Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Religion & Society / Re: Hard to Trust An Atheist When...
« Last post by Dante on Today at 05:54:41 AM »
Give it some time. It's only Tuesday morning. Some other jacktard on Fox is sure to say something even more idiotic.
22
General Religious Discussion / Re: What would make you believe?
« Last post by Mrjason on Today at 05:51:51 AM »
What I'm saying is that I completely understand why you don't believe he exists and I have no idea why God isn't doing more to help.

Thanks for the reply.
I did read it all but I just want to ask something about the last part of your post.

Can you think of any possible reasons why god isn't doing more to help?

If I kick off with a few, would you mind saying which you think is most likely?

Here we go:

1. Humans misinterpreted what god said
2. God changed his mind about what he was saying
3. God no longer cares
4. God never cared
5. God no longer exists (he died)
6. God never existed
23
Chatter / for US people that care about dogs
« Last post by eh! on Today at 05:41:28 AM »
your animal rescue workers are struggling with the demands, please read;

http://barkpost.com/compassion-fatigue-animal-workers/

24
Religion & Society / Homosexuality Is Destroying The Black Man
« Last post by Nam on Today at 04:46:33 AM »
http://thyblackman.com/2015/04/27/the-homosexual-agenda-is-destroying-the-black-man/#respond

Quote
Am I homophobic? No, I don’t fear homosexuals. But I do deal with facts and the devastation that homosexuality is doing to our African American community, our families, our churches and our value system. Is this hate speech? No, it is freedom of speech – and freedom of speech does not just apply to agreeable speech, ideas and mindsets. So if you are offended, then the truth offends you. But its time someone spoke up to the sin of homosexuality. I call homosexuality what God calls it, perversion and abomination. So if you have a problem with that, you have a problem with Him, not me. I judge nothing, but I am not afraid to relay the message regarding what has already been judged by God.

There is a strategic and deliberate effort by the powers that be who control the media, the music industry and the feminist groups to emasculate men (specifically African American), reduce our roles and impact in society and create a new class of effeminate young men who are lost and who think their behavior is normal. People like Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey are on board with this plan and it is happening even as we speak. The sociological acceptance of deviant behavior such as homosexuality is gradually becoming more accepted as it infects our schools, our churches, our TV shows, our literature, our music and our youth. As the perversion spirals out of control, we are seeing our young people under the illusion that they can change gender and more confused about what they were born to be than ever. A young masculine boy (down low) suddenly wants a “tranny” or an effeminate boy or to be a girl. A young feminine girl wants a girl (stud) who looks, acts and dresses like a boy. None of these youths know who they are, what they are, how they should act or who they were created to be. THAT IS AUTHORED CONFUSION!

IF WE KEEP ALLOWING OUR SPIRITUAL AND MORAL BOUNDARIES TO BE RESET, ERODED OR DESTROYED, WE WILL CONTRIBUTE TO THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR OWN RACE AND WE WILL NEVER FIND OUR WAY HOME AS A PEOPLE

As far back as slaves were brought here and beyond Willie Lynch, there has been a plan implemented against us. If you want to destroy the black man, you break up and redefine his family structure, you cloud or minimize his role and wipe away his identity, you incarcerate him, you devalue him, you create the socio-economic conditions that will cause him to break the law to survive, you make him undesirable to the African American woman, you profile and ostracize him then you reduce his reproduction. This is exactly what gay-agenda-2015is happening strategically, systematically and sociologically, right under your nose. And those who are pushing this agenda are doing so by using man’s desire to rebel against God as the match that lights the fuse. So I ask are you going to help blow out the fuse or are you bringing a blow torch to make it worse? DO NOT ACCEPT HOMOSEXUALITY.

Our youth are confused about who they are, who they should desire and how they should act. Little by little, real male role models are being erased and replaced with perverted and unproductive images and behaviors. Actors in dresses (Jamie Foxx, Martin Lawrence, Will Smith, Terry Kruse, Tyler Perry etc.) have become amusing and acceptable in our community and too many of us are trading part of our soul for money, fame or a laugh. The wrong way has become so acceptable that the right way is looked at as the wrong thing. African American men are becoming effeminate and emasculated with the help of famous people like Oprah Winfrey and the “prancing elites” bs, yet many of our people go right on supporting her, watching her shows and buying her magazine. Oprah Winfrey has no concept of who God is and thus she has a clouded concept of right and wrong. Do you?

