Xtian sex toy shop

[atheola]

Uhhhmm..errr.. well, just read..

 http://blogs.laweekly.com/afterdark/2012/03/christian_sex_shop_dutch_pries.php

[jakec47]

Thats...strange. I'm a Christian and I don't think we should be involved in that sort of stuff.

[One Above All]

lol

Thats...strange. I'm a Christian and I don't think we should be involved in that sort of stuff.

Why not? Stuff like this can make sex more fun.

[Tero]

Sex is a sin with condoms, not to
be enjoyed by Christians.

[velkyn]

Thats...strange. I'm a Christian and I don't think we should be involved in that sort of stuff.

toys are great fun.  I wonder, Jake, what makes you think that Christians should avoid sex toys?  Why would your god care?

I find this just great

it caters to the long-ignored niche market of consumers interested in purchasing dildos, but offended by photos of people using dildos.

so you use it but can't stand seeing others use it?  All of the dark Christian bedrooms with the buzzing    I recall one halloween we went to a halloween feast at a local very neat place, http://www.bubesbrewery.com/,  Not many were in costume, but there were a few.  Me as a vampiress, husband as a demon lord, a few others and this bunch of folks in S&M gear, flogs and all.  I'm sure they'd protest that it was "just a costume" but one doesn't lay out that kind of cash for that quality for an evening.  and if the claims of Christians are true about numbers of Christians in the US, odds are that they were in church that morning (feast was Sunday night). 

[Ivellios]

Thats...strange. I'm a Christian and I don't think we should be involved in that sort of stuff.

toys are great fun.  I wonder, Jake, what makes you think that Christians should avoid sex toys?  Why would your god care?

Simple. A woman should have no sexual experience beyond that which her owner provides for her, you know the one practicing human husbandry[1], ie. her husband. Then again, maybe YHWH doesn't care. He proposes the death penalty for men who lay with men, but says nothing about women. Does he not care, or were primitive men just incapable of imaging a woman lying with another woman? He's also silent regarding sex toys. Since he is All-Knowing, you would imagine he would have known and would have said something about it, especially since an old old pagan goddess predating the Torah once chopped down and evergreen tree, took it home with her and a baby was born from her 9 months later. Since evergreens stay green, it's because the male god of fertility dwells with them. Yes, it's the real "Reason for the Season."

Since he doesn't mention sex toys, he either: probably lacks imagination[2], condones thier use[3], or imaginary.

1.	the human equivelant of Animal Husbandry.
2.	not omniscient
3.	if omniscient

[jakec47]

Sex is a sacred thing to be shared between a male and female who are married. It is for their pleasure to grow together. It brings them closer together and a sex toy would be an abnormal thing. A man and a woman's sexual parts fit together the way they were meant to. There is no need of any additional things. And God doesn't have to say "Thou shalt not use sex toys." Because the people at that time would be like...what is he talking about. Not to mention he says. "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious..." Then he goes on to say a few of them but as he said they are obvious. If it is not for the glory of God and it is for self-indulgence, something God speaks against, then it is not good. Christ says that anyone who would follow him must deny himself.

[One Above All]

And God doesn't have to say "Thou shalt not use sex toys." Because the people at that time would be like...what is he talking about.

Sex toys were invented over 40,000 years ago. Try again.

[jakec47]

And God doesn't have to say "Thou shalt not use sex toys." Because the people at that time would be like...what is he talking about.

Sex toys were invented over 40,000 years ago. Try again.

The earth isn't even that old...try again.

[magicmiles]

Sex toys were invented over 40,000 years ago. Try again.

evidence for this?

[One Above All]

My apologies. I must've gotten my dates mixed up.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4713323.stm
This is the oldest I know of.

[caveat_imperator]

The earth isn't even that old...

ROFL

[One Above All]

ROFL

IKR. I showed him my appreciation for that joke in the form of a smite.

[jakec47]

Unfair...you cannot smite me based on something debated like that. http://www.earthage.org/

[One Above All]

jakec47, I know you're trying to be funny, but now you're really embarrassing yourself.

