Feed on Posts or Comments 24 October 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 01 Nov 2010 12:22 am

Questions that theists cannot answer

An interesting thread on Reddit:

A list of Questions that theists can’t answer

Here are some of the questions:

  1. Who created God?
  2. Why do innocent babies suffer and die?
  3. If God is perfect, why is he “a jealous God”?
  4. If God didn’t want Adam and Eve to sin, why did he create them without knowledge of good and evil?
  5. How could a Perfect being do anything? To do something, a motivation or decision must exist that sparks an action.
  6. If people are born in to sin, do babies go to hell if they die?
  7. What sets your religion apart from every other?

202 Responses to “Questions that theists cannot answer”

  1. on 01 Nov 2010 at 7:36 pm 1.Answer Man said …

    1. Nobody He has always existed

    2. Because of sin in the world

    3. Jealousy in this sense is not sin. What He desires and wants in this case BELONGS to Him. This is not the same as envy of another being and what belongs to them.

    4. Because sin did not exist and knowledge was not needed.

    5. Yes, and the point is what?

    6. No, David speaks of his own baby in heaven in I Samuel. They have not reached the age to be aware of their sin.

    7. All religions are false and man-centered. Only a relationship with Jesus Christ is worthy of man’s time and energy.

  2. on 02 Nov 2010 at 12:49 am 2.Anonymous said …

    Answer Man:

    1) If God can always exist and does not need a creator, then why does the universe need a creator?

    2) Didn’t God create the sin that is killing the innocent babies? If God created the universe, then the answer is necessarily yes.

    3) What belongs to him? Free will?

    4) Why put the tree in the garden if knowledge was not needed?

    5) The point is that anything a perfect being does that creates imperfection would necessarily mean that the perfect being is not perfect. And clearly our universe is imperfect.

    6) Should we not kill our babies so they are guaranteed to go to heaven?

    7) If All religions are false and man-centered, then why do they exist?

  3. on 02 Nov 2010 at 3:04 am 3.Answer Man said …

    1. Yes, creation shows no ability to create itself therefore a creator outside of creation would be necessary.

    2, No, sin is an action, not matter, taken by a creation of free will.

    3. The worship and obedience of His creation.

    4. Only God knows, probably to allow His creation to live in obedience.

    5. Incorrect. Man was perfect, man chose to sin. God did not create robots but creatures of free-will.

    6. No, Thou shalt NOT kill seems clear. Sadly, thousands are killed daily. Please don’t kill your baby. Accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior.

    7. They are the false prophets of which scripture warns. That would be like asking why does atheism exist. Same reason.

  4. on 02 Nov 2010 at 3:29 am 4.Hell Yeah said …

    1. “creation shows no ability to create itself therefore a creator outside of creation would be necessary.”

    Which brings to the point of who created God. He couldn’t have created himself? But if you say he has always existed, then why can’t matter and energy have always existed in some form instead?

    4. “Because sin did not exist and knowledge was not needed.”

    Then why create sin, was God bored? Knowledge not needed? Apparently believers in the supernatural don’t have knowledge, which is a shame. Open a science book instead of the bible and do research on what is reality.

    7. “All religions are false and man-centered. Only a relationship with Jesus Christ is worthy of man’s time and energy.”

    Um, isn’t Jesus Christ-ianity a religion? And all Gods are part of a religion. So yeah, all religions are false. Welcome to Atheism.

  5. on 02 Nov 2010 at 3:29 pm 5.damien said …

    It seems pointless to argue these points, although they are certainly interesting questions.

    Believers will always think that thier beliefs can be ‘proved’ without evidence; it is the nature of thier delusion. It lies at the heart of the problem, ‘ he is beyond all understanding’ therefore we cannot understand God ( usefully avoiding any requirements for the power structures in organised religion to expose thier beliefs to any rational criticism or proof)

    The very nature of thier so-called deity makes it impossible to disprove or prove at present, although why any rational person would believe something so preposterous without evidence is beyond me. All human knowledge so far (I mean knowledge, not fable and myth) supports the conclusion that there is no creator – it does not rule it out definitively so far. However, this is not a ‘proof’that god exists – it’s more likely to be a gap in knowledge and understanding

    Hard to argue the point with irrational believers though

  6. on 02 Nov 2010 at 4:36 pm 6.Severin said …

    5 damien
    “Believers will always think that thier beliefs can be ‘proved’ without evidence;”

    Not always, I hope.
    Many religions dissapeared and new ones appeared! It shows that people are ready to change their opinion. It obviously means the people is prone to changes!

    But, majority of people were uneducated through milleniums and had no base to accept anything better than other religion: Christianity replaced Judaism, Islam partially replaced Christianity, Christianity itself split to many different religions… there are many examples in history of whole populations changing their beliefs in short periods of time.
    If people were ready to change religions, why wouldn’t we expect today, in era of explosion of science and explosion of education, curious human spirit to accept facts instead of delusions.
    Facts are much more exciting!
    Unlike religions, science calls for questions!

  7. on 02 Nov 2010 at 5:27 pm 7.Horatio said …

    “All human knowledge so far (I mean knowledge, not fable and myth) supports the conclusion that there is no creator”

    Really Damien? Could you share this knowledge that supports this conclusion?

  8. on 02 Nov 2010 at 8:30 pm 8.Biff said …

    Well this will be the exchange.

    “Christians make the claim so prove it”

    “But damien makes the claim in the above post”

    Ah, well, yeah but um it is the theist that must back it up”

    Same old grandiose atheist claims which they NEVER support even though they are the ones that claim science CAN prove everything. They are always over promising and under delivering.

  9. on 02 Nov 2010 at 10:51 pm 9.Hell Yeah said …

    “Same old grandiose atheist claims which they NEVER support even though they are the ones that claim science CAN prove everything.”

    First of all, we never said science can prove everything. But science does make God unecessary. Science is based on proofs, where as faith is believing in something that has no proof. And by saying that we should prove science by writing something on a post is silly. That is like as if I ask you to prove that any country that neither of us has ever been to exists. You can’t do it on a post, but all you or I would have to do is get on a plane and fly there, just like all you have to do with scientific explanations. Do some actual research and you will find out things. Just because you are too lazy to do research and gain knowledge, doesn’t make it so a gap filler God is the better answer. I think you believers on here are just in denial that your wishful thinking of an afterlife isn’t true that you just believe anything that points to what you want to be true even if it isn’t.

  10. on 02 Nov 2010 at 11:09 pm 10.Horatio said …

    So HY can YOU back up the claims of damien? Can YOU share some of this “research” that makes God unnecessary? I truly am eager to learn.

  11. on 03 Nov 2010 at 3:09 am 11.Hell Yeah said …

    Hor,
    You might want to start with sources that can sum a lot of things up in a short time. The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking is a great example of something to read.

  12. on 03 Nov 2010 at 3:42 am 12.dxt said …

    #9

    “Just because you are too lazy to do research and gain knowledge, doesn’t make it so a gap filler God is the better answer.”

    HY, Im Just philosophically speaking here, You say you “gain knowledge”……knowledge of what exactly? Are you REALLY a student of evolution? Are you an honest, devout, evoloutionary atheist? Do you strive to be the best evolutionary atheist you can be and spend countless hours “gaining knowledge” of your descent? So all your tireless work can amount to zippo when they throw your body into the ground only to eventually be completely forgotten about. No aspirations in life other than to live in the now and cling to some generic set of moral guidelines for which there are no foundations, no promises for your life to be founded upon, just a relatively short meaningless life spending time gaining knowledge on an accidental rock formation floating in an ever expanding space that will eventually grow colder and colder untill the human race can no longer survive and dies out…..and yet here you are, dedicated and insistant on gaining knowledge and fighting for the cause of such a reality. Maybe, unwittingly, you helped some poor confused soul who stumbled upon this blog and hopelessly dragged them down into your world of abyss. What a credit! But hey, at least you know your life was an accident!

  13. on 03 Nov 2010 at 4:35 am 13.Hell Yeah said …

    #12

    Sounds about right, except for that the accidental rock will be getting hotter and hotter, not colder and colder.

    The reason I am pointing out that all religions are not real is because of the ultimate harm they cause. For example, Christian war leaders want armageddon to happen, so they are for killing mass amounts of people to get there, even though it won’t happen. I don’t know about you, but I am for living as long as possible since it is the only life we have. The religous are too concerned about what will happen to them in the afterlife that they don’t realize they are living the only life.

  14. on 03 Nov 2010 at 6:55 am 14.Severin said …

    Horatio,

    dear Horatio, you are back in role of a theist?

    We will not forget your declaring as an atheist by claiming there were some “natural” events without interfering of a god.
    I stored your claim!

    You can not sit on 2 chairs.
    You DECLARED yourself as an atheist.
    Be honest!

  15. on 03 Nov 2010 at 7:08 am 15.Severin said …

    8 Biff
    ““But damien makes the claim in the above post”

    #5 Damien said:
    “All human knowledge so far (I mean knowledge, not fable and myth) supports the conclusion that there is no creator – it does not rule it out definitively so far. However, this is not a ‘proof’that god exists – it’s more likely to be a gap in knowledge and understanding”
    “supports the conclusion” and “it’s more likely” are not claims! He never said “god does not exist”

    You DO claim god exists (or, don’t you?).
    Please give us some evidences for your claim.
    If you are not able to, you are free to continue discussing here as Damien does. You may, for example, say: “I think there is god”, or “…(something)… supports the conclusion that god exists..”
    Then give us your supporting arguments for further discussion.

  16. on 03 Nov 2010 at 8:17 am 16.Severin said …

    12 dxt
    “… just a relatively short meaningless life…”

    My life is not meaningless. It is a very nice life. Knowing I will die and go to “nothingness”, I am living an extremely full life, using every second of it. I will, most probably, die smiling (maybe a little bit bitterly, because I will not know did man reach Mars or not, and what were the results of CERN LHC, and I am SO curious to know it).

    Was Newton’s life meaningless?
    Was Einstein’s life meaningless?
    Where is Einstein (a declared atheist) now? Burning in hell?

    BS!

  17. on 03 Nov 2010 at 8:32 am 17.damien said …

    Interesting exchange, but we will always come back to the same old problems here. I wouldn’t want to be offensive to anyone who has a sincere religious belief, and this was not my intention.

    My point is that, in my opinion a deity is unlikely in the extreme – that is my opinion and I have come to this through examination of evidence ( note that I say unlikely, not impossible)

    The deists, however trouble me by insisting that thier beliefs (which are founded on myth, superstition and legend) are not only true, but that they should be followed by others.

    Other-directedness excuses actions which would otherwise be unthinkable.

    I just don’t think that rational debate, enjoyable though it is, will ever be able to resolve our contradicting world views. There is no proof that would be accepted by the believers, since thier belief allows interpretation to fit thier belief structure

  18. on 03 Nov 2010 at 9:42 am 18.damien said …

    Another thought – it seems to me that we always come up against a misunderstanding about these things. Atheism as I understand it is the lack of belief in a deity, supernatural beings etc.

    Theists insist that atheism is a belief structure that we follow; this it seems to me, is not true. We simply do not believe in thiers.

    Another thought – why do we need to ‘prove’ atheism. It is not something we believe in, or take on faith, it is more like a refusal to believe something which our experience and knowledge makes it impossible to accept without evidence.

    I know it’s the same old thing, but if someone were to claim that a giant rabbit lved at the south pole and heard our prayers, we would dismiss this as fantasy. To atheists, this is not dissimilar to theists assertions regarding thier beliefs.

    I’m not trying to offend or upset anyone here, just trying to shed some light on the different approaches and world views we hold.

    I find it difficult to understand how a religious person can believe what they do, it just doesn’t make sense to me. But by the same token, we should be aware that our views may be difficult for them to understand. Rational debate seems like a useful tool. But lets be reasonable with each other,

  19. on 03 Nov 2010 at 11:19 am 19.Biff said …

    :My point is that, in my opinion a deity is unlikely in the extreme – that is my opinion and I have come to this through examination of evidence:

    Hmm, HY now you soften your stance. Again what evidence? You present NO evidence that God is unlikely. I’ll make it easy. Give me just (1) piece of evidence.

  20. on 03 Nov 2010 at 11:38 am 20.damien said …

    Hi Biff

    I’n not softening my stance at all – just trying to approach the debate in a reasonable way. I have me opinion, but I’m not so arrogant to assume that I’m right just because I’ve come to my conclusion. I’m open to other peoples ideas and opinions, but I do find it hard to accept things ‘on faith’

    As for evidence that a deity is unlikely – it is an unlikely proposition with (as far as I know) no evidence to support it. I know there are historical accounts etc, but thier reliablility is open to question.

    I know it seems unreasonable to you – I accept that, but I would realy like to see something measurable as evidence

    I don’t think we’ll ever agree on this, but it’s good to talk in a constructive way. If we understand each other, we become better informed and tolerant of different views, The world could do with more of this I’m sure you’d agree

  21. on 03 Nov 2010 at 12:57 pm 21.damien said …

    Biff; I suppose you could say that we have mutuallyexclusive world views. If the point of this exchange is to convince either you to accept my view or me to accept yours ( and I’m not sure that this is the point, it just seems to me to be the thrust of your comments)then I suppose we would need some form of evidence from each other that the other person would find compelling.

    I could point to all of the discoveries that seem to contradict traditional religious teachings; evolution, biology, quantum physics etc and you could cite predictions from textsthat seem to have been fulfilled, creation theories etc

    I don’t think that you would accept that my reasoning is sound and excludes your views – the text is open to interpretation and so on; and i don’t think that i would accept that your evidence is rigorous enough

    therefore, we end up with the same old argument; you ask for proof – I say that it’s not needed as I’m not putting forward a belief structure that needs to be supported. I ask for proof and you say that I should accept things that cannot be measured and independently verified ( to my mind)

    We differ fundementally in our views, I do feel though that religious fundamentalism can cause real harm and suffering in the world. Atheism, however does not cause harm by itself – although prople who are atheists ( or religious) can and do.

    I don’t see the need for religion, although i know that many people do. I think it comes from within and is part of some human phsycological need rather than from without ( the deity)it seems to me that religion is too often about power and control for the hierarchy within the organisation

  22. on 03 Nov 2010 at 2:09 pm 22.Biff said …

    damien,

    I only ask for proof because you made a bold statement I felt certain you could not support. You attempt to digress and discuss specific relgions. I ask for proof of No God.
    The point is there is nothing in science that supports there is no God today than there was 1000 years ago. I have been in science for well over 35 years. Frankly, it points in the direction of Creator. Complexity, design and intelligence seem to be pretty solid arguments for a God. Ergo, the vast majority of humanity is theist at some level.

  23. on 03 Nov 2010 at 3:19 pm 23.damien said …

    I agree that the majority of people would declare themselves theist – although how much of this is genuine belief and how much cultural conditioning is open to question ( I’m sure we would differ on this)

    I don’t accept that complexity necessarily requires design, certainly in living organisms natural selection seems to answer this quite well.

    I do accept that I’m in the minority in regards to belief in some sort of deity – I just don’t see why a ‘god theory’ is required. Thanks for the more considered language of your last post, whilst we don’t agree, we can certainly be civilized about it

  24. on 03 Nov 2010 at 3:51 pm 24.Severin said …

    20 damien
    „I’n not softening my stance at all – just trying to approach the debate in a reasonable way.“
    „I’m open to other peoples ideas and opinions, but I do find it hard to accept things ‘on faith’“
    „I don’t think we’ll ever agree on this, but it’s good to talk in a constructive way.“

    You, Damien, discuss here for a short time and are not acustomed to very dishonest way almost all deist discuss all the time.
    Do not be so soft and so kind, because finally they will proclame they won, based on some bullshit they claim.

    Look at, for example, Biff: he knows well that negative claims are impossible to prove, but he (and all of them) all the time require evidences that god does not exist!
    If I claimed a pink teapot orbiting Jupiter was our creator and asked him to prove me wrong, he would NOT be able to do it!
    However, they NEVER give any evidences for their claims that god DOES exist!
    Nothing.
    They just CLAIM it, cite the bible, fall in contradictions, and when caught in contradictions (and vry frequently also lies, for example deliberate missciting of your words), they use sarcasm, or just do not discuss for some time, then start again with the same bullshits (and same arrogance!).