We must stop supporting any image, concept, practice or ideology that contributes to the sabotage or destruction of the African American community. No excuses. We cannot and we must not aid in our own demise. We have to see the big picture and recognize there is an agenda put in place against us, not for us. Am I perfect? No. Do I sin? Yes. Do I want to or make excuses for it? No. Do I blame God for my behavior? No. Am I working to change behaviors that I know are wrong? Yes. Being a heterosexual does not make me perfect, but I neither struggle with nor accept homosexuality at any time, under any conditions. I don’t want sensitivity classes because I do not plan to be sensitive to obvious perversion and blatant immorality. What about you?

Apparently homosexuals think they have better practices than God so let’s see. Let’s look at the facts. Two homosexuals cannot reproduce and there is a biological reason for that, like it or not. This means the more homosexual couples there are, the more our reproduction numbers drop in the “black” community. The father’s involvement with the child increases dopamine in the child’s brain (the motivator chemical), like it or not. The mother’s involvement with the child balances serotonin levels in the child, like it or not. Therefore both parents are biochemically necessary. Homosexuality hurts your spirit, your psyche, your family, your example, your community and your race.

The homosexual agenda is packed with propaganda through TV, music and movies that penetrate your subconscious to force you to accept or tolerate such immorality and perversion. People do what they see others doing and peer pressure for young people is putting the nails in the coffin. As a family and relationship counselor, mediator and life coach, I have seen numerous cases where a parent is faced with accepting a homosexual child. I have children and would I accept such behavior? Hell no. It is not the parent’s responsibility to accept deviant social behavior from his/her child that is counterproductive. It is not a parent’s responsibility to accept perverse behavior from the child, especially when such behavior is highly contrary to the value system of the household and poison to the family. Where are clueless parents getting the idea that they must accept the behavior no matter what? Wrong.

Without clearly defined role models. what do we expect our children to do or be? They are seeking an identity and what are many of our people giving them? Promiscuity, bisexuality, homosexuality, transexuality, transgenders and anything but a sense of being happy with who they are. Such a message confuses them and implies that God made a mistake when He created them. This weakens their concept of God, gender roles and right and wrong. We all have thoughts of doing the wrong thing at sometime in our lives, whether such thoughts are about cheating, keeping something we found, falsifying timesheets or taxes, driving without insurance, leaving a restaurant without paying etc. But that does not mean we are to act on such thoughts. No, because we have moral and spiritual barriers. If these are taken away, our sense of right and wrong goes right along with them. That is what is happening today. You may not like this article but you don’t have to interact with me. You do, however, have to look up and look in the mirror.

The Bible says we are to capture thoughts that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God (II Corinthians 10:5). We are not to entertain them, act on them and then make excuses for them or blame Him. If you believe this, you understand my point – and this article. But if you don’t therein lies your problem. If we do things just to have our own way, we rebel against the right way, the best way, the most productive way. And in the long run we will wake up or we will lose. There is a way that seems right to man, but in the end there is a loss of more than we can ever imagine.

For some of you who read these words, they will change your life forever. For others, may these words give you the empowerment and encouragement to change the lives of others. But either way, know this. I wrote this article to bring people up and out and set them free.

1. Are you homophobic? YES YOU ARE. This entire article says you are.

2. Is this "Hate speech"? YES IT IS. Freedom of speech doesn't mean it is good or bad it just means you have the FREEDOM to speak your mind without being arrested for it. That's it. And, this is HATE SPEECH.

3. You're an idiot, and a hateful homophobic one at that.

-Nam
25
Religion & Society / Hard to Trust An Atheist When...
« Last post by Nam on Today at 04:23:50 AM »
They don't Fear Eternal damnation.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/fox-priest-hard-to-trust-an-atheist-president-because-they-dont-fear-eternal-damnation/

Quote
Catholic priest and Fox News contributor Father Jonathan Morris argued over the weekend that atheists were not suitable candidates for president because it was “hard to trust” someone who did not believe that God would punish them.