[Quesi]

That falsely dated phallus is clearly part of the great scientific conspiracy to ... ummmm... be mean to God. 

But more seriously.... siltstone?  Eww. 

[RNS]

But more seriously.... siltstone?  Eww.

It's not so bad once you get used to it. Although I would suggest warming it up a bit first before use   ...i learned that the hard[1] way.

1.	buddum tsssss

[Omen]

Unfair...you cannot smite me based on something debated like that. http://www.earthage.org/

It is not debated seriously in any academic or scientific manner.

[screwtape]

Sex is a sacred thing to be shared between a male and female who are married. It is for their pleasure to grow together. It brings them closer together and a sex toy would be an abnormal thing. A man and a woman's sexual parts fit together the way they were meant to. There is no need of any additional things. And God doesn't have to say "Thou shalt not use sex toys." Because the people at that time would be like...what is he talking about. Not to mention he says. "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious..." Then he goes on to say a few of them but as he said they are obvious. If it is not for the glory of God and it is for self-indulgence, something God speaks against, then it is not good. Christ says that anyone who would follow him must deny himself.

I feel bad for any woman dumb enough to bang you.  You must be one dreary lay.

[Ivellios]

"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious..." Then he goes on to say a few of them but as he said they are obvious.

But instead of saying "don't have sex with your grandparents, thier descendants or those related via marriage." what does he say instead?

Do not have sex with your sister.
Do not have sex with brother.
Do not have sex with your daughter.
Do not have sex with your son.
Do not have sex with your nephew.
Do not have sex with your neice.
etc.

Listing many but not all circumstances: sex toys and women laying with women. It is man's nature to rebel against god, an All-Knowing being was clearly trying to cover every angle so there were no loopholes. Since you cannot know the mind of a god that works in mysterious ways, there's no way for us to know if those loopholes are intentional or not. Anyone that's read the bible, especially the books of Law would have read that ¹/₂ page of "Do not have sex with...." laws. So I felt it unnnecessary to list them in detail earlier. That doesn't matter anyways, since the OT is no longer applicable and these aren't part of the 10 Commandments, right?

Edit: Just do, whatever, and with god's grace you are forgiven!

[Ivellios]

It is not debated seriously in any academic or scientific manner.

Because, anything that supposedly comes from an All-Knowing god talking about a flat Earth and a solid dome holding up water that the Sun and Moon are within, is so wrong.

To deny the age of the Earth because it says the bible is wrong, must also deny Astronomy & Theory of Relativity with Space Program and GPS. Germ Theory, Theory of Gravity (also necessary for Space Program), and so much more. Seriously, jakec47. I also like how it[1] uses prohesied future events as events that prove the bible to be true. Since the bible says that ¹/₃ of ALL the stars will fall to the Earth One Day... it Proves the Bible True! 

1.	that site.

[velkyn]

Sex is a sacred thing to be shared between a male and female who are married. It is for their pleasure to grow together.

BS.  I love how sacred it's supposed to be but how badly the people in the bible wanted people not to do it.  It was all deny sex completely  for this god to get the really good seats.

It brings them closer together and a sex toy would be an abnormal thing.

  And ah the Christians clamiing that things are “abnormal” and claiming that their nonsense is normal.  Yep, worshipping a god that created talking snakes, believing in things that have no evidence to support them is “normal”.  

A man and a woman's sexual parts fit together the way they were meant to.

A penis seems to have no problem going in a anus.  And a mouth and tongue and genitalia? well, that’s the most fun and fitting of all. 

There is no need of any additional things. And God doesn't have to say "Thou shalt not use sex toys." Because the people at that time would be like...what is he talking about. Not to mention he says. "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious..."

  Yep, your bible also says that it’s “obvious” that this god created everything but funny how *all* religions say this about their gods.  Seems that yoru poor god can’t make that obvious either.

Then he goes on to say a few of them but as he said they are obvious. If it is not for the glory of God and it is for self-indulgence, something God speaks against, then it is not good. Christ says that anyone who would follow him must deny himself.