    You did not see our debate some time ago, when theists like Biff asked questions:
    „Why is killing of babies and ripping of pregnant women immoral“
    „Why is incest immoral“, etc.

    They got many logical answers, but NEVER gave any replay from their side! After a pause, they just continued with their sarcastic and (frequently also) insulting comments.

    I am NOT trying to fight them.
    My reason for debating here is clear: I do hope I will help some young people to start to think and to pose questions. What I write here is for them, not for obsessed, stubborn theists which are not able to make difference between their bottoms and their heads.

  25. on 03 Nov 2010 at 4:17 pm 25.dxt said …

    #13 Hy

    “Christian war leaders?” Now that is a perfect example of an oxymoron! The only warefare biblical Christianity has is spiritual warefare against lies and heresy! Martin Luther kicked off the reformation for this very thing, he refused to obey the authority of the papacy rather than live and teach in the disobedience to Gods word. He didn’t march in the catholic church and start cutting down preists with a sword. Biblical Christianity was once again attacked and persecuted for upholding the truth of Gods word. Satan, the father of lies, hates the Truth.

    What “killing of the masses” are you talking about? Tell me where true fundamental biblical Christianity is slaughtering the masses to bring on the end of the world? And im not talking about every religion under the sun that you think is Christian. Christianity is very precise and divisive on what must be understood in its teachings. So please do share with me an example of something I should be prone to do according to the word of God.

    I, like you, am also for living life as long as possible. I value the life God has given me and try to glorify God every second of every day to the best of my sinful ability.

    I, unlike others I guess, am not wondering what will happen to me in the afterlife. The wonderful afterlife is a promise to all who will believe that the Father sent the Son to die on a cross to atone for all the sins of the believing. Its done and over with PAID IN FULL. The ones that reject the sons work on the cross will not share in this wonderful afterlife and will be judged and condemned by the perfect law of God. Our great commision is to share the good news of Christs’ finished work on the cross, the once and for all sacrifice to God has been made. So, where in that does it require us to shed blood by the masses? Honestly, the religious should be concerned about the afterlife because they are trying to keep the law which Scripture says NO MAN can keep. The law forces you to the cross. There is no other way, path or escape…its the only door to forgiveness. So, I hope you gain all your knowledge that makes you know without a doubt, with absolute certainty that evolution is proven every step along the way because one day your soul will be required of you. You will rise, and be condemned. So if you have any questions or doubts, my evolutionary friend, I would unceasingly toil and labor for those answers because zero hour is closer than it was yesterday.

  26. on 03 Nov 2010 at 4:18 pm 26.damien said …

    Thanks Severin

    I do agree with almost all you say. I suppose I’m just trying to debate as you say, to help people think about the subject intellegently.

    I’m worried that extreme language and a combabtative attitude will put these very people off though.

    I’ve seen some of the posts you mention and it’s true that its very frustrating to see the theist response being so aggressive and sometimes insulting, but should we not try to set a better example?

    They cannot provide proof of course, and if they claim they have won; well let them. It doesn’t affect me or anyone else if they say that. In fact the more unreasonable they are, the more likely rational people reading this will turn away from religion

    You have more experience on this than me, and I suppose you may well be right – I just hoped that a civilized and sensible debate was possible.

    Thanks for the post though

    D

  27. on 03 Nov 2010 at 4:20 pm 27.damien said …

    wow, just saw .dxt post. Severin you have a point!

  28. on 03 Nov 2010 at 4:49 pm 28.Severin said …

    25 dxt
    “…he refused to obey the authority of the papacy…”

    And imposed his own authority!
    They never fighted for “souls”!
    They ALL fighted for power and money!

  29. on 03 Nov 2010 at 4:55 pm 29.Severin said …

    25 dxt
    “The wonderful afterlife is a promise to all who will believe that the Father sent the Son to die on a cross to atone for all the sins of the believing.”

    Yes, with 72 virgins.
    Oops, that was Kuran!

    Can you kindly provide some examples of people having wonderful afterlife for us?

    Can you answer whether Muslims go to heaven?
    Where is Aristotel now?
    Where is Archimede?
    They were nice people, just never heard about Christianity.

  30. on 03 Nov 2010 at 5:06 pm 30.dxt said …

    #16 Severin,

    So knowing you live a nice life and are going to die and enter into “nothingness” gives your life meaning? What meaning is that? Where is the meaning in nothingness? If a life lived is the sum of nothing, then what gives it meaning? Is fulfilling some superficial desires meaningful? Given evolution, where is the meaning and purpose in anything if its all going to end in nothing?

    We were given our lives and this earth to glorify Him and carry on with our God given desires and individual attributes, to labor, to build, to help heal the sick, feed the poor and hungry, to subdue the earth(Genesis 1:28). Einstein and Newton were doing just that, contributing to mankind, carrying out there God given inborn desires and attributes and conributing their part to the command to “subdue the earth”. Wheather or not they confessed Christ or honored God in their lives would lead me to speculate, which I wont do. I guess I never cared enough to read a biography on either of them.

  31. on 03 Nov 2010 at 5:11 pm 31.Severin said …

    25 dxt
    “So please do share with me an example of something I should be prone to do according to the word of God.”

    For example, to kill anyone you see working on “Sabbath”.
    Then, to stone your wife on his father’s treshold, if she was not a virgin when you married.
    Then, to kill your own children if they do not obey you.

    Enough?

    There is more!
    God’s words, no doubt, written in the Bible!

  32. on 03 Nov 2010 at 5:50 pm 32.dxt said …

    #27 Damien,

    Let me know what part of my post struck you as affirming what severin said earlier. Was I too harsh? Was I insulting? Did I speak lies?

  33. on 03 Nov 2010 at 6:30 pm 33.Biff said …

    “I don’t accept that complexity necessarily requires design, certainly in living organisms natural selection seems to answer this quite well.”

    Perhaps you could give us an example of just how something as complex as, lets say a cell, can derive from nature without intelligence to guide the process?

    Perhaps an automotive assembly line that arises from the rubble of Hiroshima or perhaps a Dell laptop from the sands of Iwo Jima? These end products are all natural, they have only been synthesized by the likes of man.

  34. on 03 Nov 2010 at 6:33 pm 34.dxt said …

    #31 severin,

    WOW! Ok, it all makes sense to me now. You are clearly arguing against something you know nothing about. Have you read the Bible at all to stake your claims about God and the Scriptures? Do you seriously think that in the age of grace we are to stone people for working on saturday? Do you know what the OT Sabbath law foreshadowed? Am I supposed to stone my wife for not being a virgin when we got married, or kill disobedient children? Do you seriously think we are in disobedience to the Word of God for not carrying these out? You shall not murder right? If we even hate someone we are guilty of murder Jesus said. Man is not God, we are not Holy, we are not perfect, we are not infinately offended by sin. We are corruptable men, born into sin and cannot uphold the perfect law of God. God demands perfect, obedient, sinless righteousness. If Levite preists carried out something contrary to Gods command they would perish on the spot! You touch the Ark of the covenant and you will die immediately. You pick up sticks on the Sabbath and yourself and a witness see it, you will be stoned outside the gates. Such perfection in the midst of Gods direct revelation and dealing with Israel can not and will not ever be meet by any corruptable man. These were to show the Grace of God upon the cross. He took it upon Himself to remove the stains of our sin against Him. He made us righteous through His Son for all who will believe. We, in now way shape or form, are to stone people for working on a saturday, or our children for being disobedient. Your comments show a lack of understanding and passing judgement on something you do not fully understand. I hope you are not a judge for a living. First, understand what you are arguing against my friend, then maybe we can bury this dead horse.

  35. on 03 Nov 2010 at 6:53 pm 35.dxt said …

    #29 severin,

    “Can you kindly provide some examples of people having wonderful afterlife for us?”

    And how do you suppose I go about proving this other than its a promise to be believed based upon the authority of Scripture and witnesses theirin. Can you show me an example of the spontaneous generation of a living cell?

    Will muslims go to heaven? Muslims believe Jesus was a man and a prophet, not the Son of God. Jesus says if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins(John 8:24). So, no, to answer your question.

    Aristotle and Archimede? I wont speculate on their disposition but Romans 1:19-20 says:

    “because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.”

  36. on 03 Nov 2010 at 7:02 pm 36.dxt said …

    #28 Severin,

    Martin Luther did not stand on his own authority when he rebuked the papacy. He stood on the authority of the plain reading of the Word of God. You better look that up again. Read what he wrote on the piece of paper after he nailed it to the door of the church. It was very much a spiritual battle for the souls of men, much like the reason I visit websites like this. Spiritual warefare is very much a reality today and will continue to be in the end times.

  37. on 03 Nov 2010 at 7:16 pm 37.Horatio said …

    dxt,

    May I add something here? Sev really does believe this. I wish I could say you might be able to help him understand but you will not. His thought process is quite askew.

    Biff,

    LOL, if one of these scenarios do take place please warn me! I don’t want to be on the land where factories suddenly sprout up.

  38. on 03 Nov 2010 at 7:20 pm 38.damien said …

    it’s a shame this has become a rant against the rational. Can’t we do better than citing a text to prove it’s own validity? Really theists, i hoped for better

  39. on 03 Nov 2010 at 8:01 pm 39.Biff said …

    I agree with damien with only one caveat. I hoped for one example, a scrap even a hypothetical rant. But once again, I have been let down.

    I guess I can categorize this as another grandiose claim by the irrational.

    Hor,

    Don’t think you have much to concern yourself with.

  40. on 03 Nov 2010 at 8:41 pm 40.damien said …

    oh well, in the face of such ridiculous and irrational comments and refusal to engage in reasoned debate. I see no point in continuing. You really make it pointless- enjoy your ignorance

  41. on 03 Nov 2010 at 9:26 pm 41.dxt said …

    Damien, you haven’t answered my question yet.

    Tell me, when Scripture is being attacked by someone without knowledge of it, why is it all of a sudden ridiculous and irrational to use it in defense of itself? I have laid out plenty of compelling reasons in these blogs for why we believe what we believe. I have yet to see reasonable responses by certain individuals on here. So, you being new on here, don’t pass me off as unwilling to engage in reasonable debate.

  42. on 03 Nov 2010 at 9:30 pm 42.Yamaha Lover said …

    A Freudian slip is when you say one thing but mean your mother.

  43. on 03 Nov 2010 at 11:28 pm 43.Hell Yeah said …

    “So knowing you live a nice life and are going to die and enter into “nothingness” gives your life meaning? What meaning is that?”

    It is a meaning of reality. Why pretend something that isn’t true in order to tell yourself there is more meaning to just living and doing your best in the short time you have? By believing in an afterlife you are only just denying reality in order to make yourself feel better and not worry as much. That is why fear drives your belief.

  44. on 04 Nov 2010 at 12:19 am 44.Hell Yeah said …

    “Will muslims go to heaven? Muslims believe Jesus was a man and a prophet, not the Son of God. Jesus says if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins(John 8:24). So, no, to answer your question.”

    So, since there was man on earth long before Jesus arrived, they all must have went to hell then? LOL I can just picture the devil wondering why everyone was going to hell and no one was going to heaven.

    Don’t you find it strange that if people only went to hell if they believe in Jesus but the only supposed evidence that is pointed to is of a book written during the middle of the existence of mankind? Why didn’t Jesus and the bible get created when Adam and Eve were first created then if that is the only way people can get into heaven? And if man was worshipping other gods for thousands of years then why did it take so long for the real god to say, wait a minute you need to believe in me and not Zeus, Ra, etc? And if the bible is the word of god then when did Christianity split up into many different religions?

  45. on 04 Nov 2010 at 12:38 am 45.Hell Yeah said …

    ……..and if God created Adam and Eve, wouldn’t they tell their children and so on about the true god and religion? Why did it take thousands of years for people to realize that Adam and Eve were the first humans since everyone decended from them? Did Adam and Eve believe in Zeus, Ra, or any other God before the Christian god then?

  46. on 04 Nov 2010 at 12:46 am 46.Hell Yeah said …

    …..and if the bible is the word of God then why does it state only heaven and earth being created in the beginning of the book? Why didn’t it say the whole universe and how earth was separated from the rest of the planets? Or was it because the bible was written by man who had limited knowledge of the universe and thought the earth was the center of the universe and didn’t know anything else beyond earth? Wouldn’t God know beyone earth since he created it? If so, then why didn’t God tell mankind about the rest of the universe? ……and since earth is actually a combination of many rocks colliding together throughout billions of years, how could God create all those “elements” that actually came from other planets in 7 days? You do realize that the gold we find on earth is actually from other stars that exploded, right?

  47. on 04 Nov 2010 at 1:06 am 47.dxt said …

    #43 HY,

    So the reality of nothingness gives your life meaning. I got it.

  48. on 04 Nov 2010 at 1:16 am 48.dxt said …

    #44 HY,

    If you would have actually read my post from which you quoted you would realize I already answered your question. Read it again my friend. I can offer more Scripture if you like.

  49. on 04 Nov 2010 at 1:18 am 49.Hell Yeah said …

    “So the reality of nothingness gives your life meaning. I got it.”

    You totally missed the whole point. Knowing that nothingness comes after life, enjoying life while you have it is the meaning. You just want to add a false belief in an afterlife to make it look like your life has more of a meaning since you can’t stand the fact that reality has nothing more than you want. Acceptance is the meaning of life. Why do you think other animals don’t ponder an afterlife? It is because they accept their role in life.

  50. on 04 Nov 2010 at 1:47 am 50.Hell Yeah said …

    “If you would have actually read my post from which you quoted you would realize I already answered your question. Read it again I friend. I can offer more Scripture if you like.”

    I read it again. What are you refering to? Is that all you can do is offer scriptures? That just shows you can’t think for yourself and can only use brainwashed material to repeat. Your reasoning is like this:

    The bible is the word of God
    –but how can you be sure?.
    Because the bible tells us so.
    –but why believe the bible?
    The bible is infallible.
    –but how do you know that?
    Because the bible is the word of God.
    ……..

    Do you not see the circular reasoning about your belief in God and the bible?

  51. on 04 Nov 2010 at 1:55 am 51.dxt said …

    #46 HY,

    It is HeavenSSS….plural. There are 3 of them. I wont take the time to explain because you wont read it anyway. HeavenSSS are inclusive to all that is in them.

    God did seperate earth from the rest of the planets because He only mentioned earth as being habitable. Specifically earth, no other planets.

    God didnt tell the rest of mankind about the rest of the universe because He is not a science professor nor is the Bible an exhaustive scientific text book. Redemption, was on the agenda, not show and tell. Where does the Bible claim that earth is the center of the universe?

    Earth is an accumulation of rocks colliding through billions of years? Where do you get this information? So, then our spontaneously generated cell friend is a rock dodger too? He must have been one super cell! You gotta provide me a link for these wacky claims!

  52. on 04 Nov 2010 at 2:24 am 52.Hell Yeah said …

    “God did seperate earth from the rest of the planets because He only mentioned earth as being habitable. Specifically earth, no other planets.”

    So when we find life on other planets, which they are close to doing now with the planet they found in the Goldiloks zone that could have life on it even if it is in the form of bacteria, wouldn’t that contradict what God says about earth being the only habitable planet?

    ————–

    “Where does the Bible claim that earth is the center of the universe?”

    It may not state that in there, but it also doesn’t state in there that they believe the earth isn’t the center, either. But it is common knowledge that people 2000 years ago thought the earth was the center of the universe as well as being flat.

    ————–

    “Earth is an accumulation of rocks colliding through billions of years?”

    Yes, mainly in the first of the billions of years, though. After the big bang, there were a mass amount of random floating rocks, small planets, big meteors, whatever you want to call it. Earth formed from all of these collisions combined with heat and gravity. The water on earth is actually from a huge ice meteor that collided with the other parts of earth in its early formation. How do you think we actually got all of our main elements in the periodic table? How do you think the moon got to where it is? It is one of those small planets that got sucked into the earth’s gravitational pull. If the moon actually combined with earth during those early years when everything was molding together, we would have moon rock as one of our elements found in the core somewhere. Darn science.