“One thing is very certain, you can’t fake religion,” Morris said of the Republican presidential candidates on Sunday’s edition of Fox & Friends. “Politicians sometimes fall into that, I think. What matters most to us Americans — those who will be voting — is what these guys said before they were running for president, the way in which they lived before they started running for president.”

“I think they need to be very clear about the values they believe in, not making stuff up in order to get votes,” he continued. “And then people will say, ‘Even if I disagree with some of his beliefs, I like the fact that I can trust him to be who he says he is.'”

According to Morris, anything that did not “inform” a public official’s life was not faith “because faith is a set of beliefs.”

“It’s a belief in God, it’s a belief that there are eternal consequences for your actions,” he explained. “And I think that a leader that doesn’t have that — a set of core beliefs that help him to make justice an important part of his life and his decisions because he knows that there are eternal consequences, well, it’s somebody that it’s hard to trust.”

Fox News host Peter Johnson Jr. wondered if voters should “judge” people based on their faith.

“For example, if someone running for president is an atheist,” he said. “Are they qualified to be the president.”

“You know, I would say faith is not the most important thing, but wisdom,” Morris opined. “But yes, it certainly makes a difference who that person is.”

“That’s for sure,” co-host Tucker Carlson agreed.

Most idiotic thing i've read this week.

-Nam
26
Evolution & Creationism / Re: Abiogenesis and probability?
« Last post by ParkingPlaces on Today at 04:20:13 AM »
My greatest personal evidence for an eternal designer is the existence of existence itself. It simply can't be explained purely by the natural universe. Existence mandates an eternal existence, this is a simple logical truth. Unless the natural universe has existed for eternity, there is no possibility that it is all that exists. If we were to want to know about this eternal existence, we would not be able to observe it ourselves, as it would be outside of the bounds of our existence. In order to know of it, it must directly communicate with us; it must reveal itself to us. Indeed, that is what we see with the Bible and the existence of Jesus Christ. Theology aside, that is what we would expect if existence were to exist, and if an eternal transcendent existence were to somehow be known to us.

So an infinite and complete being that has always been makes more sense to you than a universe that grew out of various bits and pieces of energy and matter. Over time and stuff. To you, a complex, all-knowing deity who is big on anonymity and free will makes sense. And natural pathways to the present situation do not make sense to you.

Which is all well and good, but please keep in mind that the conclusion you have drawn, that an infinite being with lots of superpowers is more likely than a universe forming out of the void is only one way to look at it.

Quote
Like I told lotanddaughters, the decision between God and atheism is one of worldview, not science. We choose our worldview and interpret the science later. If we don't believe in God, and we only actively seek to satisfy a naturalistic belief, then we will make naturalistic conclusions. The same can be said for a belief in God. I think the main argument revolves around philosophy, as science cannot explain that which caused science to even be possible to begin with.

You are allowed to jump to conclusions about yourself, but you should let the rest of us jump to our own conclusions about the ideas and processes that lead to our take on the situation. I, for one, did not form a world view and then go looking for science to back me up. It was science that informed me and influenced my views. It was after I learned stuff that I drew conclusions. It was when I learned stuff that I found out my previous assumptions had flaws.

This isn't science, but I think it works as a good example. When I was in grade school, Dwight Eisenhower was president. One of the first grade teachers was named Mrs. Eisenhart. I didn't know how to read or spell yet, and I reached the quite logical conclusion, all on my own, that Mrs. Eisenhart was the wife of the president, who lived nearby. Because I didn't know about other places..

I didn't have Faux News to misinform me, however I was pretty good at doing it myself. But as I became more educated, I realized that that particular assumption was incorrect, and I made adjustments as necessary.

I did not seek out proof of my tiny little worldview. My worldview, if you wish to use that term, came to me as I learned.

And lo, it came to be that the science that I learned matched well with reality. Whether it was photosynthesis or fossils or pond ecology, the stuff I was taught tied in well with the world I live in. And I learned that we don't have al the answers yet, because we're still learning. A situation that is exacerbated by the fact that millions of people prefer to follow the voluntary ignorance of religion, specifically the ones who believe every silly story in the bible is literally true. Those folks have no ability to add to our base of scientific knowledge, because they are too busy claiming they know EVERYTHING!