Why, yes he does, he says that oen should abandon everything and follow him.  But funny how Christians never do.  He never says that sex is sacred as you claimed it to be and if Paul is to be believed as the spiritual continuation of JC, we have Paul quite certain that

1 Corinthians 7: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”(A) 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.

So who is wrong here, Jake, you or Paul?  Sex  is only approved grudgingly by this god of yours (you have to be a virgin to get into the heaven where this god is per Revelation), again another instance where it could have made things better to fit what is supposedly wanted but failed miserably with using its omniscience and omnipotence.   

and you are quite a willfully ignorant person to think that the earth is not more than 40,000 years old.  Poor hypocrite, using all of that science that shows this is the case as long as it make you comfy.

[jakec47]

"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious..." Then he goes on to say a few of them but as he said they are obvious.

But instead of saying "don't have sex with your grandparents, thier descendants or those related via marriage." what does he say instead?

Do not have sex with your sister.
Do not have sex with brother.
Do not have sex with your daughter.
Do not have sex with your son.
Do not have sex with your nephew.
Do not have sex with your neice.
etc.

Listing many but not all circumstances: sex toys and women laying with women. It is man's nature to rebel against god, an All-Knowing being was clearly trying to cover every angle so there were no loopholes. Since you cannot know the mind of a god that works in mysterious ways, there's no way for us to know if those loopholes are intentional or not. Anyone that's read the bible, especially the books of Law would have read that ¹/₂ page of "Do not have sex with...." laws. So I felt it unnnecessary to list them in detail earlier. That doesn't matter anyways, since the OT is no longer applicable and these aren't part of the 10 Commandments, right?

Edit: Just do, whatever, and with god's grace you are forgiven!

Most of the Old Testament is applicable, there are certain things that pointed to Jesus the Messiah's coming and those were done away with at the cross, such as the Passover Feast which was a service pointing to the coming Messiah.

It is not debated seriously in any academic or scientific manner.

Because, anything that supposedly comes from an All-Knowing god talking about a flat Earth and a solid dome holding up water that the Sun and Moon are within, is so wrong.

To deny the age of the Earth because it says the bible is wrong, must also deny Astronomy & Theory of Relativity with Space Program and GPS. Germ Theory, Theory of Gravity (also necessary for Space Program), and so much more. Seriously, jakec47. I also like how it[1] uses prohesied future events as events that prove the bible to be true. Since the bible says that ¹/₃ of ALL the stars will fall to the Earth One Day... it Proves the Bible True! 

1.	that site.

God did not say the Earth was flat, in fact he said it was round.
"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
   and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
   and spreads them out like a tent to live in."
- Isaiah 40:22

And if you deny the age of the earth you do not have to deny those other theories and such. I say the Earth is that old because of various reasons like the history of many civilizations only go back a few thousand years. And scientists have changed the age of the earth many times. How can we know it is 4.5 billions years, no one was there. But something does tell us how old the earth is and how do they know...witnesses! The Bible says it is that old so if the Bible is true, and I believe it is then it must be approxiamately 6,000 years old.

A penis seems to have no problem going in a anus.  And a mouth and tongue and genitalia? well, that’s the most fun and fitting of all. 

That may be so but a man has one reproductive organ and a female has one as well. If male's could reproduce through their anus that would be a different matter. Every body part has its function and that is the same for the sexual organs.

Why, yes he does, he says that oen should abandon everything and follow him.  But funny how Christians never do.  He never says that sex is sacred as you claimed it to be and if Paul is to be believed as the spiritual continuation of JC, we have Paul quite certain that

1 Corinthians 7: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”(A) 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.

So who is wrong here, Jake, you or Paul?  Sex  is only approved grudgingly by this god of yours (you have to be a virgin to get into the heaven where this god is per Revelation), again another instance where it could have made things better to fit what is supposedly wanted but failed miserably with using its omniscience and omnipotence.   

and you are quite a willfully ignorant person to think that the earth is not more than 40,000 years old.  Poor hypocrite, using all of that science that shows this is the case as long as it make you comfy.

You cannot say Christians never do. You can't make such a generalized statement. Your ignorance of the ways of God also make what you say about that inaccurate and unintelligable.