  53. on 04 Nov 2010 at 2:32 am 53.dxt said …

    #49 HY,

    What im referring to is in Romans 1:19 and 20 of my post. Its there in plain english to answer your question. You asked me a biblical question and I gave you a biblical answer. You use arguments to try to discredit Scripture and I answer with Scripture to discredit your arguments. I dont have a problem of not being able to think on my own, my opinions are not an authority.

    Animals dont ponder an afterlife because they are not moral agents capable of sin. Heaven is a promise for the obedient and accepting Gods free gift of salvation. Man is Gods only creation made in His own image and likeness. Man is set apart, distinctive and above all creation…….?????

  54. on 04 Nov 2010 at 2:48 am 54.True said …

    >But it is common knowledge that people 2000 years ago thought the earth was the center of the universe as well as being flat.>

    True, scientist a thousand years ago. Maybe science should be ignored since it has been proven to be wrong?

    No, can’t be as sensless as atheists.

  55. on 04 Nov 2010 at 2:52 am 55.Hell Yeah said …

    “Man is Gods only creation made in His own image and likeness. Man is set apart, distinctive and above all creation”

    Why, because the only difference is that our brain developed far more than all other animals? We are exactly like all other animals with the exception that we can learn at a much more developed rate. Human babies act no different than any other animal baby because they didn’t fully develop their brain yet and haven’t learned past their animal counterparts yet. Also, why do you think we have organs just like all other animals? That is because we are an animal. We are 99 point something percent equal in genes to an ape. If God wanted to make us more distinct above all creation, we wouldn’t be too similar to all other animals, now would we?

  56. on 04 Nov 2010 at 3:00 am 56.Hell Yeah said …

    “True, scientist a thousand years ago. Maybe science should be ignored since it has been proven to be wrong?”

    You don’t know the full understanding of what science is then, do you? Science is about finding ways to make knowledge of reality stronger. It can change it’s mind when new FACTS are presented. For example, atheists would change their mind of God actually shows up on earth in front of everyone. Until then there is nothing in science that points to an actual proof of a God. Christians have one mind set, and that is from 2000 years ago. When presented with new facts, they are still stuck with believing the old and just shove away anything that could prove them wrong without taking it seriously.

  57. on 04 Nov 2010 at 3:36 am 57.dxt said …

    #52 HY,

    If they find it let me know.

    I rest my case. Like I said, once again as before, the Bible is not an exhaustive scientific text book. Im sure the OT saints had more on their plate than to sit down and look through Scripture to find out wheather or not the earth is flat. I will share a little of what God says in His word though:

    Astronomy

    Genesis 22:17
    Blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.

    Jeremiah 33:22
    “As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.” -
    Even today, scientists admit that they do not know how many stars there are. Only about 3,000 can be seen with the naked eye. We have seen estimates of 10 to the 21st power—which is a lot of stars

    Job 26:7
    He stretches out the north over empty space;
    He hangs the earth on nothing -The Bible describes the suspension of the Earth in space

    Meteorology

    Job 28:25
    To establish a weight for the wind,
    And apportion the waters by measure. –
    The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth.

    Hydrology

    Job 36:27-29
    For He draws up drops of water,
    Which distill as rain from the mist,
    Which the clouds drop down
    And pour abundantly on man.
    Indeed, can anyone understand the spreading of clouds,
    The thunder from His canopy? –
    This simple verse has remarkable scientific insight. The drops of water which eventually pour down as rain first become vapor and then condense to tiny liquid water droplets in the clouds. These finally coalesce into drops large enough to overcome the updrafts that suspend them in the air

    There are plenty more If you would like them.

  58. on 04 Nov 2010 at 3:48 am 58.dxt said …

    #55 HY,

    I just cant seem to keep up refuting your arguments as fast as your turning them out! Brain power or development between humans and animals has nothing to do with moral agency, which animals do not have. I appologize for skipping some of your posts. If you have any pressing arguments for me I will be happy to respond in the morning.

  59. on 04 Nov 2010 at 8:28 am 59.True said …

    ?Until then there is nothing in science that points to an actual proof of a God.?

    All of creation points to God. When you have proof to the contrary let me know. Scientist have more reasons to belive today than ever before

  60. on 04 Nov 2010 at 9:01 am 60.Severin said …

    34 dxt
    „Do you seriously think we are in disobedience to the Word of God for not carrying these out?“

    Of course I do! IF you believe in god, and if you believe the Bible is god’s word.
    God DID order you to do it! If you don’t, you disobey his word and will go to hell when you die. It is said in the Bible many times (god word is perfect and is for eternity, something like that).
    I never heard Bible was reviwed. I never heard god changed it.
    Bible is as it is for milleniums, and was LITERALLY obeyed for milleniums.

    WHO changed the Bible? When?
    Is there a „User friendly manual for Bible“ which tells us what to obey from the Bible and what not? What to take literally and what “historically”?
    I never heard of it.
    IF new rules are valid for the Bible, for example: take something litarally, and other things historically, WHO wrote it? When? Where can I find it?

    YOU change god’s words according to your needs! Once you say: „I am not going to kill desobediet children ALTHOUGH god orders it strictly and unconditionally, and did NOT change his order, ever“.
    Then you cite OTHER parts of the Bible to prove the Bible right!
    You cite the book YOU do not respect and YOU do not obey.
    Who authorized you to interpret the Bible?
    WHY am I less competent do do the same you do, and say: the whole Bible is a big BS, not only the parts YOU picked?
    YOU know what god really wanted to say!?
    How dare you?
    And, why wouldn’t I dare, too?

    Either the Bible IS the word of god, and is valid in its integrity, or it is NOT.
    If YOU say it is not the case, but some parts of the Bible are valid and other are not, why would I trust you?
    Are you god?

  61. on 04 Nov 2010 at 11:38 am 61.Derek said …

    Severin you are quite mislead my friend. Your understanding of the Bible is quite sparse and erratic. I have attached a link to show you the progression of God’s covenant. I hope you will read it and learn the truth. Be mindful it will take a little time to learn but I feel you would want to speak intelligently and honestly on this matter.

    http://loveintruth.com/newcovenant

  62. on 04 Nov 2010 at 12:33 pm 62.dxt said …

    #60 Severin,

    The Bible is meant to be read just like any other piece of literature. Unfortunately, today we have people reading it with a mystical approach. We have people today who search for Bible codes. We have denominations today who cling to the legalistic aspect of the OT laws but dont go so far as offering sacrifices. All of this despite the contrary of the plain reading of it. Why? Is it because it is such a dominant piece of ancient literature who think the book itself has some type of mysterious powers?
    The Bible is a direct revelatory record of God dealing with man. You have in Genesis, a record of the beginning, creation, the fall of man and offensiveness of sin etc. and you have in Revelation a record of future events that will take place. You have the 2 perfect bookends covering the past and future. The OT is a record of God dealing DIRECTLY with the nation of Israel, a record of the giving of the Law and a record of the disobedience, punishment and blessing of Israel. In it, as well, are many prophecies of the coming messiah and the revelation of Gods plan to redeem man to a right standing once again. There are no hidden meanings or secrets or principals to health and wealth as many televangelists teach. In fact, their teaching is so radical and mystical that one would feel they could never read and understand the Bible on their own! The NT is a record of the OT prophecies coming to fulfillment. The God man has come, the foretold messiah who takes away the sins of the world, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords! There are 4 independent Gospel accounts of Jesus’ life, His teaching, His fulfillment of the foreshadowed OT laws and rituals and His death and resurrection. The epistles are full of training in righteousness, principles of Godly conduct, warnings of false teachings etc, etc. The Scriptures are to be read and understood in their original context. There must be a geek and hebrew concordance used in conjunction as well to extract the original meaning and the proper construction of words in those languages. Exegesis is a must! There is alot of time and effort involved to interpret Scripture properly. Thats why expositional teaching is so important for churches today. They are to be given the text and they are to be given the proper meaning of that text. When you combine all of that you will develop a proper theology, when you have a proper theology you will know and worship the true God of the Bible. Their will be nothing that this world could throw at you, including death, that could shake you from the solid rock of the Scriptures. The major doctrines of the Bible are not beyond mans understanding. They are not mystical and there are no hidden meanings, with the proper exegesis the meaning is there. You can not pull Scripture from the Bible and strip it out of its context….thats a big no no….because that, in essence, is saying God said something He didnt say…and that is not a good situation to be in, Scripture warns of that. So, you have 66 books that read as one. Its an amazing book and when you understand it you will realize there could only be one author. I hope this might help.

  63. on 04 Nov 2010 at 3:42 pm 63.Observer said …

    Sucked in again… #57 dxt. You do not seem to grasp science. Metaphorical reference does not make science. Science is quantitative observation, then theory & experimentation, (iterate), until laws.

    You are attributing poetic observation to science. You are writing nonsense. What is worse, the attributions to legitimate scientific fields of study are specious. As an example, your attribution from Job 28:25 relates to the value of wisdom. It uses metaphor. The translation goes to weight of wind, but there is no mention of mass, which would have been true insight. What is more, since one can feel the wind, how could one not think it is matter? The distinction lost on you is that it was not “proven” until there was technology to actually measure it. This is the quantitative observation bit.

    Moreover, do you know the definition of meteorology? You even fail the example, although there is more than a whiff of some evangelical moron mill about it.

    Using your logic, the following will distinguish me as an expert on Bovine and porcine gastroenterology.

    “dxt makes arguments as strong and credible as is possible for the validity of the Bible. dxt is a Bible scholar par excellence! Nevertheless, the value of what the exhalted dxt has to say and write is of less value than the dung erupting from a cow’s anus, more fetid than the turd squeezed from above a boar’s balls.”

    You never quite got around to the Kierkegaard did you?

  64. on 04 Nov 2010 at 7:29 pm 64.dxt said …

    #63 Observer,

    Welcome back my gastroenterologist friend. You seem defensive as ever these days! To much Kierkegaard? I have to admit, I sure do miss all your pointless scrutiny of the english language to try and discredit individuals on these blogs. I especially missed your clever and vial analogies!(Ooops, VILE).

    Is this your best shot to discredit the Bible? The fact that Scripture sporadically makes statements that are confirmed to be true by what we know today in certain scientific fields in a poetic form makes no difference to me. I wouldn’t care if it were in the form of an ancient rap song! This is from one of the OLDEST books in the Bible! Furthermore, like I have said before, the Bible is not a scientifically exhaustive textbook.

    For your meteorology comment, It was in reference to the functioning of the hydrologic cycle which in turn effects weather. It also applies to atmospheric pressure as well. Did we know about it before 300 years ago, sure, Aristotle is considered the founder of meteorology in 350BC wrote a book on it. Job is estimated to be written around 2000-1800BC. Not bad for an ancient text huh?

    You can make all the excuses and rant all you want observer but the fact of the matter is, it is there in plain english and science today confirms it. You either accept it or reject it and as I understand it, that is the fundamental issue put before mankind. Its your choice…dont shoot the messenger!

  65. on 04 Nov 2010 at 8:14 pm 65.Horatio said …

    LOL, call him Buster dxt. He once told me he was known as nose buster in rubgy and he has a tendency to work in mambian dalit into the conversation, Quite impressive, huh?

  66. on 05 Nov 2010 at 10:07 am 66.Severin said …

    dxt
    To make it short and to finisf this empty dicussion having no single common point:

    Any god is always welcome to address directly to me and to prove himself/herself/itself a god.

    After I accept proofs, I will clearly and honestly admit: yes, there is god!
    It does not mean I will ACCEPT “him” and start to worship “him”!
    If such a god represents “himself” as Biblical god and confirms the Bible, I will admit it too, BUT, I will never accept such an immoral lunatic as my authority at any price, including eternal burning in hell.

    I (capital “I”) have my own integrity, moral rules I follow and live accordingly, and I can not and could not EVER kiss the ass of such a lunatic.
    Dashing babies (just as pulling out living hearts from people) is not the way I understand morality, and I can never accept a god (or gods) allowing and/or ordering such brutality.

    I, of course, do not expect any god will address to me, ever.
    If there is something “higher” than nature itself, some “cause” of things (which I do NOT believe, but can not exclude it using formal logic), then I do not expect such a “creature” (or “something”, or whatever) is interested in me, in Israelities, in earth, in my sexual life, in my “prayers”, in an “atom” in the huge universe.
    To expect such a powerful and INDEFINABLE “creature” to pick mud to “create” man on a small rock, negligible compared to the entire universe, then to care about sexual life of each individual on this rock, is idiocy.

  67. on 05 Nov 2010 at 11:50 am 67.dxt said …

    #66 Severin,

    I regret I did not mention to you in my previous post that the age of direct revelation is past. His predetermined plan of redemption is finished, it has been written in a book and handed down through generations. Dont expect Him to appear to you.

    You have moral rules and live a certain way because those morals are God given, the very one you do not believe exists. I thought we debated this already.

    If God were not interested in us then why would He send the Son to die on the cross? If you do not believe this as well as the resurrection we can debate that too, if you need further convincing.

    I know you “would not” accept Christ as savior because you CAN NOT! You only harden your heart more by remaining in the state your in. You must humble your self and realize you are at severe odds with God right now. Once you humble yourself and repent of your sins THEN God will take your stoney heart and give you a new one. Untill that happens NO ONE can come to God.

  68. on 05 Nov 2010 at 10:12 pm 68.Severin said …

    dxt
    “You have moral rules and live a certain way because those morals are God given, the very one you do not believe exists.”
    If I had to live according to moral rules your god showed us in the Bible, I would kill myself instantly.
    My moral rules do not include killing of babies.
    My moral rules are based on tollerance and love.

    “If God were not interested in us then why would He send the Son to die on the cross?”
    Why did he send his son on the cross?
    People sacrificed many things to many gods through history, including human sacrifices, to please gods to do something for them (rain, harvest…).
    Christian god is the only one who sacrificed his own son to HIMSELF, to please himself to do something for humans.
    What an ugly, selfish, lunatic god!
    Not the wildest and most primitive religion knows for such example.
    Some god, some religion!
    Some morality!

  69. on 05 Nov 2010 at 10:18 pm 69.Rostam said …

    Buster! are you sure you are not a Mambian? Awfully big city and full of very intolerant hateful people?

    Next, I’m convinced Severin is a theist attempting to make atheist look bad. There is just no way anyone can have this much misinformation and lack this much understanding. I just can’t buy it.

  70. on 05 Nov 2010 at 10:33 pm 70.Severin said …

    69 Rostam
    “There is just no way anyone can have this much misinformation and lack this much understanding.”

    What is misinformaition in my post?
    What did I misunderstood?

    Is that the way you debate?
    Typical for someone who has nothing to say!

    Couldn’t one ask you: “Are you sure you are not an idiot”

  71. on 06 Nov 2010 at 12:12 am 71.Observer said …

    dxt- How was #63 defensive in any way? Seriously, is English your first language?

    I think you do not understand what science is all about, but if you try, you might learn. Karl Popper has some excellent essays on science. Reading and thinking are wonderful things. The phrase “open your mind” is quite apt.

    Would you want to be end up like Hor and Rosta? Actually, I believe they are trolls to goad the gormless.

  72. on 06 Nov 2010 at 2:07 am 72.dxt said …

    #68 Severin,

    What your telling me in the beginning of your post is they are YOUR morals. That would make YOUR morals a subjective issue when clearly this is not the case. I dont think you want to debate wheather or not murder or rape is a subjective issue and left to ones own opinion. Morals are objective and are intrinsic to humanity. So where do you think we get our morals from? Now, seriously think about that…..and dont tell me we evolved into them or this website will begin to smoke from the amount of posts its going to recieve. I believe we have discussed this already and all I ask for is an honest intelligent answer.