So back to abiogenesis. That may or may not be what happened. Maybe it is wrong. Maybe single celled critters, embodied with infinite knowledge and infinite wisdom and a thing for anonymity and free will decided to wing it here on earth, and see what would happen if they let go of controlling every little cellular divide. Maybe rocks are conscious and they decided to make pets. Science thinks it is making an educated guess on this subject. It could be wrong.

There is so much that we don't know that it is actually silly for us to claim that we are educated. For every little innocent Eisenhower/Eisenhart mistake people make, there are billions more made on purpose, by those eager to get things their way. There are billions more mistakesmade by people too stupid to know how stupid they are. And yet billions more made by well meaning people with inadequate information on any given subject. So we humans are running around with both good and bad information at all times, and combining it as we see fit.

I didn't create my 'worldview' that includes evolution by assuming it true, and then running around burying a bunch of fossils to dig up and use to prove my point. It was those kind dinosaurs and plants who donated their bodies and fronds to science 100 million years ago that laid the groundwork. And it has been the people in the discovery business that have parsed the information coming out of the ground and out of genetics and that have put forth the theories that I now accept. Not as absolute truths, but as the most plausible.

So I find it slightly refreshing that science can't yet explain the origin of life. That is honesty. A rare commodity. There are people working on the question, people who could make crap up and claim they have it figured out and stuff, but they don't do that because they seem to be good people. They are just looking, and trusting that if there is an answer, they will find it.

If there isn't, if they are barking up the wrong tree, then they won't find it.

But from the standpoint of those observing nature, abiogenesis appears to be the most plausible explanation, even though we don't know that for sure. And until science gives up or someone bring up another idea that turns out to be provable, we'll probably just have to continue searching for origins even as we continue to work with the sciences we know more about.

So if there was a god involved, intimately, with the creation of our world, do keep in mind that his shyness is likely to cause some folks to consider alternatives to religious points of view. And if we who adhere to science rather than the Pat Robertson/Oral Roberts view of reality, it isn't our fault. A real god could deal a death blow to all our confusion just by saying hi on "America's Got Talent".  Until he gets a bit more involved, there are those of us who are going to draw conclusions vastly different that those proffered by the bible or other religious texts. You know, the ones that don't match reality worth a whit.

As a wise huckster once said, "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time." (Note: this is not an appeal to authority.) And until we can come up with some dependable, agreed upon and universal way of proving otherwise, each of us will always think that the other group is the foolish one.

27
General Religious Discussion / Re: solar powered bibles for disaster victims
« Last post by Nam on Today at 04:09:43 AM »
For the cost of that I wonder how much actual aid they could have sent?

I just looked, $69,000. What a waste of money given that Haiti could use...oh, I don't know...more than Bibles. I wonder what version it is because Haiti is 80% Roman Catholic.

-Nam
29
General Religious Discussion / Re: Will a Christian explain freewill to me
« Last post by eh! on Today at 03:26:54 AM »
did god know he would build himself in the jesus form when he created the universe, or was that an after thought he stumbled on some 2000 years after creation?
30
Evolution & Creationism / Re: Abiogenesis and probability?
« Last post by Ataraxia on Today at 03:03:26 AM »
Any argument used against an event occurring naturally can equally be applied to the omnipotence of a deity.

Abiogenesis happened - it is a label for the mechanism for which started life off, it's just that we don't know what that mechanism is. However, whatever that mechanism is, it is, by definition, natural, because it had to have happened within the confines of the constrained world that we perceive for us... well, for us to perceive it's fruits (life).

Now for the crucial bit - that it had to be a naturally occurring mechanism says absolutely nothing, zip, nada, zilch, as to whether or not there was a force external to the natural world that used this mechanism to instigate life. Science deals with methodological naturalism, not philosophical naturalism. To state that philosophical naturalism is unfalsifiable (as Spinner has done) is to admit that you have no method for falsifying supernatural claims - you know, there is no red pill that takes us outside of nature to test and investigate it.

So, to state that abiogenesis didn't happen, or that it wasn't natural, is to question the power and ability of the deity who should be able to use the mechanism to instigate life. The more incredulity you show towards the capabilities of nature, the weaker your god becomes.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10