by doing this, you made yourself look more stupid than you would have had you admitted to receiving knowledge that you did not previously have. I admit when I am wrong, and am smart enough to reevaluate what I previously thought to be true when I receive new information. As soon as you give me the sources that you say prove elephants possess a conscious awareness (not instinct) of their own mortality, then I will concede the point to you and rethink my ideas. That is, if the source is both reliable and valid (as in: don't post some crap from website written by an unknown elephant fan who has no educated knowledge on the fundamentals of Biology.) Only then will I continue with this with you. Otherwise, I know from the sentence in your above quote that anything I say will go in one ear and out the other, valid and reasonable, or not. If it doesn't jive with what you believe, you won't listen to or consider it. You'll just pretend you never heard it, and keep on saying the same thing over and over. It's pointless to continue.

Egekrusher
07-01-2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay ... This sentence all by itself is my cue to stop debating with you. Anyone who has any education worth its salt never says that they know it all. Socrates said that the only reason the oracle stated he was the wisest man was because he knew that he knew nothing ... whereas everyone else thought they knew everything. All this does is show me that you are too ignorant to even realize that you are ignorant (just like we ALL are ignorant, to a certain extent.) You've already demonstrated that you're the type of guy who will be shown evidence that contradicts what he currently believed, and is too arrogant to change his belief in light of the evidence (I am referring to the "Moon" reference I posted.) You merely dismissed the evidence as "wrong", to keep from feeling/sounding stupid. When in actuality, by doing this, you made yourself look more stupid than you would have had you admitted to receiving knowledge that you did not previously have. I admit when I am wrong, and am smart enough to reevaluate what I previously thought to be true when I receive new information. As soon as you give me the sources that you say prove elephants possess a conscious awareness (not instinct) of their own mortality, then I will concede the point to you and rethink my ideas. That is, if the source is both reliable and valid (as in: don't post some crap from website written by an unknown elephant fan who has no educated knowledge on the fundamentals of Biology.) Only then will I continue with this with you. Otherwise, I know from the sentence in your above quote that anything I say will go in one ear and out the other, valid and reasonable, or not. If it doesn't jive with what you believe, you won't listen to or consider it. You'll just pretend you never heard it, and keep on saying the same thing over and over. It's pointless to continue.

Right on man. I like you.

Stingy Jack
07-01-2004, 10:48 AM
You're pretty cool yourself. :)

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack



I have yet to hear the announcement: "Astronomers have discovered the truth behind the formation of the moon."

As far as us not being able to change our destiny because God already knows our future ... well, that's simple. Of course, we're talking about God, here, and I don't claim to understand the nature of something that doesn't exist, but I am working from a few assumptions about God's knowledge: 1) It is divine and perfect. What God knows to happen, WILL happen. It will not change. 2) If God told us what will happen, it will still not change. And I know God doesn't leave messages for us in fortune cookies. That was an hypothetical situation employed to show how we do not control our own fates (no free will). This idea is more dramatically shown in the case where "what if we KNOW our fate?" It doesn't matter. Still can't change it. Whether or know your fate or not does not change the idea that you cannot choose your own destiny. If you COULD change it, then that would mean that a) God's knowledge is not perfect. He didn't really know what your fate was to begin with, or b) he lied to you when he told you what your future held. But I was assuming that his knowledge IS perfect, and that he never lies.
well lets see. the way you spoke about theformation of themoon it indicated you DID know how it formed. and lets see.....what else o yes, you claim god doesnt excist, yet you then go on to talk about gods knowledge. and no you haven't explained how by someone knowing what someone isgoingto do is taking away there free will to do what ever they chose to do. "if god told us wha twill happen"? wtf do you mean? why all the if's? the thing is god hasn't told us whats going to happen. and if he did HOW do you know we can't change it? you talk in absolutes about a subject where there can be no absolutes. you're trying to make the rules or laws up as you go along! You say that " If you COULD change it, then that would mean that a) God's knowledge is not perfect. He didn't really know what your fate was to begin with, or b) he lied to you when he told you what your future held. " you see, he didn't tell me what my future held so again your argyment is redundant. i'm sure you're used to that aren't you? all you need to do is to stop talking about hypothetical's as if they were fact. you contradict yourself so many time it has stopped being funny

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by misterX
well lets see. the way you spoke about theformation of themoon it indicated you DID know how it formed. and lets see.....what else o yes, you claim god doesnt excist, yet you then go on to talk about gods knowledge. and no you haven't explained how by someone knowing what someone isgoingto do is taking away there free will to do what ever they chose to do. "if god told us wha twill happen"? wtf do you mean? why all the if's? the thing is god hasn't told us whats going to happen. and if he did HOW do you know we can't change it? you talk in absolutes about a subject where there can be no absolutes. you're trying to make the rules or laws up as you go along! You say that " If you COULD change it, then that would mean that a) God's knowledge is not perfect. He didn't really know what your fate was to begin with, or b) he lied to you when he told you what your future held. " you see, he didn't tell me what my future held so again your argyment is redundant. i'm sure you're used to that aren't you? all you need to do is to stop talking about hypothetical's as if they were fact. you contradict yourself so many time it has stopped being funny


I've read your guy's argument, and here's what it sounds like you're saying:

We have no free will at all. God is making me type this right now, and there is nothing I can do to change anything God says will happen because it's my destiny or whatever and he's perfect so It is, how they say, his way or the highway.

So if we have no free will, then why isnt everyone Christian? Why didnt God just MAKE everyone believe in him? Did he pick and choose people like me and Stingy and Ege to burn in hell for all eternity, because we dont believe in him? Seems like a pretty fucked up God. Not so forgiving after all.