    Why did God send the Son to the cross you ask. I say I already answered this question. All I have given you is sound reasonable proofs for the validity of the God of the bible, as well as facts on the historical reliability of the Scriptures. All you have given me is the same old “lunatic baby killer God” type of responses. You seem to completely disregard the evidences of which I mentioned. To top it off, you seem clueless to what the Scriptures teach, not a hint of exegesis or theology. If you have some honest questions then just simply ask, im sure there are plenty of people on here that could answer your questions. Untill you have studied the Scriptures, I would steer your debates clear of the Bible.

    The simple fact that we are here several thousand years later debating this ancient book should begin to say something right there. The Bible does not make some lame claims of itself but makes extraordinary claims that have yet to be proven otherwise. For your own sake, humble yourself once! Take a little time out in your life to honestly read the Bible! Forget about the money grubbing televangelists you see on t.v. and dont throw Biblical Christianity on the shoulders of some immature individuals you see calling themselves Christians and acting like anything but that. Believe me, that label is used loosely.

  73. on 06 Nov 2010 at 2:46 am 73.dxt said …

    #71 Observer,

    See, there you go again! Why do you worry about my english so much? Are you an obsessive compulsive english professor? Is that how you start all your debates? Focus on the claims and not so much on structure and spelling. Maybe that is your issue with statements made in Scripture that pertain to scientific fields……it wasn’t a precise scientifically exhaustive statement so throw it out.

    So whats up Observer? Do you have anything to add here or did you just post to refer me to another author?

    Anyway, here is one for you to ponder. It is from Isaiah chapter 40 verse 22:

    “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.”

    Circle of the earth? This was written sometime between 740-680BC. Wasn’t this some 300 years before Aristotle possibly suggested it? Give me your take on it.

  74. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:27 am 74.Hell Yeah said …

    “Circle of the earth? This was written sometime between 740-680BC. Wasn’t this some 300 years before Aristotle possibly suggested it? Give me your take on it.”

    Pizza’s are circular, correct? They are spherical, though.

  75. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:29 am 75.Hell Yeah said …

    “The simple fact that we are here several thousand years later debating this ancient book should begin to say something right there.”

    Exactly. If there was any real evidence there would be no need for questioning now would there be?

  76. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:41 am 76.Hell Yeah said …

    “Pizza’s are circular, correct? They are spherical, though.”

    I meant to say that they aren’t spherical. Darn late night typing.

  77. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:42 am 77.3D said …

    dxt wrote…

    The simple fact that we are here several thousand years later debating this ancient book should begin to say something right there.

    True, but to be fair, they managed to give themselves about 1600 years head start by murdering anyone who questioned it, which tends to keep the book around.

    Now that we (mostly) don’t do that anymore, give it another 100 years or so and we may no longer need to debate this piece of shit excuse for ‘literature’.

  78. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:48 am 78.3D said …

    dxt wrote:

    Why did God send the Son to the cross you ask. I say I already answered this question.

    No, you answered the surface question, which is why the character of God CLAIMED he sent Jesus to be murdered.

    The real question is, why was this bloody and ridiculous act necessary? God had to send himself to be sacrificed to himself, to appease himself? Why? Why couldn’t God forgive people’s sins anyway, without some crazy bloody murder in the desert, if he really wanted to? If he loves everybody? Why the need for more blood and more killing and mayhem?

  79. on 06 Nov 2010 at 8:16 am 79.Severin said …

    dxt 72
    “I dont think you want to debate wheather or not murder or rape is a subjective issue and left to ones own opinion.”
    No, i want. Unlike to your god, murder or rape are disgusting to me. I feel physically sick when I even see them on TV.
    For your god, it is quite normal to order killing of babies.
    You can not avoid facts written in your “holy book”! They ARE there!

    “So where do you think we get our morals from?”
    from evolution, as I already told.
    Gorilas have hhighly developed moral rules, so have cats, mice… For example they do not eat their protein rich youngs (but DO eat youngs of other species!). They do not kill (except in strictly situations predicted by THEIR moral rules) members of their own species…!
    Those ARE moral rules built in their genes.

    “Why did God send the Son to the cross you ask. I say I already answered this question.”
    Where? When?
    Let’s not call him “lunatic”, but what other words can you use for someone sending his own son to death to satisfy himself?
    Sick?
    You never answerd the simple question:
    God saw people were “sinning”
    He COULD stop sinning, but he killed them all (including innocent children) in the big flood.
    He did it for NOTHING (no results, no purpose!), as people continued sinning! What a bestial and unnecessary and ineffective mascre! One would expect much more from an allmighty!
    Then, when he saw he did nothing, he decided to kill his son, sending him to die on the cross!
    WHY? Just answer this simple question: WHY would god kill his own son? For what reason?
    He sacrificed his own son TO HIMSELF, there is absolutely no doubt, any other explanation is without any logic. WHY?

  80. on 06 Nov 2010 at 8:25 am 80.Severin said …

    72 dxt
    “If you have some honest questions then just simply ask,…”

    I pose simple and honest questions, for example WHY would anyone kill his son to satisfy himself (to make HIMSELF to do something for humans)?

    I pose simple and honest quesion: WHY would anyone,especially someone so mighty, kill millions, including children, in the big flood?

    And WHY were his cruels, illogical deeds so inefficient?
    WHAT did he achieve?
    People are “sinning” today as they sinned 2000 years ago.
    HOW to call such a ruler, who does cruel massacres, the kills his own son, WITHOUT ANY RESULTS?

    Hitler, Stalin, Mao, did exactly the same: killed millions to achieve their goals.
    How did we call them?
    Why would god be exception?

  81. on 06 Nov 2010 at 9:43 am 81.Anonymous said …

    I have lived in Seattle for 22 years of my life without stepping into church one time. I read much of the information on this website and it conforms to many beliefs I have held for a long time. I never questioned them – religious people were annoying and extreme. I didn’t really care either. I didn’t step out of the box to form an opinion for myself. I started asking some deep questions and here is something that guided me. Ask yourself: can I live my life missing out on (possibly) the most important aspect of human life (that is GOD)? I mean, if God exists: does anything I do on the grind daily actually matter? Can I change my life? WHAT IS LIFE? One thing that will surprise you is that YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT LIFE IS……..

  82. on 06 Nov 2010 at 10:25 am 82.Anonymous said …

    I am a bible newbie but I will let you guys in on some top secret Christian information. If there is flaws in this please forgive me.

    The bible begins with the creation account. It takes place in 6 days and 1 day of sabbath. This account was recorded by Moses as a way for people to live their weekly lives in accordance with OT laws (much of what the OT is built on). If you wish to argue anything scientific about the creation days please review the analogical days view. At the end of the creation God says that everything is “good”. Adam and Eve are created from dust and later “The Great Sin” occurs. This is the first entrance of sin into the world and an event that would result in the fall of mankind. At this point Adam and Eve are separated from God and banished from the Garden of Eden (much like we are today). God uses a specific group of people named “Isreal” which are the people that came through the lineage of Abraham Issac Jacob and Joseph. All of which were under a specific covenant ordained by God. As the OT progresses God is claimed to work through a lineage of prophetic kings who will one day birth a “great savior”. These prophecies are written AT THE VERY LEAST 210 years (according to radiocarbon dating) prior to the birth of Jesus Christ. Jesus enters the world through the virgin birth and – according to accounts written by the apostles of Jesus Christ – claims to BE GOD, is thrown up on the cross and is sacrificed in accordance with OT prophecies, then resurrected from the dead. And this was all done in the name of the Father; to re-establish His glory that was hindered through the disobedience of man and give us the chance to repent.

    It is interesting to note that the followers of Jesus Christ spend their lives in and out of prison, are persecuted by non-believers, never get married, give up all the money that they have, are murdered and they give up their lives spreading the gospel that by your point of view is a lie.

    I read a question at the top that said: what is the difference between Christianity and every other religion? Every other religion says: TRUST IN YOUR OWN WORKS TO RECONCILE YOUR DEBT TO GOD. Christianity says: TRUST IN THE WORKS OF GOD BECAUSE HE HAS FORGIVEN YOU THROUGH THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST.

  83. on 06 Nov 2010 at 12:50 pm 83.Rostam said …

    Well sated Anonymous. The God of Christianity has continued to grow and flourish whilst the false God quickly fall to the wayside. Why? They are not real.

    But to the real issue our belligerents truly care about. HY and Severin your English is atrocious.

  84. on 06 Nov 2010 at 3:10 pm 84.dxt said …

    #74 HY,

    Circle of the earth. Here is another one from job chapter 26 verse 7, it reads:

    “He stretches out the north over empty space And hangs the earth on nothing.”

    So we have the “The circle of the earth” and “Hangs the earth on nothing”. These were ancient descriptions pertaining to earth. Between both Isaiah and Job we have suspended circular descriptions of earth. Like I said, Job was estimated to be written around 2000-1800BC and Isaiah around 700BC……Well before Aristotle suggested this could POSSIBLY be the case. These are strong statements made here and all you can come up with is “pizzas are round”……..nice. There is not a word specifically for “sphere” in the Hebrew language HY.

  85. on 06 Nov 2010 at 3:20 pm 85.dxt said …

    #77 and 78 3D,

    Your statements show lack of understanding of both the Scriptures and the character and nature of the God of the Bible. If you have not read it, how can you argue against it?

  86. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:16 pm 86.dxt said …

    #79 Severin,

    Lets start with defining Morality:

    Morality has two principal meanings:

    In its “descriptive” sense, morality refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores that distinguish between right and wrong in the human society.

    In its “normative” sense, morality refers directly to what is right and wrong, regardless of what specific individuals think. It could be defined as the conduct of the ideal “moral” person in a certain situation.

    Where in that does it discuss animal behavior or animals possesing morals?

    You have shown examples of animal instincts and behavior, none of which show possesion of moral agency. What about lions that eat their own young or monkeys that hunt and eat other monkeys? Again, morality is intrinsic to humanity, not nature. But if you insist on telling me cats and mice are capable of murder and rape within their own kind then I have nothing left to say in this argument.

    Again, I HAVE answered this question before but your so bent on insisting “God is a lunatic baby killer” that you fail to see the significance and necessity of the explainantion of the sacrifice. At least You should look up your Scriptural arguments before posting them because it shows nothing for your credibility on here.

    If you insist, God sent the Son to die on a cross to redeem all the believing ones back to a right standing relationship with Him. The sacrifice had to be perfect and sinless, so the spotless lamb of God was offered once and for all. Christ is the only one to fit the bill. The atonement for sin was complete, the reqirement was paid in full TO GOD and their is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ! It is finished! Every sin of every believer ever committed, past present or future was paid for by the blood of Christ on the cross. This act is taught as the doctrine of substitution. Christ, while perfect and sinless, bore our sins and punishment on the cross and in turn God imputed Christs’ righteousness to the sinner……Christ took this punishment, SO WE DONT HAVE TO! Even your rabbid hatred of the God of the Bible can be forgiven.

  87. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:24 pm 87.Hell Yeah said …

    “These are strong statements made here and all you can come up with is “pizzas are round”……..nice. There is not a word specifically for “sphere” in the Hebrew language HY.”

    You are bad at analogies, aren’t you? Your whole point on pointing out the “circular” aspect is because you are trying to show the bible thinks the earth wasn’t flat. The pizza example is because the pizza is flat yet round/circular but not a sphere like earth.

    And how does hanging something on nothing mean circular? I think you are just trying to make up your own meaning on the versus.

    ————-

    “HY and Severin your English is atrocious.”

    Um, where can you point out that my English is bad? And Severin’s first language isn’t English, so you can give him a break on that. I could point out tons of gramatical errors by you believers, but I do realize there is no spell check on here, so……

  88. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:29 pm 88.Hell Yeah said …

    “Where in that does it discuss animal behavior or animals possesing morals?”

    All animals, including us, have instinctive survival morals. To survive as a species, certain morals have to be developed. Morals that we have, such as do not kill others, is to help us survive as long as possible as a species. It has nothing to do with an invisible being telling us that.

  89. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:39 pm 89.Hell Yeah said …

    “God sent the Son to die on a cross to redeem all the believing ones back to a right standing relationship with Him………..”

    Blah blah blah…….just a fairy tale. Shakesphere wrote well poetic fairy tales as well. Do you take those literally? Also, the King Arthur story is another story that has lasted a long time. You don’t believe that to be true, do you? It is thought to have been many things that happened in history that got embelished, while throwing made up things in and then compacted into one story. Do you believe there was a wizard named Merlin? There may have been a guy who served a king who made home made remedies and that got embelished into a wizard story. Jesus was the same type of thing.

  90. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:39 pm 90.dxt said …

    #87 HY,

    Did you not understand that there is no specific word for “sphere” in the hebrew language?

    Hanging something on nothing would mean suspension, as I implied.

  91. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:46 pm 91.dxt said …

    #88 HY,

    All subjective. There are no grounds of objective morality in the case you have given. Did you not read the definition of morality? Do not kill others, isn’t it you shall not murder? And where did you get that idea from? Thank you for providing proof of objective morality in your own refutation!

  92. on 06 Nov 2010 at 4:59 pm 92.dxt said …

    #89 HY,

    This post does not even deserve a refutation as it shows a severe lack of knowledge in historical evidence and reliability of the Scriptures.

  93. on 06 Nov 2010 at 5:08 pm 93.dxt said …

    #82 Anonymous,

    I agree with Rostam but im afraid it will be wasted time and effort. Certain individuals on here consistently turn their backs on solid reasonable facts and evidences put forth for the Bible.

  94. on 06 Nov 2010 at 5:37 pm 94.Anonymous said …

    Romans 1:19

  95. on 06 Nov 2010 at 5:42 pm 95.dxt said …

    I here ya brother!

  96. on 06 Nov 2010 at 6:48 pm 96.Hell Yeah said …

    “Did you not understand that there is no specific word for “sphere” in the hebrew language?”

    Try this as a good reference:

    http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=hebrew+sphere&d=4513542623135696&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=f40e34dd,b8dfffab

    Here is a quote from it: “The Hebrew word for circle is chuwg and has a primary meaning of circle (no lexicons I have read give the primary or secondary meaning as sphere). The point was argued to me that there was no ancient Hebrew word for sphere, so chuwg (circle) was used in its place. This is total baloney and here is why. There are in fact numerous passages in the bible where a sphere is described, in Isaiah 22:18 it describes Yahveh ”will turn and toss you like a ball…” A ball is ALWAYS without exception a sphere. The Hebrew word translated as ball by the way, is duwr (I am studying ancient Hebrew). Furthermore, in no mathematical or geometrical sense is a circle ever a sphere, and would not an omniscient and omnipotent being know this? Most Bibles translate that bit of scripture correctly as circle and not sphere.”

  97. on 06 Nov 2010 at 6:50 pm 97.Hell Yeah said …

    “There are no grounds of objective morality in the case you have given.”

    Name any moral. It can be related to survival as a species.

  98. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:19 pm 98.dxt said …

    #96 HY,

    Again, no word for “sphere” in hebrew. Is it not scientifically correct to say that the earth is circular in shape and is suspended, or hangs on nothing?

  99. on 06 Nov 2010 at 7:53 pm 99.Hell Yeah said …

    “Again, no word for “sphere” in hebrew. Is it not scientifically correct to say that the earth is circular in shape and is suspended, or hangs on nothing?”

    Are you in denial? Here, I will shorten it so you will read it:

    There are in fact numerous passages in the bible where a sphere is described, in Isaiah 22:18 it describes Yahveh ”will turn and toss you like a ball…” A ball is ALWAYS without exception a sphere. The Hebrew word translated as ball by the way, is duwr….Furthermore, in no mathematical or geometrical sense is a circle ever a sphere, and would not an omniscient and omnipotent being know this?

    And if you read the rest of the article, you would have found the part that talks about how people back then all they needed to do is look up into the sky and see the moon and sun as a circle and relate that the earth as a circle. Hence, the pizza example I used earlier.

  100. on 06 Nov 2010 at 8:14 pm 100.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt, here is what you wrote in #73:

    “Circle of the earth? This was written sometime between 740-680BC. Wasn’t this some 300 years before Aristotle possibly suggested it? Give me your take on it.”