Your completely wrong. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 says, "Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband." As he is obviously stating because there is so much sexual immorality and fornication (word used in the KJV) a man should marry so that they do not break God's law by fornication, which is sexual immorality.

And you don't have to be a virgin to get to heaven, it says that nowhere. You may be referring to Revelation 14:4 which says, "These are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins." First off it is talking about the 144,000 which are not the same as all those saved, it is a separate group, those saved are referred to as the "multitudes that surround the throne".

Also if one looks at Revelation they will see it is a book that speaks of many unbelievable things, that is because it is imagery. It has a meaning but it is not literal. This is obvious when is says some of the things for example, "Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars. Then being with child, she cried out in labor and in pain to give birth. And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to give birth, to devour her Child as soon as it was born. She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne." - Revelation 12:1-5

This is imagery that using the Bible can be interpreted. The women is speaks of if Mary, Jesus' mother. The red dragon having seven heads (this refers to seven hills) and ten horns (this refers to the 10 powers or nations, which is the 10 nations that Rome was divided into when it crumpled). A third of the stars (reference to angels) were through out of heaven. Satan deceived 1/3 of the angels when he was cast out, and they were cast out with him. The dragon was ready to kill Jesus once we was born. We know it was Jesus because it says he will rule all nations with a rod of iron which is what it says of Jesus in other places in the Bible and he was caught up to God...the resurrection. When Jesus was born the Roman government, which Satan was working through, under King Herod tried to have Jesus killed once he was born.

As you can see it is imagery that John, the writer, had to use since he was exiled on the island of Patmos, if he had spoken plainly the letter would have most certainly been taken and destroyed so he had to hide the truth under imagery that the rest of the Bible could be used to understand it.

And I would not call me ignorant because of what I say about the age of the earth because many scientists agree that the earth is fairly young. Here is a list of scientists who believe in a young earth:

•Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
•Dr. Kevin Anderson, Microbiology - Biography
•Mark Armitage, Biology - Biography
•Alexander Arndt (analytical chemist, etc.) [more info]
•Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
•Francis Bacon (developed the Scientific Method)
•Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
•Thomas G. Barnes (physicist) [more info]
•Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
•Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
•Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
•Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
•Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
•Arthur V. Chadwick (geologist) [more info]
•Dr. Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist
•Dr. John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
•Dr. Bob Compton, DVM
•Melvin Alonzo Cook (physical chemist, Nobel Prize nominee) [more info]
•Dr. Ken Cumming, Biologist
•Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
•Dr. William M. Curtis III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S., Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
•Dr. Raymond V. Damadian, M.D., Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
•Dr. Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
•Dr. Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
•Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
•Dr. David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
•Dr. Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
•Dr. Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
•Dr. Ted Driggers, Operations research
•Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
•Dr. André Eggen, Geneticist
•Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
•Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
•Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
•Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
•Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
•Robert V. Gentry (physicist and chemist) [more info]
•Dr. Paul Giem, Medical Research
•Dr. Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
•Dr. Duane Gish, Biochemist
•Dr. Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
•Dr. Warwick Glover, General Surgeon
•Dr. D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
•John Grebe (chemist) [more info]
•Dr. George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
•Dr. Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
•Dr. Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
•Dr. Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
•Dr. Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
•Dr. George F. Howe, Botany
•Dr. James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
•D. Russell Humphreys (award-winning physicist) [more info]
•Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
•George T. Javor, Biochemistry
•Dr. Arthur Jones, Biology
•Dr. David Kaufman, Human Anatomy - Biography
•John W. Klotz (geneticist and biologist) [more info]
•Leonid Korochkin (geneticist) [more info]
•Dr. John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry
•Lane P. Lester (geneticist and biologist) [more info]
•Dr. Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist
•Dr. Ian Macreadie, molecular biologist and microbiologist:
•Dr. John Marcus, Molecular Biologist
•Frank L. Marsh (biologist) [more info]
•Dr. George Marshall, Eye Disease Researcher
•Dr. Ralph Matthews, Radiation Chemist
•Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
•Dr. David Menton, Anatomist
•Dr. Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
•Dr. John Meyer, Physiologist
•Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
•Dr. Tommy Mitchell, Physician
•Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
•Dr. Henry M. Morris (1918–2006), founder of the Institute for Creation Research.
•Dr. Arlton C. Murray, Paleontologist
•Dr. John D. Morris, Geologist
•Dr. Terry Mortenson, History of Geology
•Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
•Isaac Newton (helped develop science of dynamics and the discipline of calculus / father of the Law of Gravity / invented the reflecting telescope) - See also a refutation of the argument Newton was a creationist only because there was no alternative)
•Dr. Eric Norman, Biomedical researcher
•Michael Oard, Atmospheric Science - Biography
•Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
•Gary E. Parker (biologist and paleontologist) [more info]
•Louis Pasteur (helped develop science of bacteriology / discovered the Law of Biogenesis / invented fermentation control / developed vaccinations and immunizations)
•Dr. Georgia Purdom, Molecular Genetics
•Dr. John Rankin, Cosmologist
•Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
•Dr. Ariel A. Roth, Biology
•Dr. Joachim Scheven Palaeontologist:
•Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist
•Dr. Timothy G. Standish, Biology
•Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
•Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
•Dr. Esther Su, Biochemistry
•Dr. Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
•Charles B. Thaxton (chemist) [more info]
•Dr. Ker C. Thomson, Geophysics
•William Thompson (Lord Kelvin) (helped develop sciences of thermodynamics and energetics / invented the Absolute Temperature Scale / developed the Trans-Atlantic Cable)
•Dr. Michael Todhunter, Forest Genetics
•Dr. Royal Truman, Organic Chemist:
•Leonardo da Vinci (helped develop science of hydraulics)
•Dr. Larry Vardiman, Atmospheric Science
•Prof. Walter Veith, Zoologist
•Dr. Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
•Dr. A.J. Monty White, Chemistry/Gas Kinetics
•Dr. John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
•A.E. Wilder-Smith (chemist and pharmacology expert) [more info]
•Dr. Kurt Wise, Palaeontologist
•Dr. Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
•Dr. Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist
•Dr. Henry Zuill, Biology
 