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay ... This sentence all by itself is my cue to stop debating with you. Anyone who has any education worth its salt never says that they know it all. Socrates said that the only reason the oracle stated he was the wisest man was because he knew that he knew nothing ... whereas everyone else thought they knew everything. All this does is show me that you are too ignorant to even realize that you are ignorant (just like we ALL are ignorant, to a certain extent.) You've already demonstrated that you're the type of guy who will be shown evidence that contradicts what he currently believed, and is too arrogant to change his belief in light of the evidence (I am referring to the "Moon" reference I posted.) You merely dismissed the evidence as "wrong", to keep from feeling/sounding stupid. When in actuality, by doing this, you made yourself look more stupid than you would have had you admitted to receiving knowledge that you did not previously have. I admit when I am wrong, and am smart enough to reevaluate what I previously thought to be true when I receive new information. As soon as you give me the sources that you say prove elephants possess a conscious awareness (not instinct) of their own mortality, then I will concede the point to you and rethink my ideas. That is, if the source is both reliable and valid (as in: don't post some crap from website written by an unknown elephant fan who has no educated knowledge on the fundamentals of Biology.) Only then will I continue with this with you. Otherwise, I know from the sentence in your above quote that anything I say will go in one ear and out the other, valid and reasonable, or not. If it doesn't jive with what you believe, you won't listen to or consider it. You'll just pretend you never heard it, and keep on saying the same thing over and over. It's pointless to continue.
ok. now with the quote by Socrates. just because someone says something catchie, doesn't make it true. and as far as the moon goes. if the earth was hit by a object big enough and hard enough to displace a mass as big as the moon it would have destroyed it. and lets say it didn't destroy it. if the earth was hit by a object hard enough to make a mass as big as that break the gravitaional pull of the earth. the earth would not be able to hold it in place. the moon would totaly escape the earths pull. its just simple reasoning. but most atheist are too retarded, to think for themselves, you sit there and absorb anything that would try and discredit the excistance of god like the blind sheep you are. same with the elephants. i'm still looking for that proof, because it was a number of years since i read about it. But in the mean time think about it. do you think animals with as much intelligence as a elephant or dolphin etc. don't know they will die? and not just from a accident or from a predator? come on you stupid atheist sheep think for yourself for once. and speaking of making claims with out any proof. how do you know god doesnt excist? like you claimed in your post? o and i don't see you replying to my discrediting of you on the subject of the constatine matter. lol@ your claims. get your facts right. now you're the one who can be called ignorant. since you believe you are the only one to state claims, asumptions, theories, stories and myths as fact. and by the way trying to insult my intelligence is just a sign that you are truely beaten in this debate. awww insults the last resort of a beaten man.

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by misterX
ok. now with the quote by Socrates. just because someone says something catchie, doesn't make it true. and as far as the moon goes. if the earth was hit by a object big enough and hard enough to displace a mass as big as the moon it would have destroyed it. and lets say it didn't destroy it. if the earth was hit by a object hard enough to make a mass as big as that break the gravitaional pull of the earth. the earth would not be able to hold it in place. the moon would totaly escape the earths pull. its just simple reasoning. but most atheist are too retarded, to think for themselves, you sit there and absorb anything that would try and discredit the excistance of god like the blind sheep you are. same with the elephants. i'm still looking for that proof, because it was a number of years since i read about it. But in the mean time think about it. do you think animals with as much intelligence as a elephant or dolphin etc. don't know they will die? and not just from a accident or from a predator? come on you stupid atheist sheep think for yourself for once. and speaking of making claims with out any proof. how do you know god doesnt excist? like you claimed in your post? o and i don't see you replying to my discrediting of you on the subject of the constatine matter. lol@ your claims. get your facts right. now you're the one who can be called ignorant. since you believe you are the only one to state claims, asumptions, theories, stories and myths as fact. and by the way trying to insult my intelligence is just a sign that you are truely beaten in this debate. awww insults the last resort of a beaten man.

WTF. We're the sheep? I think I remember making a conscious desicion to go AWAY from the pack with becoming an atheist.

Here ya go- Okay. We were wrong on the Constantine thing. Whatever. I accept that. In no way does that prove that there is a God.

Also, you just called us stupid, retarted and sheep, then yelled at us for trying to insult your intelligence. STFU

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
I've read your guy's argument, and here's what it sounds like you're saying:

We have no free will at all. God is making me type this right now, and there is nothing I can do to change anything God says will happen because it's my destiny or whatever and he's perfect so It is, how they say, his way or the highway.

So if we have no free will, then why isnt everyone Christian? Why didnt God just MAKE everyone believe in him? Did he pick and choose people like me and Stingy and Ege to burn in hell for all eternity, because we dont believe in him? Seems like a pretty fucked up God. Not so forgiving after all.
who said you have no freewill? maybe some people are just too stupid to understand what the meaning of a all knowing god means

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by misterX
maybe some people are just too stupid to understand what the meaning of a all knowing god means

awww insults the last resort of a beaten man.


thats all that needs to be said.

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
WTF. We're the sheep? I think I remember making a conscious desicion to go AWAY from the pack with becoming an atheist.

Here ya go- Okay. We were wrong on the Constantine thing. Whatever. I accept that. In no way does that prove that there is a God.

Also, you just called us stupid, retarted and sheep, then yelled at us for trying to insult your intelligence. STFU
did stingy go out and test one of these "theories" himself? i bet not. he read them from a book, so yes that makes him as a big a sheep as any christian, even more so as christians are told what god or jesus did. but we also interpit what that means ourselfs. and i don't see any caps?

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by misterX
did stingy go out and test one of these "theories" himself? i bet not. he read them from a book, so yes that makes him as a big a sheep as any christian, even more so as christians are told what god or jesus did. but we also interpit what that means ourselfs. and i don't see any caps?

WTF did you just say? Learn some basic grammer, then post.

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
thats all that needs to be said.
did i say YOU was too stupid? no i didn't . are you saying everyone in theworld is smart enough to know whata all knowing god is? surely not. it isn't my fault when i make a general observation that you attribute those observations to yourself is it?

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
WTF did you just say? Learn some basic grammer, then post.

BTW its grammar not grammer. learn to spell before you worry about other peoples education

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by misterX
did i say YOU was too stupid? no i didn't . are you saying everyone in theworld is smart enough to know whata all knowing god is? surely not. it isn't my fault when i make a general observation that you attribute those observations to yourself is it?

Yes actually it is your fault. I never said anything about Christians being stupid, retarted, or sheep for believing in God. Just dont resort to name-calling and insults. It just makes you sound immature.

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:34 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
Yes actually it is your fault. I never said anything about Christians being stupid, retarted, or sheep for believing in God. Just dont resort to name-calling and insults. It just makes you sound immature. did i say you? are you paranoid as well as dyslexic?

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by misterX
did i say you? are you paranoid as well as dyslexic?

Here we go again. Can't we just talk about stuff without you insulting me?

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
Here we go again. Can't we just talk about stuff without you insulting me?
yes, i can. can you?

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by misterX
yes, i can. can you?

Well since I have been, I'll go ahead and say yes I can.

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by orangestar
Well since I have been, I'll go ahead and say yes I can. Well since I have been, I'll go ahead and say yes I can.

orangestar
07-01-2004, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by misterX
Well since I have been, I'll go ahead and say yes I can.

You're so cool. You're my idol now. You rock.

kpropain
07-01-2004, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by misterX
BTW its grammar not grammer. learn to spell before you worry about other peoples education

You are a fine one to be talking about spelling skills....

http://dictionary.reference.com/

Here is a hint use it.

And while you are at it go back and study capitalization and punctuation skills. ;)

misterX
07-01-2004, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by kpropain
You are a fine one to be talking about spelling skills....

http://dictionary.reference.com/

Here is a hint use it.

And while you are at it go back and study capitalization and punctuation skills. ;)
lol ole great krapinhand, o great man of the wispy hair. do you say that grammar is spelled grammer too ? if so maybe you need to go to that link yourself. :)

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:21 PM
hey misterx shut the fuck up

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:26 PM
as if. my dimwitted pokemon lovin friend

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:27 PM
first off pokemon and i mean this is one of the greatest if not the greatesa rpg of all time

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:27 PM
O btw. watch the term "as if" start to used by all of my worshippers here, just as excatly, concur and fuck stick was. god its so good being me.

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:28 PM
ok im really starting to think your a nazi whos playing it safe i could be wrong but

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:28 PM
waits for the wails of protest lofllllll

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:30 PM
wtf does that mean

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by KRUGERKID13
ok im really starting to think your a nazi whos playing it safe i could be wrong but
hey now, o he who wears the snoopy pyjammas. show me one post nay thread. where i have started the insults off? i'm no nazi, but if being a nazi means i don't put up with abuse, then sieg heil. my orange power ranger friend

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:34 PM
are you like 3yrs old or somthin whats with these comebacks

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:37 PM
o he who wears big bird slippers. they aren't comebacks, i'm just replying to your post.shesh at the paranoia here

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:38 PM
its official i hate you

Satanicus
07-01-2004, 10:40 PM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
IF god or satan exist (which they don't, I'm just being hypothetical), I doubt that they would have any definite physical properties.
When I was younger I would picture god looking more like zeus from clash of the titans, and satan, more like the devil in legend.

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:41 PM
really? funny. i have absolutly no feelings what so ever towards you. and my picachu (sp) look a like friend, if you feel anything towards me then you need to get off the net for a while, and go sniff some flowers or something. take a walk in the sunshine, go chat to some off line friends. then you'll realize what l or anyone else says here doesn't really amount to a hell of beans

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:44 PM
ok ya know what misterx lets just stop wasting bandwith and move on

misterX
07-01-2004, 10:47 PM
yes. you're right ;ets not waste bandwith. someone might be trying to post something really important, like
"which hand is best to jerk off with, lefty or righty

KRUGERKID13
07-01-2004, 10:48 PM
your not making this easy

misterX
07-02-2004, 12:36 AM
i wasn't trying to be diffcult, i was just reffering to all these stupid "v's" polls

Rebel Yell
07-02-2004, 03:03 AM
I always imagine Satan being extremely handsome. Nice jet black pomp, a soul patch, nicely trimmed sideburns, black eyes, well defined bone structure, and I do believe he dresses much like the Reverend Horton Heat.

Yes.

He is extremely handsome.

Stingy Jack
07-02-2004, 05:44 AM
Originally posted by misterX
well lets see. the way you spoke about theformation of themoon it indicated you DID know how it formed. and lets see.....what else o yes, you claim god doesnt excist, yet you then go on to talk about gods knowledge. and no you haven't explained how by someone knowing what someone isgoingto do is taking away there free will to do what ever they chose to do. "if god told us wha twill happen"? wtf do you mean? why all the if's? the thing is god hasn't told us whats going to happen. and if he did HOW do you know we can't change it? you talk in absolutes about a subject where there can be no absolutes. you're trying to make the rules or laws up as you go along! You say that " If you COULD change it, then that would mean that a) God's knowledge is not perfect. He didn't really know what your fate was to begin with, or b) he lied to you when he told you what your future held. " you see, he didn't tell me what my future held so again your argyment is redundant. i'm sure you're used to that aren't you? all you need to do is to stop talking about hypothetical's as if they were fact. you contradict yourself so many time it has stopped being funny

Okay, this goes against my better judgement ... but here's my reply. When talking about God, you really can't help but to use "ifs" and hypotheticals. I was working with the idea of god that was given to me by the Christians here ... that he is omniscient. I know that omniscient means "all-knowing." Therefore, if God knows all, then he must know your future. I state that as a simple course of logic. If "this," then "that." As to how I KNOW you couldn't change your future if God knows what it is ... well ... because God knows your future. Your future is laid out for you in his mind, and you have to play it out according to what is in his head (I hate talking about God personified, but I do it for the sake of simplicity). The reason why I say you HAVE to play it out according to what is in his head is because if you did something that god didn't know you would do, then god would not be all-knowing. Hence, this is why I say you cannot have free will if there is an omniscient being out there. Now, I am going to use a hypothetical situation again. The reason for this is because it demonstrates how free will is an illusion when there enters an omniscient being. You go through life, thinking you have free will because you cannot see the future. You can make small predictions ... like, if I don't pay the electric bill, they will cut off my power. But you don't truly know the consequences of all of your actions, or what situations you will face in the future and the choices you will make when you face them. And you think that you have the freedom to make any choice you wish. That is how you live your life now.

Enter: Someone who knows everything you will do in the future, and all of the choices you will make. This guy just starts hanging around your apartment, smiling whenever you do something. You finally ask him: "Why are you smiling?" And he says, "I knew you were going to do that." At first you wouldn't believe him. Surely, you're not THAT predictable. So, you ask him for proof. You tell him to write down what you will say in the next five minutes and put it in his pocket. He does so, then you remain silent for four minutes and 58 seconds. At the last second you say "Strawberry." Sure enough, he pulls out a piece of paper that says: "Strawberry." You might be amused and a little creeped out ... but would dismiss it as a parlor trick. He continues with his annoying "I knew you would do that" as the days go by and it really starts to bug you. Finally, you ask him for real proof. No little party trick. He is to go home for two hours and write down everything you will do in his absence. He grins and says "I'll write it down before I leave and leave it in this envelope for you to read when the two hours is up." And you say, "What if I read it BEFORE the two hours is up?" And he responds "You won't." He writes down what you will do for the next two hours and leaves the envelope on the counter before heading out the door. Two hours pass, and you open the envelope. Sure enough, everything you did was detailed exactly on those sheets of paper. You run to his house, and ask him to write down how the rest of your life will go. He says: "You don't really want me to do that. It would feel as if you weren't making any real choices anymore." But you insist, and he does so. You read the book, and then ... suddenly you know everything you are going to do. And your life from then on feels as if you are a slave to the life written down for you in the book. You can't break away from it, you can't change it, you just follow the story. If anything, not just God, but anything knows your future (and I say "know" in the true sense. As in, they know it. They are not wrong), then you do not have free will. Right now, you only think you do because YOU not going gives you the illusion of free will. You are destined to play out your life as it is written in that book, whether you read it or not.

Now, you say the difference here is that God didn't tell you what your future held. This is true, which is why the illusion of free will is still with you. Right now, you THINK you have free will ... but you really don't (if, as you say, an omniscient god exists). And you would KNOW you don't if god told you. The only thing that happens if god tells you your life is you go from thinking you have free will, to feeling like a slave to your life's story. Your life doesn't change. Your future doesn't change. Any of the choices that you make or would have made do not change. The illusion of free will disappears.

That's about as simple as I can get it. Does anybody follow what I'm saying here?

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 06:12 AM
I never had any question as to what you were saying in the first place.

And as to the original question- I believe that if there is a God, he has no true form. He is more an energy being than anything else.

As for Satan- As stated before, he is a trickster, a prankster, very sly and cunning. I'm guessing that he would be very handsome, dresses in Armani suits, and is very, very charming. The thing is, the devil can't MAKE you do anything, he can only try to talk you into doing it, so he has to use every resource at hand.

Stingy Jack
07-02-2004, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by misterX
ok. now with the quote by Socrates. just because someone says something catchie, doesn't make it true. and as far as the moon goes. if the earth was hit by a object big enough and hard enough to displace a mass as big as the moon it would have destroyed it. and lets say it didn't destroy it. if the earth was hit by a object hard enough to make a mass as big as that break the gravitaional pull of the earth. the earth would not be able to hold it in place. the moon would totaly escape the earths pull. its just simple reasoning. but most atheist are too retarded, to think for themselves, you sit there and absorb anything that would try and discredit the excistance of god like the blind sheep you are. same with the elephants. i'm still looking for that proof, because it was a number of years since i read about it. But in the mean time think about it. do you think animals with as much intelligence as a elephant or dolphin etc. don't know they will die? and not just from a accident or from a predator? come on you stupid atheist sheep think for yourself for once. and speaking of making claims with out any proof. how do you know god doesnt excist? like you claimed in your post? o and i don't see you replying to my discrediting of you on the subject of the constatine matter. lol@ your claims. get your facts right. now you're the one who can be called ignorant. since you believe you are the only one to state claims, asumptions, theories, stories and myths as fact. and by the way trying to insult my intelligence is just a sign that you are truely beaten in this debate. awww insults the last resort of a beaten man.

The quote by Socrates ... you don't think it's true? You don't think that people, in general, are ignorant to a certain extent? Do you even KNOW what ignorant means? Ignorant simply means "lacking knowledge." It is OBVIOUS that people are ignorant. Socrates merely states that he is wise because he REALIZES he is ignorant, as opposed to everyone he spoke with who thought they were not. It is TRUE. It's happening right now. I realize that I am ignorant ... about MANY things. YOU, on the other hand, stated that you know it all. I would test you on this by asking you questions, but you would just run to the internet and look up the answers. But, we both know that you CAN'T know it all. If you did, you would be pretty fucking famous.
There are things you DO NOT KNOW, hence you are IGNORANT ... just like everybody else. Capice?


As far as the moon thing goes, you know .... I gave you the theory from an ASTRONOMY text written by ASTRONOMERS. And still you think it is bullshit. The Earth would not have been destroyed because it was in it's magma state. A liquid state. Getting hit, or receiving "a glancing blow" as the source stated, would not destroy it. And as far as the moon escaping the Earth's pull ... they tested this theory with computers ... and if you go back and read the source, you will see where I mention computer simulations (Fig. 8.27). I would post the images from the simulation, but my scanner is missing it's cable. Anyway, the moon is held in place not just by the gravitational pull of the Earth, but by that of every other nearby object in the solar system. Particularly the sun. The piece, according to the pictures, begins more like a spray as it is ripped from the side of the Earth. This spray floats off, and forms into a small sphere itself. I will type the caption for Figure 8.27: "This sequence shows a simulated collision between the Earth and an object the size of Mars. The sequence proceeds top to bottom, and zooms out dramatically. The arrow in the final frame shows the newly formed moon." DID it happen this way? I don't know. It seems reasonable, and I trust that the scientists know what they're doing.

Then you say: "Don't you think that animals as intelligent as elephants or dolphins don't know that they will die? And not by accident or some predator?" No, I don't think they do know. I mean, dolphins sure do spend a lot of time tangling themselves up in fishermen's nets. But really ... you tell me to think for myself. Well, I could sit around and make up what I know about elephants and dolphins ... but I would rather someone teach me. That way, I won't be wrong.

I don't KNOW that god doesn't exist ... just like I don't KNOW that in some other dimension lives the giant, flubbering shit-hill of Aldretch. I just don't believe they do.

The Constantine thing ... that wasn't even my argument. I had nothing to do with any of that. I wasn't even online at the time! Why should I give that point to you when I never argued with you about it in the first place? You say you descredited me with your Constantine thing ... What the hell? Are you confused?

I never stated any theories, myths, or assumptions as fact. If you are referring to the god's "omniscience" thing, go back to my previous thread. I was working from what YOU claimed to be fact: "God is omniscient". Even though I believe that is not true, I worked from that point to show that IF that was true, THEN you cannot have free will. I said IF it was true. Not that it WAS true.

I never called you names. I said you were ignorant. This is a fact. Just as I and everyone else in the world are ignorant. You're just one of those people who refuse to believe it. And I didn't say you were stupid. I said you are making yourself sound stupid. There is a difference. It's not like I said: "You stupid Christian", like you did to me in your last reply. I also said you were arrogant. This, too, is a fact. You say I insulted you as a last resort? What? I have made valid points this whole time which you have yet to refute. I can't help it that you are unable to comprehend my argument about no free will with an omniscient being. I tried and tried to make it as simple as possible. I am not ON my last resort. I am not even past my FIRST resort, since you have yet to refute it or challenge it adequately.

Then you wonder why I don't go out and experiment all this stuff myself and resort to books for my knowledge. Did I get this right? Why do I use books to get my knowledge?





Do I really have to answer this?

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 06:21 AM
Exactly.

If we had to rely on first-hand experience for all of our knowledge, humans, as a whole, would not be where we are today. We'd still be living in caves, afraid to go outside because we don't know what's out there. We wouldn't know what's out there because we didn't listen to our ancestors, the people that came before us, or even the people who currently live around us.

His argument holds no validity. Without books and the research and knowledge of other people, we'd still be cavemen.

Stingy Jack
07-02-2004, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
Exactly.

If we had to rely on first-hand experience for all of our knowledge, humans, as a whole, would not be where we are today. We'd still be living in caves, afraid to go outside because we don't know what's out there. We wouldn't know what's out there because we didn't listen to our ancestors, the people that came before us, or even the people who currently live around us.

His argument holds no validity. Without books and the research and knowledge of other people, we'd still be cavemen.

Thank you! And by the way (this is for misterX), the "sheep" metaphor is for Christians, as stated in the Bible. "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want".

misterX
07-02-2004, 06:33 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay, this goes against my better judgement ... but here's my reply. When talking about God, you really can't help but to use "ifs" and hypotheticals. I was working with the idea of god that was given to me by the Christians here ... that he is omniscient. I know that omniscient means "all-knowing." Therefore, if God knows all, then he must know your future. I state that as a simple course of logic. If "this," then "that." As to how I KNOW you couldn't change your future if God knows what it is ... well ... because God knows your future. Your future is laid out for you in his mind, and you have to play it out according to what is in his head (I hate talking about God personified, but I do it for the sake of simplicity). The reason why I say you HAVE to play it out according to what is in his head is because if you did something that god didn't know you would do, then god would not be all-knowing. Hence, this is why I say you cannot have free will if there is an omniscient being out there. Now, I am going to use a hypothetical situation again. The reason for this is because it demonstrates how free will is an illusion when there enters an omniscient being. You go through life, thinking you have free will because you cannot see the future. You can make small predictions ... like, if I don't pay the electric bill, they will cut off my power. But you don't truly know the consequences of all of your actions, or what situations you will face in the future and the choices you will make when you face them. And you think that you have the freedom to make any choice you wish. That is how you live your life now.

Enter: Someone who knows everything you will do in the future, and all of the choices you will make. This guy just starts hanging around your apartment, smiling whenever you do something. You finally ask him: "Why are you smiling?" And he says, "I knew you were going to do that." At first you wouldn't believe him. Surely, you're not THAT predictable. So, you ask him for proof. You tell him to write down what you will say in the next five minutes and put it in his pocket. He does so, then you remain silent for four minutes and 58 seconds. At the last second you say "Strawberry." Sure enough, he pulls out a piece of paper that says: "Strawberry." You might be amused and a little creeped out ... but would dismiss it as a parlor trick. He continues with his annoying "I knew you would do that" as the days go by and it really starts to bug you. Finally, you ask him for real proof. No little party trick. He is to go home for two hours and write down everything you will do in his absence. He grins and says "I'll write it down before I leave and leave it in this envelope for you to read when the two hours is up." And you say, "What if I read it BEFORE the two hours is up?" And he responds "You won't." He writes down what you will do for the next two hours and leaves the envelope on the counter before heading out the door. Two hours pass, and you open the envelope. Sure enough, everything you did was detailed exactly on those sheets of paper. You run to his house, and ask him to write down how the rest of your life will go. He says: "You don't really want me to do that. It would feel as if you weren't making any real choices anymore." But you insist, and he does so. You read the book, and then ... suddenly you know everything you are going to do. And your life from then on feels as if you are a slave to the life written down for you in the book. You can't break away from it, you can't change it, you just follow the story. If anything, not just God, but anything knows your future (and I say "know" in the true sense. As in, they know it. They are not wrong), then you do not have free will. Right now, you only think you do because YOU not going gives you the illusion of free will. You are destined to play out your life as it is written in that book, whether you read it or not.

Now, you say the difference here is that God didn't tell you what your future held. This is true, which is why the illusion of free will is still with you. Right now, you THINK you have free will ... but you really don't (if, as you say, an omniscient god exists). And you would KNOW you don't if god told you. The only thing that happens if god tells you your life is you go from thinking you have free will, to feeling like a slave to your life's story. Your life doesn't change. Your future doesn't change. Any of the choices that you make or would have made do not change. The illusion of free will disappears.

That's about as simple as I can get it. Does anybody follow what I'm saying here?
ok well, l know what you are trying to say. but just answer this. did the man make you do what was written in the letter? or did he just know what you was going to do? And where he told you what was going happen for the during the rest of your life, did he make it that way? or did he know the chocies you was going to make? but whats to say if god was to come down and say. On saturday you will cross the street at 12 pm and you will be hit by a car and killed. how do you know that i wouldn't be able to change that? hmmmm? i still have a choice to cross the road at that time, or chose not to. perhaps! But since goddoesn't come down and tell us what the furtue holds for us then what i just said is redundant. isn't?just because someone knowswha tis gonna happen to someone doesn't mean he made it happen.

Stingy Jack
07-02-2004, 06:41 AM
Originally posted by misterX
ok well, l know what you are trying to say. but just answer this. did the man make you do what was written in the letter? or did he just know what you was going to do? And where he told you what was going happen for the during the rest of your life, did he make it that way? or did he know the chocies you was going to make? but whats to say if god was to come down and say. On saturday you will cross the street at 12 pm and you will be hit by a car and killed. how do you know that i wouldn't be able to change that? hmmmm? i still have a choice to cross the road at that time, or chose not to. perhaps! But since goddoesn't come down and tell us what the furtue holds for us then what i just said is redundant. isn't?just because someone knowswha tis gonna happen to someone doesn't mean he made it happen.

Well, assuming that god came down and said that to you ... I would say that you have no choice as to whether or not you could cross the road. Unless the nature of god is something other than what I am working from. As I said before, I am working from two assumptions: 1) God's knowledge is truth. It is not wrong. 2) God never lies.

If we agree that these two things are true (for the sake of this arguement), then I do not see how you can avoid getting hit by the car. If you did avoid it, then either assumption 1 or 2 would be false. Either god didn't know your future with divine certainty, or he lied to you when he told you what would happen to you.

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 06:42 AM
Originally posted by misterX
ok well, l know what you are trying to say. but just answer this. did the man make you do what was written in the letter? or did he just know what you was going to do? And where he told you what was going happen for the during the rest of your life, did he make it that way? or did he know the chocies you was going to make? but whats to say if god was to come down and say. On saturday you will cross the street at 12 pm and you will be hit by a car and killed. how do you know that i wouldn't be able to change that? hmmmm? i still have a choice to cross the road at that time, or chose not to. perhaps! But since goddoesn't come down and tell us what the furtue holds for us then what i just said is redundant. isn't?just because someone knowswha tis gonna happen to someone doesn't mean he made it happen.

The thing is, it doesn't matter whether he just knows or if he is making you do those things. It is the same thing. If he knows what you are going to do, does that not also mean that you cannot change it, therefore he is, in a way, making you do it?

Stingy Jack
07-02-2004, 06:43 AM
My wife just woke up and needs the phone, so I have to go. I will be back later, though.

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:01 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack


I never called you names. I said you were ignorant. This is a fact. Just as I and everyone else in the world are ignorant. You're just one of those people who refuse to believe it. And I didn't say you were stupid. I said you are making yourself sound stupid. There is a difference. It's not like I said: "You stupid Christian", like you did to me in your last reply. I also said you were arrogant. This, too, is a fact.

Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Okay ... This sentence all by itself is my cue to stop debating with you. Anyone who has any education worth its salt never says that they know it all. Socrates said that the only reason the oracle stated he was the wisest man was because he knew that he knew nothing ... whereas everyone else thought they knew everything. All this does is show me that you are too ignorant to even realize that you are ignorant (just like we ALL are ignorant, to a certain extent.) You've already demonstrated that you're the type of guy who will be shown evidence that contradicts what he currently believed, and is too arrogant to change his belief in light of the evidence (I am referring to the "Moon" reference I posted.) You merely dismissed the evidence as "wrong", to keep from feeling/sounding stupid. When in actuality, by doing this, you made yourself look more stupid
mmmm that sure sounds like you're calling someone stupid, don't you think?the bad thing about about posting is that it's slower than chat. the good thing is you can catch people out

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
The quote by Socrates ... you don't think it's true? You don't think that people, in general, are ignorant to a certain extent? Do you even KNOW what ignorant means? Ignorant simply means "lacking knowledge." It is OBVIOUS that people are ignorant. Socrates merely states that he is wise because he REALIZES he is ignorant, as opposed to everyone he spoke with who thought they were not. It is TRUE. It's happening right now. I realize that I am ignorant ... about MANY things. YOU, on the other hand, stated that you know it all. I would test you on this by asking you questions, but you would just run to the internet and look up the answers. But, we both know that you CAN'T know it all. If you did, you would be pretty fucking famous.
There are things you DO NOT KNOW, hence you are IGNORANT ... just like everybody else. Capice?


As far as the moon thing goes, you know .... I gave you the theory from an ASTRONOMY text written by ASTRONOMERS. And still you think it is bullshit. The Earth would not have been destroyed because it was in it's magma state. A liquid state. Getting hit, or receiving "a glancing blow" as the source stated, would not destroy it. And as far as the moon escaping the Earth's pull ... they tested this theory with computers ... and if you go back and read the source, you will see where I mention computer simulations (Fig. 8.27). I would post the images from the simulation, but my scanner is missing it's cable. Anyway, the moon is held in place not just by the gravitational pull of the Earth, but by that of every other nearby object in the solar system. Particularly the sun. The piece, according to the pictures, begins more like a spray as it is ripped from the side of the Earth. This spray floats off, and forms into a small sphere itself. I will type the caption for Figure 8.27: "This sequence shows a simulated collision between the Earth and an object the size of Mars. The sequence proceeds top to bottom, and zooms out dramatically. The arrow in the final frame shows the newly formed moon." DID it happen this way? I don't know. It seems reasonable, and I trust that the scientists know what they're doing.

Then you say: "Don't you think that animals as intelligent as elephants or dolphins don't know that they will die? And not by accident or some predator?" No, I don't think they do know. I mean, dolphins sure do spend a lot of time tangling themselves up in fishermen's nets. But really ... you tell me to think for myself. Well, I could sit around and make up what I know about elephants and dolphins ... but I would rather someone teach me. That way, I won't be wrong.

I don't KNOW that god doesn't exist ... just like I don't KNOW that in some other dimension lives the giant, flubbering shit-hill of Aldretch. I just don't believe they do.

The Constantine thing ... that wasn't even my argument. I had nothing to do with any of that. I wasn't even online at the time! Why should I give that point to you when I never argued with you about it in the first place? You say you descredited me with your Constantine thing ... What the hell? Are you confused?

I never stated any theories, myths, or assumptions as fact. If you are referring to the god's "omniscience" thing, go back to my previous thread. I was working from what YOU claimed to be fact: "God is omniscient". Even though I believe that is not true, I worked from that point to show that IF that was true, THEN you cannot have free will. I said IF it was true. Not that it WAS true.

I never called you names. I said you were ignorant. This is a fact. Just as I and everyone else in the world are ignorant. You're just one of those people who refuse to believe it. And I didn't say you were stupid. I said you are making yourself sound stupid. There is a difference. It's not like I said: "You stupid Christian", like you did to me in your last reply. I also said you were arrogant. This, too, is a fact. You say I insulted you as a last resort? What? I have made valid points this whole time which you have yet to refute. I can't help it that you are unable to comprehend my argument about no free will with an omniscient being. I tried and tried to make it as simple as possible. I am not ON my last resort. I am not even past my FIRST resort, since you have yet to refute it or challenge it adequately.

Then you wonder why I don't go out and experiment all this stuff myself and resort to books for my knowledge. Did I get this right? Why do I use books to get my knowledge?





Do I really have to answer this?
yes, they tested it with computers. and where do computers get their infomation from? last i heard they didnt have free thikning or rational thinking computers. a computer can only work on what a programer tells it too.
well you don't think a animal knows it can will die? well then why does a wilderbeast run from the lion? even a calf that isa few hours old will either hide or failingthat run from a predator. why? would it if it had no concept of death?

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by Stingy Jack
Thank you! And by the way (this is for misterX), the "sheep" metaphor is for Christians, as stated in the Bible. "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want".
well i never said that the term "sheep" doesn't apply to christians. but it also applies to atheist as well but even more so

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:20 AM
o and btw the way there are five "theories" (myths) going around about how the moon was formed
1.The Fission Theory
2.The Capture Theory
3.The Condensation Theory
4.The Colliding Planetesimals Theory
5.The Ejected Ring Theory:
which is your "theory?

o an btwx2 i didn't need to go to the net for these answers
(which is again you calling me stupid which you claim to never have done)
i asked my brother who is a student and is very interested in these "myths" ( not his words mine)

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:28 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
The thing is, it doesn't matter whether he just knows or if he is making you do those things. It is the same thing. If he knows what you are going to do, does that not also mean that you cannot change it, therefore he is, in a way, making you do it?
what do you mean it doesn't matter if he knows or is making you do it? if he just knows then he isn't making you do it, therefore you have freewill. if he is making you do it, then you have no free will. which we do. and no it doesn't mean i cannot change it. and like i said if someknows you're going to do something. that doesn't mean he is MAKING you do it. gesshhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 07:29 AM
You know what, I'm done with this. You can't argue with a brick wall.

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:34 AM
No you just can't argue with the truth.

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 07:42 AM
Originally posted by misterX
No you just can't argue with the truth.

Whatever. Nobody knows the truth. Only arrogant assholes think they really know.

orangestar
07-02-2004, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
Whatever. Nobody knows the truth. Only arrogant assholes think they really know.

Exactly, which is what pisses me off about him. He's just making more of an ass out of himself every time he posts.

Dude, no one knows the truth. Believe whatever you want, but dont shove it down our throats like you KNOW that it is the absolute truth.

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 07:48 AM
Originally posted by orangestar
Exactly, which is what pisses me off about him. He's just making more of an ass out of himself every time he posts.

Dude, no one knows the truth. Believe whatever you want, but dont shove it down our throats like you KNOW that it is the absolute truth.

Yup. Even those of us that back our beliefs up with facts can still admit that those are just beliefs. Even facts can lie, because they are conclusions reached by imperfect creatures.

Also, yes, I've resorted to name calling, MisterX, because it seems to be the only thing you understand.

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:51 AM
you two remind me of a dog and a bitch who have got stuck togther while fucking. ya hypocritical fuckers, by calling me arogant for saying i that i know it as a fact is saying that all ya other bum buddies are, cause they were doing the same. so hows about pulling ya fingers out of each other arses and smell the roses instead of each others shit. btw you two butt pirates are just jealous cause you know i'm right. yet you can't bring yoursleves to say so out of love for one another. go for a march in a gay pride parade. and relax. fuck i hate bitter hate filled losers who hate their betters

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:54 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
Yup. Even those of us that back our beliefs up with facts can still admit that those are just beliefs. Even facts can lie, because they are conclusions reached by imperfect creatures.

Also, yes, I've resorted to name calling, MisterX, because it seems to be the only thing you understand. well if you didnt sit around masturbating over elton john music clips you would have saw a post, where isaid "of course christians don't know that god is a fact. thats why its called faith. now stop listening to crocodile rock and read what is posted before commenting on them?

misterX
07-02-2004, 07:57 AM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
Yup. Even those of us that back our beliefs up with facts can still admit that those are just beliefs. Even facts can lie, because they are conclusions reached by imperfect creatures.

Also, yes, I've resorted to name calling, MisterX, because it seems to be the only thing you understand.
are you a fucking simpleton, or just wierd freak who doesn't want to look like a "bad guy"? how thefuck can you say you have resorted to name calling before you or your little bf posted insults directed at me did i insult you? mmmmmmmmmmmm huh? mmmmmmmmm?

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 08:00 AM
I'm done. That's it. I can't fucking stand you, your aggressive attitude, and the high horse you rode in on. You think you are so intelligent, but you can barely form a proper sentence. You contradict yourself at every turn. First you say "Christians don't know for a fact that God exists", and then you say "You can't argue with the truth"? What? I don't understand you, and I don't care to. I'm done with this conversation.

And just so you know, I'm actually bisexual, so your petty insults don't mean jack shit to me.

misterX
07-02-2004, 08:03 AM
no wonder you hate god. you thought that you was smart being half a fag you would still get into heaven. huh? pity it doesn't work that way hey?look forward to watching you burn in hell. hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

Egekrusher
07-02-2004, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by misterX
no wonder you hate god. you thought that you was smart being half a fag you would still get into heaven. huh? pity it doesn't work that way hey?look forward to watching you burn in hell. hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

If I could reach through the computer, I would cut off your balls and shove them up your ass, while making you suck my dick at the same time.

I don't believe in heaven, so I don't care about going there. However, if you really believe in that BULLSHIT, then you may want to change your ways and repent, because God may take a slight offense to the way that you're treating your fellow humans.

Stingy Jack
07-02-2004, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by misterX
o and btw the way there are five "theories" (myths) going around about how the moon was formed
1.The Fission Theory
2.The Capture Theory
3.The Condensation Theory
4.The Colliding Planetesimals Theory
5.The Ejected Ring Theory:
which is your "theory?

o an btwx2 i didn't need to go to the net for these answers
(which is again you calling me stupid which you claim to never have done)
i asked my brother who is a student and is very interested in these "myths" ( not his words mine)

If you actually read the source I posted, you would know. However, I will state it again: "Today many astronomers favor a hybrid of the capture and fission themes. This idea -- often called the impact theory -- postulates a collision by a large, Mars-sized object with a youthful and molten Earth." This is stuff straight from the mouths of practicing, PhD-certified Astronomers ... not your brother. But, as I've said, you don't even read anything I write. You just jabber on and on with the same stuff you always say. Animals running from a predator is a survival instinct. Instinct is much different from conscious awareness. I asked you to show me the proof that elephants possess this kind (the consciously aware kind) of knowledge regarding their own mortality, and specifically said "not on the instinctual level." It is for these reasons that I said I was going to stop arguing with you. I just end up repeating myself over and over again, because you pretend (and I'm giving you credit, here) to not have listened to anything I have said. I'm wasting my time.

misterX
07-02-2004, 06:44 PM
well for one my brother got his info from a astronomer with a phD
first hand. and even though i live in a small town. there are a lot of astronomers here from all over the world. as we have the largest radio telescopes in the southern hemisphere.
and ya instinct might tell the animal which animal to run from. but does it tell the animal why?
does the wilderbeast ever stop and think "hey i know i have to run from this lion, but WHy do i run from this lion" hmmmmmm? does it ever stop to see why it is running?

misterX
07-02-2004, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Egekrusher
If I could reach through the computer, I would cut off your balls and shove them up your ass, while making you suck my dick at the same time.

I don't believe in heaven, so I don't care about going there. However, if you really believe in that BULLSHIT, then you may want to change your ways and repent, because God may take a slight offense to the way that you're treating your fellow humans.
that's a bit hypocritical don't you think? you don't believe in something yet you want to use someone else's belief in that, to make them change their way ofthinking about something so disgusing and unnatural? hhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
and nah i dont have to worry. i'm a catholic. we aren't perfect............just forgiven