    Aristotle suggested the spherical shape of the earth, not circular.

  101. on 06 Nov 2010 at 8:25 pm 101.Severin said …

    83 Rostam
    “The God of Christianity has continued to grow and flourish whilst the false God quickly fall to the wayside.”
    Ra religion grew fo a few thousand years, then dissapeared.
    greek and roman religions, Maya religion…grew and dissapeared.
    Christianity will dissapear too, do not doubt!
    It already started:
    1. To split to many different christianities (why?)
    2. To lose its reliability because people is getting more educated and start posing (unpleasant) question and doubting.
    Matter of timing, nothing more!

    “…and Severin your English is atrocious.”
    I know, and I am sorry!
    I repeat: I am self-thaught, I started to learn English from books when I was about 50 or 55, without any systematic courses, etc.
    But, I hope you (all) understand me well enough to keep debating.

    I am very good in my native language, trust me!

  102. on 06 Nov 2010 at 8:41 pm 102.Severin said …

    86 dxt
    “You have shown examples of animal instincts and behavior, none of which show possesion of moral agency”
    Because you say so?

    What is it “instincts AND behavior”?
    Did you mean “instict behavior”?

    What else is human behavior, than instinct, just a little bit upgraded with human ability to store more data in their grey cells, and with more interconnections among cells, enablin humans to think?
    Human brain does not differ much from ape’s brain.
    It (and many other anatomical details, including genetic analysis), clearly shows that humans and apes have common ancestors. They developed parallel in different directions.
    If we had enough time to wait (and if we do not kill all apes on earth), we will have new primitive human race within next 50 or 100,000 years.

  103. on 07 Nov 2010 at 2:24 am 103.Rostam said …

    “Ra religion grew fo a few thousand years, then dissapeared.
    greek and roman religions, Maya religion…grew and dissapeared.
    Christianity will dissapear too, do not doubt!”

    More misinformation. Ra lasted a few centuries, mainly only in Egypt. Not to mention such a comparisons are fallacious arguments. Christianity has more followers than in any time in history throughout the entire world.

    Atheist must resort to misinformation to bolster their bottom feeder status. Theism in its many forms is going now where. The sooner you realize Nietzsche was wrong then and now, the better you can accept reality.

    Spellcheckers work for all people. Try one. lol, Well, let me add I could deal with the spelling if you didn’t present so may lies and fallacious arguments!

  104. on 07 Nov 2010 at 2:27 am 104.Rostam said …

    Oh, I forgot to add this. Aristotle wasn’t real. He was only a fairy tale made up by writers of his time. If you can prove his existence, scientifically, we might reconsider.

    Cheers!

  105. on 07 Nov 2010 at 4:23 pm 105.dxt said …

    #97 HY,

    Murder. In your case of “survival of the species”, it does nothing to say that it is in fact absolutely and objectively right or wrong. In the case you have given, “Murder” would be a relative issue. It would not be good for the advancement of the species but nothing says it is necessarily objectively wrong. You have no case then, by your claims, because there is no grounds in the dividing line between something being right and wrong. Like I said before as well, right and wrong, good and evil wouldn’t exist! Everything would be relative in your world view, some things just may or may not be benifical for you.

  106. on 07 Nov 2010 at 4:42 pm 106.Hell Yeah said …

    Rostam said “Theism in its many forms is going now where.”

    then said shortly after “Spellcheckers work for all people. Try one.”

    You brought it up, so I am pointing it out….”now” passes the spell checker, doesn’t it. LOL

    ————-

    “Ra lasted a few centuries, mainly only in Egypt. Not to mention such a comparisons are fallacious arguments. Christianity has more followers than in any time in history throughout the entire world.”

    Ra lasted a little longer than you think. And since Christiantiy is more recent, so has the world’s population explosion….so to say it has more followers than any other is only because the population has been the most ever.

    ————

    “Aristotle wasn’t real. He was only a fairy tale made up by writers of his time. If you can prove his existence, scientifically, we might reconsider.”

    If Aristotle is claimed to have had supernatural powers that have never been seen in history other than with other religions that are claimed to be false by the same people that believe in another religion, then I would agree. But that isn’t the case. LOL

  107. on 07 Nov 2010 at 4:54 pm 107.Hell Yeah said …

    “Murder. In your case of “survival of the species”, it does nothing to say that it is in fact absolutely and objectively right or wrong. In the case you have given, “Murder” would be a relative issue.”

    Not murdering your own species is seen in all animals, not just humans. Humans decided it is a moral….or maybe it is just a natural instinct? If species murdered their own without knowing a consequence, the chances of extinction is very high. And also, you are saying morals were created by God for humans. Then why do we see the animal instinctive morals in humans and all other animals? What we humans decided to call morals are just animal instictive behaviors based on the current environment.

  108. on 07 Nov 2010 at 5:55 pm 108.dxt said …

    #99 HY,

    Denial?…..far from it. In Isaiah 22:18 the hebrew word “Duwr” as said in your link refers to a ball and by assuming by implication that Isaiah is referring to a “sphere”. The fact is, this word as well, no more indicates “sphericity” than the other word. Isaiah uses “Duwr” again in 29:3, he uses this SAME Hebrew word in decribing the “encircling of a camp”. It is not possible to encircle a camp in a “spherical” manner. My point is, the difference between the two words is NOT the intention to show a description of a spherical geometrical shape. The two words only seem to be giving reference to a circular pattern. As other words in hebrew describe a compassive circle as well, none of them mean “sphere”. So, as I said before, no word for “sphere” in the hebrew language. At the very least, it is ambiguous and by no means provides definitive proof of a “flat earth” or “pizza shape” belief. The Bible remains as the only scientifically verified ancient text today. Let me say it again, the Bible is not a scientific text book and has yet to be out of line by thousands of years of scientific discovery. As I see it, you have an overwhelming MONUMENTAL task ahead of you to definitively disprove the Scriptures.

  109. on 07 Nov 2010 at 6:47 pm 109.dxt said …

    #107 HY,

    You need to look up the definition of murder. You confuse murder with the act of killing. Murder pertains to human beings and means to UNJUSTLY and UNLAWFULLY take another HUMAN BEINGS life. Do you know of any monkeys that went to court for murdering and eating another breed of monkey? Or a trial that a monkey was deemed justified and innocent of murder due to self defence? Lions eat their young..shouldn’t they go to court and be entitled to a fair trial for that?

    So we just up and decided one day that hey, we shouldnt kill eachother anymore because it’s really not in our best intrest as a species? What about the other side of the fence that says who are you to make the rules, we’ve been killing for millions of years while still advancing our species?….Its subjective in this case. Evolution provides subjectivity for morality. You can not tell me murder is absolutely and objectively wrong…..its simply your opinion and we have no grounds to condemn anyone for it.

    Tell me, what consequence do animals know of for “murder”. The strong survive right…isnt that natures way?

  110. on 07 Nov 2010 at 7:58 pm 110.Lou said …

    “Aristotle wasn’t real. He was only a fairy tale made up by writers of his time. If you can prove his existence, scientifically”

    Won’t enter the killing argument but this is funny Rostam! Many of the new atheist like to claim they only believe in what science can prove so I suppose that would rule out Aristotle along with a whole host of ancient personalities. (lol)

  111. on 07 Nov 2010 at 8:06 pm 111.Severin said …

    103 Rostam
    “Ra lasted a few centuries, mainly only in Egypt.”
    Maybe, but it DISSAPEARED!
    Why did Christianity split to so many “christianities”?
    Are they all right?

    “Not to mention such a comparisons are fallacious arguments. Christianity has more followers than in any time in history throughout the entire world.”
    So, the number of followers makes a religion right?
    That is for you a right argument?

  112. on 07 Nov 2010 at 8:55 pm 112.Rostam said …

    Sev says

    Maybe, but it DISSAPEARED!

    No, The point is you lie, not that they disappeared. You attempt to claimed it lasted thousands of years. Christianity has, NOT Ra.

    Sev the says ”

    So, the number of followers makes a religion right?

    Again the point is you lie as you claimed Christianity is dieing out. This is not my argument, it was yours.

    Sev the point is you just make up numbers and facts. You do not practice due diligence. You also again attempt to use fallacious arguments to make a point. Your response indicated you are not aware of fallacious arguments. Look it up or take a logic class.

    Lou,

    Thank you! I get off a good one now and again.

  113. on 08 Nov 2010 at 2:17 am 113.Jesus wasn't real said …

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljRKhZ81aqY&feature=related

    Watch this video in full. Only 10 minutes. Then you will know where the idea of Jesus actually came from.

  114. on 08 Nov 2010 at 6:31 am 114.Severin said …

    112 Rostam
    “Sev the point is you just make up numbers and facts.”

    The FACT is that no one today believes in Ra., that Ra-religion dissapeared, and THAT is the essence of what I said.
    The FACT is also that neither the duration of a religion nor the No. of followers makes a religion right.
    You are doing the same you did some time ago:
    When I say a 400 kg piano fell on someone’s head, you call me a lier, because the piano was only 380 kg.
    The fact the man is dead is unimportant to you.

  115. on 08 Nov 2010 at 6:46 am 115.Severin said …

    Rostam,

    Ra “ruled” the religion of ancient Egypt from fifth dinasty (25th century BC) to New Kingdom age (14th century BC):
    “Ra, Egyptian is the ancient Egyptian sun god. By the Fifth Dynasty he had become a major deity in ancient Egyptian religion,…”

    So, before stating something, please check it, and do not call people liers to make yourself right.

    My point was not exact duration of Ra.
    My point was: theis religion DISSAPEARED, after a long “life”.

  116. on 08 Nov 2010 at 12:21 pm 116.azriel said …

    you theists – when will you ever learn:) not a matter of dicussing intracies of you textx, might as well discuss the merits of lord of the rings as a reigious text ( has a lot to commend it and shouldn’e be discounted because it is ficticious – so is the bible after all)

    bunch of blind sheep – folowing mindlessly – you make me sick

  117. on 08 Nov 2010 at 12:23 pm 117.Rostam said …

    ?My point was: theis religion DISSAPEARED, after a long “life”.”

    Which AGAIN is a fallacy. Would you please look those up! Let me help, I feel generous today. Check this out.

    Ra disappeared therefore Ra must not be real
    God WILL disappear therefore GOD is not real.

    You see how fallacious this argument is Sev? Of course you making up Christianity is dieing is a false statement to begin with. However even if the statement were true the argument is still fallacious. You also DO throw out numbers to bolster arguments without knowledge and this is disingenuous.

    Let me simplify. You cannot disprove God and when one makes such claims based on Ra it is foolish.

  118. on 08 Nov 2010 at 12:50 pm 118.azriel said …

    why would anyone bother to disprove god – why not disprove that the earth is made from cheese, no need to provide proof against a rediculous statement like this. the burden of proof is on the person making these clains and since there can be none just shut up

  119. on 08 Nov 2010 at 12:51 pm 119.dxt said …

    #114, Sev

    “The FACT is also that neither the duration of a religion nor the No. of followers makes a religion right.”

    There is no “right” religion. Religion relies upon the individuals works to earn a right standing with God. In true Biblical Christianity it is GRACE, a FREE GIFT from God, no works involved. When Gods Grace is upon an individual, it produces a new nature. An “about face” is taken in the individuals life and as a result, good works are produced. Religion pruduces pride and haughtiness and reason to boast. Biblical Christianity eliminates pride and haughtiness and leaves nothing to boast about except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ(Galations 6:14).

    Do yourself a favor Sev, humble yourself and study the scriptures. Stop letting “religion” dictate your view of Biblical Christianity, because your not helping your disposition. The same sun that hardens the clay softens the wax.

  120. on 08 Nov 2010 at 12:59 pm 120.dxt said …

    #118 azriel,

    So, do you have anything intelligent to add? Is there something in particular you would like to share with us “blind sheep?”

  121. on 08 Nov 2010 at 1:13 pm 121.azriel said …

    there is nothing that I can say to you – I do hope that you will one day realise how you’ve been fooled; for your own sakes. I don’t hold out any hope that will happen anytime soon.

    Y don’t you just accept that the word doesn’t need your fantasies, keep it to yourself and leave us sane people alone. I’m sick of religious views having influence in politics, education and any other field for that matter. We need a rational approach, not a fairy tale believing bunch of fanatics telling us what to do

  122. on 08 Nov 2010 at 3:19 pm 122.Severin said …

    112 Rostam,

    Your trying to make me a lier is so transparent!
    The point of my claim was not the duration of a religion (it was figurative), BUT the FACT that it DISSAPEARED!
    I maybe exaggerated (not deliberately) in duration of “Raism” in ancient Egypt, but I did NOT exaggerate when I said: it EXISTED and DISSAPEARED, which was the point.

    You are the real lier!

    You claim there is god without offering any evidences for your claim.
    That is SOME lie!

    Exactly as “Raism” (and all other dissapeared religions!) started to fall apart splitting in many different “raisms” before it dissapeared, ruining of christianity started at its very beginning. Today we have so many “christianities” that normal human can not distiguih among them, and they all fight among each other!
    It is the start of the end!

    Who cares whether “Raism” was actual for 1000 or for 2000 years?! IT DISSAPEARED!
    Who will care whether christianity was actual for 1 or for 2 milleniums when it dissapear!

  123. on 08 Nov 2010 at 4:38 pm 123.Severin said …

    112 Rostam
    “Sev the point is you just make up numbers…”

    Maybe, but I do not make up gods!

  124. on 09 Nov 2010 at 1:02 am 124.Jesus wasn't real said …

    Believers, watch this video. Give me your input on it, especially the last part.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljRKhZ81aqY&feature=related

  125. on 09 Nov 2010 at 2:07 am 125.dxt said …

    #121 Azriel,

    I would just like to focus on a few key words here in your post “fooled”, “fantasies”, and “rational”.

    Fooled

    The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” Psalm 53:1.

    So, how do you suppose life originated on earth? I have yet to see PROOF through any naturalistic means. Let us just start with that one. It is the God of the Bible who claims He created it, therefore God is a “default” position. It is up to the Atheist to DISproove the existence of God THROUGH these naturalistic means.

    Fantasies

    66 books, 3 different languages, 40+ authors over a period of 1500 years, and all come together and read as 1 flowing book.
    Discovery of the dead sea scrolls confirming the reliability of the OT, including hundreds of prophecies written within.
    Over 24,000 copies of NT letters, by far most of any ancient writtings. Next closest is 600 copies. More copies = more scrutiny, 24,000+ copies = no major differences, biblical doctrines remain intact. Fulfilled OT prophecies confirmed as foretold……..EVERY ONE OF THEM.
    The book “Apostolic Fathers” confirm NT was written within the eye-witness generation as they quote or refer to 25 of the 27 NT letters including all 4 Gospels already in secondary literature. Quotes range from 96 AD – 110 AD. The Scriptures are proven reliable. The Scriptures are scientifically verifiable by what we know today in several different fields and are the ONLY ancient texts of the sort.

    Rational

    How are denying these facts “Rational?” All that we know today right down to the intelligence in molecular biology and your going to imply I am irrational for believing what I believe? Please tell me how this is so. Give me proof evolution is right and therefore excludes the need for God and creation. I am interested in your response.

  126. on 09 Nov 2010 at 2:22 am 126.I am God said …

    I am God. Prove that I am not. I only exist in your wishful thinking imagination. Please do not think beyond this because I am telling you so. The bible is not my word. It was written by man and cherry picked by the pope at the time who actually only kept what he thought was appropriate. If it was truly my word, the whole thing would have stayed intact. I am, at default, your God. Because I said so. There aren’t any other Gods, because you haven’t proved that other Gods don’t exist.

  127. on 09 Nov 2010 at 3:03 am 127.Supernatural vs Reality said …

    Why is it that the supernatural are only found in religous myths? There is no evidence of anything supernatural in the real world. All religions believe in supernatural beings, but each religion believes theirs is correct while the other ones are wrong. It is either all of them are correct, or none of them are. Which is it? And Christians believe that theirs is the true religion because theirs is the one that is believed currently. If it was the true religion, it would have been the only religion ever. And yet, Christianity is divided into multiple religions. If you think God is real, then you must give proof of an actual supernatural event that has taken place. You can’t because nothing supernatural has ever happened, not now, not ever. If you cannot prove the supernatural, then where does your God fit in?

