i didn't read the 19 pages. i read about 3.
i don't think there is a god. i just think it was all something created by very smart people to make death and life easier to deal with.
oh, your mothers sick ... pray for her.
oh, your mothers dead ... she's in a better place.
having god, heaven, hell, etc makes it easier for humans to be controlled and it makes it easier for them to cope with life.
Think about these when u go to bed tonight mate
1. Origins of the universe, Einsteins theory of relativity shows that the universe is expanding. Furthermore discoveries by Hubble have confirmed that the UNIVERSE BEGAN TO EXIST. When the universe began to exist, time, space and matter began to exist. Therefore, prior to the beginning of the universe, time, space and matter began to exist.
Now here is the crunch line, i am afraid you will be backed into a corner here. "SOMETHING CANNOT COME FROM NOTHING". Therefore as we know the universe began to exist, the universe must have a cause. This cause must be timeless (Eternal), materialess and speceless. You can try and determine what that is satrting to shape like.
Now, u must either believe, the UNIVERSE popped into being FROM NOTHING by Nothing (u are very free to believe that) or something outside of space, time, energy and matter created it.
YOU DECIDE.
2. The fine tuning, did you know that, if you changed any of the conditions by the slightest, the earth would not be conducive to life. ie, the distance from the sun to the moon, earth to the sun, moon to earth etc etc, electro magnetic fields, if any of these conditions were changed by the slightest, we would not have life. Now, u must either believe, this all happened by luck and chance OR a creator is behind this.
I am only touching the surface, did u know that when the big bang happened, if the rate of expansion of energy was slower by like a ridicolous small amount, the the universe would have collapsed.
Anyways this is a massive topic, it is really amazing, U either believe a creator was behind it with an intention OR you believe it was all pure luck and chance
3. The Bible is God's word. Men were used as an instrument for God to convery his thoughts.
The Bible is a compilation of 66 books written over 1500 years by 40 DIFFERENT authors.
They were written in 3 different languages in 3 different continents.
Let me ask you a question,
If you got 5 people working in the same organisation, same nationality, in the same year and you asked them to speak there mind on ONE controversial subject, say abortion, what are the chances that they are all going to agree? Yet, despite all the differences in geographical locations of the authors, nationalities etc etc, the Bible is absolutely HARMONEOUS on the controversial subjects from beginning to end. If one person wasnt speaking through different people, what are the chances of that happening.
Scientists and many people thought the earth was flat, the bible describes it as a circle, furthermore, the common belief back then was that the earth rested on 3 large tourteses, where as the bible clearly states that the earth does not rest of anything, (how do you know that without the technoclogy of the last few hundred years?)
Furthermore, before the oceans were explored, how does the bible know of the springs and valleys of the ocean?
It even knew of the great hydrologic cycle with tremendous clarity thousands of years before scientistsand confirm this.
It is the only spiritual book THAT HAS FULFILLED PROPHECY.
Either you believe in the bible or you have to think that the authors were the greatest cappers to ever live on the earth with a 100% strike rate.
It also clearly states that the Messiah will come, born of a virgin and that he will be rejected by his own people. That is where that Zeitgest came into it, those fairy tales were trying to claim that they were the messiah' etc, Horus etc......
The bible does not have contradictions, but it does have 1 mistake, the biggest one is when when Adam and Eve in the garden rejected God, please dont do the same.
No contridictions?
How about this:
The Bible states many times that incest is a sin. Here is one example:
Leviticus 18:6
None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness.
Adam and Eve had children, and those children populated the earth. How did those children have children without incest?
Go ahead Rostos, give this one a shot. And this is one of hundreds. (before someone says contridictions dont disprove the christian story, I get it - he said directly there are no contridicitons)
No contridictions?
How about this:
The Bible states many times that incest is a sin. Here is one example:
Leviticus 18:6
None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness.
Adam and Eve had children, and those children populated the earth. How did those children have children without incest?