[Ivellios]

God did not say the Earth was flat, in fact he said it was round.
"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
   and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
   and spreads them out like a tent to live in."
- Isaiah 40:22

A plate is a circle. Do you know what a canopy is? A tent? The Earth is an orb floating[1] in the vast emptiness of space. The "heavens" or sky is absolutely NOT a solid object with tiny itty-bitty holes in it.

And if you deny the age of the earth you do not have to deny those other theories and such. I say the Earth is that old because of various reasons like the history of many civilizations only go back a few thousand years. And scientists have changed the age of the earth many times. How can we know it is 4.5 billions years, no one was there. But something does tell us how old the earth is and how do they know...witnesses! The Bible says it is that old so if the Bible is true, and I believe it is then it must be approxiamately 6,000 years old.

The same scentific method is used is used for the age of the Earth and allowing us to pass that non-existant solid object our rockets do not hit before leaving the atmosphere. If you were told something by someone and later they retract it and tell you something different (lie) and admit they are a liar. Which comment are you going to believe? The first? The last? Neither? Whatever is more comfortable for you. In this scenario, you were told there is a Santa Claus, then somone tells you, "there is no Santa Claus." You choose to believe simply it's what you would rather believe, or because it's what you were told first.

Do you just believe that Demons are the cause for illness, because that's what the bible says ? Bronze age goat herders said that FIRST, so they MUST be right!

 I'd say more but I need to go to work now.

1.	for a simplistic term.

[screwtape]

Here is a list of scientists who believe in a young earth:

uh-uh. 

Not scientists:

•Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
•Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
•Arthur V. Chadwick (geologist) [more info]
•Dr. John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
•Dr. Bob Compton, DVM
•Melvin Alonzo Cook (physical chemist, Nobel Prize nominee) [more info]
•Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
•Dr. Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
•Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
•Dr. Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
•Dr. Ted Driggers, Operations research
•Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
•Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
•Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
•Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
•Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
•Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
•Robert V. Gentry (physicist and chemist) [more info]
•Dr. Paul Giem, Medical Research
•Dr. Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
•Dr. Warwick Glover, General Surgeon
•John Grebe (chemist) [more info]
•Dr. Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
•Dr. James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
•Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
•George T. Javor, Biochemistry
•Dr. David Kaufman, Human Anatomy - Biography
•Lane P. Lester (geneticist and biologist) [more info]
•Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
•Dr. David Menton, Anatomist
•Dr. Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
•Dr. John Meyer, Physiologist
•Colin W. Mitchell, Geography  Geologist? Are you kidding?
•Dr. Tommy Mitchell, Physician
•Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
•Dr. Henry M. Morris (1918–2006), founder of the Institute for Creation Research.
•Dr. Terry Mortenson, History of Geology
•Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
•Michael Oard, Atmospheric Science - Biography
•Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
•Gary E. Parker (biologist and paleontologist) [more info]
•Dr. John Rankin, Cosmologist
•Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
•Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
•Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
•Dr. Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
•Charles B. Thaxton (chemist) [more info]
•Dr. Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
•Dr. John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
•A.E. Wilder-Smith (chemist and pharmacology expert) [more info]
•Dr. Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
•Dr. Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist

So over half of your list is just padding.


You also don't get to have these guys:
•Leonardo da Vinci died 1519, 340 years before the Origin of Species was published.  His creationist beliefs, if he had any, were based in ignorance.
•Francis Bacon died 1626, 235 years before the Origin of Species was published.
His creationist beliefs, if he had any, were based in ignorance.
•Isaac Newton died 1727, 132 years before the Origin of Species was published. His creationist beliefs, if he had any, were based in ignorance.
•Louis Pasteur died 1895, 36 years after the Origin of Species was published. Conflicting reports of his religiousness. No clear evidence he was a YEC
•William Thompson (lord Kelvin) died 1907. Not a YEC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Kelvin#Age_of_the_Earth:_Geology_and_theology
He thought the earth was 20-400 million years old. This was based on his calculations for the age on the sun, but did not know about thermonuclear fusion.  He thought it was a big ball of fire that gradually cooled, because he knew of no fuel that would burn for 400 million years.

I was also pretty generous about the "scientists" I left on your list.  You probably don't want me to research them or the rest of them would get kicked off the list too, either because they aren't actually scientists, or someone lied about their position.  For example, "Dr" A.J. Monty White said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_White

Each discipline should be dismantled, and, starting at the foundation, purged of unbiblical notions and rebuilt in accordance with biblical values and givens ... If ultimately we will be fools in the eyes of the world anyway, why not at least be consistent fools, and uphold God's Word in its undiminished entirety?

These are not the words of a man who is interested in following the facts to where they lead.  These are the words of a religious zealot.  Not a scientist.

[Ivellios]

Ok, back from work...

Most of the Old Testament is applicable, there are certain things that pointed to Jesus the Messiah's coming and those were done away with at the cross, such as the Passover Feast which was a service pointing to the coming Messiah.

List the verse in the bible that specifically states which of the old law is still applicable and which ones are not. There isn't, it's, "I think this is a good law, I'll obey it. I think this law is written by primitive ignorant bigots, God must have surely meant it as a metaphor, so I will not obey it." Simple special pleading.

That may be so but a man has one reproductive organ and a female has one as well. If male's could reproduce through their anus that would be a different matter. Every body part has its function and that is the same for the sexual organs.

Just remember to tell every woman you date that your tongue will never touch her clitoris or vulva. Since the tonge is not a reproductive organ so it's obviously not designed for that.

Your completely wrong. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 says, "Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

You wrote it but ignored it. In my version, "It is best for a man to never marry, so that he may give Jesus his all." Since spending time with women and defiling themselves with women takes away precious Jesus time. Then it goes on to say, "But, if you INSIST on having sex, get married first so you don't burn."