  128. on 09 Nov 2010 at 4:26 am 128.The Answer Man said …

    It is not supernatural vs reality it is supernatural AND reality.

    Wake up atheist. Your little cult cannot support reality. So many in your cult are made up of students rebelling against authority. You only make up little stories in attempt to disprove what is obvious.

  129. on 09 Nov 2010 at 5:01 am 129.Hell Yeah said …

    “it is supernatural AND reality”

    Really, where in reality is supernatural real? Prove just one supernatural event.

    ———-

    “Your little cult cannot support reality.”

    First of all, you might want to look up the definition of a cult. Religions are cults, not the non-belief of something.

    ———-

    “So many in your cult are made up of students rebelling against authority. You only make up little stories in attempt to disprove what is obvious.”

    Students rebelling against authority? Is that your perception of an atheist? You have it all wrong. Yet I am the one who cannot support reality? And who makes up little stories? Supernatural stories about a man in the sky are not made up stories? And if it was so obvious this man in the sky exists, then atheists wouldn’t need to question, now would we?

    Let’s put it this way, if your religion didn’t promise you an afterlife, would you really think you would have the mass amount of followers it does? That is the only reason most people believe. Because it is too good to not be true. But really, it is too good to be true. And most people are brainwashed as kids. Why do you think another religion believes that when they die they will get 72 virgins? How can you prove they don’t?

  130. on 09 Nov 2010 at 7:31 am 130.Severin said …

    125 dxt
    “The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” Psalm 53:1.
    It is the God of the Bible who claims He created it, therefore God is a “default” position. It is up to the Atheist to DISproove the existence of God THROUGH these naturalistic means.”

    THAT is really SOMETHING!
    Brilliant logic: there is god, because the Bible says so. If you do not trust it, just read the Bible!

    It was written in old Chinese book, much, much older than the Bible itself:
    „Pan Gu is the creator of the universe. He created the world.”

    You do not trust it!
    But, hey, it is WRITTEN in a book! A VERY, VERY old book, a few milleniums older than Bible.!

    From now on, if believers need a god, please address to Pan Gu!
    HE was the REAL creator, not biblical god!
    It is WRITTEN in a book!

    Or, prove it wrong!

  131. on 09 Nov 2010 at 7:42 am 131.Severin said …

    126 I am God

    Perfect!
    You only did not count on me: I am a God too!
    If I forgot to declare it before, I declare it now, thanks for reminding me!

  132. on 09 Nov 2010 at 7:43 am 132.Severin said …

    128 The Answer Man
    “It is not supernatural vs reality it is supernatural AND reality.”

    Have you ever heard about oxymoron?
    If you haven’t, please read your own sentence.

  133. on 09 Nov 2010 at 12:10 pm 133.Ben said …

    “And if it was so obvious this man in the sky exists, then atheists wouldn’t need to question, now would we?”

    Sure you would. We have conspiracy theorist galore all over the world. Atheist are no different. The works of Jesus were witnessed by thousands yet they did not belief. His resurrection witnessed by hundreds yet many did not believe.

    What would constitute proof?

  134. on 09 Nov 2010 at 12:24 pm 134.dxt said …

    #130 Severin,

    Haha!, This is a “less exhausive” result of a long line of deductive reasoning, historical facts and verification, Scriptural reliability and scientific verification. You have to do your homework Severin to come to this plausible conclusion. I should have known you would not have thought about that. I thought you knew better :(
    I threw Psalm 53:1 in there because I felt like it.

  135. on 09 Nov 2010 at 3:29 pm 135.Rostam said …

    From Sev: “It was written in old Chinese book, much, much older than the Bible itself”

    Severin Pangu actually has dates somewhere between 200-500AD. Therfore, it does not even predate Revelation much less the rest of the Bible.

    Just another lie from severin. I would actually believe Barrack Obama propaganda before believing anything you throw out as fact.

    Pangu is called a myth, because Pangu is myth and its origins go back as Chinese mythology, not facts.

    (sigh)

  136. on 09 Nov 2010 at 3:53 pm 136.azriel said …

    #125 dtx

    you can believe what you want – i really don’t care. you won’t change your mind since you won’t agree with my reasoning – again, i don’t care.

    just don’t ask or expect your views to have an affect on thers of politics, education etc. I’m sick and tired of the myth being pushed in schools and of clergy having an input in decision making. it’s simply crazy.

    You can believe what you want, just keep it to yourselves

  137. on 09 Nov 2010 at 3:54 pm 137.Rostam said …

    Rosta,

    Don’t sweat it. We all just know when we see a post from Sev that is full of junk logic and made up “facts”. No need to even bother pointing the fact out.

    It would be the equivalent of pointing out that Elephants have trunks.

  138. on 09 Nov 2010 at 3:57 pm 138.Rostam said …

    Now do you see Severin how false numbers to bolster your opinion is disingenuous?

    Its like posting to yourself to make your point stronger.

  139. on 09 Nov 2010 at 4:01 pm 139.Rostam said …

    azriel,

    I’m sick and tired of people like you attempting to kick God out of schools and politics considering he has been in there even before we became a ntion.

    We will never keep it to ourselves and if you don’t like it its just too bad. Last check we have elections, free speech and a constitution. We are a nation ruled by the majority. If you want to be a majority to buy an island unto yourself and live in your fairytale land.

  140. on 09 Nov 2010 at 4:10 pm 140.azriel said …

    and thats what’s wrong with people like you – and why the world is in the state it is. do what you want – just don’t try to involve the rest of us. i don’t care what you think – why should you try and influence what other people think? what makes you so special. you make me sick

  141. on 09 Nov 2010 at 9:46 pm 141.Rostam said …

    “just don’t try to involve the rest of us.”

    I would not attempt to involve you. I don’t know you. You also don’t make me sick – I pity you.

    You claim I attempt to influence how people think while on a blog attempting to influence others to think like you. The irony is delicious!

  142. on 10 Nov 2010 at 12:32 am 142.Hell Yeah said …

    “We will never keep it to ourselves and if you don’t like it its just too bad. Last check we have elections, free speech and a constitution. We are a nation ruled by the majority. If you want to be a majority to buy an island unto yourself and live in your fairytale land.”

    Um, go back to England then. The U.S. was founded on separation of church and state.

    The problem with you believers is that you are letting a fairy tale make major decisions for you in reality. Since the fairy tale isn’t reality, consequences take place. It is either you think God caused this and that to happen so whatever happened was desgined by God. Just pray to God and everything will be better instead of taking real action. Then when shit happens you don’t care because you think it was God’s plan and you will be going to en eternal heaven so who cares what happens in our short life bodies and world. Those are some of the problems. And having it in schools just promotes the brainwashing to young gullable kids who turn out like you.

  143. on 10 Nov 2010 at 12:40 am 143.Hell Yeah said …

    “The works of Jesus were witnessed by thousands yet they did not belief. His resurrection witnessed by hundreds yet many did not believe.”

    So the thousands and hundreds that a book claims to have witnessed it don’t believe? Maybe because the works of a carpenter named Jesus who was a common man who knew how to do David Copperfield magic tricks weren’t bought by some people. Do you believe David Copperfield or Chris Angel or any of those guys when they do magic tricks that they are actually floating in mid air, etc? No, we all know there is a trick behind it whether our eyes tells us it looks real. You don’t think people back then could have seen tricks like that and wrote them down in a book? Then hundreds of years later these embelleshed stories got printed and uneducated gullable people started believing them?

  144. on 10 Nov 2010 at 2:23 am 144.dxt said …

    #136 Azriel,

    You still haven’t provided me any proof yet, only your opinions.

  145. on 10 Nov 2010 at 3:12 am 145.dxt said …

    #142 HY,

    The U.S. was founded upon separation of church and state???? The U.S. was founded upon Biblical Christianity my friend. The separation of church and state means that congress shall make no laws establishing a religion. It does not mean for the individual to keep matters of faith out of Government and politics. Have you ever been in the Supreme Court building? Moses and the 10 Commandments are pasted all over it. Ever read the emblazoned inscription on the Liberty Bell? It quotes from Leviticus 25:10 from which it gets its name, it reads “and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.” Where do you see your separation of church and state here HY? Biblical Christianity should very much be apart of our Government and politics.

  146. on 10 Nov 2010 at 3:27 am 146.dxt said …

    #143 HY,

    Magic tricks? Fulfilling a prophesy of your own virgin birth, specific place and location of birth and line of descent is a magic trick? How about fulfilling numerous specific details concerning His own death and resurrection?

  147. on 10 Nov 2010 at 6:34 am 147.Severin said …

    134 dxt
    “Haha….screiptural reliability and scientific verification.”
    Do you now suddenly claim the Bible is scientifically reliable?

    Making man from mud, incestous mating to spread human race, talking snakes, big flood, resurrection, virgins delivering babies previously impregnated by a spitit… is that what you call “scientifically verified”?

    You are mocking yourself.
    And prety miserably.

  148. on 10 Nov 2010 at 1:01 pm 148.Hell Yeah said …

    But Severin, the bible talks about the earth as a circular shape, even though all the writers had to do was look up at the sun and moon to desipher that one. Also, remember dxt saying the bible isn’t scientifically exhausting? That is because it uses simple science such as that.

    ————–

    “Fulfilling a prophesy of your own virgin birth, specific place and location of birth and line of descent is a magic trick? How about fulfilling numerous specific details concerning His own death and resurrection?”

    What prophesy? Oh, the one that is made up at the beginning of the made up story that ends with it actualy happening at the end of the made up story?

  149. on 10 Nov 2010 at 1:20 pm 149.dxt said …

    Severin,

    I never claimed Scripture wasn’t! It is verified by what we know to be true today in various fields. Must we argue this issue again? Your examples are supernatural, which science can not account for nor take into consideration. The supernatural realm is left for philosophy and theology, the queen of science. Incestuous spreading of the human race should not surprise you Severin since evolution would teach the same thing. At least our line of descendants were closer to natural and spiritual perfection. As far as I know, science has not come close to confirming or verifying evolutionary origins. You have to have a lot more faith than me Severin.

  150. on 10 Nov 2010 at 1:33 pm 150.dxt said …

    HY,

    Are you still stuck on my ONE of several examples I gave? Your post shows you are absolutely clueless of any historical facts and findings pertaining to the Scriptures. You still haven’t answered any of my questions for you on our moral dilemma.

  151. on 10 Nov 2010 at 1:55 pm 151.tomas said …

    dtx
    what you call facts are open to interpretation, opinion etc. In the same way that ufo sightings cannot be confirmed, many people honestly believe they have witnessed these things, but thier accounts are often impossible to prove. Proof needs to be measurable, observable and verifiable. you cannot provide these things.

    you believe in god, without proof, this is what faith means. Atheists do not believe in god because they see no reason or evidence to support a ‘theory’ for god’s exsistence.

    I, for one, do not neet to refute your belief. I do not share belief in supernatural beings with you, but you are free to believe whatever you wish.

    my opinion differs, but i will not try to change yours – is your business.

    why do you feel the need to change the beliefs of others so that they match yours?

  152. on 10 Nov 2010 at 2:21 pm 152.ohyes said …

    “The gods can either take away evil from the world and will not, or, being willing to do so, cannot; or they neither can nor will, or lastly, they are both able and willing. If they have the will to remove evil and cannot, then they are not omnipotent. If they can, but will not, than they are not benevolent. If they are neither able nor willing, then they are neither omnipotent nor benevolent. Lastly, if they are both able and willing to annihilate evil, how does it exist?”

  153. on 10 Nov 2010 at 5:41 pm 153.dxt said …

    #151 tomas,

    Just what facts do you think im referring to that are open to interpretation and am not able to prove?

    I believe in God without proof???? You gotta be kidding! Its all that atheism and evolution can not account for and then some. Their is a long list of important, unaccounted for, explainations that evolution can not answer with proof. Creation and intelligence is seen on the molecular biological level. Evolution can not account for this. It responds with a naturalistic theory under naturalistic law……none of which is even close to providing proof with any answers. Creation was a supernatural event which is out of bounds for science. Science can only affirm what it sees IN creation. Supernatural creation and everything created AFTER ITS OWN KIND, which science affirms, is the only plausible conclusion thus far and confirms the Biblical account in Genesis. If you go with the evolutionary account, you will be faced with the requirement of more faith than it does for supernatural creation. Study hard because life is here and gone before you know it.

    Why do I feel the need to change others beliefs? Same could be asked of you….this is, after all, a website dedicated to changing the views of others is it not? I desire to change the views of others because it is of utmost importance and is a fundamental issue mankind is faced with. It has an infinite consequence.

  154. on 10 Nov 2010 at 8:35 pm 154.Lou said …

    “Proof needs to be measurable, observable and verifiable. you cannot provide these things.”

    Then why do we have theories like abiogenesis? Why do we have the Big Bang?

    Observable? No
    Measurable? No
    Verifiable? No

    He is a good one. The Oort cloud. It meets none of the above parameters.

  155. on 10 Nov 2010 at 9:25 pm 155.dxt said …

    Ohyes,

    There are so many things wrong with this. Let’s just start with the acknowledgment of evil. If you acknowledge good and evil then you conclude God exists. If God did not exist neither would good and evil, objectively. Everything would be relative, no dividing line between the two. So I can argue

    1. If God does not exist, then good and evil do not exist. exist.
    2. Good and evil do exist
    Therefore God exists

    God is perfect goodness, Holiness and righteousness. He sets the objective standard as creatures made in His likeness. Evil would be the exact opposite having no perfect goodness, Holiness or righteousness.
    God IS Sovereign over evil, it is allowed by Him for a season then WILL be utterly destroyed. So your post does not disprove the existence of the Biblical God, it only presents a false dilemma.

  156. on 11 Nov 2010 at 12:27 am 156.Hell Yeah said …

    “If you acknowledge good and evil then you conclude God exists.”

    Good and evil exists because of many things that have nothing to do with a God. One is from the struggle of survival in relation to decision making and the environment which one relates to. You can relate anything to just survival needs. Another one is chemical imbalance in the brain. Some take pills for it.

  157. on 11 Nov 2010 at 1:03 am 157.dxt said …

    #156 HY,

    If you believe in good and evil, right and wrong, and what you ought and ought not to do, objectively, then God must exist. If God does not exist then all of the above is relative and just relates to survival as you said. Do you believe in the existence of evil HY? Do you believe that something can be absolutely wrong or evil no matter anyones sane opinion? If yes to the latter question, then would you say that the consequence of doing wrong or evil would pertain to survival? You are sane right?

  158. on 11 Nov 2010 at 8:25 am 158.Severin said …

    155 dxt
    “If you acknowledge good and evil then you conclude God exists.”
    I perfectly distinguish good from evil, but my ability do distinguish them never led me to conclusion there was a god.
    I never needed any god to tell me what to do, what to say or how to act, and I never did anything wrong.

  159. on 11 Nov 2010 at 8:32 am 159.Severin said …

    157 dxt
    “If you believe in good and evil, right and wrong, and what you ought and ought not to do, objectively, then God must exist.”

    It is not the matter of “believing”.
    It is the matter of feeling.
    I never needed god to tell me not to kill or not to steal or not to offend someone or not to kill an animal, or not to spit on street.
    One big advantage of not believing in god: I never felt bad after masturbating when I was young.
    I felt gooood!

  160. on 11 Nov 2010 at 10:19 am 160.dxt said …

    #159 Severin,

    So you just “feel” murder is wrong despite someone else may feel it is right? Do you “feel” or “believe” murder is wrong despite anyones opinion about it Sev? Are you trying to say to me that objective morals and duties do not exist? You never needed God to tell you not to kill sev? So, where in billions of years of death to one for the advancement of the other did you just pick up on this? Let me rephrase that for you, you sev, dont THINK you need God to tell you not to murder. The fact is, God DID tell you, wheather in Commandment or the Law already written on your heart.