Go ahead Rostos, give this one a shot. And this is one of hundreds. (before someone says contridictions dont disprove the christian story, I get it - he said directly there are no contridicitons)
Its funny how you call me out for insulting you, and then you take a passive aggressive tone in all of your posts with your veiled insults.
I think I know the bible pretty well, better than most. But that is neither here nor there.
Stop getting so angry and taking this personally. We are discussing a topic here - I like you, I respect you - if we met I would buy you a beer and we would watch a game. No big deal. My frustration is simply with the topic, not with you. Feel better?
On the topic, you keep making chronologic assumptions about a timeless god. God knows not of time. So fine - lets assume your right about this one, that the law was written after Adam and Eve.
How about Noah and the flood? Only his family was on the ark, how did they procreate without incest? This was certainly after the numerous incest laws in the bible.
Anyway - Im not making a stand on these points - its just funny to hear someone say the bible has zero inconsistencies.
Agreed, well said.
I would add to that simply that we take all of our available options, and based on replicable evidence, take the one with the highest probability. It is simple, especially on a gambling board. Is it more likely that the christian story is correct, or is it more likely that it is not correct?
Obviously, people have different conclusions. But Im not sure the word faith applies. One chooses the christian story because he is convinced that it is the most plausible, and another chooses not to go with the christian story because of evidence to the contrary.
Im not sure where the word faith comes in to play. (I acknowledge this is semantics about the word faith, I just like to believe my viewpoints are based on replicable evidence, which I think is the opposite of faith)
Understood.
I do assume that the universe is rational and contingent.
Why? Because I believe that concept has a much higher probability than the god concept as presented. So if your position is that "faith" is required to assume that rationality is indeed "rational", then I would have to agree but say that the probability is overwhelmingly likely.
And for me,when compared to the alternative god story, it is astronomically likely. But that is just my perception.
Sims - I think the issue I have here is the same issue from pages back in the thread - you take a position that if I have "faith" (conceding that belief in rationality is faith) in something, and therefore we are the same.
But I keep going back to the concept of degree - that faith in a specific insect creating the universe is different than faith in rationality. Each concept can be graded on its own merits and not all lumped in to the same "faith" bucket.
So in the end, the fact that I have faith and you have faith dont make them equal. We have to be able to judge them, and I do that based on perceived probabilities - because that is all we can do. You do that too - your faith in your god has more credence to you than a guy on the corner yelling that his pencil created the universe.
Sims - I think the issue I have here is the same issue from pages back in the thread - you take a position that if I have "faith" (conceding that belief in rationality is faith) in something, and therefore we are the same.
But I keep going back to the concept of degree - that faith in a specific insect creating the universe is different than faith in rationality. Each concept can be graded on its own merits and not all lumped in to the same "faith" bucket.
So in the end, the fact that I have faith and you have faith dont make them equal. We have to be able to judge them, and I do that based on perceived probabilities - because that is all we can do. You do that too - your faith in your god has more credence to you than a guy on the corner yelling that his pencil created the universe.
EVERYONE.
ALL what i am saying is that if there is no God, then morals become subjective, each man decides what is right or wrong. Morals are subjective.
If you partner or girlfriend wants to go and F### guys behind your back, you might think it is wrong, but she might think it is ok.
It is simply your opinion against hers.. That is all i am saying.
If you want to look at other things such as stealing, murder and rape, if you can get away with it, then there is NO reason to not do it if you want to do it, cause after all, in the eyes of death, whether you lived like a saint or a mass murderer, we are all equal.
This makes you sound even more stupid.
You are embarressing yourself with every word that comes out of your mouth.
Do you believe something can come from nothing? You said we dont come from nothing, but something but cannot explain it yet, then who created that something that created humans?
You have limited yourself to an infinte regress, how can we have an infinute regress when the universe had a birthdate?
Gees you sound so dumb right now
You are missing the point AGAIN.
The universe has a birthdate, time , space and matter began to exist.
You are forced to either believe something can come from nothing OR you believe God created the universe.
There is nothing else you can say, it is 1 of the 2.