Paul's giving his blessing for those who wish to stay virgins, since it is the 'preferred' state. "A man who toucheth a woman defileth himself." I forgot which verse, but it is in the bible. There were generally 3 thoughts of women from biblical authors: exist for a good time (pro-rape), property, or have cooties. Paul thinks women have cooties. The thought of women just gives him the willies. He wants nothing to do with women and tries to encourage other men to do the same. However, many men have hormones that makes them attracted to and want to have sex with women. Paul disagrees with these men, refuses to join these men, but knows enough to know that if you alienate those that wish to procreate, your religion will die out. He begrudgenly accepts the inevitable so the religion doesn't solely consist of eunechs.

<snip revelation quote and jakec47 interpretation>

Every single sect of christianity has thier own interpretation, prove yours is the correct one please.

And I would not call me ignorant because of what I say about the age of the earth because many scientists agree that the earth is fairly young. Here is a list of scientists who believe in a young earth:

<snip but... Medical Physics,  Microbiology, Biology, chemist, Geologist> so far only 1 worth mentioning, still requires research to make sure it's legit.
<•Francis Bacon (developed the Scientific Method)> Lived when most people thought the Earth was flat... your point is?
<snip...  Immunologist, physicist), Electrical Engineering[1], Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics[2], Psychologist[3],
 ugh... cannot continue.

Edit: Thanks to screwtape who posted while I was typing spared me the trouble. 

1.	so, I'm just as qualified, and I disagree.
2.	Plate Tectonic Theory[1] invalidates bible.  1.  just a theory
3.

[screwtape]

You wrote it but ignored it. In my version, "It is best for a man to never marry, so that he may give Jesus his all." Since spending time with women and defiling themselves with women takes away precious Jesus time. Then it goes on to say, "But, if you INSIST on having sex, get married first so you don't burn."

Episcopal bishop Spong's thoughts:
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/04/Was-The-Apostle-Paul-Gay.aspx?p=1

[Graybeard]

I sometimes wonder why Spong bothers...

Anyway: serious stuff:


Hello,

Today's sermon is about that vile affliction that besets all God-Fearing folk. I will not beat about the bush; the words I am looking for are "Ladies Doing Rude Things" as laid down by St Paul in Romans 1:26

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

If, whatever it is, you don't do it and would never think of doing it then it isn't natural; if other folks do it, it is weird; if men do it to men and women to women; then that is an abomination. If you do it to an animal, then stoning to death is almost too good for you. However, if you do it to a minor, then there is no lower age limit in the Bible (PS do check on godless State laws).

If you use things (and I use the term advisedly) then it is weird and it is wrong. Would you vote for a President who shoved things up his ass?  No, of course you wouldn't! And neither would God.

And what about a woman? If they are Christian, we can trust them with a cucumber; but the godless, liberal atheist harlot will be short-sighted and exhausted within an hour! Y'all see? They have no moral compass.

I'm a Christian and I'm agin it! It ain't natural, and God says if it isn't natural, then it's a sin.

I feel bad for those who do not know the warm love of Christ, how it flows deep inside you, pulsing and throbbing, filling you up with that warm, liquid feeling of near ecstasy.

Thank you. And now please close your eyes, open your wallets and repeat after me, "Help yourself"

Dr Rev Graybeard PhD in Young Earth Creationism (The Kansas Kristian Kollege of The Holy Cross and Resurrection at The End of Days .)

[velkyn]

And if you deny the age of the earth you do not have to deny those other theories and such. I say the Earth is that old because of various reasons like the history of many civilizations only go back a few thousand years. And scientists have changed the age of the earth many times. How can we know it is 4.5 billions years, no one was there. But something does tell us how old the earth is and how do they know...witnesses! The Bible says it is that old so if the Bible is true, and I believe it is then it must be approxiamately 6,000 years old.

How do you know your god exists?  No one was there!  We know that the earth is billions of years old because that’s how radioactivity works.  Now, if you don’t like that, I suggest stop using electricity since you never know when you’ll get some from a nuclear reactor, you hypocrite.

and Jake, here’s a tip, circle doesn’t mean sphere. Not even in Hebrew. 

That may be so but a man has one reproductive organ and a female has one as well. If male's could reproduce through their anus that would be a different matter. Every body part has its function and that is the same for the sexual organs.

Ah, so unless you want to reproduce, sex is icky-icky and should not be done by infertile couples, older people, etc.  I do love how you ignore that your god which gave people genitalia is all about them not using it for their functions, claiming it’s better not to reproduce.  We’ve had Christians who took that to heart and they don’t exist anymore since they didn’t have breed. 

You cannot say Christians never do. You can't make such a generalized statement. Your ignorance of the ways of God also make what you say about that inaccurate and unintelligable.

Always enjoy the claism of a thesit who is sure that they and they alone know the ways of God. Evidence of this, Jake?  I do like how you avoided telling me who was wrong, Jake, you or Paul.  I know that Christians never do as their savior said, to give up all they have and follow him, only depending on this god.  If you think they do, please show me evidence where a Christian has given up all of his worldly possessions and depended on God alone for his existence.  Go ahead. I’m waiting. Show me you do that, since you are so sure you are a Christian.   

Your completely wrong. 1 Corinthians 7:1-2 says, "Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband." As he is obviously stating because there is so much sexual immorality and fornication (word used in the KJV) a man should marry so that they do not break God's law by fornication, which is sexual immorality.

  Nope, not wrong at all.  Right here it says that having no sex ever is the best.  Like I said, sex is only allowed grudgingly. 

And you don't have to be a virgin to get to heaven, it says that nowhere. You may be referring to Revelation 14:4 which says, "These are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins." First off it is talking about the 144,000 which are not the same as all those saved, it is a separate group, those saved are referred to as the "multitudes that surround the throne".

  Yes, it talks about those virgins, and then it talks about the multitude from the “tribulation”. All of which who were those who followed JC’s teachings, which were to avoid sex.  I agree, it is impossible to really tell though.

Also if one looks at Revelation they will see it is a book that speaks of many unbelievable things, that is because it is imagery. It has a meaning but it is not literal. This is obvious when is says some of the things for example, "Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars. Then being with child, she cried out in labor and in pain to give birth. And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to give birth, to devour her Child as soon as it was born. She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne." - Revelation 12:1-5
This is imagery that using the Bible can be interpreted. The women is speaks of if Mary, Jesus' mother. The red dragon having seven heads (this refers to seven hills) and ten horns (this refers to the 10 powers or nations, which is the 10 nations that Rome was divided into when it crumpled).

hmmm, which “10 nations” was that?  Magic decoder ring.  So is the resurrection only imagery? Evidence why it shouldn’t be considered that. 

A third of the stars (reference to angels) were through out of heaven. Satan deceived 1/3 of the angels when he was cast out, and they were cast out with him.

and this is from?  Oh yes, not the bible since it never says such a thing.  It’s circular reasoning. 

The dragon was ready to kill Jesus once we was born. We know it was Jesus because it says he will rule all nations with a rod of iron which is what it says of Jesus in other places in the Bible and he was caught up to God...the resurrection. When Jesus was born the Roman government, which Satan was working through, under King Herod tried to have Jesus killed once he was born.

  Hmm no evidence of JC ever using an iron rod or ruling nations.  Not even another bible verse. David is the one to wield a rod of iron. I know, you’ll claim that it “really” means someone of from the line of David, but JC isn’t that either. 

As you can see it is imagery that John, the writer, had to use since he was exiled on the island of Patmos, if he had spoken plainly the letter would have most certainly been taken and destroyed so he had to hide the truth under imagery that the rest of the Bible could be used to understand it.

Evidence for this “John” being exiled?   And I do love how each Christian is sure that their “understanding” is the “right” one but nothing to support that.   

And I would not call me ignorant because of what I say about the age of the earth because many scientists agree that the earth is fairly young. Here is a list of scientists who believe in a young earth

I would.  This list is always so cute as an attempt to appeal to authority. People who died long before the evidence we have today was found, people who are not even remotely specialists in the field.  It’s just hysterical just how stupid you look for posting it. Ooooh, Francis Bacon,  a eye disease researcher.  How about mentioning Don McElroy, the dentist who is sure that creationism is correct?

Evidence for your flood, Jake.  That’s what I’m looking for and you have failed miserably to show any.