    I am a bowhunter sev, is it wrong for me to kill a deer? Are you a PETA advocate? Do you believe as they do? Rat is a pig is a dog is a boy?

  161. on 11 Nov 2010 at 10:42 am 161.dxt said …

    #158 Sev,

    You perfectly distinguish good from evil because God DOES exist. My point is, if God doesn’t exist you WOULDN’T be able to distinguish the two, they would not exist. You believe these things because you dont honor God as God. You are futile in your thinking and your foolish heart is darkened(Romans 1:21).

    You never did anything wrong sev? How does evolution tell you that? What does the evolutionary process know of what is good and what is evil? Do you know of any monkeys that know good and evil? Or rabbits, or sqirrels, or deer, or lions, or sharks, or dolphins?

  162. on 11 Nov 2010 at 12:48 pm 162.Hell Yeah said …

    “I am a bowhunter sev, is it wrong for me to kill a deer? Are you a PETA advocate? Do you believe as they do? Rat is a pig is a dog is a boy?”

    Again, dxt, the survival instinct is in place here. It isn’t wrong to kill a deer for food because that is a source of survival of animals. Animals kill other animals of different species to survive. The circle of life. Now, if you kill it just for fun and don’t use it for food for anyone, it isn’t right because you are wasting a resource that could have been used for survival for you or someoone else. And we don’t kill each other in our own species because of the instinct of survival of our own species and we also don’t want other of our own species to be upset at us as an individual otherwise they will want to do something back in return that could hurt our own individual survival. So you see, everything is related to survival. Even other animals do the same thing. Just do some research on it. They might not all be the same, but for the majority are similar at some level.

  163. on 11 Nov 2010 at 12:57 pm 163.ohyes said …

    concepts of good and evil, or whether certain behaviours are acceptable are a function of the developmet of society. As people began to live in groups, it became important to have some sort of control on potentially destructive behaviours; thus the individual benefits from membership of the group (protection from threats, acess to greater resources etc.) and the group is protected from destructive individuals, sort of like evolution, but in regards to behaviour, rather that physical properties.

    In natural selection terms, positive selection would take place for people predisposed to behaviours leading to increased survival; therefore people who could live in groups sucessfully would be more likely to survive and breed

    the development of sophisticated communication and social interaction is all that is required for humans to develop, over many generations, a common set of values that are beneficial to society in general. This is reinforced in families and schools and larger societal groups the world over with no necessity for reference to a deity.

    Incidentally, is it not likely that religion as a concept developed in much the same way, as it can be a useful tool to control behaviour and has frequently been used for just this purpose over the centuries

  164. on 11 Nov 2010 at 1:25 pm 164.ohyes said …

    #163

    my point is not necessarily that this is prooved, I couldn’t say that. It is, however a reasonable explaination or theory that fits what we know.

    There is simply no need to suppose a deity in this case, it is not necessary. Other theories are just as plausible, or, in my opinion, more so

  165. on 11 Nov 2010 at 1:52 pm 165.dxt said …

    HY,

    Question then, while I am out bowhunting whitetail deer, I encounter a coyote. I then shoot that coyote and chuck in the woods because it could ruin my hunt. Did I just commit a survival abomination? I didn’t eat it for food or take the hide for clothes…..just left it for dead in the woods.

  166. on 11 Nov 2010 at 2:18 pm 166.dxt said …

    Ohyes,

    Right of the bat you take the objective nature of something being absolutely good or absolutely evil and fudge them in with socially acceptable and non-acceptable behavior. You strip the objective nature from them to conform to your explanation. The explanation you give only shows that certain behaviors are merely socially advantageous instead of morally right or wrong objectively. Do you think murder and torture are objectively wrong and evil or do you think that they wouldn’t be in our best interest because they are not socially advantageous?

  167. on 11 Nov 2010 at 3:03 pm 167.dxt said …

    Ohyes,

    A question or explanation that fits what we know? Who is we? What is reasonable about that argument? Are you deferring to atheists as an authority on the divine mind? What is reasonable about that?

    No need to suppose a deity? No kidding, your an atheist who uses this argument to support a conclusion that creates a false dilemma. If you want to figure out why evil exists then start with what He has to say rather than rely on the conclusion of a faulty argument. If this argument is your opinion then you should state that instead of trying to deceive the unwitting. That’s not playing nice. Deception carries a hefty penalty.

  168. on 11 Nov 2010 at 3:26 pm 168.ohyes said …

    .dxt

    I do not say that evil exists in the sense that you seem to mean .And yes I do believe that what are regarded as morals are a result of societal conditioning over many generations. It is socially adventageous to behave in ways which bring benefit to the individual and approval from the larger society – sets of commonly accepted rules/ morals/ ways of behaving could easily have developed this way. It benefits the organism in its desire to reproduce and survive. It is a theory which makes sense at least as well as the supposition of a deity defining these things. As an alternative view, it cannot be disproved or proved; something it has in common with the deist view on such matters.

    It is at least as valid and does not require a supernatural/ magical element

  169. on 11 Nov 2010 at 5:55 pm 169.dxt said …

    Ohyes,

    In what sense then do you say evil exists? It is impossible to define objective morality without the existence of God. We can not define it starting with ourselves. There must be an objective standard, or plumb line, governing the thoughts and actions of our conscience. Evolution can not do that.
    I will give you certain behavior can be learned over a given period of time, its called a habit. Habits can not define morality nor govern the conscience. If a certain society was brought up and taught throughout centuries that murder was acceptable, such as a Jihadist, would it in fact be acceptable? If you say no then why not? Who are we to condemn their societal habits? They may feel it is essential to their survival. How do we as a nation justify war? It is our societal habits against theirs. So, I don’t think your explanation of morality holds any water at all. God is the only plausible explanation, but we are all entitled to our opinions.

  170. on 11 Nov 2010 at 9:49 pm 170.Anonymous said …

    158 dxt
    “My point is, if God doesn’t exist you WOULDN’T be able to distinguish the two, “

    There are people who do not distinguish the two.
    Following your logic, this fact is negation of existence of god.

  171. on 11 Nov 2010 at 9:50 pm 171.ohyes said …

    interesting, but i still don’t buy the need for a deity, or in moral absolutes as u describe them. I think that murder is percieved as wrong because of the very mechanisms i’ve described. War is also murder but a society accepts it when it sees a benefit to itself in it such as securing scarce resources or countering threats. I still believe that morals are human concepts that have served the development of society. Destructive behaviours are eliminated or controlled by them

  172. on 11 Nov 2010 at 9:51 pm 172.severin said …

    Sorry, 170 Anonymous = 170 Severin

  173. on 12 Nov 2010 at 1:52 am 173.dxt said …

    170 Severin,

    There may be people that believe pigs can fly too, doesn’t make it so.

  174. on 12 Nov 2010 at 2:51 am 174.dxt said …

    Ohyes,

    You say you think murder is percieved as wrong, I say no matter anyones perception of it , it IS wrong in an absolute sense. It seems to me that the use of the word “percieved”, murder is open to ones own opinion making it a subjective issue. I dont think the “moral evolutionist” has any grounds to argue that murder is without a doubt objectively wrong. There is no basis for it.

    I also differ with you on that “war is murder”. If a just war is waged and the individual acts in and of themselves are justified and within the laws of the Geneva Convention(for us) then it is not murder. Murder is to take the life of another individual unlawfully or unjustly. If an individual gets court marshalled for a war crime and accused of murder it is then up to the court to decide if it was in fact murder or he was carrying out a just cause. I certainly wouldn’t think we would praise soldiers coming home from a just war and concede that they are murderers. War is ugly no matter how you look at it, but justly taking another individuals life on the unjust side of the fence certainly wouldn’t make you a murderer. Taking another individuals life is a serious issue but there is a difference between murder and justly taking a life. If we would wage an unjust war, then yes, it would be murder. God Himself put in place our governing agencies and gave them the authority to wield the sword for a reason, to crush the evil acts against humanity. For Scripture admits in Romans 13:1-4

    “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
    Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
    For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;
    for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.”

    So I say to you that society does not accept murder but will accept the just killing of individuals guilty of evil acts against humanity. There is a difference between the two of which evolution has no grounds to argue. The evolutionist will have to keep piling on excuses.

  175. on 12 Nov 2010 at 9:37 am 175.severin said …

    158 dxt
    “My point is, if God doesn’t exist you WOULDN’T be able to distinguish the two, “
    170 Severin
    “There are people who do not distinguish the two.
    Following your logic, this fact is negation of existence of god.”
    173 dxt
    “There may be people that believe pigs can fly too, doesn’t make it so. “

    Following this logic (YOURS!), there may be people that believe there is god, but their beliefs do not make it so.
    Or: If people who think pigs can fly are right, then people who think god exists are right too.
    If people who think pigs can fly are not right, then people who think that god exists are not right either.
    Your “logic”, not mine!
    Your logic, not mine!
    “Logic” of a blind believer!

    What is your point?
    To use everything to prove existence of god, no matter how contradictory it sounds?
    Like the “Constitution of communist USSR”,from an old joke, which had only 2 paragraphs:
    #1 Communist party is always right
    #2 If Communist party is not right, apply #1

    Good joke, bad logic!

    So, you just MUST be right, no matter what stupidity you claim.

  176. on 12 Nov 2010 at 10:09 am 176.ohyes said …

    my problem with your concept of ‘just’ war is that people decide what is just based on idealogical, economical, political etc. reasons. How do you know which side is right?

    Do you think that god is supportive of one side against another? if so, how would he decide? what criteria would he use? in – for example the american civil war?

    surley, if god exsists then the taking of human life by another human is always wrong. thou shalt not kill?

    I’m interested to know your reasoning, this has always troubled me from the perspective of christian teachings about tolerance and love for your enemy etc.

    I try to keep an open mind, and am open to differing views. Maybe you’re right, but I just can’t see a need for a deity in this myself, yet

  177. on 12 Nov 2010 at 12:34 pm 177.Hell Yeah said …

    “Do you think that god is supportive of one side against another? if so, how would he decide? what criteria would he use? in – for example the american civil war?”

    Another good example is with sports. It is funny how many athletes thank God for their success, for example, winning the game. How does God choose which team to help win? What if both teams have players that pray for a win?

  178. on 12 Nov 2010 at 1:14 pm 178.dxt said …

    #176 Ohyes,

    Here is one of the problems of the evolutionist, the individual really wouldn’t know absolutely which side was right or wrong, as I said before.It would always seem to be a gray area. You say that people decide it through reasons of idealogical, political etc. I say true, but with Scripture and our intrinsic morals to govern the decisions and actions. You take those 2 away and your left with do whatever you want so long as it benefits the majority. Right and wrong wouldn’t matter. No decisions and actions to answer to without an intrinsic moral compass.

    Does God support one side or the other you ask? Or, if so how would He decide? We would’t know or could’t know without first correctly reading what He has to say. In the case of the civil war the issue was slavery and the unconditional freedom of every man and the result was an ugly war. War is a last resort and efforts were taken prior to ensure the freedom of every man regardless of how they were treated.

    Thou shall not kill is a miss translation, it is rendered murder in most of them. If it were kill then we would all be in trouble for habitual disobedience. I kill flies, hornets, mice, deer etc. Romans 13 says God gives the authority to governing agencies to “wield the sword” How could that be if we are not supposed to kill? Matthew 5:21 confirms “murder”. The KJV uses “kill” but is in the context of “murder”. Christ says if we even hate someone we are guilty of murder by His perfect law. So, we are to love our enemies and pray for them. Murder is the context here as confirmed by the rest of Scripture.

  179. on 12 Nov 2010 at 2:24 pm 179.ohyes said …

    I worry about other directedness in this context – what if another, more radical religion was to consider that murder was appropitae against all people who didn’t share thier views? wouldn’t they then be justified to commit murder as part of a ‘holy war’ since they might believe that god had directed them (or at least approved) to do so?

    if we are to look to scripture for guidance on morals etc. which one? there are many religious texts and many interpretations of each one. Do you consider that christianity differs fundementally from other belief systems and do you think that christianity as you describe it is the one to be followed?

    If so, why would the other beliefs be wrong?

  180. on 12 Nov 2010 at 4:07 pm 180.severin said …

    178 dxt
    “We would’t know or could’t know without first correctly reading what He has to say.”

    1. Where can we read what he has to say ? I ma especially interested in the next football match between Italy and Argentina (no matter when will it occur)? Does god bring bulletins about his intentions about his supports in sport, wars…? How frequently? Or, maybe he bring bulletins with explanations about his last decisions? For example, why did he allow Al-Kaida to kill thousands of innocent people at 9/11? Where can I buy those holy bulletins?
    2. What does it mean “correctly reading”? Everything that is correctly written can be read no other way but correctly (unless one can’t read). Are you warning us your super-god could write something incorrectly? In that caase (as in the Bible), who is responsible to “correctly read” (interpret) god’s “incorrectly written” words?
    You?
    Why not I?

  181. on 12 Nov 2010 at 10:07 pm 181.dxt said …

    #179 Ohyes,

    Well, first off I have to say that I appreciate this reasonable discussion we have had this far. I wish they all went this way, so thank you.

    Your first question sounds alot like radical Islam. Radical Islam believes that murder is appropriate unless you renounce your faith and take up their teachings. The Islamic faith is a false religion based upon the Scriptures and as foretold by Christ Himself. Im not going to get into all the details in that or this will be quite a lengthy post.

    For the second part of your post, your questions are legitimate although we do not necessarily need to look to the Scriptures to find our morality. God has placed His Law in the hearts of every individual. If we are His creation made in His likeness then this shouldn’t seem strange. His law in the OT was to point to the coming Messiah, the lamb of God. It was not to show us how good we had to be but more to show us how good we couldn’t be. It was to show us that religion was not going to save you from eternal separation. No amount of religious works will make you right with Him. Atonement requires the blood of Gods perfect sacrifice in order to atone for all the sins ever commited by every believer. God requires this because He is perfectly Just and justice requires a penalty, and that penalty is not the physical death but the eternal spiritual death. This has to be because God is perfectly Holy, in fact Scripture says He is Holy, Holy, Holy and can not dwell with sin. The first(physical) death is part of the curse from the fall, man has been appointed by God to die once. The second death is for unbelievers who rebelled and did not accept the free gift of salvation again, justice. No man is held without excuse for the existence of God because Scripture says He has made it evident to them. And here we are with the fundamental issue at hand. Im getting carried away now, sorry.

    The Bible is head and shoulders above and differs greatly from all other religions. To keep this short, every individual is responsible for searching this out on their own. You first must come to study the Scriptures as a spiritually changed individual. I have legitimately defended Scripture on here with reasonable arguments only to have them trashed by irresponsible replies by certain individuals on here. It can take years of study to get a good grasp of the Scriptures to develop a correct theology. If you read a biography on someone to understand the character and nature of that individual you need to read it from cover to cover maybe several times in order to come to a right understanding of them. You can not just crack the book open and take a comment out of context, close the book and say “that guys a jerk” without taking the biography as a whole. You cant come to a right conclusion of anyone like that.

    This is getting long so I will end by saying, for your last question, that its up to you to search that out. The important thing is you are asking questions. You seem like a humble individual, seek and you shall find. If you would like some historical facts pertaining to the Scriptures let me know and if you would like to discuss them too we can. So my position still stands as God given objective morality not evolution needing long periods of time to develop good habits by the masses. That can not answer the objective nature of right and wrong, good and evil.

  182. on 12 Nov 2010 at 10:14 pm 182.dxt said …

    #180 Severin,

    Is it wrong of me NOT to feel compelled to answer all your nonsense?