-vanzack-
how art thou o'brother.
science is a corelated body of absolute knowlege. the accumlation of reliable scientific knowledge is a gradual + slow process.
generations, upon generations, throw away the conclusions to their predecessors untill a new stratum is laid upon the slowly accumlating pyramid, of unquestioned + unquestionable fact.
when testing the state of religion against its scriptures as the final authority, be precise like a surgen. for if religion is a state of mind, the capital city in the context of this thread is christianity. though, while jesus is the core order to christianity, the fractured faith has many identities + independant councils such as, seventh day adventism and catholicism e.c.t.
this is of importance, as even in death, cemetaries host segregated burial resting places for the various church identity deceased, due to their modified + interpretation of the gospel. while the message may remain the same to a non-believer, their custom bibles + teachings are very distinct in the own rights. to prove one false does not domino the other. lions deal with nature different to cheetahs, even though both are cats.
the threads topic has us located in a state of religion, and its capital city is christianity. from here we can travel down the roadway of joseph smith street, to visit a wealthy suburb, that being the suburb of the church of latter day saints.
vaznack, allow us to find an accusation + witnesses, both in the name of science that prove the testimony of the book of mormon to be a false witness of truth, or if it still remains in its own right an ability to claim manufaction by its god head after our assault.
accusation: the false claim of coinage.
if the alleged "nephites" were descended from person raised in jerusalem, their coinage + money values would have survived to the new world. hence, joseph smith created a system of coinage for people of the book of mormon in america.
it is strange that smith did not continue using jewish shekels + talents, but that he devised coins such as senines, seons, shums + limnals of gold.
unfortunately for smith, while his guess was logical, it was completely wrong. no system of coinage was ever developed by the ancient americas.
the mayans who traded had no money transactions in their records. their coins would have been discovered in their graves + homes. no coins were found in sacred wells, where so many valuable ornaments, + jewels were thrown as offerings to their gods have been identified, both in their own land. also along the ancient trade routes of mexico, central america + the caribbean sea, never was metallic money discovered.
columbus was informed by a mayan cheif in 1502 that all transactions were by barter. interregional markets were found at xicalenco, a market town between aztec and mayan populations, where aztec, mayan, tolec + totocan peoples met. no coinage can be found. caco beans came closest to a standardised medium of exchange for uneven barter. taxation had no metal coinage, but was a work service.
witness: there was no coinage, they had no metal until gold was discovered after 600ad. gold was used only for ornamentation. silver was discovered around 900ad.
there never was an iron age in america before columbus. in spite of this, joseph smith had his ancient nephites + lamanites using iron + steel swords. iron was the scarcest + most valuable metal. gold was the most plentiful + cheapest metal.
this is just one of numerous errors with its resource dating, such as the use of glass windows in 2200bc in ancient babylonia. the first glass vessels were invented around 1500bc in egypt + the first glass window was invented around 50ad.
conclusion: money is the root to all evil, and the book of mormons financial records force its own writings into demisal.
vanzack, this approach offers a more definitive verdict, instead of parading christians like circus freaks throughout the thread + feeding them to lions in the form of mauling questions, that are only released to execute them for their belief. continue to remember this is your thread, not your roman colosseum + keep up the conduct says the rookie tourist to the host.
though, given that you enjoy being entertained by those that come in the image of gary busey. tom cruise would have been a more suitable character reference in the theme of the thread. i'm sure he has the certified qualifications of a spoon feed drone under the spell of a doctrine for sale, that you could cut his puppet string beliefs to sacrifice to your ridicule abuse entertainment fetish.
if one seeks perfect answers vanzack, one needs to ask perfect questions. one cant look to slaughter a cow and ask the chef to cook it into fish. the flesh of all kinds are different.
-vanzack-
how art thou o'brother.
science is a corelated body of absolute knowlege. the accumlation of reliable scientific knowledge is a gradual + slow process.
generations, upon generations, throw away the conclusions to their predecessors untill a new stratum is laid upon the slowly accumlating pyramid, of unquestioned + unquestionable fact.
when testing the state of religion against its scriptures as the final authority, be precise like a surgen. for if religion is a state of mind, the capital city in the context of this thread is christianity. though, while jesus is the core order to christianity, the fractured faith has many identities + independant councils such as, seventh day adventism and catholicism e.c.t.
this is of importance, as even in death, cemetaries host segregated burial resting places for the various church identity deceased, due to their modified + interpretation of the gospel. while the message may remain the same to a non-believer, their custom bibles + teachings are very distinct in the own rights. to prove one false does not domino the other. lions deal with nature different to cheetahs, even though both are cats.
the threads topic has us located in a state of religion, and its capital city is christianity. from here we can travel down the roadway of joseph smith street, to visit a wealthy suburb, that being the suburb of the church of latter day saints.
vaznack, allow us to find an accusation + witnesses, both in the name of science that prove the testimony of the book of mormon to be a false witness of truth, or if it still remains in its own right an ability to claim manufaction by its god head after our assault.
accusation: the false claim of coinage.
if the alleged "nephites" were descended from person raised in jerusalem, their coinage + money values would have survived to the new world. hence, joseph smith created a system of coinage for people of the book of mormon in america.
it is strange that smith did not continue using jewish shekels + talents, but that he devised coins such as senines, seons, shums + limnals of gold.
unfortunately for smith, while his guess was logical, it was completely wrong. no system of coinage was ever developed by the ancient americas.
the mayans who traded had no money transactions in their records. their coins would have been discovered in their graves + homes. no coins were found in sacred wells, where so many valuable ornaments, + jewels were thrown as offerings to their gods have been identified, both in their own land. also along the ancient trade routes of mexico, central america + the caribbean sea, never was metallic money discovered.
columbus was informed by a mayan cheif in 1502 that all transactions were by barter. interregional markets were found at xicalenco, a market town between aztec and mayan populations, where aztec, mayan, tolec + totocan peoples met. no coinage can be found. caco beans came closest to a standardised medium of exchange for uneven barter. taxation had no metal coinage, but was a work service.
witness: there was no coinage, they had no metal until gold was discovered after 600ad. gold was used only for ornamentation. silver was discovered around 900ad.
there never was an iron age in america before columbus. in spite of this, joseph smith had his ancient nephites + lamanites using iron + steel swords. iron was the scarcest + most valuable metal. gold was the most plentiful + cheapest metal.
this is just one of numerous errors with its resource dating, such as the use of glass windows in 2200bc in ancient babylonia. the first glass vessels were invented around 1500bc in egypt + the first glass window was invented around 50ad.
conclusion: money is the root to all evil, and the book of mormons financial records force its own writings into demisal.
vanzack, this approach offers a more definitive verdict, instead of parading christians like circus freaks throughout the thread + feeding them to lions in the form of mauling questions, that are only released to execute them for their belief. continue to remember this is your thread, not your roman colosseum + keep up the conduct says the rookie tourist to the host.
though, given that you enjoy being entertained by those that come in the image of gary busey. tom cruise would have been a more suitable character reference in the theme of the thread. i'm sure he has the certified qualifications of a spoon feed drone under the spell of a doctrine for sale, that you could cut his puppet string beliefs to sacrifice to your ridicule abuse entertainment fetish.
if one seeks perfect answers vanzack, one needs to ask perfect questions. one cant look to slaughter a cow and ask the chef to cook it into fish. the flesh of all kinds are different.
My goal is not to further humanity through my persuasion. My goal, as stated in my title and 1st post - was to entertain myself. I doubt anyone reading this thread will be persuaded in any way either way - it is mental masturbation for everyone involved. So if I were to be entered in a debate that was to be judged by a panel, and the prize was a weekend in Salt Lake City at the airport mariott with a free fleshlight, I would probably take your suggested approach. But since this is covers, and this thread is for my entertainment - it is what it is. Sometimes intelligent, sometimes nonsensical, always entertaining, and lots of times funny - but never persuasive.
The Romans had a colisseum for entertainment. I only have covers.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