  183. on 13 Nov 2010 at 3:14 pm 183.Himangsu Sekhar Pal said …

    IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE, THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
    Earlier it was impossible for us to give any satisfactory answer to this question. But modern science, rather we should say that Einstein, has made it an easy task for us. And Stephen Hawking has provided us with the clue necessary for solving this riddle. Actually scientists in their infinite wisdom have already kept the ground well-prepared for us believers so that one day we can give a most plausible and logically consistent answer to this age-old question. Let me first quote from the book “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking:
    “The idea of inflation could also explain why there is so much matter in the universe. There is something like ten million million million million million million million million million million million million million million (1 with eighty zeroes after it) particles in the region of the universe that we can observe. Where did they all come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle pairs. But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero.”
    Here the question stops. So the clue is this: if we can ultimately arrive at zero, then no further question will be raised, and there will be no infinite regression. What I intend to do here is something similar to that. I want to show that our God is a bunch of several zeroes, and that therefore no further question need be raised about His origin. And here comes Einstein with his special theory of relativity for giving us the necessary empirical support for our project.
    God is a Being. Therefore God will have existence as well as essence. So I will have to show that both from the point of view of existence as well as from the point of view of essence God is zero. It is almost a common parlance that God is spaceless, timeless, changeless, immortal, and all-pervading. Here we are getting three zeroes; space is zero, time is zero, change is zero. But how to prove that if there is a God, then that God will be spaceless, timeless, and changeless? From special theory of relativity we come to know that for light both distance and time become unreal. For light even an infinite distance is infinitely contracted to zero. The volume of an infinite universe full of light only will be simply zero due to this property of light. A universe with zero volume is a spaceless universe. Again at the speed of light time totally stops. So a universe full of light only is a spaceless, timeless universe. But these are the properties of light only! How do we come to know that God is also having the same properties of light so that God can also be spaceless, timeless? Scientists have shown that if there is a God, then that God can only be light, and nothing else, and that therefore He will have all the properties of light. Here is the proof.
    Scientists have shown that total energy of the universe is always zero. If total energy is zero, then total mass will also be zero due to energy-mass equivalence. Now if there is a God, then scientists have calculated the total energy and mass of the universe by taking into consideration that there is also a God. In other words, if God is there, then this total energy-mass calculation by the scientists is God-inclusive, not God-exclusive. This is due to two reasons. First of all, even if there is a God, they do not know that there is a God. Secondly, they do not admit that there is a God. So, if there is a God, then they have not been able to keep that God aside before making the calculation, because they do not know that there is a God. They cannot say that they have kept Him aside and then made the calculation, because by saying that they will admit that there is a God. At most they can say that there is no God. But we are not going to accept that statement as the final verdict on God-issue, because we are disputing that statement. So the matter of the fact is this: if God is really there, then scientists have shown that both the total mass and energy of the universe including God are zero. Therefore mass and energy of God will also be zero. God is without any mass, without any energy. And Einstein has already shown that anything having zero rest-mass will have the speed of light. In other words, it will be light. So, if God is there, then God is also light, and therefore He is spaceless, timeless. So from the point of view of existence God is zero, because he is spaceless, timeless, without any mass, without any energy.
    Now we will have to show that from the point of view of essence also God is zero. If there is only one being in the universe, and if there is no second being other than that being, then that being cannot have any such property as love, hate, cruelty, compassion, benevolence, etc. Let us say that God is cruel. Now to whom can He be cruel if there is no other being other than God Himself? So, if God is cruel, then is He cruel to Himself? Therefore if we say that God is all-loving, merciful, benevolent, etc., then we are also admitting that God is not alone, that there is another being co-eternal with God to whom He can show His love, benevolence, goodness, mercy, compassion, etc. If we say that God is all-loving, then we are also saying that this “all” is co-eternal with God. Thus we are admitting that God has not created the universe at all, and that therefore we need not have to revere Him, for the simple reason that He is not our creator!
    It is usually said that God is good. But Bertrand Russell has shown that God cannot be good for the simple reason that if God is good, then there is a standard of goodness which is independent of God’s will. Therefore, if God is the ultimate Being, then that God cannot be good. But neither can He be evil. God is beyond good and evil. Like Hindu’s Brahma, a real God can only be nirguna, nirupadhik; without any name, without any quality. From the point of view of essence also, a real God is a zero.
    So, why should there be any need for creation here, if God is existentially, as well as essentially, zero?
    But if there is someone who is intelligent and clever enough, then he will not stop arguing here. He will point out to another infinite regression. If God is light, then He will no doubt be spaceless, timeless, etc. Therefore one infinite regression is thus arrested. But what about the second regression? How, and from whom, does light get its own peculiar properties by means of which we have successfully arrested the first regression? So, here is another infinite regression. But we need not have to worry much about this regression, because this problem has already been solved. A whole thing, by virtue of its being the whole thing, will have all the properties of spacelessness, timelessness, changelessness, deathlessness. It need not have to depend on any other external source for getting these properties. Thus no further infinite regression will be there.
    H. S. Pal

  184. on 13 Nov 2010 at 10:24 pm 184.severin said …

    149 dxt
    “I never claimed Scripture wasn’t!”
    Wasn’t what?
    Now you claim that:
    “It is verified by what we know to be true today in various fields.”
    WHAT are the “various fields” of our today’s knowledge supporting the Bible?
    “Creation” of earth by hocus pocus?
    “Making” man from mud (also by hocus pocus)?
    Incestuous mating among brothers and sisters?
    You are wrong about incest in evolution. I do not say there are no examples of incestuous mating in world of animals, but evolution built many obstacles to avoid it. One good example is leaving of group of youngs when they grow to adults. Incest MAY happen, but evolution put obstacles to avoid it.
    Incest is a toboo in EACH human society, no matter to which religion it belongs: it is OBVIOUSLY the result of evolution!
    It was forbidden among Aborigins before they ever knew for Europeans and Christianity!
    The ONLY god who did not know anything about nature and natural laws connected with inbreeding, was Christian god! That was the only god who ORDERED INCEST!
    Does today’s understanding of morality support Bible? NO! Human society understood something your blood thirsty never did: that human race will disappear if it continues following biblical laws of killing and destroying. Human race CHANGED its laws to laws CONTRARY to Biblical laws, more acceptable for human survival!

    You name a “field” that supports the reliability AND today’s value of Bible!
    WHAT from the Bible is acceptable and can be directly (and without vomiting) applied today. You name it!

  185. on 13 Nov 2010 at 10:38 pm 185.severin said …

    154 Lou
    “Why do we have the Big Bang?
    Observable? No
    Measurable? No
    Verifiable? No”

    Of course, many consequences of the BB are observable, measurable AND verifiable today, that make the BB plausible.
    Your ignorance does not excuse you to talk lies.

    Now let’s turn to god:
    Observable? No
    Measurable? No
    Verifiable? No

    What makes it plausible?
    Nothing!

  186. on 14 Nov 2010 at 1:26 am 186.dxt said …

    #184 Severin,

    I am now convinced that arguing with you makes about as much sense as arguing with a bag of hammers. You quoted from a previous post of mine from which it was in reply to one of your own comments…….and you quote it as if you have no idea what im talking about! Then you take the second comment of mine and twist it like it was a new position I was taking! Its no wonder the Scriptures make no sense to you!
    My position has never changed, no matter how you craft it together. Get with it Severin.

    Why dont you comb through some of my posts and im sure you will find a particular post where I state some Scripture that is verified by what we know today in certain scientific fields. Do I have to continually re-post everything specifically for you?

    So evolution built many obstacles for incest huh? It was all just built in the evolutionary process? Think about this now severin……..if life originated from a single celled organism, as your theory suggests, then you are a by product of incestuous mating. So now knowing that, your going to tell me evolution just up and decided to call it quits with that and put some obstacles in the way. How ridiculous. The rest of your post again, makes it crystal clear you have not a clue of anything when it come to Scripture. Did I not warn you that arguing Scripture severin, will make you look silly and lose your credibility on here to others reading your posts. Didn’t I tell you that you should argue about something else? Just what did the human race change their laws to in opposition to the Bible to be more adapt to survival severin? I feel as though you sucked me into a fairy tale world here!

    Hydrology

    Job 36:27-29
    For He draws up drops of water,
    Which distill as rain from the mist,
    Which the clouds drop down
    And pour abundantly on man.
    Indeed, can anyone understand the spreading of clouds,
    The thunder from His canopy?

    These verses from the book of Job are consistant, not exhaustive, of what we know today in the scientific field of hydrology. Again severin, when the Bible makes statements or references that are scientifically proven today, although some simple and not exhaustive, they are verifiable, unlike other religions. It is not a SCIENTIFIC TEXTBOOK. Now print this page for further reference, and clean up your vomit.

  187. on 14 Nov 2010 at 1:46 am 187.Kwan said …

    This is quite the funny website.

    Now I understand why Christians attempt to convert folks. They believe they are saving people from eternal damnation.

    Maybe somebody could help me out why atheist do it? You cannot Know for fact there is no God so why would atheist care if people believe in God? You could be wrong. Please no intellectual comparisons since there are many intelligent and wise theists.

    If there is no God theist and atheist will all find the same end. Let is rest.

  188. on 14 Nov 2010 at 2:10 am 188.dxt said …

    #183 HS pal,

    Just a note, you’ll probably want to keep your posts a tad shorter to get more responses.

    I have read the entire post and seems this whole theory hinges on energy in the earths atmosphere. If the universe is expanding, as science says it is, then the universe must have had a beginning point, as science also says. Meaning, there first must be a universal atmosphere first, before energy can come into play through cosmic-ray collisions. It seems to me that this theory does not explain back far enough in order to come to this conclusion.

  189. on 15 Nov 2010 at 9:48 am 189.ohyes said …

    #181.dxt

    thanks for your reply and kind words

    I appreciate your statement of your position on this subject, you are obviously a commited christian and knowledgeable about your religious texts.

    I am, however still left with the same questions, since all belief structures seem as valid as each other to me. I have researched a little, but find it difficult to make the ‘leap of faith’ required. It does seem that you may be right, it is a personal and individual endeavor. I’ll consider this further.

  190. on 15 Nov 2010 at 12:40 pm 190.dxt said …

    #189 Ohyes,

    Thank you for your reply.

    When you begin weeding out what religions are valid and which ones are not, you will find that the Bible stands head and shoulders above the rest. Start with the historical evidence, the transcribing of the texts. Consider the amount of copies we have for the Scriptures which make it easier for historians to scrutinize. Start with the hard evidence and you will find the Bible quickly runs ahead of the pack. Trust me Ohyes, it will be worth every minute of your efforts.

  191. on 15 Nov 2010 at 4:07 pm 191.nick said …

    ohyes, if you find any “hard evidence” let us all know……

    that should be worth looking forward to!

    not only hard evidence that there is a god, but that this particular one is the right, the one and only one. Good luck with that

  192. on 07 Dec 2010 at 5:46 pm 192.truth said …

    God is the Supreme Intelligence-First Cause of all things.

    You must agree that if God exists we are here for a good reason and
    could you agree that this reason be anterior to our own existence on earth?
    With your child, would you be concerned for the person or his torn clothing.
    I am saying that our spirit is our real person and that the corporeal body is
    the clothing being worn for this mission (if you will) while on earth.
    The deaths of children are complements of previous missions and a trial or
    expiation for parents etc.
    Read Gospel of Thomas saying number 37. It is referring to the spirit over the
    material body.

    The story of Adam and Eve is an allegory personifying the early age of humankind.

    If we desire to do something why would not a Perfect being also have that desire?
    What better thing for a Perfect being to do than Creation itself.

    When babies die they commence a new existence (mission).

    All religions are good if their path be toward God.

  193. on 08 Dec 2010 at 1:15 am 193.Hell Yeah said …

    “You must agree that if God exists we are here for a good reason…..”

    I don’t agree that god exists.

    —————-

    “I am saying that our spirit is our real person and that the corporeal body is
    the clothing being worn for this mission (if you will) while on earth.”

    So does this mean that all living things that have a brain and therefore the ability to think have a spirit/soul? We are no more special when it comes to living and dying than any other living thing….we just are more developed in our thinking, that is all.

  194. on 09 Dec 2010 at 8:17 pm 194.Truth said …

    Look to science on how they try to explain the Universe.
    No matter where you put a boundary to it, what comes beyond?
    Logic tells you that the Universe is infinite.
    Because man cannot comprehend the concept of infinity does not
    make it impossible.
    Keep an open mind on the existence of the Creator.

    Yes I am speaking of progression of spirit from lower-state
    to higher-state, and you should feel special about yourself.

  195. on 10 Dec 2010 at 3:53 am 195.A4 said …

    @truth, being open-minded doesn’t mean what you think it means.

    Here’s a great (non-religious) video that addresses this subject.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

  196. on 15 Dec 2010 at 6:17 pm 196.Truth said …

    I watched the video you left for my benefit; I thank you and agree completely with it. The message I render is for those who can see the logic in it or would open their hearts. I know the Bible seems to be garnished with contradictions, and misinterpreted statements but do not forget that this information was given to early man who had little capacity to understand it. To begin; I give you four points to ponder:
    1. To assure ourselves of the existence of God, we only have to look abroad on the works of creation. The universe exists, therefore it has a cause. To doubt the existence of God is to doubt that every effect has a cause, and to assume that something can have been made by nothing.

    2. If the intuition of the existence of a Supreme Being were only the result of education it would not be universal, and would only exist, like all other knowledge, in the minds of those who had received the special education to which it were due.

    3. To attribute the first formations of things to the essential properties of matter would be to take effect for the cause, for those properties are themselves an effect, which must have a cause.

    4. To attribute the first formation of things to chance is nonsense for chance cannot produce the results of intelligence. If chance could be intelligent, it would cease to be chance.

  197. on 15 Dec 2010 at 9:05 pm 197.Observer said …

    196 “Truth” You do blather on like “Romantic”. You are describing nothing more than the Prime Mover. I believe this is an Aristotelian notion. This has nothing to do with an Abrahamic God.

    You also have no idea of what “chance” is in the context of science. Forget the mumbo jumbo and get a decent education at a research university. You can also try to self-educate, but as is so easy to overlook by folks on this side of the fence, you likely do not even have the fundamentals and foundation to understand what you are reading. Hence, education at a proper university, not some Xtian diploma mill like Liberty, etc. etc.

  198. on 15 Dec 2010 at 9:21 pm 198.Observer said …

    #73 dxt Sorry, I can’t quite keep up with all this. Anyway, how is giving a reference to one of the authorities not “adding” something? In all kinds of research, giving a reference to sources of knowledge is how information is communicated. Merely trying to help you get up to speed.

    As for the poetic bit about the circle or disc of the earth, I hate to break it to you, but my planet, and I assume yours to is an oblate spheroid. But, close enough to being a sphere that its dimension was estimated by Erastosthenes around 250BC at 1% error. Stand on the hill and turn on your heel, or sandal, and the disc idea is obvious. You do see how the Greek did A/A+ work versus a the F/D- work of the Bible writer?

  199. on 15 Dec 2010 at 9:39 pm 199.Severin said …

    196 Truth
    “The universe exists, therefore it has a cause.“

    So: God exists, therefore he has a cause.

    Is that right or wrong?

    If right, what „caused“ god?
    If wrong, why? What logic stands behind it?
    What is it that distinguishes a god from universe, so universe has to have a cause, and god has not?

  200. on 08 Apr 2011 at 10:40 am 200.Not so Fast said …

    Can you train a pet to wear a paper hat and jump through a hoop? Yes.
    Can the pet train you to wear a paper hat and jump through a hoop? No.
    What you are asking is for a God to jump through a hoop at your command. Good luck.
    P.S. I have never, and will never, advocate the “yes” “no” “wait” scam.
    I am quite fond of the verse: The reason your prayers are not answered is because you pray to fill up your lusts.
    (James)
    The “secret” embedded in that verse is “purpose”.
    It’s all about purpose, my friend.
    Now… If we evolved by chance: Purpose is an illusion. Therefore the goal of your website is an illusion.
    Have a good day.

  201. on 18 May 2011 at 1:13 pm 201.aspen assignment help said …

    Hi, I appreciate the information that you have provided in the post. It is worth noting and I really liked the presentation as well. I will surely come back for more of intersting posts.

  202. on 25 May 2011 at 11:33 am 202.Essay Writing said …

    Hi, The topic that you have discussed in the post is really amazing, I think now I have a strong hold over the topic after going through the post. I will surely come back for more information.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply