# There Is No Devil.



## BrotherJay (May 10, 2009)

Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite). 

God gave us free will and by His Will, we are free to think what we wish. So we have chosen to forsake God in search of our bodily pleasures. 

To believe in some Devil out there in this world is to project your own sense of guilt onto a false fabricated personification, slap horns on it, paint it red, give it a tail and hooves and wallah, you have Satan. 

The ego is all the ideas, judgements and concepts we have about ourselves in relation to God and our brothers. WE MADE THEM UP, not God. Yet God waits for us in perfect Peace to welcome us home when we realize our matrix of illusions is nothing. Peace, BrotherJay.


----------



## cream8 (May 10, 2009)

i couldnt agree more. we create these heavens and hells ourselves that we live in in the present moment. because thats all there really is.


----------



## BrotherJay (May 11, 2009)

cream8 said:


> i couldnt agree more. we create these heavens and hells ourselves that we live in in the present moment. because thats all there really is.



The Now is all there is. All that really exists. Gods love is in it and it has that has no opposite. We have dreamed of an opposite but its just a nightmare to awaken from. Oh, we have denied Heaven and have created our own hell by the fear of God. Thanks Cream8...BJ


----------



## cream8 (May 11, 2009)

no one can torment us worse then ourselves


----------



## budsmoker87 (May 12, 2009)

damn i like this concept. I'm not religious, but i am spiritual

very empowering concept tho (i'll embrace it)


----------



## 001 (May 12, 2009)

no devil hey HA

check this out

they soul there soul for rock n roll part 1
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=2494291415376995856&ei=Pz4JSv33CsLI-Ab08_3NAw&q=they+sold+there+soul+for+rock+n+roll&hl=en&dur=3


A Trip Into The Supernatural

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7071384717786904996&ei=-D4JStGCItqa-AbMx7D7Ag&q=a+trip+into+the+supernatural&hl=en&dur=3


fritz springmeier p.s this guy was murdered 
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2694841576971107107&ei=Gz8JStqkO9XR-QbTjbzzAg&q=fritz+springmeier&hl=en


----------



## 001 (May 12, 2009)

p.s the new world order is pushing a new age religion, check them vids out please its a good watch


----------



## cream8 (May 12, 2009)

aweful videos 001. true propaganda. it makes me sick.


----------



## SOorganic (May 12, 2009)

Oh he's real, trust me he's real


----------



## cream8 (May 12, 2009)

ha. as if god has a gender. he's real...as real as me because we are all gods


----------



## BrotherJay (May 13, 2009)

People, WE made up the Devil, made him up. Why? Oh, this is the best part so listen carefully...SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PAIN AND SUFFERING IN THE WORLD. SO WE CAN POINT FINGERS AT EACH OTHER, OH, OH HE IS A DEVIL WORSHIPER, OH HE IS EVIL, OH HE IS A SINNER. LOOK IN THE MIRROR. DON'T THINK THAT YOU ARE ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANYBODY ELSE IN THIS REGARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God lives inside us, so does the "devil." Thank you, Peace, BJ.


----------



## SOorganic (May 14, 2009)

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The greatest feat Satan ever achieved, was fooling the world into believing that he didn't exist....


----------



## jammin26 (May 14, 2009)

eggsactamondo, i once started going down the local gym about 8 years ago with good intentions. now one fine day i saw a girl in there, thought nothing of it, next time i look up shes there smiling at me. so i start getting a bit excited and pretend to not really have noticed. forget about it until i get home, then i remembered it and wanted to know her. now all this is fairly normal, only the next day or so i fell victim to the demon itself of masturbation - knowing full well i should not have (obviously). so the next day im back in the gym and this girl is in there so i go up to a weights machine near her and start doing it, then i look round and shes just lying there (on a squat machine where you lie down on your back) and not moving just staring up to the ceiling. i felt a really strong attraction to her as she was pretty with unusually short hair and normally i don't get a lot of looks from girls so this time i thought i was in. then i try to pretend i hadn't wanked between the first time i saw her and now and try to underplay the situatuion, so i fooled myself into looking at her shoes and commenting to myself that they where of the appropriate brand! then i realised i had fucked up bad and all i can remember doing is walking out thinking i would never be able to get talking to her and she thinks i'm a sad geek. so after this for some stupid, geekish, fucking anti-astablishment reason i band myself from going down the gym for reasons of embrassesment of seeing that girl again and not being able to impress her again. she would probably ignore me and i would wonder if i existed. now, with hindsight i sould have just got on with what i would normally do and i wouldn't be sitting here now, hating myself for being so weak. the devil knows he's won, he has kicked the shit out of me over the past years. we all know evil to well now, whether it's the devil or your inner self or just sheer boredom that makes us act. nowadays theres now real excitment like there was when we were teenagers, now i can do things i wouldn't have dreamed of when i was young, i just wonder about this girl i want to see her face again so the demons of hell can play instead of this boredom


----------



## Don Gin and Ton (May 14, 2009)

what a crock of shit brother j you cant have one without the other. life is balance and without the other there is no balance.


----------



## CrackerJax (May 14, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> People, WE made up the Devil, made him up. Why? Oh, this is the best part so listen carefully...SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PAIN AND SUFFERING IN THE WORLD. SO WE CAN POINT FINGERS AT EACH OTHER, OH, OH HE IS A DEVIL WORSHIPER, OH HE IS EVIL, OH HE IS A SINNER. LOOK IN THE MIRROR. DON'T THINK THAT YOU ARE ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANYBODY ELSE IN THIS REGARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God lives inside us, so does the "devil." Thank you, Peace, BJ.



Same reason we made up jesus.


----------



## BrotherJay (May 14, 2009)

SOorganic said:


> BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The greatest feat Satan ever achieved, was fooling the world into believing that he didn't exist....



Thank you. Its good to hear that old line of BS again, its been a while. 

If Satan exists outside of ourselves then who is he? Oh, that's the never ending mystery isn't it. Always keeps us paranoid about our Brothers. So we go out and kill the one we think is a devil. Meanwhile, the brother of the guy we just blew away plans his revenge thinking we are the evil one. It is a game of the ego and a long on at that. God did not start that game but he will finish it.

But the thing is, while we are looking suspiciously at each other wondering if the other guy sold his soul to the "Devil," Heaven is hidden from us because We have usurped God's role as Judge. We think we are good judges and we assume we know whom God will save and whom he will not. Be honest with yourself, you need the idea of a devil out there somewhere so that you can project your "unholy" desires onto someone else and not own 'em. Its OK, we all have done that. The Truth shall set you free my friend.

Truth is... God does and always will love each and every one of us unconditionally forever and ever. But we can't accept that. We feel compelled to do the judging for God. Some people might think "Oh God doesn't love fags or rock n rollers or a young girl who had an abortion. Don't worry God, we will do your judging for you. We will exterminate them one way or another, don't worry." We all play a part in the insanity of this false world, own it so you can forgive it. 

What does God have to do to convince us he has forgiven us? Send his only Son to be crucified? Yeah, maybe that would work. Surely that would work. Peace, BJ


----------



## BrotherJay (May 14, 2009)

jammin26 said:


> eggsactamondo, i once started going down the local gym about 8 years ago with good intentions. now one fine day i saw a girl in there, thought nothing of it, next time i look up shes there smiling at me. so i start getting a bit excited and pretend to not really have noticed. forget about it until i get home, then i remembered it and wanted to know her. now all this is fairly normal, only the next day or so i fell victim to the demon itself of masturbation - knowing full well i should not have (obviously). so the next day im back in the gym and this girl is in there so i go up to a weights machine near her and start doing it, then i look round and shes just lying there (on a squat machine where you lie down on your back) and not moving just staring up to the ceiling. i felt a really strong attraction to her as she was pretty with unusually short hair and normally i don't get a lot of looks from girls so this time i thought i was in. then i try to pretend i hadn't wanked between the first time i saw her and now and try to underplay the situatuion, so i fooled myself into looking at her shoes and commenting to myself that they where of the appropriate brand! then i realised i had fucked up bad and all i can remember doing is walking out thinking i would never be able to get talking to her and she thinks i'm a sad geek. so after this for some stupid, geekish, fucking anti-astablishment reason i band myself from going down the gym for reasons of embrassesment of seeing that girl again and not being able to impress her again. she would probably ignore me and i would wonder if i existed. now, with hindsight i sould have just got on with what i would normally do and i wouldn't be sitting here now, hating myself for being so weak. the devil knows he's won, he has kicked the shit out of me over the past years. we all know evil to well now, whether it's the devil or your inner self or just sheer boredom that makes us act. nowadays theres now real excitment like there was when we were teenagers, now i can do things i wouldn't have dreamed of when i was young, i just wonder about this girl i want to see her face again so the demons of hell can play instead of this boredom


What??? Look, there is nothing wrong with jerking off. I know we do eventually need to transcend bodily desires to atone with God who is Spirit of Love... but God does not condemn you for that. Give me a break and grow up a little. Maybe you feel shame about it but that is your own judgment upon yourself. God doesn't want us to be fooled by the ego. Our own egos see only the body and not the soul. Jesus taught that we are not bodies, we are spirit. But lust is no different than any other worldly pleasure we indulge in including eating, drinking, smoking, earning lots of money, faith in death or feeling more pure and righteous than another person. Its all false. That's a lesson everyone will learn eventually, but placing judgement upon yourself is no different then to crucify God's Holy Son because you are Holy and sinless brother. Peace, BJ


----------



## BrotherJay (May 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Same reason we made up jesus.


Jesus was a man who discovered early on in his life Christ within him. We all have Christ within us. Jesus was a perfect teacher, not the only teacher, but the best. Christ was in Buda, Christ was in Gandi, Christ was in Mohamed. Christ is what binds us all as One with God. Jesus is the way the truth and the light and the light is in you and you can be a light for others who are in darkness. It is within us. Seek not outside yourself for there is nothing there...Nothing. Peace, BJ


----------



## BrotherJay (May 14, 2009)

Don Gin and Ton said:


> what a crock of shit brother j you cant have one without the other. life is balance and without the other there is no balance.


Thank you. In this world of illusions that makes perfect sense but...God is in everything. God is love. Now tell me, how can God have an opposite? Peace, BJ


----------



## 001 (May 15, 2009)

one who stands for nothing will stand for anything

god is real and his angles


----------



## CrackerJax (May 15, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Jesus was a man who discovered early on in his life Christ within him. We all have Christ within us. Jesus was a perfect teacher, not the only teacher, but the best. Christ was in Buda, Christ was in Gandi, Christ was in Mohamed. Christ is what binds us all as One with God. Jesus is the way the truth and the light and the light is in you and you can be a light for others who are in darkness. It is within us. Seek not outside yourself for there is nothing there...Nothing. Peace, BJ


No, Jesus was a myth and never a historical figure. Bingo....


----------



## BrotherJay (May 16, 2009)

001 said:


> one who stands for nothing will stand for anything
> 
> god is real and his angles


I agree totally. The question is then, what do we stand for? This present moment, (without the intrusion of our past grievances toward ourselves and others and future fears) is an alter unto God who abides here. Upon this alter, I choose to bring love and forgiveness. To do that, I have to let go of the idea that I am special and that God loves me more than any body else out in the world. That is delusional. We all have our illusions to overcome but the Holy Spirit does not wrench them from our hands. He merely waits until we discover we want Him and not our illusions for we cannot have both. Peace, BJ


----------



## BrotherJay (May 16, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> No, Jesus was a myth and never a historical figure. Bingo....


The belief in any body formulation is a myth. My body is a myth and not reality because it is ephemeral, just like my thoughts... they come and go. Christ is reality whom always is. He is in you and I. We share this identity. The only thing that separates me from you are my grievances and desires for specialness. Thanks, BJ


----------



## CrackerJax (May 17, 2009)

Nice try, but jesus was never a historical figure. A conglomeration of myths he is.


----------



## BrotherJay (May 17, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Nice try, but jesus was never a historical figure. A conglomeration of myths he is.


I think we are a little stuck here. I guess I just assumed that folks who peruse the spirituality forums were interested in learning from each other and conversing thoughtfully and respectfully. You seem like you have something to say, I wish you would say it and not keep repeating yourself. Thanks, BJ


----------



## cream8 (May 17, 2009)

jammin26 said:


> eggsactamondo, i once started going down the local gym about 8 years ago with good intentions. now one fine day i saw a girl in there, thought nothing of it, next time i look up shes there smiling at me. so i start getting a bit excited and pretend to not really have noticed. forget about it until i get home, then i remembered it and wanted to know her. now all this is fairly normal, only the next day or so i fell victim to the demon itself of masturbation - knowing full well i should not have (obviously). so the next day im back in the gym and this girl is in there so i go up to a weights machine near her and start doing it, then i look round and shes just lying there (on a squat machine where you lie down on your back) and not moving just staring up to the ceiling. i felt a really strong attraction to her as she was pretty with unusually short hair and normally i don't get a lot of looks from girls so this time i thought i was in. then i try to pretend i hadn't wanked between the first time i saw her and now and try to underplay the situatuion, so i fooled myself into looking at her shoes and commenting to myself that they where of the appropriate brand!  then i realised i had fucked up bad and all i can remember doing is walking out thinking i would never be able to get talking to her and she thinks i'm a sad geek. so after this for some stupid, geekish, fucking anti-astablishment reason i band myself from going down the gym for reasons of embrassesment of seeing that girl again and not being able to impress her again. she would probably ignore me and i would wonder if i existed. now, with hindsight i sould have just got on with what i would normally do and i wouldn't be sitting here now, hating myself for being so weak. the devil knows he's won, he has kicked the shit out of me over the past years. we all know evil to well now, whether it's the devil or your inner self or just sheer boredom that makes us act. nowadays theres now real excitment like there was when we were teenagers, now i can do things i wouldn't have dreamed of when i was young, i just wonder about this girl i want to see her face again so the demons of hell can play instead of this boredom


first off masterbation is not a demon its a natural act and there is nothing wrong with it. second the devil didnt kick your ass. you did. humans are the only animal to punish themselves over and over for the same mistake. you still beat yourself up about this women yet you blame the devil because in fact. you are this devil . you are reasponsible. take on the reasponsiblility your just a human animal


----------



## cream8 (May 17, 2009)

no one can torment you worse then yourself. to all things there is balance. and some know this as duality.(ie man woman. day night, east, west, yin yang) you can learn this first hand the organic natural way.

ayahuasca the vine of the dead. the great spirit gives us plants and herbs to heal and teach us.


----------



## CrackerJax (May 17, 2009)

I've already said it.The devil and jesus are BOTH myths..... not real.....figments....get it?


----------



## cream8 (May 17, 2009)

yes i get and agree. they are the externalized persona of the way we feel. no more. life is empty and meaningless. we humans put meaning were there is none. that is the point i am trying to make. i dont actually believe in jesus being the savior of mankind. or that the devil presides over hell. its nonsense!


----------



## Brazko (May 17, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> I think we are a little stuck here. I guess I just assumed that folks who peruse the spirituality forums were interested in learning from each other and conversing thoughtfully and respectfully. You seem like you have something to say, I wish you would say it and not keep repeating yourself. Thanks, BJ


Well, I would've stopped you a few posts back if you thought by using a hint of intelligence, sincerity, & being logically open minded would help convey your meaning in a debate/discussion......

Don't be discouraged (I no ur not) but your posts do get through 2 many others, don't worry about that, and you'll learn quick enuff as you already have when discussions / debates are.........ummmmmmm, PRICELESS

And to note, I think CJ is OK, No he is, ....he comes around sometime. But get used to the mud


----------



## CrackerJax (May 17, 2009)

No mud, just reality...it's a bitch. Grab a crutch....if that's your need.


----------



## BrotherJay (May 17, 2009)

cream8 said:


> first off masterbation is not a demon its a natural act and there is nothing wrong with it. second the devil didnt kick your ass. you did. humans are the only animal to punish themselves over and over for the same mistake. you still beat yourself up about this women yet you blame the devil because in fact. you are this devil . you are reasponsible. take on the reasponsiblility your just a human animal


Eggsactamundo!


----------



## BrotherJay (May 17, 2009)

Brazko said:


> Well, I would've stopped you a few posts back if you thought by using a hint of intelligence, sincerity, & being logically open minded would help convey your meaning in a debate/discussion......
> 
> Don't be discouraged (I no ur not) but your posts do get through 2 many others, don't worry about that, and you'll learn quick enuff as you already have when discussions / debates are.........ummmmmmm, PRICELESS
> 
> And to note, I think CJ is OK, No he is, ....he comes around sometime. But get used to the mud


Thanks Brazko, I am not discouraged. I don't ask anyone to just believe what I say, I am just all about finding common ground. For me, Christ is reality and everything else is what we made up ourselves. I totally empathize with people who are skeptical about Jesus Christ. I have been there, and still am sometimes when there is so much suffering in the world. I feel helpless. I have learned a lot though about the way of Christ and the peace that abides in him and I don't think people get that message. They are fed the fear of the wrath of God. If I didn't see the Holy Spirit working in my life, believe me, I would not utter any praises for Him. But I can't deny that I really do. Peace to you. BJ


----------



## Brazko (May 17, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> No mud, just reality...it's a bitch. Grab a crutch....if that's your need.


Yes, Mud, metaphor of him inevitably getting stuck / dead ends / brickwalls, but of course rightfully monkeys slinging shit as well....,


Reality isn't a Bitch, Perceived Reality Yule Referring too, bayou standards alone......

What Crutch is it thats Needed? 



,


----------



## Brazko (May 17, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Thanks Brazko, I am not discouraged. I don't ask anyone to just believe what I say, I am just all about finding common ground. For me, Christ is reality and everything else is what we made up ourselves. I totally empathize with people who are skeptical about Jesus Christ. I have been there, and still am sometimes when there is so much suffering in the world. I feel helpless. I have learned a lot though about the way of Christ and the peace that abides in him and I don't think people get that message. They are fed the fear of the wrath of God. If I didn't see the Holy Spirit working in my life, believe me, I would not utter any praises for Him. But I can't deny that I really do. Peace to you. BJ


 
BrothaJ, I've learned much from my peeps on here, Many all Good Sheeple, Some Like Beef, 

In The End, Ur Still Breathng, Only a lil Stronga,


----------



## BrotherJay (May 17, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I've already said it.The devil and jesus are BOTH myths..... not real.....figments....get it?


I get it. Peace, BJ


----------



## Johnnyorganic (May 17, 2009)

The Devil is in my car.

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VpYRnVcNPto&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VpYRnVcNPto&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Much better performance. No embedding permitted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSe6SYvsk9E


----------



## cream8 (Jun 1, 2009)

all and all your just another brick in the wall


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 12, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite).
> 
> God gave us free will and by His Will, we are free to think what we wish. So we have chosen to forsake God in search of our bodily pleasures.
> 
> ...


What about magickians who summon these entities of evil, and see them manifest physically?


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 12, 2009)

Both jesus and the devil are man made CONTROLLING agents....nothing more.


----------



## AchillesLast (Jun 14, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> What about magickians who summon these entities of evil, and see them manifest physically?


There's a lot about this world we don't know. Not everything can be logically explained, but people will rationalize and try. Those things may exist on entirely other planes but parallel to the world we create everyday. All in all, they are manifestations of energy; the monster of energy that makes up everything around us.

I dig the thread brother jay. You familiar with the book "Be Here Now"?


----------



## jenni8675309 (Jun 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> No, Jesus was a myth and never a historical figure. Bingo....





CrackerJax said:


> Nice try, but jesus was never a historical figure. A conglomeration of myths he is.





CrackerJax said:


> I've already said it.The devil and jesus are BOTH myths..... not real.....figments....get it?


Wow. You really discredited yourself there. It is rarely debated that Jesus never existed, because there is so much proof that He did exist.
However, it is often debated wether or not He is the savior. Some people think yes, some people think no, some people say He was a prophet and nothing more. 
But saying that he never existed? Come on man, if you dont want to take the time and research it, do you atleast have the History channel? Or Discovery Channel? They dig up historical facts all the time.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 14, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> Wow. You really discredited yourself there. It is rarely debated that Jesus never existed, because there is so much proof that He did exist.
> However, it is often debated wether or not He is the savior. Some people think yes, some people think no, some people say He was a prophet and nothing more.
> But saying that he never existed? Come on man, if you dont want to take the time and research it, do you atleast have the History channel? Or Discovery Channel? They dig up historical facts all the time.


I'm sorry, what proof? Proof from the Bible is the ONLY source. I've done this far too many times but I can rip the bible and its time lines to shreds if you wish. The bible is NOT a historical document. All HISTORICAL documents from that time and area are replete of jesus. Shall I go into detail? I can, I just was keeping it short before.

All three statements were spot on.


----------



## robert 14617 (Jun 14, 2009)

even if he was , bringing someone back from the dead after 3 days please in the middle east no less stinking and bloated with blow fly maggots starting in all my openings , let me stay dead


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 14, 2009)

There is NO historical evidence that a jesus ever existed. One need only ACTUALLY read the writings of Paul to see that, but most just get spoonfed what the church wishes to talk about. Ever notice (I have) that when you hear a mass, they are all over the place. Quote here, and a quote there, no real consistency...because there isn't any.


----------



## robert 14617 (Jun 14, 2009)

just like horoscopes vague so they can be patched together to fit any scenario


----------



## robert 14617 (Jun 14, 2009)

as far as the devil goes evil lives in the heart of us all ,we are all capable of the worst offenses against our fellow man, and are also capable of great compassion


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 14, 2009)

AchillesLast said:


> There's a lot about this world we don't know. Not everything can be logically explained, but people will rationalize and try. Those things may exist on entirely other planes but parallel to the world we create everyday. All in all, they are manifestations of energy; the monster of energy that makes up everything around us.
> 
> I dig the thread brother jay. You familiar with the book "Be Here Now"?


Well put!

Some energy is condensed into mass via E=Mc^2, but most energy isn't, and that doesn't mean the energy isn't 'real'.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I'm sorry, what proof? Proof from the Bible is the ONLY source. I've done this far too many times but I can rip the bible and its time lines to shreds if you wish. The bible is NOT a historical document. All HISTORICAL documents from that time and area are replete of jesus. Shall I go into detail? I can, I just was keeping it short before.
> 
> All three statements were spot on.


I'd like to see you rip the Bible's timelines to shreds.


----------



## bigwheel (Jun 14, 2009)

There are many smart folks who have spent their entire lives trying to discredit the Bible which none has been able to do. Aside from a few copyist errors it has never been proven wrong on even a minor issue let alone a major one. Where God speaks of science history or geography it is 100% accurate. Modern archeaologists use at as a handbook on where to dig. What do God and Obama have in common? Neither has a birth certificate. How do they differ? God does not think He's Obama and Liberals love Obama (paraphrasing my pal old Maja Rushie of course Meaning by extension that liberals don't love God. They couldn't because God and His Written Word are not compatible with the dogmas of the Religion (cancer) of Liberaslism. Now that is simple enough even a Liberal can understand it. Right?


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 14, 2009)

bigwheel said:


> There are many smart folks who have spent their entire lives trying to discredit the Bible which none has been able to do. Aside from a few copyist errors it has never been proven wrong on even a minor issue let alone a major one. Where God speaks of science history or geography it is 100% accurate. Modern archeaologists use at as a handbook on where to dig. What do God and Obama have in common? Neither has a birth certificate. How do they differ? God does not think He's Obama and Liberals love Obama (paraphrasing my pal old Maja Rushie of course Meaning by extension that liberals don't love God. They couldn't because God and His Written Word are not compatible with the dogmas of the Religion (cancer) of Liberaslism. Now that is simple enough even a Liberal can understand it. Right?


Which Bible, which edition? Who put the Bible together and when? What was left out? What has been taken out?

Answer some of these first and then get back to me..... before you speak of the Bible.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Jun 19, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Which Bible, which edition? Who put the Bible together and when? What was left out? What has been taken out?
> 
> Answer some of these first and then get back to me..... before you speak of the Bible.


Wait, you mean you dont know the answer to that? 
I cant believe you are sitting there talking trash about something you dont know anything about. Geeze dude, atleast do a google search about the bibles history or something. 



bigwheel said:


> There are many smart folks who have spent their entire lives trying to discredit the Bible which none has been able to do. Aside from a few copyist errors it has never been proven wrong on even a minor issue let alone a major one. Where God speaks of science history or geography it is 100% accurate. Modern archeaologists use at as a handbook on where to dig. What do God and Obama have in common? Neither has a birth certificate. How do they differ? God does not think He's Obama and Liberals love Obama (paraphrasing my pal old Maja Rushie of course Meaning by extension that liberals don't love God. They couldn't because God and His Written Word are not compatible with the dogmas of the Religion (cancer) of Liberaslism. Now that is simple enough even a Liberal can understand it. Right?


Amen


Also, there are many, many archaeological discoveries to support the relevant truth of the bible.
Have you ever heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls?
Or the Ebla archive? Found in the 1970's written on clay tablets from around 2300 BC. 
And it was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in the bible. Then Sargon's palace was discovered in Khorsabad, Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isiah 20 was recorded on the palace walls. What is more, fragments of a stela memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.
I could go on and on.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 19, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> Wait, you mean you dont know the answer to that?



I asked HIM the question. that does not mean I don't know the answer. Tone down the hate a bit there.

All of your bible references are about the OLD testament, not the new. Besides that, having proof that a myth was created long ago and handed down doesn't make it true.....does it?


----------



## marijuana13579 (Jun 19, 2009)

werewolves, vampires and worms with ears are myths.
Jesus NOT in that category


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 19, 2009)

marijuana13579 said:


> werewolves, vampires and worms with ears are myths.
> Jesus NOT in that category


Says who? The ppl collecting the money?


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> Wait, you mean you dont know the answer to that?
> I cant believe you are sitting there talking trash about something you dont know anything about. Geeze dude, atleast do a google search about the bibles history or something.
> 
> 
> ...


We also have the Septuagint from 300BC (400AD-oldest copy), which proves that the Jews are really good at copying things down. What is cool is that we can track down where certain mistranslations were made and when, and in some cases, why.
The Bible is an integrated message system from outside our time doman.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

Just because ppl write things down, doesn't make them TRUE. They also thought the earth was flat.... religion is mans explanation of his surrounding world WITHOUT the benefit of SCIENCE. We have science now......drop the myth and move on.


----------



## pillarize (Jun 24, 2009)

Free will is just an excuse for not wanting God in your knowledge.

And the people perish for lack of it.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

And yet the very basic tenant of your religion is based on FREE WILL. You may want to rethink that post. So the whole thing is a trap? Nice.......


----------



## Reddragon1986 (Jun 24, 2009)

Free will is a life without religion, are catholics or jews, when they turn 16 years old,be asked if they would like to be controlled by a god? I dont think so, anyone could bring up a child and tell them disney stories they would believe true. Yet if u imagine a human being brought up with no religion, and had never heard about it, he would just live his life. So why wouldn't god make himself known to his creation? If there was never a bible, god would not exsist, as he is a myth, a bedtime story.

Lets say he did exsist, he would be the devil aswell as being good, if he wants people to prey to him he must have a ego, therefore emotion, and emotions come in opposites, so he must get angry and let his people die.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

It's just made up stuff from a pre science era....nothing more. I can fully understand why they did it. But not now.....when will we grow up??


----------



## Reddragon1986 (Jun 24, 2009)

Tis' madness old boy


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

Yes, and it is everywhere.


----------



## unknownuk420 (Jun 24, 2009)

why do alot of people belive there is no devil or no jesus but belive in god?


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

well, it doesn't necessarily go hand in hand. Muslims believe in god , but not Jesus.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> well, it doesn't necessarily go hand in hand. Muslims believe in god , but not Jesus.


Muslims do believe in Jesus, very much so. They just think he was a prophet.



unknownuk420 said:


> why do alot of people belive there is no devil or no jesus but belive in god?


I think most people just can't deny the existence of something higher, but totally don't want to go along with what they've been told was true about Jesus and the devil, because that is just too uncomfortable. But as long as there is an all forgiving force of good and Light of Love that will never let anything bad happen to their soul upon death, they're happy.


----------



## unknownuk420 (Jun 24, 2009)

> I think most people just can't deny the existence of something higher, but totally don't want to go along with what they've been told was true about Jesus and the devil, because that is just too uncomfortable. But as long as there is an all forgiving force of good and Light of Love that will never let anything bad happen to their soul upon death, they're happy.


ye sounds bout right


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

I certainly believe in a higher power, just not a MAN MADE myth. There have been thousands of religions through the ages, and each one thinks theirs is true. This cannot be. Can it?


----------



## IndicaFatnHeavy (Jun 24, 2009)

Seriously??... there is no such thing as god.. when you die. you decompose in a fucking hole.

People made up god/devil/bible because they refuse to believe that when they die, they don't go to a special place, where everything is right and well. They are scared to even begin to think when they die they wont live anymore. So they make up some bogus crap that if you obey the commandments or w.e. the fuck it is you religious people do, you in someway hope that your righteous and unselfish thoughts and actions will be rewarded in going to, "Heaven"


everyone who is religious has their own idea of what heaven is and what you have to do to get there.

*it pisses me off even more to think that people are being killed, raped and beaten over what they are to stupid and ignorant to comprehend. (Israel, korea etc...)*


----------



## ruderalis88 (Jun 24, 2009)

i think that the most beautiful game the devil plays is convincing you that he does not exist.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

Yes, and the church's favorite game is getting you to believe such nonsense, and then part you from your $$$.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

Man did not write the Bible. Man can't predict the future. The Bible writes the future from the past. No other 'holy' book has done that with the precision that the bible has. Also, the prophecies in the Bible are being fulfilled today. Who would have thought that Israel would exist again? The Bible said it would, and now there is a country called Israel. Such prophecies, and even the multidimensional structure of the text, prove that the bible has its origin from outside the time domain, where humans don't exist. Hence, man did not write it. It is impossible for man to have written it. Science has shown us that we can't know the future (quantum mechanics and chaos theory). Science has also shown us that life on this planet is the result of intelligence. The fatal flaw (one of many, actually) in the Darwinian interpretation of the origin of life is that it can't explain the origin of information. Scientifically speaking, we see information in DNA (something Darwin could not do because he didn't have the technological apparatus.) Where did this information come from? Natural Selection can't account for this existence of information in DNA because Natural Selection, acting on random mutation, is actually harmful to information content. What else is there? Answer: intelligence. Intelligence put forth the information in the DNA.


----------



## jfgordon1 (Jun 24, 2009)

Have you noticed that atheist/agnostic seem to have more value for human life compared to religious people?...

I have. thats for DAMN sure


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

jfgordon1 said:


> Have you noticed that atheist/agnostic seem to have more value for human life compared to religious people?...
> 
> I have. thats for DAMN sure


Atheists like Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao? Those atheists????? Yeah. They loved human life. 
What 'religious' people were responsible for mass murder last century? I'd like to know how many people they killed too.
All beliefs are a form of religion. Science is a religion (although it SHOULDN'T be.) Atheism is a religion.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> > Man did not write the Bible.
> 
> 
> Oh really? Who wrote it then? The Bible fell out of the sky? I missed that headline. Perhaps you mean the Ten Commandments? By the way the people of Israel, for whom it was written (with no proof that it ever existed) failed that test miserably. The old testament will tell you that much. The bible was written by anonymous men of whom we know practically nothing at all, except for perhaps Paul (Saul), who jacked the entire religion. Who is Jesus? I mean who is he?? The bible doesn't say. No one in the bible ever talked to Jesus. Who is Mary? Where did Mary come from? In all probability Mary was adopted by her Mother Anne who was well past the age of maternity. Who are these people? The Bible doesn't say. No other book does either.
> ...


----------



## eelloopp (Jun 24, 2009)

If you follow the bibles timeline (LOL Noah lived for 950 years LOL) it would have you believe the earth is 5000 years old. If someone wants to put their head in the sand and believe in this farce no amount of proof will change their minds. Rome is laughing all the way to the bank (which they own). Look into the history of the popes. The warrior popes especially amuse me. Its a real education. The church of today does not even come close to resembling the church of yesteryear - Rome had to ELVOLVE or become irrelevant.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Oh really? Who wrote it then? The Bible fell out of the sky? I missed that headline.


Maybe I should have said that the origin of the Bible is not with men. The God of Israel told the prophets what to write.



> Perhaps you mean the Ten Commandments? By the way the people of Israel, for whom it was written (with no proof that it ever existed) failed that test miserably. The old testament will tell you that much. The bible was written by anonymous men of whom we know practically nothing at all, except for perhaps Paul (Saul), who jacked the entire religion. Who is Jesus? I mean who is he?? The bible doesn't say.


The OT (Old Testament) tells us who Jesus is. The whole freaking OT was about him. All of the Jewish Feasts and rituals spoke of Jesus, that was the whole reason for the feasts and rituals.



> Have you heard of the newly discovered annals from a monastery twenty miles from Jerusalem? They are from the Essene sect and these newly discovered "dead sea scrolls" start one half century BEFORE the supposed birth of Jesus to second half of the century after him.


Why yes I have heard of the dead sea scrolls. As a matter of fact, there is a complete scroll of Isaiah (almost 2 complete scrolls, if I remember right) that was found at Qumran. This copy of Isaiah is THE SAME as the book of Isaiah I have sitting on my floor. To be more exact, the copy found at Qumran will translate exactly to what I have sitting on my floor. 

Look. If God is smart enough to create the universe, He is smart enough to get a message to us. That is, if He cares enough about humanity to send us a message. I think He does. Why would He even bother to create us if He didn't care. He is not confined by the time dimension!



> Twenty miles away and these scrolls are very detailed about everything going on. These were the true scribes of that area. The Bible was not written by scribes. All of the wonderful deeds, and miracles, and great throngs of followers and the triumphant entrance in to Jerusalem, the rendering of the temple and the cruci"fiction", and the sky darkening for three hours , *none of it is recorded*.


That is up for debate. There are fragments of what seem to be from the NT that were found at Qumran. Remember, what we found at Qumran is not complete. It is quite *possible* that they did record things at Qumran that happened in NT times, but time destroyed them.



> These people recorded everything of note in that entire region. The annals speak for themselves of their attention to detail. And yet, nothing of Jesus....nothing.
> 
> Your "belief" was hijacked by Paul and corrupted by the church. Things were added that strengthened the church and things that weakened their position was thrown out.


Not true. Paul didn't write the OT. The OT is revealed in the NT. Paul only made things clear and explained things. Everything Paul said was totally in line with what was written in the OT.




> Don't tell me about the Bible...because the copy you so richly read is NOT the Bible.
> 
> And that's the name of that tune.
> 
> As for the DNA NON-SENSE....DNA like everything else on the planet EVOLVED.


What exactly do you mean by 'EVOLVED'? Do you simply mean that DNA changed? If so, I agree. The point I am making is that the Darwinian mindset of Natural Selection working on random mutation can not account for the information content in DNA. That is science talking. Not much of a debate. That is why biologists have to resort to directed panspermia arguments for our origin because they know that Darwinian arguments can't explain the origin of life on the Earth. 


> Only the ID folks think things can spring from nothing.


How do they do that? What are you talking about? 



> Please name what the bible has predicted..... I need a chuckle. I need a bowl... JESUS!


1. The fact that Israel would be back in their land that they lost almost 2000 years ago.
2. The prophecy given to Daniel from Gabriel that gave the EXACT day that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey.
3. The hundreds of prophecies concerning Jesus's birth, life, and death.
4. The fact that technology would 'evolve' that could destroy all life on the planet.
5. The 7 letters to the 7 churches that Jesus gave John in Revelation. Jesus laid out all of church history from about 100AD to today.
I could go on and on and on, but you won't see such things because the god of this world has blinded you. Seek the truth and you will see. 

What does it matter what we think we know? In the end, there is no denying the truth.


----------



## eelloopp (Jun 24, 2009)

The fact that Israel would be back in their land that they lost almost 2000 years ago - self fulfilling prophecy.

The prophecy given to Daniel from Gabriel that gave the EXACT day that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey - says who?? CNN? Fox news? Or are you tyring to prove the bible WITH the bible?

The hundreds of prophecies concerning Jesus's birth, life, and death - see above

The fact that technology would 'evolve' that could destroy all life on the planet - Wow that was a hard one to guess

The 7 letters to the 7 churches that Jesus gave John in Revelation. Jesus laid out all of church history from about 100AD to today - again you are using the bible to prove the bible which means your proof is fictional.

Please tell me you can come up with better arguments then that.


----------



## eelloopp (Jun 24, 2009)

How come God conveniently hides from us? We are told we need faith. Lol thats another word for believing with no proof. Where are the burning bushes today? Dude you have been brainwashed. I went through 13 years of religious instruction. It just doesnt make sense - and when you ask them to prove ANYTHING they say you need faith. When I went to my science teachers and asked for proof on things we were learning it was given to me - ad nauseam. hmmmmmm who to believe?


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

Oh my lord, where to begin? You've made quite a mess while i was gone. 



shroomer33 said:


> > Maybe I should have said that the origin of the Bible is not with men. The God of Israel told the prophets what to write.
> 
> 
> You don't even understand the time line of the writings of the bible do you? If you are talking Jesus, then you are talking the NEW testament, not the OLD.
> ...


Hindsight is the entire folcrum upon which the entire religion rests, isn't it? 
There was no prophecy of Jesus. The OT spoke of a messiah. Many many times. But not of Jesus. Not a word for him. The people of the time never heard of Jesus. The NEW scrolls show that much, but either way, any real word of Jesus came AFTER him, so that's a no go.

The ride into jerusalem is a JOKE sir. That story was written DECADES after the event (which never happened). See how easy it becomes to write a good story if you have hindsight. The entire NT is hindsight sir. 

Do you not see that?


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

eelloopp said:


> The fact that Israel would be back in their land that they lost almost 2000 years ago - self fulfilling prophecy.


You try to start your own country. Let me know how that goes.



> The prophecy given to Daniel from Gabriel that gave the EXACT day that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey - says who?? CNN? Fox news? Or are you tyring to prove the bible WITH the bible?


maybe a bit of circular reasoning, but that prophecy was written in the Septuagint in 300BC, and if Jesus did ride into Jerusalem on that day, that is pretty impressive, and shows the author of the writing is outside of the time domain.



> The hundreds of prophecies concerning Jesus's birth, life, and death - see above


I'll give you that one. My reasoning, in this case, is too circular for my own satisfaction. But, if indeed everything happened as recorded in the NT, then the prophecies are way too much to ignore.



> The fact that technology would 'evolve' that could destroy all life on the planet - Wow that was a hard one to guess


Who else speculated that the entire world could be destroyed at the hand of man? Anyone? I don't think so. And yes, that was a hard one to guess. Back then they didn't even have Newtonian mechanics, much less quantum mechanics. They didn't even know about microorganisms. So yes, it was a hard one to guess, and nobody outside of the Bible even thought that man could destroy the world.




> The 7 letters to the 7 churches that Jesus gave John in Revelation. Jesus laid out all of church history from about 100AD to today - again you are using the bible to prove the bible which means your proof is fictional.


NO. I am looking at the history of the Church over the last 2000 years. It just so happens that the history of the church was laid out, exactly as it happened, in Revelation.



> Please tell me you can come up with better arguments then that.


Oh yeah. I can come up with some really good ones. 

Here's the short version of one:

Encoded behind the text of Isaiah 53 is the entire crucifixion scenario, names and all. What makes this amazing is that Isaiah 53 (OT) is describing the crucifixion. It is only with the advent of computers are we able to see such writing. Hence, the text of the Bible has a component that is multidimensional in nature and beyond human capability to write. This is another example of the Bible predicting the future hundreds of years before it happened.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Oh my lord, where to begin? You've made quite a mess while i was gone.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Were you there? Neither was I. Is there any hardcore scientific proof either way? Nope. I guess I'll take it on faith that it did happen and you'll take it on faith that it didn't. We both can come up with real facts that back up our beliefs about what happened back then. What it comes down to is faith in our individual beliefs.....BUT
like I said before:

In the end. There is no denying the truth.
And that goes for me as much as it goes for you.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

Yah, I guess I'll base my one life on the belief that other people with this OUTRAGEOUS story all written AFTER any events took place, are telling me the truth. 

I take my take by simply looking at the facts of the bibles time lines , not what is IN the bible. The bible has some great stories, but that is all they are. Stories. 

You need to look up the annals from the Essene monastery. The fact that you cannot process any information which does not already align itself to your belief, means something. I'll let you come to it on your own. It means something. Check out the new scrolls that are for the very first time right on top of the life of Jesus. You should be thrilled!!!!! You should be....


----------



## shroomer33 (Jun 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yah, I guess I'll base my one life on the belief that other people with this OUTRAGEOUS story all written AFTER any events took place, are telling me the truth.
> 
> I take my take by simply looking at the facts of the bibles time lines , not what is IN the bible. The bible has some great stories, but that is all they are. Stories.
> 
> You need to look up the annals from the Essene monastery. The fact that you cannot process any information which does not already align itself to your belief, means something. I'll let you come to it on your own. It means something. Check out the new scrolls that are for the very first time right on top of the life of Jesus. You should be thrilled!!!!! You should be....


Can you post a link to the stuff you are talking about.
First and foremost, I am a scientist. Show me all information out there. I am pretty sure that I understand what you are saying about Qumran though, but I will certainly look at what you post.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jun 24, 2009)

Follow this link. Just like my name there is a prize.

http://www.library.flawlesslogic.com/tarsus.htm


----------



## cbtwohundread (Jun 27, 2009)

devils dead...............................jah lives


----------



## jenni8675309 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yes, and the church's favorite game is getting you to believe such nonsense, and then part you from your $$$.


 I think its funny how the man who hates Jesus, also mourns a child molester.


----------



## marijuana2468 (Jul 10, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> I think its funny how the man who hates Jesus, also mourns a child molester.


haha, so true
yes you crackerjacks... thousands of posts, all bs
fuck off get a life loser


----------



## kho20 (Jul 10, 2009)

i love how every one wants to be free to make a choice but if everyone else dont choose what you want then thier instantly wrong ... but hey its your choice to be bigamistic an i respect that everyones thier own.... the only thing i will promote is that "there's no love like ganja love"


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> I think its funny how the man who hates Jesus, also mourns a child molester.


I think it is quite appropriate and in tune with my logic. 

Neither the Bible nor the cases against MJ has any proof. They must therefore be false. The justice department agreed with my process of thought.

Whereas you need no such proof! You have already condemned him without the benefit of damning facts. This goes in line with your thought processes with the Bible too. You don't desire proof......you just smash everything into your perspective regardless of how flimsy the evidence, if it is there at all.

We are both consistent. Only one of us is using logic however.....

PS... I don't hate jesus. he doesn't exist.


----------



## robert 14617 (Jul 10, 2009)

cj i think there was a guy named jesus ,but as far as him bringing someone back to life after being dead three days i have to call BS,and mj him paying off the first child's family who accused him that in my mind is a confession


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

Take away the Bible as a reference and there is no Jesus. Truly examine the Bible and the same conclusion is inevitably reached....again. No Jesus. People don't really want to look, there's the rub. They just want the blanket of comfort, even if it is false.


----------



## robert 14617 (Jul 10, 2009)

the romans kept records there are no mentions there?


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

None. None at all, although the church has gone to great lengths to make connections they are flimsy at best. Surely the King of Kings would have been BIG BIG news, and yet, nothing.

The Romans were real paper pushers too. Nothing escaped their detail.......


----------



## robert 14617 (Jul 10, 2009)

you are right cj the best i found were (possible ref. or assumed writings)

Extrabiblical, Non-Christian Witnesses to *Jesus* before 200 a.d.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

Certainly there would be a mention of his upheaval in jerusalem, the center of information gathering in that sector.... MYTH.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I think it is quite appropriate and in tune with my logic.
> 
> Neither the Bible nor the cases against MJ has any proof. They must therefore be false. The justice department agreed with my process of thought.
> 
> ...


There is no proof for either supersymmetry or extra dimensions. Does that mean that neither exist?
Just because we don't have the proof in our hands at this moment, that doesn't mean that the proof doesn't exist.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> There is no proof for either supersymmetry or extra dimensions. Does that mean that neither exist?
> Just because we don't have the proof in our hands at this moment, that doesn't mean that the proof doesn't exist.


I want you to re read your own post twice.... slowly...out loud to yourself. If you haven't seen the problem, let me know.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Take away the Bible as a reference and there is no Jesus. Truly examine the Bible and the same conclusion is inevitably reached....again. No Jesus. People don't really want to look, there's the rub. They just want the blanket of comfort, even if it is false.


I never wanted a blanket of comfort. I wanted the truth. I was quite happy before I knew how true the Bible really was, but there was no truth anywhere else. I could not ignore that.

Not all people who believe in a higher power do it because it makes them comfortable. 

Your ignorance is overwhelming, and your logic is quite flawed. Have you even taken a class on logic, or read a book on logic?


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I want you to re read your own post twice.... slowly...out loud to yourself. If you haven't seen the problem, let me know.


Done. Can't see the problem. Enlighten us with your amazing mind.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> None. None at all, although the church has gone to great lengths to make connections they are flimsy at best. Surely the King of Kings would have been BIG BIG news, and yet, nothing.
> 
> The Romans were real paper pushers too. Nothing escaped their detail.......


Nobody other than the Jews would care!!
The Jews DID write down what happened. The King of Kings came to the Jews, according to their scriptures. Nobody else would care. 

In Roman eyes, Jesus was just another crazy person put to death. Show me all the records of people who were crucified by the Romans, since they were so meticulous in their record keeping.

Jesus only made a bit of a fuss for a few days. After that, there was no fuss. He was dead. 
Why would Rome care to record anything?


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I never wanted a blanket of comfort. I wanted the truth. I was quite happy before I knew how true the Bible really was, but there was no truth anywhere else. I could not ignore that.
> 
> Not all people who believe in a higher power do it because it makes them comfortable.
> 
> Your ignorance is overwhelming, and your logic is quite flawed. Have you even taken a class on logic, or read a book on logic?


Can't even admit it to yourself?  That's ok, most cannot either. The ONLY thing religion offers is a made up comfort. The Bible is not true, and cannot be proven to be so.....where's your logic son? Don't get into logic when discussing religion. You only diminish your view to others. At least those who are actually listening to you that is, and not just bobbing their heads because they share the same fears.



shroomer33 said:


> Done. Can't see the problem. Enlighten us with your amazing mind.


You propose to believe in something ABSOLUTELY, with no proof required. Shall I continue?  I can.....it's very easy.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> You propose to believe in something ABSOLUTELY, with no proof required. Shall I continue?  I can.....it's very easy.


I was talking about supersymmetry and extra dimensions, or even the Higgs boson. Just because we don't have the proof of their existence, that doesn't mean they don't exist. The point is, AGAIN, (I always have to repeat myself to you because you don't get it the first time.) that sometimes we have to wait for the proof. 

It doesn't mean that the proof doesn't exist.

Again, enlighten us. Show me the flaw here. I'll even read it aloud again.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I was talking about supersymmetry and extra dimensions, or even the Higgs boson. Just because we don't have the proof of their existence, that doesn't mean they don't exist. The point is, AGAIN, (I always have to repeat myself to you because you don't get it the first time.) that sometimes we have to wait for the proof.
> 
> It doesn't mean that the proof doesn't exist.
> 
> And you are just as guilty of ABSOLUTE belief.


Your logic is circular at best, if non existent. You may mention hypothetical scientific theories which are based upon foundational knowledge layered over time and tested constantly. 

That has NOTHING...NOTHING to do with religion. 

Keep trying though, it's amusing.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Your logic is circular at best, if non existent. You may mention hypothetical scientific theories which are based upon foundational knowledge layered over time and tested constantly.
> 
> That has NOTHING...NOTHING to do with religion.
> 
> Keep trying though, it's amusing.


No kidding. I am not talking about religion. Do you even know what circular reasoning is? If so, how is my reasoning circular?

My logic is non existent??? Show me the fallacy. You can't. You are not equipped to. So stop going around pretending like you know logic, because you don't.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I never wanted a blanket of comfort. I wanted the truth. I was quite happy before I knew how true the Bible really was, but there was no truth anywhere else. I could not ignore that.


Don't pee down my leg and tell me it's raining. you use those analogies to crutch up your faith. It COULD be possible. Yah, and the universe could all be a backdrop on a Hollywood set.... COULD BE, so let's all believe it, because it COULD be true. 

Laughable and sad at the same time. Neat trick.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Neither the Bible nor the cases against MJ has any proof. They must therefore be false.


Great logic, pal.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Laughable and sad at the same time. Neat trick.


I love how you resort to name calling by calling me sad and my reasoning laughable.

Showing your true colors, huh, and your inability to debate someone(me) who has just a miniscule idea of how to argue?


----------



## devilngod (Jul 10, 2009)

jesus is a myth. he was no more real than zeus or santa clause for that matter. theres something bigger then us(god?) but the human brain just can't comprehend it, sorta like life after death and the size of space.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I love how you resort to name calling by calling me sad and my reasoning laughable.
> 
> Showing your true colors, huh, and your inability to debate someone(me) who has just a miniscule idea of how to argue?



Where's the name calling? Why can't you just admit that you use those scientific examples to make an abstract parallel why the Bible could be true as well. I mean if you are trying to be coy about it, and your responses since indicate that very thing, I call shenanigans upon you!

But saying that unproven SCIENTIFIC theories somehow exists on the same plane of consideration as RELIGION just doesn't fly!!

You have been the one getting personal.... I'm just keeping it real.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Where's the name calling? Why can't you just admit that you use those scientific examples to make an abstract parallel why the Bible could be true as well. I mean if you are trying to be coy about it, and your responses since indicate that very thing, I call shenanigans upon you!
> 
> But saying that unproven SCIENTIFIC theories somehow exists on the same plane of consideration as RELIGION just doesn't fly!!
> 
> You have been the one getting personal.... I'm just keeping it real.


what did you mean by "laughable and sad at the same time"?


----------



## cream8 (Jul 10, 2009)

we are all gods we are all devils. we are human animals


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Where's the name calling? Why can't you just admit that you use those scientific examples to make an abstract parallel why the Bible could be true as well. I mean if you are trying to be coy about it, and your responses since indicate that very thing, I call shenanigans upon you!
> 
> But saying that unproven SCIENTIFIC theories somehow exists on the same plane of consideration as RELIGION just doesn't fly!!
> 
> You have been the one getting personal.... I'm just keeping it real.


AGAIN....
the scientific theories were illustrations of how things can be true independent of proof, like your comment about Michael Jackson's lack of guilt.
RELIGION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!!!!

I am getting sick of having to repeat myself. This is like the third time with this one.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

I did mean your logic was laughable, and the sad was the result of flawed logic....i.e. unquestioning belief in something not in evidence.


Yo, Cream... I can get behind that one. Religion is a reflection of MAN, not G*D. 

We make our world......


----------



## g00sEgg (Jul 10, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite).
> 
> God gave us free will and by His Will, we are free to think what we wish. So we have chosen to forsake God in search of our bodily pleasures.
> 
> ...


Is this your own religion you made up yourself?

If there's no "satan" therefore, there is no "god".

Personally...i think when jesus was talking of "eveil"...trying to scare people...just like cults to this day....

I personally...grew up christian, went to a catholic high school...4 years of religion class...and then i realized...none of this shit makes sense. 

It's just another fictional book...


----------



## Green Cross (Jul 10, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite).
> 
> God gave us free will and by His Will, we are free to think what we wish. So we have chosen to forsake God in search of our bodily pleasures.
> 
> ...


The Devil would like you to believe there is no devil. 

What I am more interested in is why someone would waste so much time trying to disprove Christianity?


----------



## cream8 (Jul 10, 2009)

the only reality is the one you create yourself. life is empty and meaningless. humans are the ones who put meaning into things


----------



## tip top toker (Jul 10, 2009)

agreed, no devil, no god.

10 commandments, one of which, don't work the sabbeth. go to hell yadda yadda. jesus openly breaks this commandment, picks grain, saves a goat etc etc, so jesus goes to hell. god hoever, tells jesus that he will ascend and be sat next to him etc in heaven, but if jesus is in hell, then the always-correct god, is also down in hell, as he's got to be sat there for jesus to sit beside him. god also calls it his kingdom, so therefore god is in hell in his kingdom. god is the devil. jesus is god is the holy spirit is one. jesus is the devil. heaven is hell. the whole thing is one big evil  

shazam, a book in the works!


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 10, 2009)

Green Cross said:


> The Devil would like you to believe there is no devil.
> 
> What I am more interested in is why someone would waste so much time trying to disprove Christianity?


What's that against 2000 years of the church trying to prove their view to the world......?? Much to our detriment I might add. Many have died under the weight of the cross.....many innocents have been killed. Many multitudes....


----------



## cream8 (Jul 10, 2009)

theres only 2 commandments the others are variations on those 2


----------



## g00sEgg (Jul 10, 2009)

tip top toker said:


> agreed, no devil, no god.
> 
> 10 commandments, one of which, don't work the sabbeth. go to hell yadda yadda. jesus openly breaks this commandment, picks grain, saves a goat etc etc, so jesus goes to hell. god hoever, tells jesus that he will ascend and be sat next to him etc in heaven, but if jesus is in hell, then the always-correct god, is also down in hell, as he's got to be sat there for jesus to sit beside him. god also calls it his kingdom, so therefore god is in hell in his kingdom. god is the devil. jesus is god is the holy spirit is one. jesus is the devil. heaven is hell. the whole thing is one big evil
> 
> shazam, a book in the works!


Yes, it's retarded.

After 4 years of religion classes, you'd think i'd be a jesus freak...but it just made me realize how crazy people really are...to believe the craziness that's in the bible...

Every church i've been too, since i was a youngin...soooo fake. I remember going to a church thing when i was around 7-8...Pastor putting his hand on people's foreheads and them falling like they were punched straight in the face....fucking ridiculous. 

Yelling out there "tongues" which is just fucking jibberish....god damn people are annoying.


----------



## tip top toker (Jul 10, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> What's that against 2000 years of the church trying to prove their view to the world......?? Much to our detriment I might add. Many have died under the weight of the cross.....many innocents have been killed. Many multitudes....


agreeeeeed.

it's the christians going rampant telling people off for sinning, saying they're right, we're wrong etc, if that's the case, you're the ones that have to prove it, not us.


----------



## cream8 (Jul 10, 2009)

Green Cross said:


> The Devil would like you to believe there is no devil.
> 
> What I am more interested in is why someone would waste so much time trying to disprove Christianity?


for the same reason why people prove and promote christianity for past thousand plus years


----------



## cbtwohundread (Jul 16, 2009)

love them and live hate and you should suely die.....devils dead...only the rightous will stand weakheart drop


----------



## g00sEgg (Jul 16, 2009)

cbtwohundread said:


> love them and live hate and you should suely die.....devils dead...only the rightous will stand weakheart drop


English please.

We don't speak tongues.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 16, 2009)

It's the idea behind the words which makes it stand out, not the other way around.

I think he may be doing the best he can tho... Cut him some slack.


----------



## 001 (Jul 25, 2009)

yeh is he not then

check this and reseach 
*The Goetia*


*The Goetia - Part One*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_gc7CubRzI


evil shit


----------



## SocataSmoker (Jul 29, 2009)

Until The Day I Die.


----------



## pillarize (Jul 30, 2009)

Yes, it's retarded.

After 4 years of religion classes, you'd think i'd be a jesus freak...but it just made me realize how crazy people really are...to believe the craziness that's in the bible...

Every church i've been too, since i was a youngin...soooo fake. I remember going to a church thing when i was around 7-8...Pastor putting his hand on people's foreheads and them falling like they were punched straight in the face....fucking ridiculous. 

Yelling out there "tongues" which is just fucking jibberish....god damn people are annoying. 

Who or what were you looking for in the bible?


----------



## g00sEgg (Jul 30, 2009)

pillarize said:


> Yes, it's retarded.
> 
> After 4 years of religion classes, you'd think i'd be a jesus freak...but it just made me realize how crazy people really are...to believe the craziness that's in the bible...
> 
> ...


Are you talking to me??

If so...please explain your question.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 30, 2009)

Superstitions rarely make sense.


----------



## pillarize (Jul 30, 2009)

goosegg...You see the bible only contains scriptures testifing of whom we ought to be seeking...not following the letter and trying to fulfil that which is written.

what you've seen in churches is exalctly what following the flesh is...there is a spirit given to those that believe...of which when given all scripture is inspired by God alone.

God is an understanding that is of a sound mind and love.


----------



## wm2009 (Jul 30, 2009)

SocataSmoker said:


> Until The Day I Die.


Modern masons are fanatical scum that doesn't deserve any attention...


----------



## g00sEgg (Jul 30, 2009)

pillarize said:


> goosegg...You see the bible only contains scriptures testifing of whom we ought to be seeking...not following the letter and trying to fulfil that which is written.
> 
> what you've seen in churches is exalctly what following the flesh is...there is a spirit given to those that believe...of which when given all scripture is inspired by God alone.
> 
> God is an understanding that is of a sound mind and love.


Eh...probably not. Believe what you want.

I believe in god as much as i believe in santa...sorry...


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 30, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> Eh...probably not. Believe what you want.
> 
> I believe in god as much as i believe in santa...sorry...


I guess we will all know at some time or another. Most likely at death.

Seek the truth with a true heart.

As for me, I will praise the origin of all true and real love while I am here. And there is no love greater than when one lays down his life for his friends.


----------



## shroomer33 (Jul 30, 2009)

001 said:


> yeh is he not then
> 
> check this and reseach
> *The Goetia*
> ...


Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of his work with the Necronomicon ever brought anything forth. He tried opening the first gate with no luck.

I'd like to see some of these atheistic people on this board sit in this guy's circle while he summons demons. (Not that they'd materialize with profane eyes upon them. But hey, what do I know?)


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 31, 2009)

Exactly....what do you know.


----------



## pillarize (Jul 31, 2009)

If there is faith...the truth will be given...an evidence of Gods existence.


----------



## cbtwohundread (Jul 31, 2009)

those who have eyes to see let them see,,, those who have ears to hear let them.........

most people who dont believe in a higher power,,,,see and blind,hear and deaf,,,,they shall not see god,,,i see him everyday in the trees,clouds,sun moon and stars.....

and yes there is no devil,hes dead,,,under my foot,,i am gabriel come to slay the dragon


----------



## cbtwohundread (Jul 31, 2009)

pillarize,,,,wat more proof do u need besides the spirit u have now,,,????thats like telling your mother u need proof she loves you,,,wat proof?????


----------



## g00sEgg (Jul 31, 2009)

cbtwohundread said:


> those who have eyes to see let them see,,, those who have ears to hear let them.........
> 
> most people who dont believe in a higher power,,,,see and blind,hear and deaf,,,,they shall not see god,,,i see him everyday in the trees,clouds,sun moon and stars.....
> 
> and yes there is no devil,hes dead,,,under my foot,,i am gabriel come to slay the dragon


Sounds to me like you're smokin' some good shit.

Personally, i believe, if there was a "god"...would he have really put me through what he did? If he loves me sooo much...would he have given me cancer? Along with all of the other thousands of people that die every fucking day...

If there is a god...personally, i wouldn't think he really gives a shit.


----------



## CrackerJax (Jul 31, 2009)

Those prone to hallucinate will see and hear things. 

Those not prone to hallucinations will be free from skewed vision and hearing.


Sounds about right to me.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 1, 2009)

There is a God
Not believing in Him doesnt change the fact


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 1, 2009)

No facts are in evidence.....sorry.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 1, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> No facts are in evidence.....sorry.


haha.... you wish

sorry buddy, but there is more evidence to support the existance of Jesus than there is of Gangus Khan or Socrates. But I dont see you saying neither of them existed.
You have a hatred for Jesus and therefore you do not have an open mind. Any proof of His existance will immediately be disreguarded because your mind is already closed.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 1, 2009)

just look at your sig cracker...
its obvious that you have hatred in your heart for any religion


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 1, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> just look at your sig cracker...
> its obvious that you have hatred in your heart for any religion


I thought there was supposed to be a difference between Jesus and God.

dur


----------



## pillarize (Aug 1, 2009)

pillarize,,,,wat more proof do u need besides the spirit u have now,,,????thats like telling your mother u need proof she loves you,,,wat proof????? 

The truth given by the Spirit of God.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 1, 2009)

There should be a TV show called "Christians say the darndest things". You both would make for great entertainment.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 1, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> haha.... you wish
> 
> sorry buddy, but there is more evidence to support the existance of Jesus than there is of Gangus Khan or Socrates. But I dont see you saying neither of them existed.
> You have a hatred for Jesus and therefore you do not have an open mind. Any proof of His existance will immediately be disreguarded because your mind is already closed.


It is unfair to compare jesus to ghengis Khan or socrates, since they were true historical figures with many many references from DIFFERENT sources confirming their identities and deeds. There are NO corroborating references for jesus. 



jenni8675309 said:


> just look at your sig cracker...
> its obvious that you have hatred in your heart for any religion


No, My sig is based upon FACT. Most religions end up out of favor at some point and then drift into accepted myth. Christianity will follow as sure as the sun sets. Hopefully it will end the day of cult beliefs.....I hope.


----------



## strangerdude562 (Aug 1, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite).
> 
> God gave us free will and by His Will, we are free to think what we wish. So we have chosen to forsake God in search of our bodily pleasures.
> 
> ...



There is no god either.....


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 1, 2009)

My mother was there for me when I needed her. God wasn't. That's how I know.


----------



## pot scott (Aug 1, 2009)

obviously there is no devil, its just a scare tactic so churches can bank!


----------



## strangerdude562 (Aug 1, 2009)

And touch your children.


----------



## pot scott (Aug 1, 2009)

strangerdude562 said:


> And touch your children.


hey now! thats jus catholics


----------



## cbtwohundread (Aug 1, 2009)

gooseegg....every man thinks his burden is the heaviest,,,,u think god supposed to swoop down and heal u,of ur cancer ???thats the problem with people,,,life is for suffering,,,u get paid for the work u perform,,,ur shell is sick,,,but u let it affect ur spirit,,,i could be sitting here with nothing but one eye to see, and one tooth to chew and rastafari i will praise,,,,life is a bumpy road but i love the ride so....my grandma passed from lung cancer in my arms,,,,i was screaming and crying and praying and she said"be quiet your gonna scare the kids,its all right",,,i was more scare than her and i am perfectly fine,,,i guess some people talk to god while god tries to talk to some people


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 1, 2009)

Yes, it's the perfect slave religion. You get paid when ur ded....


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 1, 2009)

cbtwohundread said:


> gooseegg....every man thinks his burden is the heaviest,,,,u think god supposed to swoop down and heal u,of ur cancer ???thats the problem with people,,,life is for suffering,,,u get paid for the work u perform,,,ur shell is sick,,,but u let it affect ur spirit,,,i could be sitting here with nothing but one eye to see, and one tooth to chew and rastafari i will praise,,,,life is a bumpy road but i love the ride so....my grandma passed from lung cancer in my arms,,,,i was screaming and crying and praying and she said"be quiet your gonna scare the kids,its all right",,,i was more scare than her and i am perfectly fine,,,i guess some people talk to god while god tries to talk to some people


I'm gonna unsubscribe this thread...i really don't need people preaching to me. 

I believe what i believe...and I'm happy in life, isn't that what matters?

peace


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> It is unfair to compare jesus to ghengis Khan or socrates, since they were true historical figures with many many references from DIFFERENT sources confirming their identities and deeds. There are NO corroborating references for jesus.


It is more than fair to compare Jesus to Khan and Socrates, as there is MORE evidence to support the existance of Jesus, than there is of either of them.

Ive seen you post numerous times that there is no evidence and blah blah blah, even after Ive given you links and referrences to back up His existance.

Like I said, your closed minded mentality will prevent you from seeing anything except for what you want to see. Open your mind my friend, take the red pill 

And why should you discredit the validity of the bible? Do you have any idea what historical documents are? The bible was not written by a single person, or a single group. It is a collection of over a hundred different authors.

Further, the vast majority of scholars will grant that the Epistles of Paul were in fact written by Paul in the middle of the first century A.D., less than 40 years after Jesus' death. In terms of ancient manuscript evidence, this is extraordinarily strong proof of the existence of a man named Jesus in Israel in the early first century A.D.

It is also important to recognize that in A.D. 70, the Romans invaded and destroyed Jerusalem and most of Israel, slaughtering its inhabitants. Entire cities were literally burned to the ground. We should not be surprised, then, if much evidence of Jesus' existence was destroyed. Many of the eyewitnesses of Jesus would have been killed. These facts likely limited the amount of surviving eyewitness testimony of Jesus.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 2, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> It is more than fair to compare Jesus to Khan and Socrates, as there is MORE evidence to support the existance of Jesus, than there is of either of them.
> 
> Ive seen you post numerous times that there is no evidence and blah blah blah, even after Ive given you links and referrences to back up His existance.
> 
> ...


The bible is simply a book of stories...nothing more. Think about it...back in the day when the average life span was around 30-35 you got people living thousands of years. More like fairy tales...


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

If you dont want to discuss the validity of the bible, with books from the bible, I understand.
From here on out, I will only use secular historical documents.

The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the more accurate historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious &#8220;Christians&#8221; (from _Christus_, which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (_Annals_ 15.44).

Flavius Josephus is the most famous Jewish historian. In his _Antiquities_ he refers to James, &#8220;the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.&#8221; &#8220;At this time there was a wise man named Jesus. His conduct was good and [he] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who became his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.&#8221;

Julius Africanus quotes the historian Thallus in a discussion of the darkness which followed the crucifixion of Christ (_Extant Writings_, 1.

_The Babylonian Talmud_ (Sanhedrin 43a) confirms Jesus' crucifixion on the eve of Passover and the accusations against Christ of practicing sorcery and encouraging Jewish apostasy.

Lucian of Samosata was a second-century Greek writer who admits that Jesus was worshiped by Christians, introduced new teachings, and was crucified for them. He said that Jesus' teachings included the brotherhood of believers, the importance of conversion, and the importance of denying other gods. Christians lived according to Jesus&#8217; laws, believed themselves to be immortal, and were characterized by contempt for death, voluntary self-devotion, and renunciation of material goods.



I have more, plenty more. But Im sure youre not planning on reading them.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> The bible is simply a book of stories...nothing more. Think about it...back in the day when the average life span was around 30-35 you got people living thousands of years. More like fairy tales...


 haha, I thought you unsubscribed.
welcome back, its good to have you here.



I believe the subject at the moment is confirming the existance of Jesus.
You dont have to believe he is Christ, or the son of God. But yes, a man named Jesus did infact walk the earth.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 2, 2009)

And guess what...hundreds of thousands still walk the earth today! Whoaaaaaaaa!


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 2, 2009)

Those are complete and utter BS sources....

No one outside the Bible ever mentions jesus by name, and most especially NO ONE ever spoke of miracles or surviving a three day crucifixion. 

What drivel of a religious novella did you pull that from?


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Those are complete and utter BS sources....
> 
> No one outside the Bible ever mentions jesus by name, and most especially NO ONE ever spoke of miracles or surviving a three day crucifixion.
> 
> What drivel of a religious novella did you pull that from?


Complete and udder bs sources?
Thats all I ever hear from you.... Bs this, bs that. Thats all you have


After I give you *real people, not in the bible, who mention Jesus,* you still say they dont exist either....

According to you, not only does Jesus not exist, but neither do any of the people I mentioned earlier...

Talking to you is like 

Its cool though, nothin but love here 

Here are some links for you, enjoy

Roman Tacitus http://www.roman-emperors.org/tacitus.htm
Flavius Josephus http://www.answers.com/topic/josephus
Lucian has about 150 manuscripts http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/lucian/lucian_intro.htm


btw, have you heard about the jewish mishna? its not in the bible either


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 2, 2009)

Its funny that all of those references sound like what somone would say who went to bible college. Dont you think theres a reason why we learn about genghis khan and socrates in our public education and not this idiot jesus? The man did more harm to the world than we'll ever know.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Its funny that all of those references sound like what somone would say who went to bible college. Dont you think theres a reason why we learn about genghis khan and socrates in our public education and not this idiot jesus? The man did more harm to the world than we'll ever know.


sorry, never went to bible college.
nor is it my intent to attack anyones personals belief. I think we should try to love everyone, reguardless of race, religion, or pollitics. 
one love as bob marley said. 
it is however my intention to prove that Jesus did infact exist. which crackerjax still denies 
Hate Jesus or love Him, the choice is yours and I love you reguardless


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 2, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> The bible is simply a book of stories...nothing more. Think about it...back in the day when the average life span was around 30-35 you got people living thousands of years. More like fairy tales...


The Bible has characteristics of supernatural engineering.
It writes the future from the past. Therefore, its origin is outside of time and physics as we know it. 

It is not just a book of stories. Mother goose is a book of stories. Mother goose does not predict the future, nor does Mother Goose have multidimensional codes and structures contained within it, like the Bible does. Also, no other 'holy' books contain such structure.

What is contained in the Bible is beyond coincidence and human engineering.

Don't worry, you'll understand sooner or later. It is all up to you.

And you can't say you weren't warned.

As a sidenote, it doesn't matter what we sit around and tell each other what we think. For in the end, there is no denying the Truth!


----------



## fish601 (Aug 2, 2009)

pillarize said:


> Yes, it's retarded.
> 
> After 4 years of religion classes, you'd think i'd be a jesus freak...but it just made me realize how crazy people really are...to believe the craziness that's in the bible...
> 
> ...


 
you know not every church is like that.. alot of that bull is just for show.. like about 99% of those tv preachers are there just for money.. look for a real church not a money making church


----------



## fish601 (Aug 2, 2009)

One page i like is http://gotquestions.org/Does-God-exist.html


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 2, 2009)

*Tacitus: Not one word of what you said was in that link.


Flavius Josephus: This is directly from your link. I hope you realize what they mean by this statement...

Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews (ca. 93), in 20 volumes, outlines the history of the Jews from creation to the revolt. Its laudation of John the Baptist, Jesus, and James is deemed to be a 3d-century interpolation by a Christian.* 
*
Lucian: Again,this is directly from your link..... get a grip and do some research.

Rightly to understand and appreciate Lucian, one must recognise that he was not a philosopher nor even a moralist, but a rhetorician, that his mission in life was not to reform society nor to chastise it, but simply to amuse it.*


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 2, 2009)

fish601 said:


> you know not every church is like that.. alot of that bull is just for show.. like about 99% of those tv preachers are there just for money.. look for a real church not a money making church


Exactly!
Also, the Bible even says that the love of money is the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:10).
SO...
If Christianity is 'all about money', which I always hear uninformed, simple people spout, why does the Bible preach against the love of money?
Please people, think deeper


----------



## fish601 (Aug 2, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> Exactly!
> Also, the Bible even says that the love of money is the root of all evil.
> SO...
> If Christianity is 'all about money', which I always hear uninformed, simple people spout, why does the Bible preach against the love of money?
> Please people, think deeper


Christianity is not all about money.. i think you missed my point.
I was responding to the guy that said "Pastor putting his hand on people's foreheads and them falling like they were punched straight in the face....fucking ridiculous" thats all for show they do it for money there is a scripture in the bible that says 
*Matthew 7:21-23**21* "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. *22* Many will say to me on that day, *'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'* *23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'* 
You see these people are not real christians they just used the name of Jesus


----------



## fish601 (Aug 2, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> My mother was there for me when I needed her. God wasn't. That's how I know.


 
If your mother wasnt there when you needed her does that mean she didnt exist?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 2, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> The bible is simply a book of stories...nothing more. Think about it...back in the day when the average life span was around 30-35 you got people living thousands of years. More like fairy tales...


 
not real sure what your talking about but let me try..
before the flood of noah people lived for a very long time.. after the flood the life span of people got shorter and shorter, my guess is it had something to do with the flood.. not really a good answer its just what i gatherd from reading the bible


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 2, 2009)

The church has always been about money. Who do you think financed all those trips of colonial pillaging? They say that they aren't _NOW_ because the money system is ripe and already set up. Start siphoning away the church's wealth (paying taxes would be a nice start) and watch them squeal.....


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> *Tacitus: Not one word of what you said was in that link.*
> 
> 
> *Flavius Josephus: This is directly from your link. I hope you realize what they mean by this statement...*
> ...


 
my point was simple, but I think you missed it.

you incorrectly claim that there is no evidence of Jesus outside the bible. even though there are many people who have written about Him

Personally, I dont care if Lucian was a rhetorician, it doesnt negate the fact he wrote about about Jesus.
as far as Joseph being a christian, why would that contradict anything?
and Tacitus, yes, he is real, yes he wrote about the crucification of Jesus.

also, I didnt see you say anything about the Jewish Mishna? Or do you think it doesnt exist either?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 2, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> my point was simple, but I think you missed it.
> 
> you incorrectly claim that there is no evidence of Jesus outside the bible. even though there are many people who have written about Him
> 
> ...


No, you missed the entire point. Your references are not historical, but allegorical. Even if I was to accept that ANY of those far flung references are about THE Jesus Christ, where's the meat? There's no story...just a recognition of a life lived. No miracles, no big follower throngs, nothing. 

Then throw into the mix the scrolls of Essene which were in fact written by true scribes (historians). They were doing the recording in a monastery 20 miles from Jerusalem, and yet, not a word of Jesus. Like he never existed. These scrolls are dated from 50BC to 50 AD, and yet...nothing.

That's the trouble with myths....unprovable.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 2, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> No, you missed the entire point. Your references are not historical, but allegorical. Even if I was to accept that ANY of those far flung references are about THE Jesus Christ, where's the meat? There's no story...just a recognition of a life lived. No miracles, no big follower throngs, nothing.
> 
> Then throw into the mix the scrolls of Essene which were in fact written by true scribes (historians). They were doing the recording in a monastery 20 miles from Jerusalem, and yet, not a word of Jesus. Like he never existed. These scrolls are dated from 50BC to 50 AD, and yet...nothing.
> 
> That's the trouble with myths....unprovable.


Wait, so because a few guys didnt mention Jesus in some scroll that is your proof He never existed?
With that logic, I dont exist either, as my neighbor never wrote a book about me. Even though other people have seen me, written about me, and documented my birth.
And dont forget who and when these Essene guys were around. If you read your own post, you will find that they were writting before Jesus was born. How can they write about about Jesus when He wasnt even born yet?
Also, arent they the ones responsible for the dead sea scrolls? Which actually proves my point more than yours.


----------



## pillarize (Aug 2, 2009)

Thing is the devil is the heart of man in unbelief towards God...even if they believe in the bible.

You see the bible is in the hands of God and under the authority of his Christ...whos Christ...the truth or Spirit of GOd.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 2, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> The church has always been about money. Who do you think financed all those trips of colonial pillaging? They say that they aren't _NOW_ because the money system is ripe and already set up. Start siphoning away the church's wealth (paying taxes would be a nice start) and watch them squeal.....


 
I dont believe the church has allways been about money but it does take money to run one
I am a christian and it makes me mad to see all those guys on tv asking for money saying you will get healed or even recieve 100x the money back its a scam and they know it.. I give money to my church a church i trust and i do see them waist some of it but i give because i love God and they help alot of needy people with it


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 2, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> Wait, so because a few guys didnt mention Jesus in some scroll that is your proof He never existed?
> With that logic, I dont exist either, as my neighbor never wrote a book about me. Even though other people have seen me, written about me, and documented my birth.
> And dont forget who and when these Essene guys were around. If you read your own post, you will find that they were writting before Jesus was born. How can they write about about Jesus when He wasnt even born yet?
> Also, arent they the ones responsible for the dead sea scrolls? Which actually proves my point more than yours.


Listen UP! It's not just a few. The Essene monastery was basically a recording studio for that area, and about the only historical documents in the supposed time of Jesus. Absolutely nothing..... that certainly means something. 

If Jesus was all that and did indeed perform miracles in front of MANY MANY people, it would have been noted, certainly. It was not.

In fact, the message of Jesus disappeared for decades after his supposed existence. How could that be? Something truly as miraculous as Jesus, and poof, as soon as he's gone, so is his teachings. 

The Jesus myth has all the trappings of hindsight writing. The entire New testament is filled with hindsight allegories. 

Jesus made no imprint on history.


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 3, 2009)

Hey Cracker whats up man? And whats the deal with your avatar? You know I liked looking that beautiful, big breasted, beer drinking chick  haha j/k

Anyways I just thought Id drop my $.02 Actually, Id just like to repeat some of what was already said.

There are many many people who infact did write about Jesus, and yes they are all not in the bible (like you requested.) Jenni only mentioned a handful of them. 
Lets focus on Josephus and The Essene Monastary



jenni8675309 said:


> The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the more accurate historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious Christians (from _Christus_, which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (_Annals_ 15.44).
> 
> Flavius Josephus is the most famous Jewish historian. In his _Antiquities_ he refers to James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ. At this time there was a wise man named Jesus. His conduct was good and [he] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who became his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.


 
Cracker, I am glad you brought up the subject of The Essene Monastary.
You are right, they were kinda like the recording studio for that era. But did you know *Josephus Flavius was actually one of the contempararies of the first century Essene? *


CrackerJax said:


> Then throw into the mix the scrolls of Essene which were in fact written by true scribes (historians). They were doing the recording in a monastery 20 miles from Jerusalem, and yet, not a word of Jesus. Like he never existed. These scrolls are dated from 50BC to 50 AD, and yet...nothing.


Let me copy and paste for you.....

We will begin with two ancient scholars, both of whom were contemporaries of the first century Essenes: Josephus Flavius and Philo of Alexandria. Josephus, born at Jerusalem in 37 A.D., was the greatest historian of the Jews in that period. Philo was the greatest Jewish philosopher of that period. Both men had personal knowledge of the ancient Essenes; thus, what they tell us has a high degree of credibility. In regard to the origin of the Essenes, neither Josephus nor Philo can give a specific date, but both make clear that the Essenian roots are incredibly ancient. Josephus declares that the Essenes have existed *"from time immemorial"* and *"countless generations"*. Philo agrees, calling the Essenes *"the most ancient of all the initiates"* with a *"teaching perpetuated through an immense space of ages"*. Josephus and Philo -- as well as several other ancient writers including Pliny the Elder -- are in consensus on two points in regard to the origin of the Essenes:​ 

Also, a direct quote from Josephus Flavius in his book antiquties

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. - Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 


And lets not forget about those damn rulers trying to wipe out a nations existance. Jenni is right again, 



jenni8675309 said:


> It is also important to recognize that in A.D. 70, the Romans invaded and destroyed Jerusalem and most of Israel, slaughtering its inhabitants. Entire cities were literally burned to the ground. We should not be surprised, then, if much evidence of Jesus' existence was destroyed. Many of the eyewitnesses of Jesus would have been killed. These facts likely limited the amount of surviving eyewitness testimony of Jesus.


 

We can still be friends right?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

He may have been a contemporary, but he was not a scribe recording events in that area. The Essene monastery was. 

So basically any mere mention of A person named Jesus or Christ (there were volumes of declared Christs by the way....volumes). then it is validation, but all of the EMPTY SILENCE of his existence by the actual recorders of events of the time period gets ignored!! How convenient.

Again, how is it that any reference is merely a snippet of info. No detail, no miracles, no upending in Jerusalem, other than the norm that is.

There would be OVERWHELMING proof of his existence if he was indeed real.....


PS u r like the 9th person to complain about my missing lady... She'll be back...promise.


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> He may have been a contemporary, but he was not a scribe recording events in that area. The Essene monastery was.


Did you even read my post?

*Josephus Flavius was a scribe for the Essene Monastary*

Josephus and Philo of Alexandria were the two most notable scribes of that time.

Its also important to understand that Josephus was NOT a christian. Infact, he witnessed the destruction of the holy temple under the command of Roman commander Titus.


----------



## Bud Frosty (Aug 3, 2009)

*The bible has one fatal flaw:*

*It was written by men.*


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

bigtomatofarmer said:


> Did you even read my post?
> 
> *Josephus Flavius was a scribe for the Essene Monastary*
> 
> ...


thanks btf.
I got excited when crackerjax mentioned The Essene Monastary. Its like he wanted to help me prove my case. 

Anyways, I dont think people like to read. So here is a short video
[youtube]zaehE_3MN8M[/youtube]


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

So let me get this straight?! You are saying that one of the scribes recorded it but not in the scrolls? That was not how it was done back then.....

Sounds very very fishy to me. Source that for me.

nevermnd, i sourced it. Josephus was not a scribe but did visit and write about the essenian lifestyle. that does not make him a scribe. That does not validate his writings. Where's the witness testimony? Everything which is supposed to be absolutely TRUE is non verifiable. Is that any way to run a religion...of truth?


----------



## pot scott (Aug 3, 2009)




----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

OMG!! Not only can you not read, but you cant watch a video either. Ive given you plenty of evidence, numerous times.
Maybe you can do both, but you cant admit when your wrong, Maybe you're a man??

Pontius Pilate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate

Flavius Joseph http://reluctant-messenger.com/josephus.htm

Book 15 of the _Annals_(written _c._ 116) by the Roman historian Tacitus mentions Christus as a person convicted by Pontius Pilate during Tiberius' reign
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Jesus



And if the Essene never believed in Jesus, tell my why there are modern day Essene Churches whom recognize Jesus as Christ?
Here is a quote from the modern day Essene

"We believe that Yeshua is the Son of God and that His demonstration while here on earth is a perfect example for all to follow. We believe that Yeshua was crucified and was resurrected on the third day."

http://biblesabbath.blogspot.com/2008/09/modern-essenes.html
http://www.churchofjerusalem.org/


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

And yet no sources at the SOURCE!!! Classic history rewriting techniques!

Pontius never mentions it back to Rome...certainly that would have occurred....and yet... only third party writings can be had..... stinky fish myth.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 3, 2009)

who cares...i don't think your changing anyone's mind. Taker your bible psycho babble somewhere else. why do people insist in driving their beliefs into others?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

Because Christianity is a *CULT* religion. Their belief isn't enough...you must believe as well.


----------



## pillarize (Aug 3, 2009)

God is not mocked...whatsoever a man sows that shall he reap.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> And yet no sources at the SOURCE!!! Classic history rewriting techniques!
> 
> Pontius never mentions it back to Rome...certainly that would have occurred....and yet... only third party writings can be had..... stinky fish myth.


Funny, even after I give you sources, quotes, links, video you still reject the truth.
Like I said before, your mind is already closed, and therefore you will disreguard anything you dont want to hear.
It is impossible to have an intellegent conversation with you because you always resort to insults and attacks, much like a child in self defense. 







g00sEgg said:


> who cares...i don't think your changing anyone's mind. Taker your bible psycho babble somewhere else. why do people insist in driving their beliefs into others?


I think you're right. It doesnt seem like crackerjax is budging. Also, I have no bible psycho babble.... as every refference has been proof that exists outside the bible.
Never one time have I tried to sway your belief system. I have said before that it is *your decision. *I am strictly talking from a historians perspective, not a religious one. as I said before......


jenni8675309 said:


> haha, I thought you unsubscribed.
> welcome back, its good to have you here.
> 
> 
> ...


 
I am a historian and the ignorance of people who refuse to research the truth really bugs me. 
I guess ignorance is bliss


----------



## pillarize (Aug 3, 2009)

Sure its written by man...but it was God's understanding in them.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

Jenni, you like the Bible i can see that. In some ways you must NEED the Bible. So be it. But how much of the Bible do you really know? I will now give you a video which ONLY sources the Bible verse.....

Let's see how good of a Christian you really are...or maybe you are just another poser who likes to belong. Let's see.... let's see if you can really be a REAL Christian.

[youtube]vkXOwBIRX7Y[/youtube]


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

DONT CHANGE THE SUBJECT, lets try to stay on track.... for the moment

Who said anything about the bible? I didnt... why would you assume? And church? When did I say anything about church? I didnt, you are assuming and judging me.

I have only mentioned sources outside of the bible.....

So you are wrong again. 

We were talking about a man who walked the earth, His name was Jesus. So far that is ALL you know about me. 

Dont go judging me, as you will condemn yourself like you condem "church people" you hate so much


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

Hahah couldn't get through it? I thought not...too logical?

All of your beliefs stem from the Bible... Take it away and what do you have? Nothing....


Back to Josephus...hmm..
Writings like Josephus&#8217; &#8220;Antiquities of the Jews&#8221; that mention Jesus were copied exclusively by Christian scribes. Most scholars now agree that the major portion of this text that discusses Jesus was falsified by scribes who were probably surprised by the suspiciously few mentions of their savior in such histories, and attempted to correct the obvious oversight. There are no credible sources that can be used to show that the Jesus of the bible ever existed, that the identity given him is not completely contrived.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Hahah couldn't get through it? I thought not...too logical?
> 
> All of your beliefs stem from the Bible... Take it away and what do you have? Nothing....
> 
> ...


 
So, what you are saying is that Jesus never existed? Still? 
Even after all the proof I gave you. 

And quit lying... MOST SCHOLARS AGREE that Josephus is one of the most notable scholars of that time.
We will begin with two ancient scholars, both of whom were contemporaries of the first century Essenes: Josephus Flavius and Philo of Alexandria. Josephus, born at Jerusalem in 37 A.D., was the greatest historian of the Jews in that period. Philo was the greatest Jewish philosopher of that period. Both men had personal knowledge of the ancient Essenes; thus, what they tell us has a high degree of credibility. In regard to the origin of the Essenes, neither Josephus nor Philo can give a specific date, but both make clear that the Essenian roots are incredibly ancient. Josephus declares that the Essenes have existed *"from time immemorial"* and *"countless generations"*. Philo agrees, calling the Essenes *"the most ancient of all the initiates"* with a *"teaching perpetuated through an immense space of ages"*. Josephus and Philo -- as well as several other ancient writers including Pliny the Elder -- are in consensus on two points in regard to the origin of the Essenes:




Also, I already know about the scholars who discredit Josephus. Im glad you brought that up.... Here is the story


In book 18 of the Antiquities, 63-64, the text of Josephus as we have it today says:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is lawful to call him a man, for he was a performer of wonderful deeds, a teacher of such men as are happy to accept the truth. He won over many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the leading men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again on the third day, as the prophets of God had foretold these and ten thousand other wonders about him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day.'

Here is the "other" assumption
Some scholars today agree that it has been altered by early Christians seeking to 'improve' it. It seems more likely that Josephus originally wrote something like this:About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, for he was a performer of wonderful deeds, a teacher of such men as are happy to accept the truth. He won over many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the leading men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him at the first did not forsake him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day.'




either way, it proves that Jesus infact DID walk this earth


Thank you, again, for helping me prove my point.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

I have given proof upon proof. atleast 10 different sources.

You have only given me the Essene & Scholars who discredit Josephus. And I proved that both of your sources are bogus

Why cant you admit it? 

You probably dont need a map when your lost either lol


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

You have given no proof. The church has rewritten histories to fit Jesus in. All of the "sources"  mentioned were recorded by the church!!!

Still looking for an OUTSIDE source....


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> You have given no proof. The church has rewritten histories to fit Jesus in. All of the "sources"  mentioned were recorded by the church!!!
> 
> Still looking for an OUTSIDE source....


 your post is BOGUS, as usual

the dead sea scrolls prove the church did not change anything.

carbon dated before 100 B.C. and untouched until 1947


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

The dead sea scrolls talk NOTHING of Christ....nothing. I think you are confused. The dead sea scrolls were NOT tampered with....and say NOTHING of Jesus...connect the dots...

All of your sources originate from the CHURCH!!!


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

So what is that?
Crackerjax facts 0/3
Jenni facts 10/10

Sounds about right to me

Just admit it already


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

You haven't proven a thing...take a look at my video...see if you really are a Christian?


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Aug 3, 2009)

I am satisfied that there did exist a Jesus of Nazareth.

What I am looking for are *contemporary*, *independent*, sources indicating he walked on water, turned water into wine, raised the dead, rose from the dead, and ascended into the clouds. 

Operative words being contemporary *and* independent. That eliminates 'The Bible sez' as a viable response.

We need not delve into the Immaculate Conception, or Divine Rape, if you will. I think everyone can agree that Mary's story is bullshit. Naughty, naughty, Mary.


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 3, 2009)

Jenni never said anything about being a christian. I only read where she described herself as a historian.
Even after she told you that, you still assume and judge her. Whats up with that?
Jenni has given overwhelming evidence that Jesus did infact exist. And every reference is real, and outside the bible.


Also, the dead sea scrolls dont mention Jesus because they are dated before 100 B.C. Duh, before christ!!!
Which proves that the church did not change anything, before Christ and after.

Anyways Cracker, I still like you. And you dont have to bring back that old avatar either. I like it, but I understand the need to change things up from time to time.
I think about changing my avatar all the time


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 3, 2009)

i'm with jonny organic. let's see some sources that are not signed 'the church'


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

I haven't judged Jenni, just her argument, which is faulty. All references to Jesus as a person cannot be made if the Church is removed from the equation. Now who possibly would benefit from ppl believing? Who indeed. Who wrote the Bible? Who indeed.....

No, there just isn't any cause to believe in jesus supposed miracles. Miracles were thrown around back then ALL the time. People through poor diets hallucinated ALL the time. People loved to tell stories around the campfire and some persevered through time and were recorded....as stories. It is the Church who hijacked the faith through Saul to make it into a HISTORY. It is not history....they are fables, and allegorical stories of the tribes. The code of conduct is instilled in the Old testament and I'm sure you will agree, it was barbaric!


----------



## Johnny Retro (Aug 3, 2009)

Religon..The biggest cult to date


----------



## fish601 (Aug 3, 2009)

Johnny Retro said:


> Religon..The biggest cult to date


I am a christian and i agree Religon is no good


----------



## fish601 (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> You have given no proof. The church has rewritten histories to fit Jesus in. All of the "sources"  mentioned were recorded by the church!!!
> 
> Still looking for an OUTSIDE source....


 
Just gona throw this in... Can you really trust anything written in history?

for instance Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad doesnt really believe the Holocaust happend
With all the facts about it how can he deny it??
with all the facts about Jesus how can you deny him?
but i guess if you dont see the facts you just dont see them


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

Can you trust a history with one author??


----------



## blakkmask (Aug 3, 2009)

SocataSmoker said:


> Until The Day I Die.


Then we are brothers.


----------



## pot scott (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Can you trust a history with one author??


almost everything in the bible happened, it was all just changed over time for the church's benifit.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 3, 2009)

That's nice....says who? The church? There's no way of knowing....


----------



## pot scott (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> That's nice....says who? The church? There's no way of knowing....


the only thing that is actually real is ur faith in something


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 3, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Can you trust a history with one author??


Even YOU have admitted the bible has many authors. And by doing so you discredit yourself..... Again 
I swear, you flip flop more than a fish out of water



pot scott said:


> almost everything in the bible happened, it was all just changed over time for the church's benifit.


Do you remember the discussion we had earlier about the dead sea scrolls? The church didnt change anything. Google it for yourself 



CrackerJax said:


> That's nice....says who? The church? There's no way of knowing....


How much weed do you smoke? And can you send me some? Haha, seriously man, Ive given you PLENTY of links, quotes, resources.
Even YOU mentioned the Essene which proved my point even further.

I have answered ALL of your questions pertaining to the existance of Jesus. And you have not been able to discredit any of my posts with facts, links or sources. You just sit there and say, nope, that didnt happen. Nuh uh, I dont believe you. Is that all you have?
Remember when I tore your argument of the Essene into shreds?
And when you said scholars discredit Josephus Flavius I gave you a direct link to YOUR SOURCE!!! That even still proved my point they did infact believe Jesus walked the earth. They had a different view of Him, but yes even your source confirms Jesus's existance.
And what else.... Oh yeah! You said all my sources are from the bible aka church. However, not one of my sources are found in the bible. I never one time used the bible as a reference.

Ignorance is one thing, denial is another


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 4, 2009)

Jernni Jenni, so confused....

Yes, the Bible has many authors.... ANONYMOUS authors.... who's words are GOSPEL... sounds a bit ridiculous, no? Try passing that off today.

BUT, and it's a big one Jenni, BUT the church is the one that has done ALL the editing, compiling, throwing out (?), of the Gospels...... so I stand by my post. It is not relevant how many different authors if it is all being controlled by ONE agent, the church, who just coincidentally has amassed a HUGE fortune with that CONTROL. Wake up jenni.....

The Essene scrolls prove MY point Jenni. How hard is it for you to understand? There is NO RECORD of Jesus in the Essene scrolls. That doesn't help you dear. It works AGAINST your argument.... In a very damning way as well.

I have already knocked down your sources, which again have been funneled through the church and rewriting of history has already been established by many scholars. The church has been found guilty of this many times, and yet, you believe each rewrite. Why not though, you accept the VERSION of the Bible, no? 

I dare say, you will never see the true Bible....

You don't seem to know the history of what you believe in...

Everything about Jesus died with him (supposedly died,existed). All that great stuff and momentous occasions and POOF...no more religion after his death. Nothing about anything for DECADES. Then a guy named Saul, who never met jesus, writes all of this stuff about a new religion. He never heard of mary, he never heard of the Nativity, he never heard of miracles, never heard of the entrance into Jerusalem.....amazing lack of recall, and yet..... (to be continued)


----------



## pot scott (Aug 4, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Jernni Jenni, so confused....
> 
> Yes, the Bible has many authors.... ANONYMOUS authors.... who's words are GOSPEL... sounds a bit ridiculous, no? Try passing that off today.
> 
> ...


just face it, jesus was an alien/human hybrid who possesed extra terrestrial powers


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 4, 2009)

Since any entity of this universe must obey physics.....I must disagree. The miracles are outside the universal laws, so it is safe to conclude they never happened. Notice how none happen today? 

Just walk around and try and start a new religion using the Jesus model..... see what happens to you. Padded room is all you will receive. Back then, nutty stories were accepted. They didn't know what nutrition was, nor vitamins. hallucinations were considered REAL....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 4, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Can you trust a history with one author??


 
I didnt read all the post but are you talking about the bible?
It wasnt one author 40 different human authors contributed to the Bible, which was written over a period of about 1500 years. http://gotquestions.org/what-is-the-Bible.html

Non-biblical accounts of New Testament events and/or people http://www.carm.org/christianity/bible/non-biblical-accounts-new-testament-events-andor-people


----------



## fish601 (Aug 4, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> The miracles are outside the universal laws, so it is safe to conclude they never happened. Notice how none happen today?


 
May i ask you how you know that none happen today? I will answer for you..
You dont know 
How can you know? I dont even know what goes on at my neighbors house much less what goes on all around the world


----------



## fish601 (Aug 4, 2009)

pot scott said:


> almost everything in the bible happened, it was all just changed over time for the church's benifit.


 

http://www.biblestudy.org/maturart/is-bible-the-word-of-god/chapter4.html

really i guess you dont have to believe all this and if you cared a simple search would answer all your questions




.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 4, 2009)

fish601 said:


> May i ask you how you know that none happen today? I will answer for you..
> You dont know
> How can you know? I dont even know what goes on at my neighbors house much less what goes on all around the world


So, in light of the accepted fact that both you and I cannot KNOW what is going on somewhere else.... outrageous stories should be given the highest scrutiny. Religion abhors scrutiny and always end up saying...."you can't question my faith", or "it's all based on faith". Now I don't have a problem with the faith bit. I do have a problem with people who try to pass off the Bible as a historical document. It is not. And without the Bible, there is no Jesus. Heck, he was forgotten, even according TO the Bible, pretty much as soon as he died. In the end Jesus' movement (one of many by many others) was a failure. Certainly Saul did not represent jesus well, but unfortunately for believers is the main foundation of text from which all the other gospels spring forth. It forced the FUTURE gospel authors to inject Jesus (complete hearsay or plain made up) back into the gospels. 

But it was Saul's version which Constantine adopted. Old Constantine knew a good slave religion when he saw it. Christianity just calls out for people to bend over and take it. Of course the early church didn't stress love too much...more like fire and brimstone to gain control...at any cost. 

So you end up with a religion born from authoritarian rule, coupled with a text which is half stolen and the rest made up! There's not one original idea in the Bible.

Besides, none of you REALLY follow the Bible...so it's all a moot point.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 4, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> So, in light of the accepted fact that both you and I cannot KNOW what is going on somewhere else.... outrageous stories should be given the highest scrutiny. Religion abhors scrutiny and always end up saying...."you can't question my faith", or "it's all based on faith". Now I don't have a problem with the faith bit. I do have a problem with people who try to pass off the Bible as a historical document. It is not. And without the Bible, there is no Jesus. Heck, he was forgotten, even according TO the Bible, pretty much as soon as he died. In the end Jesus' movement (one of many by many others) was a failure. Certainly Saul did not represent jesus well, but unfortunately for believers is the main foundation of text from which all the other gospels spring forth. It forced the FUTURE gospel authors to inject Jesus (complete hearsay or plain made up) back into the gospels.
> 
> But it was Saul's version which Constantine adopted. Old Constantine knew a good slave religion when he saw it. Christianity just calls out for people to bend over and take it. Of course the early church didn't stress love too much...more like fire and brimstone to gain control...at any cost.
> 
> ...


You can put your own twist on anything and thats fine. you are saying they did it i am saying you are doing it.

as far as none of you REALLY follow the Bible i totally agree with you.
you cant look at a christian and judge the bible or his God

You said "* I do have a problem with people who try to pass off the Bible as a historical document. It is not."*
Can *YOU *tell me if these are historical documents?

http://www.carm.org/christianity/bible/can-we-trust-new-testament-historical-document





.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

So if you admit you are not following the Bible.... then what ARE you following? THE book says quite clearly that any deviation from it is FALSE. So?..... you just follow what you are told? From what source?

There is a big difference between having a book with contemporary dates and places in it and a HISTORICAL reference. The book "Gone With The Wind" took place with names and places familiar to us all as well. No one considers it to be a historical reference. Heck, we even actually kNOW who wrote it too!


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

THe history has been wrote by the winners... always... 
Pure historical facts does not exist on any book


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Since any entity of this universe must obey physics.....


Would not be so sure.....


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

wm2009 said:


> THe history has been wrote by the winners... always...
> Pure historical facts does not exist on any book


The Bible is not a history book....period. It was never written by the authors as such. Christianity is a hijacked religion in every sense of the word. Besides, even a mediocre history book has verifiable data. the Bible has NONE!! Not a history book. Just a very scary reflection of a pre science desert tribe.



wm2009 said:


> Would not be so sure.....


Then you need to get back to school. I'm sure....


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> The Bible is not a history book....period. It was never written by the authors as such. Christianity is a hijacked religion in every sense of the word. Besides, even a mediocre history book has verifiable data. the Bible has NONE!! Not a history book. Just a very scary reflection of a pre science desert tribe.
> [/QUOTE ]
> 
> 
> Maybe.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

Like I said...you need to go back to school..... Hooboy!


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Like I said...you need to go back to school..... Hooboy!



why ?
Maybe I don't need to lose time with some people...


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

Fine...shuffle off. Einstein's theory of relativity works within the laws of physics. Uhhh, where did you get your education?


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

have you heard about black holes theory ?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

Yes, and they are all within the laws of physics..... that is not to say that all the answers are in yet, they aren't. That's the WONDERFUL thing about science. But so far, science has a set of laws which are immutable. That's why "miracles" don't occur. 

Outrageous claims demand outrageous proof. One of the MANY reasons why Christianity falls on its face.


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

bla bla bla


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

I concur, and this means what to the Bible or Christianity?


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yes, and they are all within the laws of physics..... that is not to say that all the answers are in yet, they aren't. That's the WONDERFUL thing about science. But so far, science has a set of laws which are immutable. That's why "miracles" don't occur.
> 
> Outrageous claims demand outrageous proof. One of the MANY reasons why Christianity falls on its face.


don't forget about evolution...


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

You are rambling without making salient points......


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 5, 2009)

adsdfsd sdf sfdf


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

I am already quite aware of everything you posted....I'm not seeing a direction in your posts tho.... How about finishing up this convo. 

Comparing evolution to religion is a joke of the highest order. It only demonstrates the desperation of the church.


----------



## pillarize (Aug 5, 2009)

The devil has the power of death...as long as there is death...that means hes still in power.

Only one way to escape death and the grip of the devil...all doctrines and science are of the devil of which many say there is none...but yet they do his works.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

thats just ridiculous.....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> So if you admit you are not following the Bible.... then what ARE you following? THE book says quite clearly that any deviation from it is FALSE. So?..... you just follow what you are told? From what source?
> 
> There is a big difference between having a book with contemporary dates and places in it and a HISTORICAL reference. The book "Gone With The Wind" took place with names and places familiar to us all as well. No one considers it to be a historical reference. Heck, we even actually kNOW who wrote it too!


 

I am just saying noone is perfect.

And i cant believe you dont understand that page about historical references you seem alot smarter than that


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

Like I said. "Gone with the Wind" had historical references all through it. Does that make it history? Think it through.....the Bible is not a recording of history. It just isn't, and that's where the church went off the tracks...long ago. It has been corrupted ever since.

Everyone talks about the Bible but NO ONE (save some orthodox sects, slightly) follows the Bible. Why? Because it's just plain barbaric! Those were barbaric times and the stories reflect that. Nothing wrong with a little window on tribal behavior, but HARDLY a guide to live by. 

I can pick out several fables that surpass the Bibles message without all the dogma and insistence of truth.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yes, and they are all within the laws of physics..... that is not to say that all the answers are in yet, they aren't. That's the WONDERFUL thing about science. But so far, science has a set of laws which are immutable. That's why "miracles" don't occur.
> 
> Outrageous claims demand outrageous proof. One of the MANY reasons why Christianity falls on its face.


 
Miracles.... You know thats why we call him God. God is the Creator of the universe and the master of all of its laws. Who or what do you think set the laws of physics?




.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Like I said. "Gone with the Wind" had historical references all through it. Does that make it history? Think it through.....the Bible is not a recording of history. It just isn't, and that's where the church went off the tracks...long ago. It has been corrupted ever since.
> 
> Everyone talks about the Bible but NO ONE (save some orthodox sects, slightly) follows the Bible. Why? Because it's just plain barbaric! Those were barbaric times and the stories reflect that. Nothing wrong with a little window on tribal behavior, but HARDLY a guide to live by.
> 
> I can pick out several fables that surpass the Bibles message without all the dogma and insistence of truth.


Will you name me a historical document?


Guess i am not clear on what you mean by following the bible. 
We all sin the pope, me, you, everyone.


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> You are rambling without making salient points......


Are you talking about yourself here? Because as far as I can tell, you have given NO PROOF to back up any of your claims. You simply run and hide behind an attack at another persons beliefs everytime you are confronted with facts.

Furthermore, you refuse to answer any of Jenni's questions. She easily tore ALL of your arguments into pieces and you continue to refuse to answer any of hers

When you asked for sources outside of the bible, Jenni complied and gave you plenty of people. ALL of whom did exist outside of the bible, All of whom did mention Jesus...
Remeber this post??///
And dont try to tell us its bogus either, there are source references at the end of each statment if you'd like to look it up for yourself


jenni8675309 said:


> If you dont want to discuss the validity of the bible, with books from the bible, I understand.
> From here on out, I will only use secular historical documents.
> 
> The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the more accurate historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious Christians (from _Christus_, which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (_Annals_ 15.44).
> ...


 

Also, you foolishly tried to use the scrolls of the essene as a source.... Haha Im still laughing about that one... 
Did you even try to google it? If you did you would find that the Essene Monastary believes in Jesus.
here are the top search results when I typed "scrolls of the essene" on google
http://reluctant-messenger.com/essene/index.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/portrait/essenes.html
http://www.crystalinks.com/dss.html
All of which claim Jesus.


I also enjoyed it when you said that some scholars discredit Josephus's early writings because it may have been tainted by christian writers. 
But even the scholars YOU tried to use as a source give Jesus plausibility as real person. 
So even your sources prove Jesus was a real person. Remember this post by Jenni.....



jenni8675309 said:


> Also, I already know about the scholars who discredit Josephus. Im glad you brought that up.... Here is the story
> 
> 
> In book 18 of the Antiquities, 63-64, the text of Josephus as we have it today says:
> ...


My personal favorite is when you try to talk about albert einstein. 
To quote Albert Einstein himself....

"There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views." - Albert Einstein


Also, more on einstein

Were all familiar with Einsteins e=mc2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared) equation. However what most people dont know is that originally Einstein wasnt solving for e, he was solving for m so his original equation was m=e/c2 (mass equals energy divided by the speed of light squared). So what, whats the difference? With the first equation we learn how to get energy out of mass which has led, for example, to the fission of atoms and getting energy (the atomic bomb and nuclear energy). But in the second equation we learn _*how mass is created by energy*_ and that, for example, the energy generated by the blastoff of the space shuttle adds mass the weight of a flee to the shuttle. (For more authority on this idea listen to Frank Wilczek, Theoretical Physicist and Nobel Laureate at MIT, Sheldon Glashow, Theoretical Physicist and Nobel Laureate at Boston University and Albert himself!). 

Einstein uses science to prove there is more to this life than meets the eye. He himself believed in life after death based on scientific facts.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 5, 2009)

Oh then, let's stick to your fav... 

The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. 

Letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind, January 3, 1954 from Albert Einstein


----------



## fish601 (Aug 6, 2009)

I dont know anything about Einstein but i dont think you two disagree about him

you said "He himself believed in life after death based on scientific facts" BUT that doesnt mean he believes in god.
cracker said "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses.."
I dont see a problem with it... my 2 cents


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 6, 2009)

I do agree with Einsteins opinion of religion. By 1954, he had lived a life, and I think after much thought, he came to the correct conclusion.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 6, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I do agree with Einsteins opinion of religion. By 1954, he had lived a life, and I think after much thought, he came to the correct conclusion.


 
but really who cares what he thought?
he might be right he might be wrong


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 6, 2009)

His analysis is spot on. It takes a certain mental toughness to crawl out of the rabbit hole. Indoctrination is a very successful technique, as I'm sure you well know.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 6, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> His analysis is spot on. It takes a certain mental toughness to crawl out of the rabbit hole. Indoctrination is a very successful technique, as I'm sure you well know.


 
Yes it is
I think naturally people are born not believing in God we are taught evolution and big bang theory in grade school and we have to see past the so called obvious fairy tales and contradictions of the bible and our selfish unwillingness to surrender to something bigger than ourselves and change our lives in such a way that we are no longer living for ourselves but living to please God its a hard thing to do. I am glad God pulled me out of the rabbit hole.


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 7, 2009)

i'm fully iwth crackerjack on all of what he's saying.

especially in regard to miracles. looking at the "why don't miracles happen now then?" and peoples telling of "you can't know what's going on everywhere" etc, well look guys, the whole world knows when a funny shaped frog is seen ten thousand miles into a remote field. if some peasant suddenly fed ten thousand of his villagers in the desert on a packet of nuts, then proceeded to part the seas, well doesn't matter if it's not where i'm at or focused on, it's gonna be known, hell if jesus "did it" and the world knows, 2000 years on, with todays tech, the world would immediately know when a miracle happens, it would be everywere. and for those that do claim a miracle has happened, well you know the irony, i can guarantee you that the general publiuc will tell you you're a tit and to stop trying to get some twitter attention or whatnot, because we realise these days that it's not possible, due to our advances in science and understanding. they lived in the desesrt, he prolly just blew sand on them told them it was bread crumbs and paid off the guy with the manuscript! 

afterall, he couldn't follow even the most simple commandments, the most important as well, so why would he be trusted legit through and through?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

Nobody really follows the ten commandments anymore. They aren't even original in thought. Christianity brings nothing new to the table. Just remixed myths and platitudes. It's all been done before by other Myths. Myths are what they are according to the church! But not theirs...no no no. Isn't that exactly what the previous myth said about others when it was the religion? It's a carny trick of the highest order and has been going on forever. 
What is frightening is how many ppl actually believe the Bible is a true story.....scary. 

Can Armageddon happen? You bet. When you get it into mans head that something is supposed to happen, he will make sure it does happen. The religious in the end are going to try and kill everyone....mark my words. Islam, Christianity are both working towards an apocalypse. Yes, Islam has an end game too..... 

Both religions are nutty and dangerous.


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 7, 2009)

nutty and crazy alright, i'll get bloody arrested if i so much as mention the word mohammed in public or whatnot these days. it's a laugh. 

i will take the piss out of whoever i want, i don't care if he's your profet, he was a nob, or something to that extent. since everything happened, the muslim world seems to be allowed to burn places to the ground, and it's all ok, because well, we made a joke about their god etc. that's really mad.

i enjoyed the film zeitgiest, and while i have not looked into the validity of any of it's arguments, so i can't say this is how it is, how do christians explain the apparent identical "jesus story" being inscribed onto pyramids and such in eygypt thousands and thousands of years before him. and that at the end of the day he is nothing more than a metaphor for the sun. i watched it ages back, but what was said was pretty damned compelling, i just havn't read into how acurate the film portrays it.


----------



## pillarize (Aug 7, 2009)

The commandments of men are the morales of man...but the commandments of God must be revealed.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

They are a joke is what they are. If you read the Bible, no one pays attention much to the ten commandments...least of all G*D! People are killing in the name of G*D all over the place in that book. It's a horror story of primitive mysticism.

Yes, G*d's will is YET to be revealed....that's convenient.. boogedy boogedy....run children run.


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> They are a joke is what they are. If you read the Bible, no one pays attention much to the ten commandments...least of all G*D! People are killing in the name of G*D all over the place in that book. It's a horror story of primitive mysticism.
> 
> Yes, G*d's will is YET to be revealed....that's convenient.. boogedy boogedy....run children run.


what do you mean it's yet to be revealed? i thought it was upto our own interpretation ..


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 7, 2009)

People have negative/evil energy confused with the devil. Hell is what man has created here on earth and those that continue to follow this will live here eternally until they realize the errors of their ways.

Read about Babylon and the masons. They are the rulers of this materialistic world we live in, and they will continue to be long after we're gone. We have a choice to denounce these material things and realize that we're higher beings with a purpose. A purpose that isn't being realized because we're spiritually and mentally oppressed. 

The people that're above material things and realize what we truly are, will ascend to a higher level of existence.


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 7, 2009)

Operation 420 said:


> People have negative/evil energy mixed up with the devil. Hell is what man has created here on earth and those that continue to follow this will live here eternally until they realize the errors of their ways.
> 
> Read about Babylon and the masons. They are the rulers of this materialistic world we live in, and they will continue to be long after we're gone. We have a choice to denounce these material things and realize that we're higher beings with a purpose. A purpose that isn't being realized because we're spiritually and mentally oppressed.
> 
> The people that're above material things and realize what we truly are, will ascend to a higher level of existence.


So you think this world is hell ? or at least purgatory ?


"Your mind is like a parachute. It only works if it is open."
one of my favorite quotes from A.E.
I introduced him to this thread just to remind a open minded person... not as the one that knew the truth.
Who cares in what he believed?


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 7, 2009)

wm2009 said:


> So you think this world is hell ? or at least purgatory ?
> 
> 
> "Your mind is like a parachute. It only works if it is open."
> ...


The world in my eyes is mans created hell. Made through fear, hate, violence etc. only driven by greed and ego. The people that choose to leave this life behind for that will, but the "Builders" will stay. They've been here since Shinar.

I like that quote, and it's true.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 7, 2009)

Check out the documentary in this thread https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/221826-message-heart-world-pleas-watch.html. Its about a pre-columbian society who live in seclusion in the mountains of northern columbia. Its really a film beyond words. If there were a gods chosen people the kogi would certainly be them.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

_The concept of "hell' is yet again more proof of the hijacking of the Christian religion by the church. 

By examination of the Hebrew Scriptures it will be found that its radical or primary meaning is, _ _The place or state of the dead. No eternal damanation or suffering...just a place. It also means "grave". 

This got twisted by the church (on purpose) to scare the wits out of doubters. Don't forget that most ppl didn't read back then and books were only owned by the wealthy and the church. 
_


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> They are a joke is what they are. If you read the Bible, no one pays attention much to the ten commandments...least of all G*D! People are killing in the name of G*D all over the place in that book. It's a horror story of primitive mysticism.
> 
> Yes, G*d's will is YET to be revealed....that's convenient.. boogedy boogedy....run children run.


you are forgetting

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*matt 7:22* Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*7:23* And then will I profess unto them *, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. [/FONT]
not all who claim to be christians are.. if you claimed to be christian and when around killing people in the name of god does that mean christians are bad?


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 7, 2009)

fish601 said:


> you are forgetting
> 
> [FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*matt 7:22* Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*7:23* And then will I profess unto them *, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. [/FONT]
> not all who claim to be christians are.. if you claimed to be christian and when around killing people in the name of god does that mean christians are bad?


and is someone who is going around spreading good and peace a christian? maybe he's just a little insecure and is getting his rocks off one way or another. it's funny that alllll these religions, they have people who've claimed to have had some kind of encounter, maybe in their sleeeeeeeeeeeeep........ involving 'god' or something to that extent, to persuade them, that happens to revolve around the 'god' that they've been brought up around, in literature and society etc. fishy. unless it's actually the same god, which none of the religious types would agree, and if it were, then they'd all be tits for being so against the other gods......


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> _The concept of "hell' is yet again more proof of the hijacking of the Christian religion by the church. _
> 
> _By examination of the Hebrew Scriptures it will be found that its radical or primary meaning is, __The place or state of the dead. No eternal damanation or suffering...just a place. It also means "grave". _
> 
> _This got twisted by the church (on purpose) to scare the wits out of doubters. Don't forget that most ppl didn't read back then and books were only owned by the wealthy and the church. _


Lol you know just enuf to mess things up.
The old testament had no eternal damnation or suffering. And Paradise for the righteous not heaven.
If you bother to keep reading you will find out thats untill Judgment Day
where some will go to hell and others heaven...


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

tip top toker said:


> and is someone who is going around spreading good and peace a christian?


people do good all the time it doesnt make them a christian


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

fish601 said:


> Lol you know just enuf to mess things up.
> The old testament had no eternal damnation or suffering. And Paradise for the righteous not heaven.
> If you bother to keep reading you will find out thats untill Judgment Day
> where some will go to hell and others heaven...



That is not what the church teaches ... and you know it.


As for using bible quotes to prove the Bible... come off of it already....


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 7, 2009)

The kogi are a perfect example of why it doesnt even matter if christ existed or not. Its all perception.


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Aug 7, 2009)

fish601 said:


> you are forgetting
> 
> [FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*matt 7:22* Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*7:23* And then will I profess unto them *, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. [/FONT]
> not all who claim to be christians are.. if you claimed to be christian and when around killing people in the name of god does that mean christians are bad?


LOL! @ "*The Bible sez....*"


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

I'll watch it a bit later tonite... thank you for the link.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> That is not what the church teaches ... and you know it.
> 
> 
> As for using bible quotes to prove the Bible... come off of it already....


 
that is not what money making churches preach but that doesnt mean its not in the bible

only using bible quotes to show you some churches lie


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

In the end, it's all a lie, varying degrees not withstanding.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> In the end, it's all a lie, varying degrees not withstanding.


if its a lie its a lie but dont let a church or some silly preacher turn you away they could be wrong about what they say or think is in the bible


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

I'm sorry but I cannot look at a tiny portion of a pie and then decree that the entire thing is edible. The whole must be examined and the whole of Christianity is based on a farce. If it's the word of G*D.... then it needs to be 100% accurate.... why wouldn't it be? So the fact that there are lies, mistakes and downright nutty things in the Bible tends to make me believe it is NOT the word of G*D. Once that becomes clear to you... the rest falls into place. It's a primitive set of stories...just stories. What has been done with those stories though, should be a crime.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> ..The whole must be examined and the whole of Christianity is based on a farce. If it's the word of G*D.... then it needs to be 100% accurate.... why wouldn't it be? So the fact that there are lies, mistakes and downright nutty things in the Bible tends to make me believe it is NOT the word of G*D. ..


What makes you think it isnt 100% accurate? tell me some lies and mistakes
as far as nutty things sorry God didnt write it the way you would of liked.

but really do you think nothing exploded and created all this over billions of years?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

What makes you think G*D wrote it? All of it? So if I write a book and at the end declare that the entire book is absolutely true and the word of G*D.... you would accept it?  Think it through....take your time.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> What makes you think G*D wrote it? All of it? So if I write a book and at the end declare that the entire book is absolutely true and the word of G*D.... you would accept it?  Think it through....take your time.


 
nope i would test your book just like i tested the bible the alleged contradictions, mistakes, & prophecies.
if its true its true if not i would move on


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

so... nothing exploded and created you billions of years later?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

Okay, here's a quickie, but wonderfully illustrative... i can provide many many...many more.

"Love thy neighbor as thyself?" (Lev.l9:l. Mass murder is again condoned in Exodus 32:27; in Deut. 2:15-16 and 34-36 and 3:2. No "just and right" God of true peace or love could command a massacre of innocents. These are the writings and contradictions in a religious human-inspired literature coming from the biases and values of an uncivilized warrior peoples. To call this the "inspired words" of a merciful, worthy Deity should be a base insult to even the meanest intelligence.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 7, 2009)

Well, its been a few days. And I can see we have all been busy. From physics and Einstein to evolution and Saul.
Wow, thats alot of ground to cover. But I would like to begin with a quote from a liar



CrackerJax said:


> I haven't judged Jenni


Yessir as a matter of fact you have. Why would you assume anything about my religion? as I have never stated any personal belief. There are many many religions that believe Jesus was a man who did infact walk the earth. (As well as atheist historians.) Some claim He was a prophet, some say a fake, some say he was very nice. 
For all you know I could be a musslim, jew, jehova witness or many many more. Yet you call me a Christian  How would you know smart ass, it seems like you are judging me pretty well over there.

ALL of my posts have been from 100% historical documents outside of the bible. Every single post has a reference. A reference is one of those things you use to look up the original source. If you dont believe me, look it up. Are you too lazy? Or did you look it up and find out you were wrong, but just cant admit it?


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> As for using bible quotes to prove the Bible... come off of it already....


Wait, didnt you mention Saul first? And look at you now... 
How does using one of the bibles authors (Saul, author of a few books in the new testament) help disprove the bible? 
You tell me not to use the bible, and I havent, but then you go off and do it yourself....

Hmm, what thats called when you tell someone not to do somethin, and then you go and do it.... Hmmm


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

Your posts say otherwise. I can read in between the lines. So, answer me now in front of G*D (gulp)...are you a Christian?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 7, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> Wait, didnt you mention Saul first? And look at you now...
> How does using one of the bibles authors (Saul, author of a few books in the new testament) help disprove the bible?
> You tell me not to use the bible, and I havent, but then you go off and do it yourself....
> 
> Hmm, what thats called when you tell someone not to do somethin, and then you go and do it.... Hmmm



I used Saul to show the flawed time lines and stories, not as quotes.


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Your posts say otherwise. I can read in between the lines. So, answer me now in front of G*D (gulp)...are you a Christian?


Why do you want to label someone? What if she's spiritual?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Okay, here's a quickie, but wonderfully illustrative... i can provide many many...many more.
> 
> "Love thy neighbor as thyself?" (Lev.l9:l. Mass murder is again condoned in Exodus 32:27; in Deut. 2:15-16 and 34-36 and 3:2. No "just and right" God of true peace or love could command a massacre of innocents. These are the writings and contradictions in a religious human-inspired literature coming from the biases and values of an uncivilized warrior peoples. To call this the "inspired words" of a merciful, worthy Deity should be a base insult to even the meanest intelligence.


really? you really just ask that question?
what makes you think any of them are innocent? but even if.. doesnt god have a right to do what he wants to?

because you dont like it doesnt mean its not "just and right"


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 7, 2009)

fish601 said:


> What makes you think it isnt 100% accurate? tell me some lies and mistakes
> as far as nutty things sorry God didnt write it the way you would of liked.
> 
> but really do you think nothing exploded and created all this over billions of years?


 
If you think the bible is 100% accurate, the word of God, or even slightly compatable with today's moral standards, I suggest you go re-read your bible...buddy.

We do not know what happened moments before the universe came into existence, there's a million theories out there dealing with this, the big bang theory is the BEST description of how it happened, all the evidence supports what the theory says.

Do you believe a magic man created the earth and everything in the universe in 6 days, 6,000 years ago?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Do you believe a magic man created the earth and everything in the universe in 6 days, 6,000 years ago?


LOL yes 

do you know what you believe?


.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 7, 2009)

CrackerJax u gona stick to the big bang theory also?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> LOL yes
> 
> do you know what you believe?
> 
> ...


 
What do you have to support that claim?


I know exactly what I believe.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> CrackerJax u gona stick to the big bang theory also?


I'll stick to the big bang theory.
I am also a bible believing Christian. I will also say that the big bang theory is consistent with scripture. As a matter of fact, the bible actually sheds some pretty interesting light on the big bang theory. (specifically, how the universe is 13.5 billion years old and 7 days old all at the same time. I actually taught it in a few of the undergrad physics classes I taught when we covered special relativity and quantum mechanics)

There is too much that we see in the night sky that the big bang successfully explains: the Cosmic Microwave Background and its structure, the abundances of the elements, large scale structure of the universe, etc. Any other theory will have to explain these things, and I don't see any other theories that do. That isn't to say that the big bang theory is the whole truth. But I am pretty sure that it is a big piece to the puzzle of the history of our universe.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

pot scott said:


> just face it, jesus was an alien/human hybrid who possesed extra terrestrial powers


If so, who created his race?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I am already quite aware of everything you posted....I'm not seeing a direction in your posts tho.... How about finishing up this convo.
> 
> Comparing evolution to religion is a joke of the highest order. It only demonstrates the desperation of the church.


Classical Darwinism is as much of a joke as religion. Classical Darwinism IS a religion. You need to have WWAAAYYY more faith to believe that nonsense than the bible. The bible has tons of scientific evidence to back it up. Classical Darwinian 'evolution' has NONE.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

bigtomatofarmer said:


> Are you talking about yourself here? Because as far as I can tell, you have given NO PROOF to back up any of your claims. You simply run and hide behind an attack at another persons beliefs everytime you are confronted with facts.
> 
> Furthermore, you refuse to answer any of Jenni's questions. She easily tore ALL of your arguments into pieces and you continue to refuse to answer any of hers
> 
> ...


Einstein did have an extreme hatred for religion though.

I'd like to make a point here: Christianity has nothing to do with religion. IMHO, religion is mind control and slavery. Christianity is freedom from mind control and slavery.
It just happens that Mystery Babylon has taken over much of 'Christianity'.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

tip top toker said:


> i'm fully iwth crackerjack on all of what he's saying.
> 
> especially in regard to miracles. looking at the "why don't miracles happen now then?" and peoples telling of "you can't know what's going on everywhere" etc, well look guys, the whole world knows when a funny shaped frog is seen ten thousand miles into a remote field. if some peasant suddenly fed ten thousand of his villagers in the desert on a packet of nuts, then proceeded to part the seas, well doesn't matter if it's not where i'm at or focused on, it's gonna be known, hell if jesus "did it" and the world knows, 2000 years on, with todays tech, the world would immediately know when a miracle happens, it would be everywere. and for those that do claim a miracle has happened, well you know the irony, i can guarantee you that the general publiuc will tell you you're a tit and to stop trying to get some twitter attention or whatnot, because we realise these days that it's not possible, due to our advances in science and understanding. they lived in the desesrt, he prolly just blew sand on them told them it was bread crumbs and paid off the guy with the manuscript!
> 
> afterall, he couldn't follow even the most simple commandments, the most important as well, so why would he be trusted legit through and through?


Just because you don't see miracles in your life, that doesn't mean that they don't happen elsewhere on the planet. And people wouldn't be shown such miracles on television cause people wouldn't believe it.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Nobody really follows the ten commandments anymore. They aren't even original in thought. Christianity brings nothing new to the table. Just remixed myths and platitudes. It's all been done before by other Myths. Myths are what they are according to the church! But not theirs...no no no. Isn't that exactly what the previous myth said about others when it was the religion? It's a carny trick of the highest order and has been going on forever.
> What is frightening is how many ppl actually believe the Bible is a true story.....scary.
> 
> Can Armageddon happen? You bet. When you get it into mans head that something is supposed to happen, he will make sure it does happen. The religious in the end are going to try and kill everyone....mark my words. Islam, Christianity are both working towards an apocalypse. Yes, Islam has an end game too.....
> ...


Jesus broke the sabbath. He healed on the sabbath. That is one of the reasons why they wanted to kill him.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

tip top toker said:


> nutty and crazy alright, i'll get bloody arrested if i so much as mention the word mohammed in public or whatnot these days. it's a laugh.
> 
> i will take the piss out of whoever i want, i don't care if he's your profet, he was a nob, or something to that extent. since everything happened, the muslim world seems to be allowed to burn places to the ground, and it's all ok, because well, we made a joke about their god etc. that's really mad.
> 
> i enjoyed the film zeitgiest, and while i have not looked into the validity of any of it's arguments, so i can't say this is how it is, how do christians explain the apparent identical "jesus story" being inscribed onto pyramids and such in eygypt thousands and thousands of years before him. and that at the end of the day he is nothing more than a metaphor for the sun. i watched it ages back, but what was said was pretty damned compelling, i just havn't read into how acurate the film portrays it.


911 was an inside job!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> _The concept of "hell' is yet again more proof of the hijacking of the Christian religion by the church. _
> 
> _By examination of the Hebrew Scriptures it will be found that its radical or primary meaning is, __The place or state of the dead. No eternal damanation or suffering...just a place. It also means "grave". _
> 
> _This got twisted by the church (on purpose) to scare the wits out of doubters. Don't forget that most ppl didn't read back then and books were only owned by the wealthy and the church. _


You're talking about the greek word, Hades. Everlasting damnation is Gehenna. Both words are translated as 'hell', if I am not mistaken. It didn't get twisted by the church. It just got mistranslated, but luckily we have the original greek texts.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I'm sorry but I cannot look at a tiny portion of a pie and then decree that the entire thing is edible. The whole must be examined and the whole of Christianity is based on a farce. If it's the word of G*D.... then it needs to be 100% accurate.... why wouldn't it be? So the fact that there are lies, mistakes and downright nutty things in the Bible tends to make me believe it is NOT the word of G*D. Once that becomes clear to you... the rest falls into place. It's a primitive set of stories...just stories. What has been done with those stories though, should be a crime.


 
These supposed 'stories', as you love calling them, predict the future!!!!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Okay, here's a quickie, but wonderfully illustrative... i can provide many many...many more.
> 
> "Love thy neighbor as thyself?" (Lev.l9:l. Mass murder is again condoned in Exodus 32:27; in Deut. 2:15-16 and 34-36 and 3:2. No "just and right" God of true peace or love could command a massacre of innocents. These are the writings and contradictions in a religious human-inspired literature coming from the biases and values of an uncivilized warrior peoples. To call this the "inspired words" of a merciful, worthy Deity should be a base insult to even the meanest intelligence.


INNOCENT!!????
The people that God told Israel to obliterate were far from innocent!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Jenni, you like the Bible i can see that. In some ways you must NEED the Bible. So be it. But how much of the Bible do you really know? I will now give you a video which ONLY sources the Bible verse.....
> 
> Let's see how good of a Christian you really are...or maybe you are just another poser who likes to belong. Let's see.... let's see if you can really be a REAL Christian.
> 
> [youtube]vkXOwBIRX7Y[/youtube]


whoever made this video has NO CLUE what Christianity and the Bible are really about. Jesus violated the sabbath. Joshua violated the sabbath. Jesus said to cast stones if you yourself dont have sin in you. You obviously don't have the whole picture. The person who made this video, and you Mr. Jax have no clue what is going on in the Bible.
The first several examples in the video are rules for Israel because God took them out of Egypt. The thinking expressed in the video is just as the thinking of the people who killed Jesus. Jesus referred to them as children of the Devil. Again, the person who made the video, and you Mr Jax, have no clue what the bible is really about and your understanding of scripture is just as bad as the people who killed Jesus.


----------



## EMDrummer (Aug 8, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> Classical Darwinism is as much of a joke as religion. Classical Darwinism IS a religion. You need to have WWAAAYYY more faith to believe that nonsense than the bible. The bible has tons of scientific evidence to back it up. Classical Darwinian 'evolution' has NONE.


Oh wow, I can't believe you actually just said that.

First, there is ZERO evidence to back up the Bible, the best things you can back up the Bible with are all the different translations.

So you're saying it's very likely that a man lived in a fish for 3 days, a man was resurrected after 3 days of being dead, a man was born of a virgin, men commonly lived to be hundreds of years old, a big invisible man in the sky created all of the universe in 6 days.

But genetic mutation over millions of years of natural selection, THAT'S ridiculous!

To say that there is no evidence to support evolution is absurd. The process of evolution is a fact and it is what the Theory of Evolution is highly based on.



shroomer33 said:


> I'd like to make a point here: Christianity has nothing to do with religion. IMHO, religion is mind control and slavery. Christianity is freedom from mind control and slavery.
> It just happens that Mystery Babylon has taken over much of 'Christianity'.


Oh my fuck, you just get crazier and crazier with this. The main rule in Christianity is *Love God or burn in hell forever. *There sure is a lot of choice in that one.

Add the fact that there is no God or hell, and it becomes that much more ridiculous.



shroomer33 said:


> 911 was an inside job!


We're done...


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 8, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> Just because you don't see miracles in your life, that doesn't mean that they don't happen elsewhere on the planet. And people wouldn't be shown such miracles on television cause people wouldn't believe it.


ummmmm, so you'#re saying that something extraordinary wouldn't be put on television as it was simply toooo extraordinary..

where do you come from mate?... how do you figure that. people seems to have an easy enough time believing the crap in the bible, how would that be any different, if anything, the church, vatican, you name it, would ACTIUVELY televise any miracles that were witnessed etc, i mean they've got nothing going for them, they've been waiting 2000 years for that first bit of proof. the've probably taken the collection money to buy a private jet just so they can possibly get there to get a photo.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 8, 2009)

Someone hasn't learned multi quote...



Let me drink my coffee in peace. then I will do battle with the myth makers!


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 8, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> These supposed 'stories', as you love calling them, predict the future!!!!


so does the myan callendar apparently.....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Let me drink my coffee in peace. then I will do battle with the myth makers!


 
myth makers? how did you get here?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I'll stick to the big bang theory.
> I am also a bible believing Christian. I will also say that the big bang theory is consistent with scripture. As a matter of fact, the bible actually sheds some pretty interesting light on the big bang theory. (specifically, how the universe is 13.5 billion years old and 7 days old all at the same time. I actually taught it in a few of the undergrad physics classes I taught when we covered special relativity and quantum mechanics)
> 
> There is too much that we see in the night sky that the big bang successfully explains: the Cosmic Microwave Background and its structure, the abundances of the elements, large scale structure of the universe, etc. Any other theory will have to explain these things, and I don't see any other theories that do. That isn't to say that the big bang theory is the whole truth. But I am pretty sure that it is a big piece to the puzzle of the history of our universe.


 
how come some planets spin clockwise and others counter clockwise?


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> how come some planets spin clockwise and others counter clockwise?


is there a reason they shouldn't? (genuine ignorance) i mean water spins either way depending on which hemisphere


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

tip top toker said:


> is there a reason they shouldn't? (genuine ignorance) i mean water spins either way depending on which hemisphere


 
not sure i was looking for an answer
but i googled it lol they say its a small chance but can happen


but i still cant figure out how there was nothing then that nothing exploded creating plants



.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 8, 2009)

If you guys want to debate anything and everything that is fine, however I am not on this forum all day, every day. Therefore, I would like to stick with one subject. 
Jesus. As I mentioned before, I am only here to prove that Jesus is a historical figure that did infact exist.

This is sooo easy... I can even prove your own arguments wrong with your own posts....




CrackerJax said:


> Can you trust a history with one author??





CrackerJax said:


> Yes, the Bible has many authors.... ANONYMOUS authors....





CrackerJax said:


> But it was Saul's version which Constantine adopted. Old Constantine knew a good slave religion when he saw it.


 

Im not sure you are understanding your own argument. 

First you say it has one author, then you say it has many.

Then you claim they are anonymous authors, but a few posts later you recognize Saul as an author 

WTF dude, make up your mind already.







Speaking of references, I would like to congratulate cracker on finally giving me a source. Thank you, for this FIRST TIME EVER, cracker actually gave a refference



CrackerJax said:


> The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.
> 
> Letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind, January 3, 1954 from Albert Einstein<----- reference, good job buddy!!!


I do it ALL the time. Every person in history I mentioned has a reference to the original document, look it up. oh wait, you wont look it up will you? you'll just cowar away and act as if you were never presented with a question. Change the subject and run on a tangent, try to distract people from your denail. You only recognize sources when they suit your needs.
Which isnt ignorance, its called denial.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 8, 2009)

I dont really care if he did or didnt exist. His message was flawed. Look at all the confusion it has caused. It clearly speaks for itself. I find gautama buddhas message to be by far the best. Zen is the way to go. Maby thats who the christians should be arguing with over the existance of god and the bible. Tell your bible stories to a zen master. You would look like an animal chasing its own tail.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> how come some planets spin clockwise and others counter clockwise?


That has nothing to do with the big bang.
That has to do with solar system evolution, of which I totally don't believe the canonical theory of. I am with you on that.
I think the difference in spins of the planets are most likely evidence of something catastropic that happened in the past, such as an exploding planet or two.


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 8, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Let me drink my coffee in peace. then I will do battle with the myth makers!


HHmmmm, so is that your plan for the day? To sit in front of your computer and bash everyone elses beliefs into your own? Spread your hatred for other people on these forums?

Its no wonder you changed your settings to make your online status appear invisible. Cause thats all you do is sit at your computer.

You've been here for a year, and have almost 9,000 posts. I went to your prfile and searched for all your posts. Wow, you're here first thing in the morning, every morning. With more posts every afternoon. Its also the last thing you do before you go to bed. Every day!!!!

I guess its true what people say, misery loves company.












anhedonia said:


> I dont really care if he did or didnt exist. His message was flawed. Look at all the confusion it has caused. It clearly speaks for itself. I find gautama buddhas message to be by far the best. Zen is the way to go. Maby thats who the christians should be arguing with over the existance of god and the bible. Tell your bible stories to a zen master. You would look like an animal chasing its own tail.


Nor do I care what you believe. As I clearly stated before, I am not here trying to convert anyone, nor do I preach from the bible. Never one time have I done that.
I am here simply here to prove that Jesus did infact walk the earth. From a historical point of view, which I have done repeatedly


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> I am here simply here to prove that Jesus did infact walk the earth. From a historical point of view, which I have done repeatedly


anyone who takes a honest look at history would never deny that Jesus did walk the earth.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

tip top toker said:


> is there a reason they shouldn't? (genuine ignorance) i mean water spins either way depending on which hemisphere


If the theory of solar system formation is correct: that our solar system condensed from interstellar gas and debris, then all the planets should be spinning in the same direction, due to angular momentum conservation arguments.

However, if there was something catastropic that happened in the past, such as an exploding planet, then the net angular momentum of the solar system would change. Now the question is: why would a planet explode!?
IF, and this is a big IF, spinning astrophysical bodies can pull in energy from the vacuum, they may pull in enough energy to become unstable and explode.
Another explanation that I have come across in my studies is that the orbits of the planets are antinodes of standing waves originating from the sun. The prediction of this theory is that Venus, which is the only planet spinning the wrong way, (I may be mistaken here. There may be others.) will slow down in its rotation and then start to spin the 'right' way.
But who knows? The point is that solar system formation theory is very difficult to formulate. We don't understand the physics of it at all, IMHO.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

jenni8675309 said:


> you'll just cowar away and act as if you were never presented with a question. Change the subject and run on a tangent, try to distract people from your denail. You only recognize sources when they suit your needs.
> Which isnt ignorance, its called denial.


 
well said



.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> anyone who takes a honest look at history would never deny that Jesus did walk the earth.


How can anyone living a lie take an honest look at anything????


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 8, 2009)

Heh, so much hatred.... calm down mythers....calm down.

I'll break the tension a bit.

[youtube]f-njLrDnW00[/youtube]


----------



## jenni8675309 (Aug 8, 2009)

haha, nice one cracker. but still avoiding arent you?

and what do you mean so much hatred? If your posts are an example to be followed, then Id say there is an overwhelming amount of love from the other posters in here.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 8, 2009)

> Classical Darwinism is as much of a joke as religion. Classical Darwinism IS a religion. You need to have WWAAAYYY more faith to believe that nonsense than the bible. The bible has tons of scientific evidence to back it up. Classical Darwinian 'evolution' has NONE.


..whatever the hell "Classical Darwinism" is... that might be a religion, I don't know, I've never heard of it, I've heard of "Darwinism", the word creationists use to desribe what they think is the theory of evolution, which is completely invalid in every sense of the word and would make as much sense as calling someone who believed in physics a "Newtonian" or someone who believed in the theory of relativity an "Einsteinian"... see what I mean? 

Did you REALLY just say you need more faith to believe the evidence that supports the theory of evolution than the bible?! Sir, are you serious? 

Show me even one piece of hard evidence from the bible that supports the claim Jesus is the son of God. Just ONE, Shroomer. 

It would take me way too long to provide all the standing evidence to support the theory of evolution to you, so lets make it simple. Ask me one thing you don't understand about it and I'll clear it up for you.



> IMHO, religion is mind control and slavery. Christianity is freedom from mind control and slavery.


Religion is mind control and slavery, you're right! Christianity is a religion... Anything that forces faith upon it's victims is mental abuse. Anything that limits the individuals ability to think is mental abuse. Christianity, in it's most common form, which represents a couple billion people, is mental abuse.

How do you feel your mind has become more free because of Christianity, I'd like to know?



> Just because you don't see miracles in your life, that doesn't mean that they don't happen elsewhere on the planet. And people wouldn't be shown such miracles on television cause people wouldn't believe it.


...gah Shroomer, am I going to have to address every single post you made while I was sleeping?..

Give me ONE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE that says a miracle occured. Anywhere, anytime, you can choose, you list me the details and I'll explain to you, again, why it wasn't a miracle.



> These supposed 'stories', as you love calling them, predict the future!!!!


Not a single story in the bible, or in existence for that matter, predicts the future. Predicting the future is impossible, and I'd like to think someone claiming to teach people things would know that...



> whoever made this video has NO CLUE what Christianity and the Bible are really about. Jesus violated the sabbath. Joshua violated the sabbath. Jesus said to cast stones if you yourself dont have sin in you. You obviously don't have the whole picture. The person who made this video, and you Mr. Jax have no clue what is going on in the Bible.
> 
> The first several examples in the video are rules for Israel because God took them out of Egypt. The thinking expressed in the video is just as the thinking of the people who killed Jesus. Jesus referred to them as children of the Devil. Again, the person who made the video, and you Mr Jax, have no clue what the bible is really about and your understanding of scripture is just as bad as the people who killed Jesus.


Typical believers tactic... we point out where the inconsistencies are and you claim we just don't understand it... Same shit you hear from Christians when they condemn their former fellow believers when they open their mind and lose the shackles "he was never really a TRUE Christian anyway!"... 



> how come some planets spin clockwise and others counter clockwise?


Venus is the only planet that has a retrograde rotation, and it's slight. Why does that mean that a god did it? Why would a god do that?? wtf? We don't know millions of things about the universe... doesn't mean god did every single thing till we figure out a natural explination for it...



> I think the difference in spins of the planets are most likely evidence of something catastropic that happened in the past, such as an exploding planet or two.


wtf? What evidence do you have that suggests this!?


----------



## jfgordon1 (Aug 8, 2009)

^ haha good stuff


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Not a single story in the bible, or in existence for that matter, predicts the future. Predicting the future is impossible, and I'd like to think someone claiming to teach people things would know that...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


the fulfilled prophecies is one of the reasons i chose christianity you have to dig deep but there are alot that have came to be true

as far as the question i ask about counter clockwise plantets it had nothing to do about god it was a question i had and thought he might know the answer which he did


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> wtf? What evidence do you have that suggests this!?


Mars was blasted by asteroids on one side, not the other. Without the 'exploding planet' hypothesis, how would one explain this?
The exploding planet hypothesis is based on a multidimensional model of the solar system, which has much evidence backing it up.

It is a weird theory, but I will quote Niels Bohr:

"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct. My own feeling is that it is not crazy enough"


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

Let me edit this from,

These supposed 'stories', as you love calling them, predict the future!!!! 

to

These supposed 'stories', as you love calling them, predict the future, accurately and specifically, which is something that no other belief system or religious book does!!! Therefore proving that whoever wrote the Bible is outside of the time domain, something which humans aren't. Hence, the author of the Bible is outside of time. The only being outside of time is GOD. Therefore JAH wrote the Bible.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 8, 2009)

OK then, seems reasonable. I mean, if there were stories from the bible that told the future, I'd believe them too. So lets see it! Be specific. What comes directly from the bible that gives an accurate description of some future event that couldn't have possibly been known at the time of the publication? Shroomer, fish?


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 8, 2009)

Even mormons have specific examples in one of thier scriptures which seemingly did predict certain events like the freedom of slaves, the civil war, what states succeded,wwI, WWII. and some other random stuff. Why dont you become a mormon too? Why do people want to believe in future telling and trying to "prophisize" shit.? Its unwize.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 8, 2009)

hey carkerjax did you find some time to watch that film?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 8, 2009)

Or why not start a religion about Nosterdamus! He's the best future teller of all right!?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 8, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Or why not start a religion about Nosterdamus! He's the best future teller of all right!?


I studied Nostradamus quite extensively in the 90s and I am now of the mindset that Nostradamus was rarely spot on and most of the hype surrounding him is BS.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 8, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I studied Nostradamus quite extensively in the 90s and I am now of the mindset that Nostradamus was rarely spot on and most of the hype surrounding him is BS.


 
...but the bible..that's where all the real future telling is at!


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> OK then, seems reasonable. I mean, if there were stories from the bible that told the future, I'd believe them too. So lets see it! Be specific. What comes directly from the bible that gives an accurate description of some future event that couldn't have possibly been known at the time of the publication? Shroomer, fish?


 
hit this link http://www.yahoo.com/
you will see the word *search *type bible prophecies beside it then *hit the enter button*


----------



## jfgordon1 (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> hit this link http://www.yahoo.com/
> you will see the word *search *type bible prophecies beside it then *hit the enter button*


Huh, this is what i found when i typed that in. 



> Christians claim that the Bible has hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, and is proof of its divine inspiration. In actuality, these so called fulfilled prophecies failed, were false or weren't prophecies at all. Many of these prophecies are so vague, they can be attributed to different events. It's also a fact that the Bible was written many years after these presumed prophecies and their "fulfillment" took place. It's also fair to mention that nowhere in the Bible will you find countries such as the United States, Russia, China, Korea, Great Britain prophesied. Oh Christians will tell you that they are, if you know how to interpret the Bible.





> [SIZE=+3]*Failed Bible Prophecies*[/SIZE]*[SIZE=+3]
> [/SIZE]*


http://faithskeptic.50megs.com/prophecies.htm


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

.





have given bible prophecies an honest look or are u taken that guys word for it?








.


----------



## jfgordon1 (Aug 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> .
> have given bible prophecies an honest look or are u taken that guys word for it?


Search through the bible. Write word for word what bible prophecy you think came true and prove me wrong.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 8, 2009)

do you believe the old testament is true?

i am gona assume you dont. so if i list a prophecy from the old testament and it came true and was proven to happen in a non biblical document wouldnt you just say the christian church changed the old testament to make it look like it was a prophecy?

your gona defend your believe against me but just give it a look if its wrong its wrong 

can you offer a better idea of how we got here and the purpose of life?


----------



## cbtwohundread (Aug 8, 2009)

do you hear that smell?lo0ks like it stinks.,.,


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 9, 2009)

fish601 said:


> if i list a prophecy from the old testament and it came true and was proven to happen in a non biblical document wouldnt you just say the christian church changed the old testament to make it look like it was a prophecy?
> 
> your gona defend your believe against me but just give it a look if its wrong its wrong


 
Well said.
I could give them everything they ask for and they still will not believe anything I say. Or anything anyone says for that matter.

Here are some examples.....

*Babylon would be reduced to swampland*

*Bible prophecy:* Isaiah 14:23
*Prophecy written:* Between 701-681 BC
*Prophecy fulfilled:* 539 BC

In Isaiah 14:23, the prophet said that Babylon, which had been a world power at two different times in history, would be brought to a humble and final end. It would be reduced to swampland. After Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC, the kingdom never again rose to power. The buildings of Babylon fell into a gradual state of ruin during the next several centuries. Archaeologists excavated Babylon during the 1800s. Some parts of the city could not be dug up because they were under a water table that had risen over the years.

*Nineveh would be destroyed by fire*

*Bible prophecy:* Nahum 3:15
*Prophecy written:* About 614 BC
*Prophecy fulfilled:* 612 BC

In Nahum 3:15, the prophet said that Nineveh would be damaged by fire. Archaeologists unearthed the site during the 1800s and found a layer of ash covering the ruins. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica: "Nineveh suffered a defeat from which it never recovered. Extensive traces of ash, representing the sack of the city by Babylonians, Scythians, and Medes in 612 BC, have been found in many parts of the Acropolis. After 612 BC the city ceased to be important"


100 more prophecies http://www.100prophecies.org/




I think its redundant to try and convert a persons beliefs over the internet, especially on a marijuana growing forum.

As crackerjacks proved, even if a person is faced with proven facts he/she will still deny what is in front their face, or simply avoid the confrontation, as it never happened.

Everybody has different beliefs. 
And to insult another person, or another group for their beliefs shows a persons prejudice and ignorance.

I think its funny how atheists criticize christians for pushing christianity, when they do the same thing with atheism

peace


----------



## EMDrummer (Aug 9, 2009)

bigtomatofarmer said:


> Well said.
> I could give them everything they ask for and they still will not believe anything I say. Or anything anyone says for that matter.


Not true. If any ACTUAL evidence comes up to prove the Bible as factual, most atheists will convert immediately.



bigtomatofarmer said:


> Here are some examples.....
> 
> *Babylon would be reduced to swampland*
> 
> ...


Okay, hold on here. This is what Isaiah 14:20-23 says:


* 20 you will not join them in burial, 
for you have destroyed your land 
and killed your people. 
The offspring of the wicked 
will never be mentioned again.*
* 21 Prepare a place to slaughter his sons 
for the sins of their forefathers; 
they are not to rise to inherit the land 
and cover the earth with their cities. *
* 22 "I will rise up against them," 
declares the LORD Almighty. 
"I will cut off from Babylon her name and survivors, 
her offspring and descendants," 
declares the LORD. *
* 23 "I will turn her into a place for owls 
and into swampland; 
I will sweep her with the broom of destruction," 
declares the LORD Almighty.*

Okay, first of all, verse 21 up there says that children are gonna be slaughtered for the actions of their fathers, hm... That's not a "God" I'd wanna follow.

Anyway, assuming this prophecy was written in 681 BC, and it was fulfilled in 539 BC, why was there such a long wait? 142 years? I'd think if "God" was gonna do what he was threatening to the town, maybe he would have done it before everyone he was angry at died?

That's leading me to believe that the city was built on land that had large amounts of water underneath it which naturally rose to the surface over hundreds of years.

There's another prophecy in the next four verses of Isaiah 14.
*
24 The LORD Almighty has sworn, 
"Surely, as I have planned, so it will be, 
and as I have purposed, so it will stand. ** 25 I will crush the Assyrian in my land; 
on my mountains I will trample him down. 
His yoke will be taken from my people, 
and his burden removed from their shoulders." *
* 26 This is the plan determined for the whole world; 
this is the hand stretched out over all nations. *
* 27 For the LORD Almighty has purposed, and who can thwart him? 
His hand is stretched out, and who can turn it back?*

Did that ever happen?



bigtomatofarmer said:


> *Nineveh would be destroyed by fire*
> 
> *Bible prophecy:* Nahum 3:15
> *Prophecy written:* About 614 BC
> ...


Oh, this one's easy, that's a self fulfilling prophecy.

This is what Nahum 3:9-15 says:

* 9 Cush and Egypt were her boundless strength; 
Put and Libya were among her allies. *
* 10 Yet she was taken captive 
and went into exile. 
Her infants were dashed to pieces 
at the head of every street. 
Lots were cast for her nobles, 
and all her great men were put in chains. *
* 11 You too will become drunk; 
you will go into hiding 
and seek refuge from the enemy. *
* 12 All your fortresses are like fig trees 
with their first ripe fruit; 
when they are shaken, 
the figs fall into the mouth of the eater. *
* 13 Look at your troops 
they are all women! 
The gates of your land 
are wide open to your enemies; 
fire has consumed their bars. *
* 14 Draw water for the siege, 
strengthen your defenses! 
Work the clay, 
tread the mortar, 
repair the brickwork! *
* 15 There the fire will devour you; 
the sword will cut you down 
and, like grasshoppers, consume you. 
Multiply like grasshoppers, 
multiply like locusts! *

Hm... this child murder thing is getting kinda old.

And it's also quite interesting that "God" seems to be insulting them by saying "All your troops are women, you've got no defense!"

Anyway, if they were at war, why wouldn't the enemy burn the city down after they loot everything? Wasn't that common practice back in the bronze age?



bigtomatofarmer said:


> 100 more prophecies http://www.100prophecies.org/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Prejudice and ignorance are not part of ridiculing someone for their beliefs, they chose to be that way. I think it's safe to have preconceived notions about someone's intellect if they believe that the Bible is a factual history book.

And I encourage Christians to proselytize because that's what they believe needs to be done. If you believe that everyone who does not believe in the Bible will go to hell to burn in agony for eternity, how much of an asshole would you be for not trying to save people from that?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 9, 2009)

> do you believe the old testament is true?
> 
> i am gona assume you dont. so if i list a prophecy from the old testament and it came true and was proven to happen in a non biblical document wouldnt you just say the christian church changed the old testament to make it look like it was a prophecy?
> 
> ...


You would think there would be a little more than one single document for proof of somebody telling the future in history, wouldn't you? I mean honestly, think about it. If somebody could accurately predict the future today they would be famous, they'd be respected, they'd be completely slathered in wealth. That's why there are so many David Blaine's and Chris Angel's out there, playing off of peoples ignorance, getting a paycheck off of entertaining the gullible. 

You cannot use the bible, the new testament, the old testament, anything in between or after as proof or evidence to support the validity of Christianity. That would be like writing a book about evolution, then claiming that because my book, that I wrote, says it's true, evolution is true... You need outside sources, collaborative data to determine if something is TRUE or REAL in this world. You need to be able to test it the same exact way I tested it and we should both end up with the exact same results, that's science. Just because something says something happened, and then this other document says what that document said is true, does not make the original documents claims to be true, seriously think about how we would gain knowlege if that's the way we did it... All hearsay, no actual proof of anything.

A better idea of how we got here... I'd submit the big bang theory as to how the universe came into existence, then the theory of abiogenesis for how life began, perhaps panspermia, both theories have valid evidence to support them but it's difficult to go that far back and get really accurate conclusions, so that's still in the works, but that doesn't mean we should insert some random, equally (if not MORE) probable theory into the gap and conclude that's it! We've done it! We've figured it ALL out!

The purpose of life? I personally believe we all have a subjective meaning to our own life. What may give you purpose or meaning might not be the same for me, which is perfectly OK and totally natural. Human beings are not clones, we're not all the same in any way other than genetic and anatomic. In our minds, everyone is different. Therefore it would seem logical that we would all have different meanings and purposes, wouldn't it?



> Well said.
> 
> I could give them everything they ask for and they still will not believe anything I say. Or anything anyone says for that matter.
> 
> ...


Say I had a quote from the Soviet Union a few years after WW2 from some disgruntled Soviet worker that said "the USSR will crumble to the ground!"... then half a century later...it happened. If the author of that ''prophecy'' mentioned who was going to conquor Babylon... that would have been incredibly helpful... or exactly what year... or how... or why... I mean, seriously, anything... they keep them so vague litterally anything would seem authentic. Just like horoscopes.




> I think its funny how atheists criticize christians for pushing christianity, when they do the same thing with atheism
> 
> peace


The only thing I've ever tried to do as an atheist is fight for freedom. It seems to me that religion restricts personal freedom and individual thought via government laws. You don't have a right to put "god" anywhere on money, or in school, or in public on any soil in this country, nobody has that right, the fact that most of you think you DO have that right is the problem. That's the part I get pissed about, believers think they're entitled to more rights because they're somehow more moral and righteous than everyone else when every single piece of data ever collected says otherwise. They think they know what's best for everyone and must force their opinion on people to have the kind of world they think should exist, a world where women get the death penalty for getting an abortion or homosexuals are treated like mental patients and arent allowed the same personal freedoms and individual rights as the rest of the population, where manditory prayer must be held in schools, where every immoral act inside the bible is justified and mirrored in today's society, and is considered good because the bible says so. I could go on and on, but this is the reality I get from a few years of speaking to believers about this stuff. 

This atheist wants happiness and freedom, it's as simple as that. Nobody has the right to tell me what's best for myself. I only have one life and I'll be damned if somebody else is going to tell me how I should live it. Especially, and I say that with the absolute highest emphasis possible, some invisible egotistical motherfucker that's always everywhere at once yet wont show himself and insists on having every single logical conclusion any rational human mind can come up with determine this is all clearly bullshit designed to keep a brain caged and under control while greedy men get wealthy.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 9, 2009)

cbtwohundread said:


> do you hear that smell?lo0ks like it stinks.,.,


I hope you didn't brain your damage.


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 9, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Nobody has the right to tell me what's best for myself. .


But *you* have the right to tell other people whats best for them? 






> Not true. If any ACTUAL evidence comes up to prove the Bible as factual, most atheists will convert immediately


hate to say I told ya so... but its like I predicted the future myslef... maybe Im a prophet 

haha j/k guys


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 9, 2009)

bigtomatofarmer said:


> But *you* have the right to tell other people whats best for them?


Who am I telling what's best for them? What laws am I getting enacted saying my imaginary friend says what's right and whatever he says is right no matter what?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 9, 2009)

One of the most amazing biblical prophecies was given by Daniel:
It was written during the days of the Babylonian Empire. Daniel predicted that Babylon would be taken over WITHOUT A FIGHT by Medo-Persia, giving the EXACT name of the king of Medo-Persia (Cyrus) who would take over Babylon. The prophecy also said that Cyrus would allow the Jews to go back to Israel and reestablish Jewish society. Daniel continued to prophecy how Medo-Persia would be taken over by the Greek Empire, explaining in detail the downfall of the Greek Empire, and how it would be taken over by Rome. The implication of what was given to Daniel was that the Roman Empire would not be taken over by anyone, and such was the downfall of Rome: it just dissolved.

NO book or religion or prophecy EVER nailed world history so well BEFORE IT HAPPENED, and as it is happening right now with the beginnings of the revived Roman Empire: the European Union, exactly as written thousands of years ago!!!

I find all of this pretty freaking amazing.

None of this prophecy was really Daniel. An angel gave this prophecy to Daniel.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 9, 2009)

Why couldn't the "prophet" simply write something down, claim it was going to be fulfilled at some future date, then through all of the fanatical believers, they bring about the coming of the prophecy? This reminds me of the current situation in Israel with the "prophecy'' about the end of the world. Doesn't it seem likely that those who believe this shit with everything in them would WANT these prophecies to come true, and they would try to accomplish goals that would make it happen? So how does some nutcase claiming to be a prophet thousands of years ago coming up with a random idea, then years later the craziest of the crazy in the cult make the prophecy happen in a way that could be interpreted in a way by the rest of the believers as if the ''prophecy'' actually came true? Then their whole religion is true, even though the other 99% is clearly bullshit... Just because this one random guy seemingly (to the gullible) predicted the future...

Do you see where I am coming from?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 9, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Why couldn't the "prophet" simply write something down, claim it was going to be fulfilled at some future date, then through all of the fanatical believers, they bring about the coming of the prophecy? This reminds me of the current situation in Israel with the "prophecy'' about the end of the world. Doesn't it seem likely that those who believe this shit with everything in them would WANT these prophecies to come true, and they would try to accomplish goals that would make it happen? So how does some nutcase claiming to be a prophet thousands of years ago coming up with a random idea, then years later the craziest of the crazy in the cult make the prophecy happen in a way that could be interpreted in a way by the rest of the believers as if the ''prophecy'' actually came true? Then their whole religion is true, even though the other 99% is clearly bullshit... Just because this one random guy seemingly (to the gullible) predicted the future...
> 
> Do you see where I am coming from?


 
We see where your comming from you know we were all athiest before we started believing in god we were not born christian believers. 

sure if pres obama made a prophecy he or his followers could make it come true that does not mean anything.
and maybe you can convince yourself, that something written in the old testament that was fulfilled by people who didnt believe in god, was just coincidence
you know kinda like when they hung jesus on the cross 

we can show you alot of proven prophecies but God has done 
some amazing things infront of people and they still didnt believe. Jesus healed people everywhere he went and those people who seen those healing killed him

a god who created water should be able to part the red sea even tho that seems nutty to us if a god cant do that is he really even worth knowing?


----------



## wm2009 (Aug 9, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> This atheist wants happiness and freedom


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 9, 2009)

bigtomatofarmer said:


> But *you* have the right to tell other people whats best for them?
> 
> *Your right....only the church should be able to do that.....*
> 
> ...



I agree, if you are using the "proof bar" of religion....you do qualify!! 

It's that easy!!


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 9, 2009)

[youtube]6fRJ0T-y-pw[/youtube]

[youtube]ifgHHhw_6g8[/youtube]


----------



## HarvestFest2010 (Aug 9, 2009)

I think the timeline is Bullshit and the crusaders killed the last of the dinosaurs. And what was left was some inbred bullshit anyways i guess. It will all come out again. I think that some know, but some can;t handle the truth of thier origins.


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 10, 2009)

Can you people explain the Nephilim and their architecture? Stone slabs that are so big, we can't scientifically guess their weight and have no machinery on earth that can lift them?

Can any of you naysayers explain this?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 10, 2009)

Operation 420 said:


> Can you people explain the Nephilim and their architecture? Stone slabs that are so big, we can't scientifically guess their weight and have no machinery on earth that can lift them?
> 
> Can any of you naysayers explain this?


 
I'd guess this is a false statement. Why wouldn't scientists be able to guess the weight of some stone tablets? We can estimate the weight of entire planets with pretty decent accuracy... that would be the easiest thing in the world. And I'm POSITIVE if these objects your talking about are man made, we have machinery on earth today that can lift them. Give me a source so I know exactly what your talking about.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 10, 2009)

Operation 420 said:


> Can you people explain the Nephilim and their architecture? Stone slabs that are so big, we can't scientifically guess their weight and have no machinery on earth that can lift them?
> 
> Can any of you naysayers explain this?


I'll explain.

Extraterestrial life forms from another planet brought them here for noobs like you to ponder upon.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 10, 2009)

Here in lies a problem. A percentage of any population, when faced with a scientific conundrum (temporary I assure you), instead of "working the problem" instantly run to a G*D conclusion so as not to have to think the matter through, or encourage others to.

I am not familiar to the architecture you speak of (that is rare for me), but let's say that science cannot explain (today) how the stones were lifted. So what? That does not indicate G*D in any way. 

I think modern man underestimates not so modern mans capabilities when it came to work and patience. Slavery was a common and accepted practice globally (it still is today to an extent). Heck the Bible and Jesus were all for slavery!! No problems there! Craftsmen worked on these large structures for decades at a time. 

If there is anything history can teach you concerning man.... where there is a will...there is a way.

No G*D needed there. Just ingenuity and hard work over a long period. Satisfactory scientific proof impending....I'm sure, like everything else. The church has repeatedly had to make hasty retreats from "their" worldly conclusions and quickly grasp at any conundrum they can find with a wisp of desperation as the Myth falls away to science.


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 10, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> I'll explain.
> 
> Extraterestrial life forms from another planet brought them here for noobs like you to ponder upon.


Shouldn't you be eating graham crackers and milk, then taking a nap about now?


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 10, 2009)

Operation 420 said:


> Shouldn't you be eating graham crackers and milk, then taking a nap about now?


Haha, I take it you're assuming I'm a child?

Think again. Your post was bogus. Just deal with it.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 10, 2009)

why should he be eating ghram crackers? Your the one who made the silly comment.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 11, 2009)

You people are all insane. Graham crackers, chocolate, and marshMELLOWs. SMORES crackers!!!!

you jive turkey fools!


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 11, 2009)

"Did you just call me a jive turkey???"
"no..no...i called you a cock sucker"
"yeah...he called you cock sucker...that's all..."


----------



## Illegal Smile (Aug 11, 2009)

Religion is the synthetic apriori and it's a part of human nature. You all have some variation of the same psychological orientation that leads people to religion. Assuming you are human.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 13, 2009)

Does religion really make sense to any believer out there? I mean, _really_, in your own mind, does it make sense? I could never get past that, when I was calling myself a Christian, I never really _truly_ believed it, just as far as a childs mind could take it I guess. I'm just wondering if anyone out there is the same way?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

Religion works along peer pressure points....like most social structures of man.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 13, 2009)

makes sense.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 13, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> makes sense.


 
Explain it to me in a way that would make sense, will ya?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Religion works along peer pressure points....like most social structures of man.


 
including atheism?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 13, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Does religion really make sense to any believer out there? I mean, _really_, in your own mind, does it make sense? I could never get past that, when I was calling myself a Christian, I never really _truly_ believed it, just as far as a childs mind could take it I guess. I'm just wondering if anyone out there is the same way?


"Religion" makes no sense to me. To me, Jesus is totally anti-religion. That is why he got killed! He was a threat to the ruling religious authorities!
Anyway, Jesus has nothing to do with 'religion.'
Christ is above and beyond 'religion'. He is the Truth. 




CrackerJax said:


> Religion works along peer pressure points....like most social structures of man.


I totally agree. 
"Religion" is also a 'feel good' thing. People get into it because it makes them feel good. When I got 'saved' I certainly didn't feel good about it. 
At the time, it was not how I wanted to live my life, but I could no longer ignore the truth. And I wanted, above all else, the TRUTH!


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 13, 2009)

fish601 said:


> including atheism?


 
Two of the most basic principles in an atheistic philosophy are free thought and individuality. Both are incompatable with the influences of peer pressure. If you're easily led by peer pressure, you are not an open minded free thinking person, likewise, if you are an open minded free thinking person, you're not easily led by peer pressure.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

99% of all the peer pressure is to believe the fairy tales..........


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> 99% of all the peer pressure is to believe the fairy tales..........


yeah like the one that says nothing absolutly nothing created me and you.
wait umm how does it go?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

It starts out I think... In the beginning.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> It starts out I think... In the beginning.


ok i got it

in the beginning nothing exploded and created me and you


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

In the beginning...something happened, but you won't find out what in the Bible, that's for sure!!!


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> In the beginning...something happened, but you won't find out what in the Bible, that's for sure!!!


 
well in the end if i am wrong i will go back to nothing and if your wrong i hope you come back as a nun


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 13, 2009)

Seems you've got a really simplified version of what you believe to be the big bang theory there fish...

Are you willing to admit that you do not know everything?

If you are, why is it hard to then admit that just because we don't know exactly how the universe started right now doesn't mean we won't figure it out in the future? 

Does everything you can't explain have supernatural origins?


----------



## Brazko (Aug 13, 2009)

fish601 said:


> including atheism?


Is it really necessary to answer that? 

It was made all to clear that whatever one choose to call themselves, wheelchair and crutch adjusts to a one size fits all.

Man didn't need religion or science, and somehow they found a way to get by and survive for some umpteen thousands of yrs.

Now the cozy comfort of either has somehow we todd did the evolution of the mind.

From observance, I would have to answer, Yes!!


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Are you willing to admit that you do not know everything?
> 
> If you are, why is it hard to then admit that just because we don't know exactly how the universe started right now doesn't mean we won't figure it out in the future?
> 
> Does everything you can't explain have supernatural origins?


 
yep i am wrong alot are you?

use your imagination, give me something to think about, what could possibly of created the universe

i do think if the big bang theory is the best man can come up with we are not even close to figuring it out because for nothing to expand/explode or whatever and create anything is crazy to me


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

Being an atheist or an agnostic is going to bed without the answers. Not knowing is actually the tougher road to go down. 

Religion is popular because it is easy. It isn't correct, but it is easy.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Being an atheist or an agnostic is going to bed without the answers. Not knowing is actually the tougher road to go down.
> 
> Religion is popular because it is easy. It isn't correct, but it is easy.


 
I found the answer and yes it is easy


----------



## Brazko (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Being an atheist or an agnostic is going to bed without the answers. Not knowing is actually the tougher road to go down.
> 
> Religion is popular because it is easy. It isn't correct, but it is easy.


True dat... Not knowing is Hard, Choosing to ignore & dismiss is Harder.

Religion/spirituality isn't easy, Believing in fairytales tho' sure is


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 13, 2009)

fish601 said:


> yep i am wrong alot are you?
> 
> use your imagination, give me something to think about, what could possibly of created the universe
> 
> i do think if the big bang theory is the best man can come up with we are not even close to figuring it out because for nothing to expand/explode or whatever and create anything is crazy to me


 
Of course, I'm wrong about plenty of things. Are you willing to change something you believe to be true if real life evidence suggests otherwise?

The natural laws we see everyday could have created the universe, I don't see why not. 

How do you explain redshift? Every galaxy in the universe expanding away from eachother, suggesting that they were, at one point, all together in the same point?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Of course, I'm wrong about plenty of things. Are you willing to change something you believe to be true if real life evidence suggests otherwise?
> 
> 
> Every galaxy in the universe expanding away from eachother, suggesting that they were, at one point, all together in the same point?


 
are you willing to change something you believe to be true if evidence suggest otherwise?
[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*Isaiah 42 *_Read This Chapter_[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*42:5* Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and *stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth,* and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:[/FONT]


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

if you can give me evidence that the bible and christianity is fake i will change what i believe for sure


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 13, 2009)

fish601 said:


> are you willing to change something you believe to be true if evidence suggest otherwise?
> [FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*Isaiah 42 *_Read This Chapter_[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*42:5* Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and *stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth,* and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:[/FONT]


Haven't you ever heard you can't define a word with that same word? The same thing goes for the bible, you can't use the bible to prove Christianity. 

Again, how do you explain redshift?



fish601 said:


> if you can give me evidence that the bible and christianity is fake i will change what i believe for sure


- nobody on earth can come back to life once they are dead, that is impossible

- people do not live over 500 years old

- snakes do not talk

- the earth was never flooded by water

- descending from the same two people would present problems in reproduction and genetics within our species, like how if brother and sister have a child, there are risks of abnormalities and deformities

- people do not walk on water

- the earth is not a circle

- there is nothing immoral about being homosexual

- dinosaurs

- chromosome #2

...


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> - nobody on earth can come back to life once they are dead, that is impossible
> 
> - people do not live over 500 years old
> 
> ...


go to yahoo.com type in how do christians explain redshift.. if you really wanted to know the answer you would of done that alrdy.

I know someone that was dead for a few mins and came back to life but i know what your talking about and if you did believe in a god that wouldnt be imposible...neither would walking on water, parting the red sea, flooding the earth (which is easily proven to be true)
along with descending from the same two people having kids ( easily proven )
onlything new to me in that list is chromosome #2 i will check that out.

did u just take some guys word for all of that? alot of that is nonsence
i can copy and paste stuff that can make evolution or big bang theory look dumb but i havent really researched it all, have you or is it just fun to paste it here?


pfft chromosome 2  *I suspect you are aware that humans have 46 chromosomes and tobacco has 48. And amoebas have 50. And yet the evolution textbooks constantly say we came from an amoeba-like creature and yet they have already got more chromosomes than we do. They're ahead of us, not behind us. The truth of the matter is, the chimpanzee has the same number of chromosomes as the tobacco plant. They both have more than humans have. So the similarity would break down right there. And the most complex creature in the world, of course, would be the fern. Theyve got 480 chromosomes. So this idea is ridiculous.*


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

deep in the rabbit hole u r. no light i'm afraid.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 13, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> deep in the rabbit hole u r. no light i'm afraid.


yeah but if your right i win


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 13, 2009)

I just can't base my life on something with infinitesimally low odds. I'll stick with "it is unknown what happens when ppl die, if anything."


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 14, 2009)

fish601 said:


> go to yahoo.com type in how do christians explain redshift.. if you really wanted to know the answer you would of done that alrdy.
> 
> I know someone that was dead for a few mins and came back to life but i know what your talking about and if you did believe in a god that wouldnt be imposible...neither would walking on water, parting the red sea, flooding the earth (which is easily proven to be true)
> along with descending from the same two people having kids ( easily proven )
> ...


Sir, I asked how you explain redshift, not how other Christians explain it. The fact that as galaxies move away from us, the light coming from them when viewed from the earth moves further into the red end of the light spectrum, the farther away, the faster they go, all of them, always. The universe is expanding at an exponential rate, this is a fact. It is not known yet if there is enough dark energy/dark matter repelling everything away from eachother or if there is enough gravity to counteract the expansion. That's the main idea behind it. How do you explain that if the universe is static or infinite? 

The only explination that makes any sense is that all the matter and energy that is now expanding, was once much smaller. How small? I don't know. Think of it like a movie that's on rewind, you see the universe as it is, then as you rewind it, it gets smaller and smaller and finally at the beginning of the tape, it's a single point. It's that simple.

Jesus... 3 days.. you can't be dead for 3 days then come back to life. That is impossible.

Yes, descending from two people, your parents is proven, that happens, you're right... But re read what I said. 

Everyone descending from the same two people. That would be like your parents having you and your sister, then you and your sister having multiple kids, then those kids having multiple kids, all through incest. Human genes do not work this way, we need diversity to ensure our immune systems are stronger and better able to fight more diseases and infections. Without diversity, you get abnormalities and deformities. Also, how do you explain such diversity amongst our species? We've got black people, white people, Mexicans, Asians, Europeans.. tons of different people all different shapes, sizes, and colors... How do you explain this if not through evolution, with only the time frame of 10,000 years? (give or take..)

Well, that doesn't surprise me, you haven't researched the big bang theory or evolution at all.. Most people who have never heard much about it ignorantly disregard it as false because of their religious indoctrination... I know shit laods about both theories, and I love talking about them, so if you have any questions I'd be happy to answer them!

Chromosome #2 is extremely important buddy. It is the chromosome that the creationists were asking for before it was found, it's the chromosome that PROVES without a shadow of a doubt that there is a link between modern day homo sapiens and our ancient ape like relatives. 




> - All members of





> Hominidae except humans have 24 chromosomes. Humans have only 23 chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.
> 
> - Fusion of ancestral chromosomes left distinctive remnants of telomeres, and a vestigial centromere
> The evidence for this includes:
> ...


Wherever you got that paragraph trying to debunk the data, the author apparently figured that the number of chromosomes is what indicates an organisms complexity... which is not the case at all... Which is the innitial claim that 'debunks' the data in the first place... Obviously the number of chromosomes is NOT what determines an organisms complexity, and I'm shocked the guy who wrote that, and you after reading it, wouldn't figure that out. 

More evidence in support of the theory of evolution, I'll break down the ancestors, right from Wiki for you. We have discovered all these skeletons, and they are all without a doubt ancestors to modern day homo sapiens;

Ardipithecus (5.5 - 4.4 million years ago)
kadabba
ramidus

Australopithecus (4 - 2 million years ago)
anamensis
afarensis
africanus
bahrelghazali
garhi

Kenyanthropus (3 - 2.7 million years ago)
platyops

Paranthropus (3 - 1.2 million years ago)
aethiopicus
boisei
robustus

Homo (2 million years ago - present) 
habilis (South and East Africa, large brains, made stone tools, 2.2 - 1.6 million years ago)
rudolfensis (1.9 million years ago, out of Kenya)
ergaster (1.9 - 1.4 million years ago, East and South Africa)
georgicus (1.8 million years ago, Republic of Georgia)
antecessor (1.2 - 0.8 million years ago, out of Spain)
cepranensis (0.9 - 0.8 million years ago, Italy)
erectus (1.4 - 0.2 million years ago, Africa, Eurasia)
heidelbergensis (0.6 - 0.35 million years ago, Europe, Africa, China)
rhodesiensis (300,000 - 125,000 years ago)
neanderthalensis (250,000 - 30,000 years ago)
sapiens idaltu (0.16 - 0.15 million years ago, Ethiopia)
florensis (0.10 - 0.012 million years ago, Indonesia)
sapiens (250,000 years ago - present)


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Jesus... 3 days.. you can't be dead for 3 days then come back to life. That is impossible.




how hard would it be to raise someone from the dead if you created earth?


----------



## mexiblunt (Aug 14, 2009)

How hard would it be to keep said person alive to begin with? If you created earth.


----------



## Brazko (Aug 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> deep in the rabbit hole u r. no light i'm afraid.


Deep, Very Deep... It's Not his fault CJ, he's lost and has been misled horribly, Eventually in time it will piece to gether, if not in this lifetime, maybe the next..... Instead of getting rid of religion, which is impossible, I think we should start taxing the church, That will start to curb all the pretenders and phoneys, and Predators Away.....All the Mind Fuk camps may start shutting down as well


----------



## mexiblunt (Aug 14, 2009)

Sounds like a good idea. But so does starting a church. $$$$


----------



## Brazko (Aug 14, 2009)

fish601 said:


> how hard would it be to raise someone from the dead if you created earth?


 
Its' not hard at all, I didn't create the EArth, but I've raised Tw2 from the DeaD


----------



## Brazko (Aug 14, 2009)

mexiblunt said:


> Sounds like a good idea. But so does starting a church. $$$$


Yeah, I wonder if the Church is feeling the REcession....If shit gets real hard, I've never considered it, but hey God's Will is God's Will


----------



## mexiblunt (Aug 14, 2009)

Good... partners then?

I'm not religious but where I live has got to be one the highest per capita churches to people ratio ever(really have no idea). Always room for another. But my town is small. like maybe pushing 4500 now. I could go to a different church every sunday of the year just in my town alone. We have at least 15-18 christian churches, 1 Jehovah I know of, 1 Lutheran. I may be out a few either way. 
People are always changing churches around here. example... Man and woman get divorced (frowned upon to begin with) the man finds a new woman and want to get married. His church people don't believe that's right. He changes to a different church gets married.

I want to build a new house. A few people I know have a really good construction company but they go to a different church. I think I'll join that church for a while. They will cut me a "deal" plus they can work on sunday when they want, I wont tell anyone. 
End Rant....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

mexiblunt said:


> Good... partners then?
> 
> where I live has got to be one the highest per capita churches to people ratio ever(really have no idea).End Rant....


you would live in ms then?


----------



## mexiblunt (Aug 14, 2009)

No I'm in Canada.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 14, 2009)

It's a money making machine, that's for sure. Ka-ching! $$$ Tax free.....even the following investments..... Ka-ching $$$$ , separation of church and state my arse. They are in bed together, and always have been.... Ka-ching $$$.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> It's a money making machine, that's for sure. Ka-ching! $$$ Tax free.....even the following investments..... Ka-ching $$$$ , separation of church and state my arse. They are in bed together, and always have been.... Ka-ching $$$.


 
you must be really high right now


----------



## what... huh? (Aug 14, 2009)

"There's certainly a devil, and he knows my name."
-Daniel Johnston


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 14, 2009)

fish601 said:


> you must be really high right now



Hahaha! That post is 100% certified correct. Money taken in by the church is tax free. The money IF spent for assets, such as real estate or cars or trips, Tax free again!!!

Don't tell me ur unaware of all this. Ka-ching!!$$$$$ Deals have been struck.... Ka-ching!!$$$$$


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Hahaha! That post is 100% certified correct. Money taken in by the church is tax free. The money IF spent for assets, such as real estate or cars or trips, Tax free again!!!
> 
> Don't tell me ur unaware of all this. Ka-ching!!$$$$$ Deals have been struck.... Ka-ching!!$$$$$


LOL why u allways attacking the church you know all religious organizations get that


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 14, 2009)

To me it's all the same..... from Roman Catholic to Paula White..... church. 
All born from the same cloth.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> To me it's all the same..... from Roman Catholic to Paula White..... church.
> All born from the same cloth.


ewww roman catholic and paula white i see why u hate christianity if thats the part you are looking at


----------



## Cap K (Aug 14, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite).
> 
> God gave us free will and by His Will, we are free to think what we wish. So we have chosen to forsake God in search of our bodily pleasures.
> 
> ...


The greatest trick the devil will ever pull will be to convince the world he does'nt exist. I'm not overly religious, but some food for thought my dude.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 14, 2009)

Cap K, that's just another one of those tactics they came up with to keep people from looking outside the box.

With that statement, it's completely lose lose, and either way you go, just like all the shell game tactics, it doesn't matter. 

Also, if the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist, he must have taken that out of God's playbook!


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Also, if the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist, he must have taken that out of God's playbook!


God has all but came down and slaped you in the face and said here i am believe me. open your eyes


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 14, 2009)

fish601 said:


> ewww roman catholic and paula white i see why u hate christianity if thats the part you are looking at


I don't mean them specifically.... I mean the entire spectrum. From one to the other with everything in between = CHURCH.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I don't mean them specifically.... I mean the entire spectrum. From one to the other with everything in between = CHURCH.


ok, they are both on one side WRONG about alot of things, but i see what you are saying


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 14, 2009)

mexiblunt said:


> How hard would it be to keep said person alive to begin with? If you created earth.


I get your point, but God warned Adam and Eve NOT to eat the fruit. For if they did, they would die.
So if God kept the person alive, he would violate his own rules. Allah does that stuff, not Jah.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Hahaha! That post is 100% certified correct. Money taken in by the church is tax free. The money IF spent for assets, such as real estate or cars or trips, Tax free again!!!
> 
> Don't tell me ur unaware of all this. Ka-ching!!$$$$$ Deals have been struck.... Ka-ching!!$$$$$


My church spends MILLIONS to help the poor and the not so poor. We have a free clinic for people who need doctor/dentist care, a free community center for people to use, numerous food banks for starving people to get food, and on and on.....

What do you, or any of your atheist friends, do to help your community?
Christians do this stuff because we have the Spirit of Christ AKA LOVE in us!


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> My church spends MILLIONS to help the poor and the not so poor. We have a free clinic for people who need doctor/dentist care, a free community center for people to use, numerous food banks for starving people to get food, and on and on.....
> 
> What do you, or any of your atheist friends, do to help your community?
> Christians do this stuff because we have the Spirit of Christ AKA LOVE in us!


 
cool i havent heard of another church doing a fee clinic . my church also gives away free food each week


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 14, 2009)

On cal hwy 99 going south as your approaching sacramento there is an athiest group that adopted a highway.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 14, 2009)

fish601 said:


> God has all but came down and slaped you in the face and said here i am believe me. open your eyes


That's what it took to wake me up. He actually did have to slap me in the face and say, "Here I am. Stop being a fool. You aren't as smart as you think. Here. Look at this. Now try to explain it."

I couldn't.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 14, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> That's what it took to wake me up. He actually did have to slap me in the face and say, "Here I am. Stop being a fool. You aren't as smart as you think. Here. Look at this. Now try to explain it."
> 
> I couldn't.


 
I probably can. 

What was it?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> I probably can.
> 
> What was it?


 
LOL i am sure u can make something up


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 14, 2009)

Thats right. Just like thiese aberhamic religions are made up from thin air. The aberhamic god seems too primitive to ever spend a minute of devotion with. I could never knowingly worship something deep in my heart that I directly know down inside that every thought I would ever have was contrived. . Even christianitys only real link with reality, gnosticism, the nag hamadhi documents are considered heretical to christians and are rejected by christian monastics. Christianity is made up bull shit. There are other explinations for the phenomena. Its funny that Buddhist enlightenment requires no knowledge of how what you understand to be creation, ever came to be. If a buddhist ever asks how the world began he would be told to ask a scientist, plain and simple.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 14, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> On cal hwy 99 going south as your approaching sacramento there is an athiest group that adopted a highway.


athiest group, do they have meetings?


----------



## zorkan (Aug 14, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Thats right. Just like thiese aberhamic religions are made up from thin air. The aberhamic god seems too primitive to ever spend a minute of devotion with. I could never knowingly worship something deep in my heart that I directly know down inside that every thought I would ever have was contrived. . Even christianitys only real link with reality, gnosticism, the nag hamadhi documents are considered heretical to christians and are rejected by christian monastics. Christianity is made up bull shit. There are other explinations for the phenomena. Its funny that Buddhist enlightenment requires no knowledge of how what you understand to be creation, ever came to be. If a buddhist ever asks how the world began he would be told to ask a scientist, plain and simple.


some scientist believe in god and creation


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 14, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> My church spends MILLIONS to help the poor and the not so poor. We have a free clinic for people who need doctor/dentist care, a free community center for people to use, numerous food banks for starving people to get food, and on and on.....
> 
> What do you, or any of your atheist friends, do to help your community?
> Christians do this stuff because we have the Spirit of Christ AKA LOVE in us!



Yes, the church takes in Billions and gives out Millions..... what am I missing?


----------



## PVS (Aug 14, 2009)

without satan people have to take full responsibility for their actions.
satan is not a villain, he's a crutch and a lame excuse.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 14, 2009)

If Satan did exist, what would be his motivation to torment all of mankinds souls? Again, that's another thing I never understood... Why does Satan want to torture all these horrible people? Think about it... If Satan is the ultimate manifestation of evil, just like how God is supposed to be the ultimate manifestation of good, and all the people that get sent to hell who committed incredibly horrible acts on earth, wouldn't he throw a fuckin' party and thank them all for helping him out with all that evil shit? Wouldn't torturing all the evil souls be a favor for God in a way? He'd be enforcing God's ruling wouldn't he? He'd still be a slave to God, even though he fell from heaven... 

shit just doesn't make any goddamn sense... come on you Chrsitians, give me an answer for that one.

And fish, tell me that story, what couldn't you explain that made you believe in God? I was serious, I can probably give you a rational explination for it.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 14, 2009)

zorkan said:


> some scientist believe in god and creation


There are many smart people who believe in very ignorant things. They will never see the full picture. Like why did the illiterate monk who walked around the monastery sweeping reach enlightenment before the educated monks who spent thier days in study and debate? Despite being very uneducated he was able to percieve (if thats a good word) what reality truly was. As one zen master said about his enlightenment, "I eat when I eat, and I sleep when I sleep."


----------



## Boogaloo Bud (Aug 14, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> If Satan did exist, what would be his motivation to torment all of mankinds souls? Again, that's another thing I never understood... Why does Satan want to torture all these horrible people? Think about it... If Satan is the ultimate manifestation of evil, just like how God is supposed to be the ultimate manifestation of good, and all the people that get sent to hell who committed incredibly horrible acts on earth, wouldn't he throw a fuckin' party and thank them all for helping him out with all that evil shit? Wouldn't torturing all the evil souls be a favor for God in a way? He'd be enforcing God's ruling wouldn't he? He'd still be a slave to God, even though he fell from heaven...
> 
> shit just doesn't make any goddamn sense... come on you Chrsitians, give me an answer for that one.
> 
> And fish, tell me that story, what couldn't you explain that made you believe in God? I was serious, I can probably give you a rational explination for it.


 I always thought the concept was Satan was pissed at God so they've been fighting for our souls?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 14, 2009)

Boogaloo Bud said:


> I always thought the concept was Satan was pissed at God so they've been fighting for our souls?


 
So did God have the idea of heaven/hell in mind before he cast Satan into hell, or was it created at the same time? 

Did he create Lucifer knowing he would fall and he would then have to design a place for all the fallen souls that sinned? Essentailly creating this entire good v. evil, "I love you but you might be tortured for eternity" paradox...

*What is Satans motivation to want to torture fallen souls? Why does he do it?*


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 14, 2009)

Boogaloo Bud said:


> I always thought the concept was Satan was pissed at God so they've been fighting for our souls?


Satan isn't going to be tormenting anyone. Satan's power and authority is going to be stripped from him. Then he will be worthless and weak. His followers will see him for what he is: worthless and weak.
The torment of everlasting damnation is separation from all things good, righteous, and holy, AKA God.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 14, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> And fish, tell me that story, what couldn't you explain that made you believe in God? I was serious, I can probably give you a rational explination for it.


It wasn't fish. It was me.

Anyway, the veil that separates the battlefield of warring angels and demons and our physical plane was torn apart and I saw what lurked on the other side and how it pressed on our reality. I had no idea what I was looking at at the time. Over time and study, I began to understand what I was seeing/saw. Most people would have gone insane.
There is much more to this story than I can write here. It would take a pretty thick book.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 15, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> It wasn't fish. It was me.
> 
> Anyway, the veil that separates the battlefield of warring angels and demons and our physical plane was torn apart and I saw what lurked on the other side and how it pressed on our reality. I had no idea what I was looking at at the time. Over time and study, I began to understand what I was seeing/saw. Most people would have gone insane.
> There is much more to this story than I can write here. It would take a pretty thick book.


 
Well, I'm not going anywhere...

Try to summarize it, and simplify it as much as possible.


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Well, I'm not going anywhere...
> 
> Try to summarize it, and simplify it as much as possible.


I think he saw the reptile people.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> And fish, tell me that story, what couldn't you explain that made you believe in God? I was serious, I can probably give you a rational explination for it.


I have a rational explanation for it: The God of the Bible is real. Satan is real. Demons are real. Angels are real. The Holy Bible is true. Yeshua is real. 
Look. I am not stupid. I am very rational. I understand quantum theory. I understand special relativity. I understand logic. I understand evolutionary theory. What makes you think your explanation of whatever I have experienced is better than my explanation? How many letters do you have behind your name? 
Just because you don't understand what I say doesn't mean that I am wrong.

And I didn't see reptile people.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 15, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> > I have a rational explanation for it: The God of the Bible is real. Satan is real. Demons are real. Angels are real. The Holy Bible is true. Yeshua is real.



Check your rear view mirror.......You just left rationality behind you..


----------



## zorkan (Aug 15, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> There are many smart people who believe in very ignorant things. They will never see the full picture. ."


 
 wow, dude you said "If a buddhist ever asks how the world began he would be told to *ask a scientist, plain and simple"*

guess its not so plain and simple BECAUSE
some scientist believe in creation.
MEANING what good would it do to ask a scientist ok? got it? good atheist


----------



## zorkan (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> If Satan did exist, what would be his motivation to torment all of mankinds souls? Again, that's another thing I never understood... Why does Satan want to torture all these horrible people? Think about it... If Satan is the ultimate manifestation of evil, just like how God is supposed to be the ultimate manifestation of good, and all the people that get sent to hell who committed incredibly horrible acts on earth, wouldn't he throw a fuckin' party and thank them all for helping him out with all that evil shit? Wouldn't torturing all the evil souls be a favor for God in a way? He'd be enforcing God's ruling wouldn't he? He'd still be a slave to God, even though he fell from heaven...
> 
> shit just doesn't make any goddamn sense... come on you Chrsitians, give me an answer for that one.
> 
> And fish, tell me that story, what couldn't you explain that made you believe in God? I was serious, I can probably give you a rational explination for it.


 
look i dont know where god is but geez man you really dont have a clue what the bible teaches do you
i am not gona speak for a christian but that would be an easy answer.. one of the dumbest post i seen yet


----------



## zorkan (Aug 15, 2009)

ok this makes 17 post

couldn't let you win the dumbest post contest


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yes, the church takes in Billions and gives out Millions..... what am I missing?


The fact that it takes money to run a church.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 15, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I have a rational explanation for it: The God of the Bible is real. Satan is real. Demons are real. Angels are real. The Holy Bible is true. Yeshua is real.
> Look. I am not stupid. I am very rational. I understand quantum theory. I understand special relativity. I understand logic. I understand evolutionary theory. What makes you think your explanation of whatever I have experienced is better than my explanation? How many letters do you have behind your name?
> Just because you don't understand what I say doesn't mean that I am wrong.
> 
> And I didn't see reptile people.


Ok...so where is your rational explanation.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 15, 2009)

fish601 said:


> The fact that it takes money to run a church.



The Church has taken a heck of a lot more than money to keep itself running. Massive profit margin included. 

Life, liberty, property, free thought. 

That's a mighty Butcher's bill.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 15, 2009)

zorkan said:


> look i dont know where god is but geez man you really dont have a clue what the bible teaches do you
> i am not gona speak for a christian but that would be an easy answer.. one of the dumbest post i seen yet


 
Sill can't answer it.



Thought so.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> The Church has taken a heck of a lot more than money to keep itself running. Massive profit margin included.
> 
> Life, liberty, property, free thought.
> 
> That's a mighty Butcher's bill.


i am sure some churches have done that


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Sill can't answer it.
> 
> 
> 
> Thought so.


 




http://gotquestions.org/Bible-Questions.html






.


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 15, 2009)

like the christian church in one of it's forms.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 15, 2009)

zorkan said:


> wow, dude you said "If a buddhist ever asks how the world began he would be told to *ask a scientist, plain and simple"*
> 
> guess its not so plain and simple BECAUSE
> some scientist believe in creation.
> MEANING what good would it do to ask a scientist ok? got it? good atheist


I guess you dont understand what I mean. When I say a scientist, I am speaking of a scientific answer. When I ask a scientist something like that, why would I care what his personal beliefs are? Science is science. Why would a scientist who is a mormon give me a different answer than somone who is muslim?


----------



## Cap K (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Cap K, that's just another one of those tactics they came up with to keep people from looking outside the box.
> 
> With that statement, it's completely lose lose, and either way you go, just like all the shell game tactics, it doesn't matter.
> 
> Also, if the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist, he must have taken that out of God's playbook!


Sorry I've been out of the conversation for a bit , but this is what I really want to say. Neither God nor the devil are tangible, visible beings to most of us. But I think an easy way of proving their existence is to look at the world and what takes place. 

Let's take a little hypothetical stroll and we'll say that they do exist, God and the devil right? Now we know there are a set of standards that god would like us to live by, although he has given us the free will to do as we please. Know that there are consequences for breaking his commandments. Of course the devil is the opposite of this. He adheres to no commandments and furthermore influences humans not to. This is how he offends god. By turning the lords chidren against him. By encouraging a do what thou wilt mantra. 

That was all hypothetical right? Let's look at homosexuality and how any public opposition to it is met with swift media coverage. Let me ask ya'll something let's say the devil exists hunh? What better way to offend God than to have legislation passed that recognizes the union of two men or two women. What better way to offend God then to have clergymen under the law preside over the proceedings of the immoral union?

I submit we have only, but to look closely at the world we live in and we can quickly find the devil.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> I guess you dont understand what I mean. When I say a scientist, I am speaking of a scientific answer. When I ask a scientist something like that, why would I care what his personal beliefs are? Science is science. Why would a scientist who is a mormon give me a different answer than somone who is muslim?


If i may? 

"Today *scientists generally believe* the universe was created in a violent explosion called the Big Bang." Susan Terebey, Department of Physics and Astronomy, California State University Los Angeles ""

There is not a scientific answer they are only guessing. there is no way to prove how old the earth is, dating methods are flawed. if you ask a scientist about the beginning they will tell you what they believe happen.


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 15, 2009)

fish601 said:


> If i may?
> 
> "Today *scientists generally believe* the universe was created in a violent explosion called the Big Bang." Susan Terebey, Department of Physics and Astronomy, California State University Los Angeles ""
> 
> There is not a scientific answer they are only guessing. there is no way to prove how old the earth is, dating methods are flawed. if you ask a scientist about the beginning they will tell you what they believe happen.


so what though? at least they're out there trying to find an answer, instead of just going back to the same old book, making the same old TOTAL FAIL ARGUMENT! and then trying to tell us that _we're_ the wrong ones, as the scientists are ust working on theory.

he's right, in that science is science, doesn't matter if you're a christian or a muslim. just because you're a devout believer pf the bible, if you're a scientist, and you put this beliefe into your work and such, then it's nothing but flawed, unreliable work. science is science.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

what do you mean " TOTAL FAIL ARGUMENT " ?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 15, 2009)

CapK, an omnipotent being is immune to being offended. 




fish601 said:


> If i may?
> 
> "Today *scientists generally believe* the universe was created in a violent explosion called the Big Bang." Susan Terebey, Department of Physics and Astronomy, California State University Los Angeles ""
> 
> There is not a scientific answer they are only guessing. there is no way to prove how old the earth is, dating methods are flawed. if you ask a scientist about the beginning they will tell you what they believe happen.


 
You sir, have no idea what your talking about. Every single dating method we have that's used is accurate to a few million years, and thats just the dating methods dealing with the dead stuff.... I'll get back to this later, gotta go to work...


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 15, 2009)

fish601 said:


> If i may?
> 
> "Today *scientists generally believe* the universe was created in a violent explosion called the Big Bang." Susan Terebey, Department of Physics and Astronomy, California State University Los Angeles ""
> 
> There is not a scientific answer they are only guessing. there is no way to prove how old the earth is, dating methods are flawed. if you ask a scientist about the beginning they will tell you what they believe happen.


Again illustrating the point that the question in itself is ignorance and having that knowledge will not make you enlightened. Theres so many educated idiots in the world. Its funny that you try to reinforce the idea that scientists are the confused ones and the only real knowledge comes from a mans own personal beliefs.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> You sir, have no idea what your talking about. Every single dating method we have that's used is accurate to a few million years, and thats just the dating methods dealing with the dead stuff.... I'll get back to this later, gotta go to work...


ROTFLMAO!!!!
The freaking half life of Carbon 14 is 6000 years.

Also, we don't KNOW what the cosmic ray flux was thousands of years ago. We don't KNOW the nitrogen content of our atmosphere that long ago either. 
And that is just the beginning of all the flaws of radiocarbon dating.

I hope you clarify things when you get back from work.

Accurate to a few million years???
Are you really high right now??
Error bars of a few million years are not good: "yeah, we dated this as being 1 million years old +- 3 million years."


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Its funny that you try to reinforce the idea that scientists are the confused ones .


They know they are wrong ""First, for carbon-14 dating to be accurate, one must assume the rate of decay of carbon-14 has remained constant over the years. However, evidence indicates that the opposite is true. Experiments have been performed using the radioactive isotopes of uranium-238 and iron-57, and have shown that rates can and do vary. In fact, changing the environments surrounding the samples can alter decay rates.""

science is science right?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 15, 2009)

fish601 said:


> They know they are wrong ""First, for carbon-14 dating to be accurate, one must assume the rate of decay of carbon-14 has remained constant over the years. However, evidence indicates that the opposite is true. Experiments have been performed using the radioactive isotopes of uranium-238 and iron-57, and have shown that rates can and do vary. In fact, changing the environments surrounding the samples can alter decay rates.""
> 
> science is science right?


Most scientists aren't scientists. They are priests of a religion.
A true scientist doesn't rule out conclusions that are uncomfortable or verboten.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 15, 2009)

Like I said earlier, your argument for an almighty god shouldnt be taken up with a mere scientist but with real enlightened people. People who have devoted entire lifetimes to meditation, contemplation and cultivating wisdom and compassion. For instance, somone who is good at meditation can shut down all brain waves and be in full samadhi while being completely awake. Shit christians cant even concieve of. In fact they would say its of the devil, which to me is blasphemy. Christianity is retarding the spiritual progress of man. Actually any aberhamic religion is. Looking into the mirror and seeing yourself and living by the truth. Thats what I get out of all this nonsence. If you truly look at yourself and empty out everything you know to be true and all the stuff that was told to you that you believe in, theres no way you could hold on to christianity. Unless you truly cant be honest with yourself.


----------



## zorkan (Aug 15, 2009)

your an idiot LOL maybe you dont know any christians

this statement "If you truly look at yourself and empty out everything you know to be true and all the stuff that was told to you that you believe in, theres no way you could hold on to christianity." can be said about anything.
I am not so sure christians are right but one this is for sure, your an idiot.

can i get an amen


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

zorkan said:


> your an idiot LOL maybe you dont know any christians
> 
> this statement "If you truly look at yourself and empty out everything you know to be true and all the stuff that was told to you that you believe in, theres no way you could hold on to christianity." can be said about anything.
> I am not so sure christians are right but one this is for sure, your an idiot.
> ...


I am sure he knows christians or at least claim to be a christian. I think you mean a real bible reading christian one who well actually reads and studies the bible, one who lives by the word of God, one who lives for God. Now those are getting kinda rare. The christians you mostly know today just listen to what some preachers has to say and well they are not allways right.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> If you truly look at yourself and *empty out everything you know to be true* and all the stuff that was told to you that you believe in,* theres no way you could hold on to christianity.* Unless you truly cant be honest with yourself.


erm you said if i empty everything i know to be true there is no way i could hold on to christianity.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 15, 2009)

zorkan said:


> your an idiot LOL your an idiot.
> 
> can i get an amen


 
be nice


----------



## zorkan (Aug 15, 2009)

fish601 said:


> be nice


 
I WAS  but i am an idiot to so i can say that


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 15, 2009)

zorkan said:


> your an idiot LOL maybe you dont know any christians
> 
> this statement "If you truly look at yourself and empty out everything you know to be true and all the stuff that was told to you that you believe in, theres no way you could hold on to christianity." can be said about anything.
> I am not so sure christians are right but one this is for sure, your an idiot.
> ...


Wow. An idiot? I was raised christian, and went to a baptist school so its not like Im suprised from that comment. I realize that you are fondly attached to your beliefs, but why not give them up? Try it. Open your mind to reality. That is the true test. 
One of my favorite Buddhist quotes, "with the abandonment of all attachment the self dissappears, for the self is the illusion generated by attachment."


----------



## zorkan (Aug 15, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Wow. An idiot? I was raised christian, and went to a baptist school so its not like Im suprised from that comment. I realize that you are fondly attached to your beliefs, but why not give them up? Try it. Open your mind to reality. That is the true test.
> One of my favorite Buddhist quotes, "with the abandonment of all attachment the self dissappears, for the self is the illusion generated by attachment."


 
dude who said i was a christian???????

you to far gone for anyone to help


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 15, 2009)

Well you said quite clearly that "Maby I dont know any christians." I'll add you to my ignore list. Its for the best.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 15, 2009)

> ROTFLMAO!!!!
> The freaking half life of Carbon 14 is 6000 years.
> 
> Also, we don't KNOW what the cosmic ray flux was thousands of years ago. We don't KNOW the nitrogen content of our atmosphere that long ago either.
> ...


Oh God, that hurt me to read man seriously, the ignorance is disgustingly strong in this post! 

Will you please tell me your age and education level before you reply again? I like to know these things about a person, it tells me a few things.

OK, carbon 14 dating... 

half-life - 5,730 years (constant)

We DO know the levels of nitrogen, we gather that through geology. The trace elements in the atmosphere get trapped inside the rock, over millions of years, dozens of layers build up, we can then take samples of each layer, analyze it's composition... then from there, determine what was in the atmosphere at the time... it's pretty simple and very accurate. 

From Wiki;



> An organism acquires carbon during its lifetime. Plants acquire it through photosynthesis, and animals acquire it from consumption of plants and other animals. When an organism dies, it ceases to take in new carbon-14, and the existing isotope decays with a characteristic half-life (5,730 years). The proportion of carbon-14 left when the remains of the organism are examined provides an indication of the time elapsed since its death. The carbon-14 dating limit lies around 58,000 - 62,000 years.


There are no flaws with carbon dating, that is a lie spread through the religious community from lying preachers who don't know a goddamn thing about science and believe if things like carbon-14 dating were actually true it would destroy a big part of the reason people feel they need to believe, exact same with the theory of evolution, abiogenesis, big bang... anything that openly contradicts what their religion has already determined to be fact gets thrown out the window, true or not. 

I challenge you to find me one source openly criticising the validity of carbon dating. 

Radiometric dating is used to date things like rocks and the age of the earth, which is accurate to a few million years, which I was talking about in the previous post... and yeah, the earth being 4.5 Billion years old, 4,500,000,000 years --- 1,000,000 +/- ... you do the math, let me know when you get that percentage. That's very accurate buddy. 

Well, there you go for now... I hope you consider this.



> They know they are wrong ""First, for carbon-14 dating to be accurate, one must assume the rate of decay of carbon-14 has remained constant over the years. However, evidence indicates that the opposite is true. Experiments have been performed using the radioactive isotopes of uranium-238 and iron-57, and have shown that rates can and do vary. In fact, changing the environments surrounding the samples can alter decay rates.""
> 
> science is science right?


The half-life and decay rate of carbon-14 is constant. So a few samples dated using the method came out wrong because of the materials they were next to contaminated them... so that makes all the other accurate measurements already established void? WTF kind of reasoning is that? 

Science is science because it can be corroborated by other people, and guess what, other people use these dating methods every single day and get the exact same measurements. It can be done over and over again with the exact same results, it can predict the outcome of future experiments, that is science.



> Most scientists aren't scientists. They are priests of a religion.
> A true scientist doesn't rule out conclusions that are uncomfortable or verboten.


You are dilusional. Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 15, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Oh God, that hurt me to read man seriously, the ignorance is disgustingly strong in this post!
> 
> Will you please tell me your age and education level before you reply again? I like to know these things about a person, it tells me a few things.
> 
> ...


Could you refer some good literature please?

You seem very intelligent...and i'd like to read into a lot of these topics.

Thanks in advance! =D


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 16, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> Could you refer some good literature please?
> 
> You seem very intelligent...and i'd like to read into a lot of these topics.
> 
> Thanks in advance! =D


 
Absolutely! And thanks for the compliment!

The one that really got me deep into science was _Billions and Billions_ by Carl Sagan, the guy was a genius, I felt privileged to read it I thought it was that good! He's great at explaining complicated theories for the layman. I'd definitely suggest reading it. (it's a pretty popular book, I'm sure you can find it online and download it for free, if not, send me a PM and I'll try to find it for you)

Another good one is _A Short History of Nearly Everything_ by Bill Bryson. This book has all the nitty gritty scientific stuff included and it's insanely interesting to read, I couldn't put it down!

A good author that I've been following for a while is Sam Harris, he writes mainly about religion, but he also touches on ethics and politics too, great stuff from this guy, FILLED with logical points that make believers scratch their heads.

Richard Dawkins is one of the best at explaining the theory of evolution, he's got 5 or 6 best sellers out there, _The Blind Watchmaker, Climbing Mount Improbable, _and most recently _The God Delusion, _I'd definitely check out his material. He's also pretty up to date with current technology, he's got his own youtube channel and he does a lot of public appearances, so if you don't want to spend a lot of time reading you can find plenty of clips of him speaking.

Not to mention there are a ton of TOP QUALITY channels on youtube already, just as good as Dawkins, if not better! Seriously check these out if you've got the time!

AronRa - great at explaining anything related to the theory of evolution

AndromedasWake - amazing videos related to astonomy! He's got a subchannel also - beautyintheuniverse

cdk007 - anything evolution

Danmill23 - logical points about the universe and tons of stuff to think on, more on the philosophy side of things

DonExodus2 - one of the best evolutionary bilogists (student in NC) on the internet!

KingHeathen - always puts out great arguments, also more on the philosophy side of things

patcondell - mainly criticizes religion, lots of logical points

PaulsEgo - he's not as active as the rest, but his vids are brilliant

philhellenes - one of the smartest guys out there, he knows a ton about a ton, from anything science to anything religious and anything in between, this is the guy to go to

ProfMTH - brilliant guy, criticizes religion 

shanedk - top quality vids, from economics to math to science to religion

TEDtalksDirector - this channel is GREAT! The best and brightest showing inventions and explaining the newest in technology and research in all fields of science, you could spend weeks on this one channel!

TheAtheistExperience - this channel is really entertaining, they talk about religion and have callers from all over the world call in and discuss things

Thunderf00t (that's with zero's) - this guy is great at explaining most scientific topics, he specializes in evolution, electronics, mechanics, astronomy, and a ton of other things.. 

TheBadAstronomer - Phil Pliatts channel, he's an engineer whose worked for NASA, his vids are about space and cool things that they're up to, new missions and such

Veritas48 - a Christian who brings a lot of logic to the table, this is the perfect example of how a believer should debate, this guy is brilliant

TheoreticalBullshit - smart? Holy fuck! This guy is a straight up genius! Seeminly educated from MIT, Harvard and Yale, this guy brings stacks and stacks of logic to the party. I aspire to be this awesome at logical pwnage.


That should get you started, I can probably suggest some more stuff if you find any of this interesting!

Good for you for taking that step man, I commend you!


----------



## DrZ (Aug 16, 2009)

If you believe in God there is a Devil He made him Duh ..


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 16, 2009)

Thanks Padawan, much appreciated bro!
Honestly, I can't ever sit through lectures...usually am better with the reading.
I'll def. look into em all...I'm sure I can find torrents for em'.

Again, thanks!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 16, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> CapK, an omnipotent being is immune to being offended.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Gee. Radiocarbon dating is one of the methods we use. Hence, one of the "every single dating method"s you speak of.
Which is accurate to a few million years????


----------



## zorkan (Aug 16, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Well you said quite clearly that "Maby I dont know any christians." I'll add you to my ignore list. Its for the best.


 
i dun even no wut ur talkn bout


----------



## what... huh? (Aug 16, 2009)

Carbon dating is only accurate to about 50,000 years. That isn't propaganda. This is why they primarily use Argon dating for very old material. The problem with Argon is that it is a relative dating method, so you have to have a sample with a known lifespan in order to test against something else of the same material.

It is also a known issue IN carbon dating that materials are tested again and again with differing results, so they take an average mean. The problem there is that many bad scientists tweak the averages in order to achieve the result desired... like a cop making you blow into a breathalizer over and over again to try and get a reading over .08. 

The exact science just isn't that exact.



HOWEVER... the inaccuracy is not able to be willfully manipulated to come up with 66 million years when the true age is 10,000. Again... carbon dating is extremely accurate to well beyond that date on its own... which is why I assume it was brought up... haven't done my back reading just yet. Wanted to address the accuracy of padawans statement... who's side I am on btw.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 16, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Will you please tell me your age and education level before you reply again? I like to know these things about a person, it tells me a few things.


This just shows how totally illogical you are. It doesn't matter how old I am or my education level. Such things have nothing to do with what I present. 
Lets just say that I am more educated than you will ever be.
Or maybe I am not.
It doesn't matter. You are trying to set up an ad hominem fallacy.
The bottom line is whether or not what I say is true. I could be in 3rd grade and still speak the truth.
Get it? 



> OK, carbon 14 dating...
> 
> half-life - 5,730 years (constant)


I was rounding up to 6000. Duh.



> There are no flaws with carbon dating, that is a lie spread through the religious community from lying preachers who don't know a goddamn thing about science and believe if things like carbon-14 dating were actually true it would destroy a big part of the reason people feel they need to believe, exact same with the theory of evolution, abiogenesis, big bang... anything that openly contradicts what their religion has already determined to be fact gets thrown out the window, true or not.


These are your axioms. You base all your logic on these assumptions. Open your mind and forget these axioms, just for the sake of argument. See what the evidence truly is. That is what good scientists do.

I am first and foremost a scientist. I try not to bring my beliefs into the lab, so to speak. I look at the evidence and the facts without having preconceived notions of what is true.
When I look at the facts surrounding the method of radiocarbon dating, there are way too many facts and observations against it to trust it. That is how I see it, as a scientist, not a Christian.
Religious beliefs have nothing to do with this conclusion.



> I challenge you to find me one source openly criticising the validity of carbon dating.
> 
> Radiometric dating is used to date things like rocks and the age of the earth, which is accurate to a few million years, which I was talking about in the previous post... and yeah, the earth being 4.5 Billion years old, 4,500,000,000 years --- 1,000,000 +/- ... you do the math, let me know when you get that percentage. That's very accurate buddy.


You said ANY kind of dating is accurate to 10^6 years. Carbon is one of them.



> The half-life and decay rate of carbon-14 is constant.


 
Not necessarily. As a particle physicist, I have a hard time believing that the weak coupling constant has been constant over the history of the Earth.
Einstein had a hard time with it too. He doubted that anything was really constant in nature. So do I.
If the weak coupling constant changes with time, all nuclear decay rates will change.
We have the same sort of issue with the speed of light, and there is evidence that the speed of light is NOT constant.





> So a few samples dated using the method came out wrong because of the materials they were next to contaminated them... so that makes all the other accurate measurements already established void? WTF kind of reasoning is that?


Nothing in nature can contaminate the sample with more daughter nuclei??



> Science is science because it can be corroborated by other people, and guess what, other people use these dating methods every single day and get the exact same measurements. It can be done over and over again with the exact same results, it can predict the outcome of future experiments, that is science.
> 
> 
> 
> You are dilusional. Keep telling yourself that.


The word is delusional. And you telling me that I am delusional keeps me aware that I am on the right path.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 16, 2009)

what... huh? said:


> The problem there is that many bad scientists tweak the averages in order to achieve the result desired... like a cop making you blow into a breathalizer over and over again to try and get a reading over .08.


No way! You mean a 'scientist' would cook the books????

It just so happens that the history of evolutionary theory is replete with such examples of chicanery.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 16, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Oh God, that hurt me to read man seriously, the ignorance is disgustingly strong in this post!


 
Most importantly, do you know the cosmic ray flux at all times in the past?


----------



## what... huh? (Aug 16, 2009)

So shroomer... whaddaya say about K-Ar dating?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 16, 2009)

what... huh? said:


> So shroomer... whaddaya say about K-Ar dating?


*In some cases, the whole rock age is greater than the age of the minerals, and for others, the reverse occurs*. The potassium-argon mineral results vary between 1,520 and 2,620 million years (a difference of 1,100 million years). All of this argon is being produced and entering the air and water in between the rocks, and gradually filtering up to the atmosphere. But we know that rocks absorb argon, because correction factors are applied for this when using *K-Ar dating*. So this argon that is being produced will leave some rocks and enter others. *The partial pressure of argon should be largest deepest in the earth, and decrease towards the surface. This would result in larger K-Ar ages lower down, but lower ages nearer the surface.*

What most people don't realize, or at least don't discuss, is that Ar/Ar method is not an absolute dating method. Let me emphasize again that this dating method is a _relative_ dating method. In other words, it must be _calibrated_ relative to a different dating method before it can be used to date materials relative to that other dating method.

"Because this (primary) standard ultimately cannot be determined by 40Ar/39Ar, it must be first determined by another isotopic dating method. The method most commonly used to date the primary standard is the conventional K/Ar technique. . . Once an accurate and precise age is determined for the primary standard, other minerals can be dated relative to it by the 40Ar/39Ar method. These secondary minerals are often more convenient to date by the 40Ar/39Ar technique (e.g. sanidine). However, while it is often easy to determine the age of the primary standard by the K/Ar method, *it is difficult for different dating laboratories to agree on the final age.* *Likewise . . . the K/Ar ages are not always reproducible*. This imprecision (and inaccuracy) is transferred to the secondary minerals used daily by the 40Ar/39Ar technique." 49 

Step heating does not overcome this inherent reliance of Ar/Ar dating on calibration with K/Ar or other dating methods. *So, whatever problems exist in the method used for calibration will be passed on to the Ar/Ar dating method as well*. *This same problem exists for all other relative radiometric dating techniques. In addition, there are other problems with Ar/Ar dating such as the uncertainty of the decay constants for 40K and 39Ar recoil.* 
For a further discussion of these inherent problems with Ar/Ar dating see the following link to _The New Mexico Bureau of Geology & Mineral Resources__ (_http://geoinfo.nmt.edu/labs/ argon/methods/home.html)​


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 16, 2009)

fish601 said:


> *In some cases, the whole rock age is greater than the age of the minerals, and for others, the reverse occurs*. The potassium-argon mineral results vary between 1,520 and 2,620 million years (a difference of 1,100 million years). All of this argon is being produced and entering the air and water in between the rocks, and gradually filtering up to the atmosphere. But we know that rocks absorb argon, because correction factors are applied for this when using *K-Ar dating*. So this argon that is being produced will leave some rocks and enter others. *The partial pressure of argon should be largest deepest in the earth, and decrease towards the surface. This would result in larger K-Ar ages lower down, but lower ages nearer the surface.*
> 
> What most people don't realize, or at least don't discuss, is that Ar/Ar method is not an absolute dating method. Let me emphasize again that this dating method is a _relative_ dating method. In other words, it must be _calibrated_ relative to a different dating method before it can be used to date materials relative to that other dating method.
> 
> ...


I'm glad to see that you have given up on the 6000 year old earth. slow progress.... but progress none the less.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 16, 2009)

6000 to 10000 6000 is just a close figure it could be 6001


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 16, 2009)

fish601 said:


> 6000 to 10000 6000 is just a close figure it could be 6001


 
fish, are you saying that there is no method of dating that is accurate? Not one?


Are you then saying that you believe the earth is between 6K - 10K years old?


I'd just like clarification.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 16, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> fish, are you saying that there is no method of dating that is accurate? Not one?
> 
> 
> Are you then saying that you believe the earth is between 6K - 10K years old?
> ...


No method of dating is accurate that i know of, reason why is because the The starting conditions are unknown, and we dont know if the decay rates have always been constant. Now if we use dating methods for only a few thousand years yeah we can get pretty close

The bible doesnt say how old the earth is so we can only guess. If it was proven
to be umteen billion years old that would not hurt my faith. One thing for sure is God created it


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 16, 2009)

fish601 said:


> No method of dating is accurate that i know of, reason why is because the The starting conditions are unknown, and we dont know if the decay rates have always been constant. Now if we use dating methods for only a few thousand years yeah we can get pretty close
> 
> The bible doesnt say how old the earth is so we can only guess. If it was proven
> to be umteen billion years old that would not hurt my faith. One thing for sure is God created it


 
If no method is accurate, why does the scientific community agree on the age of things like donosaur bones, or other geological discoveries? 

Also, why would the time frame for determining somethings age depend on only a few thousand years? Are you saying that because we know of the atmospheric conditions back to a few thousand years and we have to "guess" the atmospheric conditions any later than that, the farther you go the less accurate the measurement? 

If the bible doesn't say how old the earth is, then why are so many Christians sold on the idea it's 6-10 thousand years old?

What created God?


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 17, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> What created God?


Another God.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 17, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> If no method is accurate, why does the scientific community agree on the age of things like donosaur bones, or other geological discoveries?
> 
> Also, why would the time frame for determining somethings age depend on only a few thousand years? Are you saying that because we know of the atmospheric conditions back to a few thousand years and we have to "guess" the atmospheric conditions any later than that, the farther you go the less accurate the measurement?
> 
> ...


Again, apples to oranges. Science cannot be compared to Religion as a contemporary or an alternative. They are not interchangeable. 

Science undergoes vigorous testing and verification, constantly. Religion is non verifiable.

Science eventually narrows out the falsehoods to an agreed upon distillation of known truth. Religion cannot be verified and no one can agree upon any one truth, since the truths are non tested. 

science encourages the gathering of new knowledge, even if it contradicts all that has gone on before. Religion considers itself complete and perfect, and discourages any new knowledge which will contradict it. ( Like when the Church fought strongly against the "earth revolves around the sun" posit). 

Science is built on truth. Religion is not.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 17, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Again, apples to oranges. Science cannot be compared to Religion as a contemporary or an alternative. They are not interchangeable.
> 
> Science undergoes vigorous testing and verification, constantly. Religion is non verifiable.
> 
> ...


Great post!


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 17, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Great post!


Thanks again padawan! I've started reading Billions and Billions....it's amazing.

Gonna start the God Delusion i think today...i skimmed through it a bit...it also looks very interesting.


----------



## Brazko (Aug 17, 2009)

Science is based on technological advancements in observing what already is, Religion is formulated from the observed experience/experienced, both are True...The only variant is the Interpreter


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 17, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> fish, are you saying that there is no method of dating that is accurate? Not one?
> 
> 
> Are you then saying that you believe the earth is between 6K - 10K years old?
> ...


The universe is just about 7 days old, by the way.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 17, 2009)

yah..... just about.  Now that does sound like the truth.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 17, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> If no method is accurate, why does the scientific community agree on the age of things like donosaur bones, or other geological discoveries?
> 
> Also, why would the time frame for determining somethings age depend on only a few thousand years? Are you saying that because we know of the atmospheric conditions back to a few thousand years and we have to "guess" the atmospheric conditions any later than that, the farther you go the less accurate the measurement?
> 
> ...


They all use the same test so they get same results (not allways) but it doesnt mean its accurate. 

yes

I think its a gray area.. like i said the bible does not say how old the earth is we can only guess

what created god? good question go here for your answer http://www.gotquestions.org/who-created-God.html
But i think the real questions is what created earth. 
Which is harder to believe earth just exist or God just exist


----------



## zorkan (Aug 17, 2009)

fish601 said:


> ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
> 
> what created god? good question go here for your answer http://www.gotquestions.org/who-created-God.html
> But i think the real questions is what created earth.
> Which is harder to believe earth just exist or God just exist


 i dun no wut they talkn bout on tat page but umm yea mayb thers a god


----------



## zorkan (Aug 17, 2009)

zorkan said:


> i dun no wut they talkn bout on tat page but umm yea mayb thers a god


 
ahhhhhhhhhhhhh i dun like tat thought guess where ill b


----------



## zorkan (Aug 17, 2009)

zorkan said:


> ahhhhhhhhhhhhh i dun like tat thought guess where ill b


 
seriously i need to rethink tis beter not b a god tat wuld suck


----------



## zorkan (Aug 17, 2009)

zorkan said:


> seriously i need to rethink tis beter not b a god tat wuld suck





ok i think bout tis when not high


----------



## fish601 (Aug 17, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> ( Like when the Church fought strongly against the "earth revolves around the sun" posit).
> 
> Science is built on truth. Religion is not.


i dont see why the church would fight against the "earth revolves around the sun" the bible doesnt teach astronomy or science. 


The christian religion is built on truth


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 17, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> Thanks again padawan! I've started reading Billions and Billions....it's amazing.
> 
> Gonna start the God Delusion i think today...i skimmed through it a bit...it also looks very interesting.


 
If you like Carl Sagan, you should really watch the Cosmos series. That was my shit back in the day. I watched every episode about 20 times. (not an exaggeration) Me and a couple of my like minded friends would trip and/or smoke and watch Cosmos for hours. Actually, the night of my first ever shroom harvest, one of my friends and I tripped balls and watched about 7 episodes of Cosmos. Granted, he melted through my bedroom floor into the kitchen downstairs, but it was fun nonetheless. 
Aahhh, memories.
Sagan's Cosmos is one of the biggest reasons why I got into physics. Sagan had a huge impact on my life.
You see. I am well aware of evolutionary theory and science as a whole. I am neither stupid nor uneducated. I am a scientist and I always have been.
I just no longer remove potential conclusions that are uncomfortable. But the point of this was to say that Sagan rocked. So I will leave it at that.
Also, he was a huge pothead, which made him all the more cool.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 17, 2009)

fish601 said:


> i dont see why the church would fight against the "earth revolves around the sun" the bible doesnt teach astronomy or science.
> 
> 
> The christian religion is built on truth



You are never going to think this through clearly are you?


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 17, 2009)

I remember being 3-4 years old and watching that on my dads lap. Never forgot that show.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 17, 2009)

A good scientist has no religious beliefs.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 17, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> A good scientist has no religious beliefs.


Yeah. Like Newton, right?
He was a horrible scientist.

Maxwell?
Kepler?
Gauss?
Schroedinger?
Heisenberg?

What about Riemann? (one of my all time faves. Riemann was BADASS!!!!)


SO these people were bad scientists? Right.

In your line of thinking, a scientist has no religious beliefs, but "beyond your tunnel vision, reality fades like shadows into the night."

You would say that I have religious beliefs, right?
Well, I am a scientist, and I have the degrees and experience to prove it.
And many of the people I have come across (who are great scientists) as a scientist are very religious. Some way more than me. 
You are speaking out of TOTAL ignorance, yet again.


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Aug 17, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> What created God?


The human race.

Man created god; not the other way around.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 17, 2009)

God is outside of time. Hence, there is NO beginning and NO end to God.
We need to thank Dr. Einstein for this one!!!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 18, 2009)

zorkan said:


> ok i think bout tis when not high


I'd like some of that stuff you're smoking. Whew!


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 18, 2009)

> God is outside of time. Hence, there is NO beginning and NO end to God.





> We need to thank Dr. Einstein for this one!!!





> You see. I am well aware of evolutionary theory and science as a whole. I am neither stupid nor uneducated. I am a scientist and I always have been.





> I just no longer remove potential conclusions that are uncomfortable.


You may be a scientist in the sense you have earned a degree in a field of science, but you clearly show that doesn't make a person a scientist. To a scientist, nothing is outside of time, as that's NOT WHAT SCIENCE DEALS WITH. Science ONLY deals with the reality we occupy, which includes time. Science has absolutely nothing to say about anything outside of space or time, which you already admitted includes God, so how would you suggest a 'scientist' like yourself observes it/him? Answer that.

And just as a side note, what kind of bullshit non answer is that anyway? He's outside of space and time... Shroomer, dude, can't you see that's just a fallback they came up with designed SPECIFICALLY so that that question cannot be answered logically? That is clear as day. 




> Yeah. Like Newton, right?





> He was a horrible scientist.
> 
> Maxwell?
> Kepler?
> ...


Statistics are against you my friend.

http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm

The first one says that 52% of scientists have no religious affiliation, compared to 14% of the general public. 

The second one surveyed "greater" scientists (defined as those belonging to the National Academy of Sciences). It found that 65% of biological scientists expressed a "disbelief in a personal God", and 79% of physical scientists. Most of the others were agnostics. Only 7% expressed a "belief in a personal God."

Also, the scenario was essentailly... "believe in God or die", whether you actually believe or just "believe"... it's that or die. Hey uhh... I choose "believe"! No question. If that were the scenario today, you don't think I'd lie out my ass about how much I believed in God to not be killed by all the crazy people around me?? Think it through buddy, you'd do the same.

Don't get me wrong, that's not to say those men weren't actually truly believers in their faith, I'm just saying that was the law back in the day, you can't rule anything out.

Also, check the dates;

Newton - 17th century

Kepler - 16th century..

A lot of what is known today about evolutionary theory and biology was not known to them. 

Though none of that even matters... argument from authority. Doesn't hold any water with me... it doesn't matter to me what any other 'scientist' believed, or what anyone thinks they may have believed. Fact is, they could be extremely smart but incredibly ignorant, anyone could be. Someone else's belief or disbelief in a God doesn't mean and shouldn't mean anything, it does not have the power to influence my decisions. Those men you listed were no doubt geniuses in their fields and contributed a ton to humanity, but not everyone is right about everything all the time. 




> The human race.





> Man created god; not the other way around.


DING DING DING! Give this man some +rep!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 18, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> You may be a scientist in the sense you have earned a degree in a field of science, but you clearly show that doesn't make a person a scientist.


Get it right. 3 degrees.


> To a scientist, nothing is outside of time, as that's NOT WHAT SCIENCE DEALS WITH.


This shows how ignorant you are, along with CrackerJax. The dream of a unified field theory is one that is independent of a background space-time, one that at least explains the origin of space-time. Hence, a field theory independent of space-time, so to speak. This is the Holy Grail of physics. You are just as ignorant as CrackerJax on this one. You have no idea what high energy physics is about. I do. I have a degree in it. CERN has computer programs that I wrote, tracking particles through CMS's endcaps. Their cooling system for their electronics is partially my work. I am tired of you fools trying to tell me what science is really all about. I live it!! 
Try reading Lee Smolin's Three Roads to Quantum Gravity. He does a good job of explaining what I am talking about, and he is an atheist, as far as I can tell. He actually has theories about cosmology and natural selection that you would enjoy. You'll see what I am talking about. The point is:

YOU ARE WRONG.
Science, at its highest level, that is, high energy physics, is ALL about what happens outside of time. If we understood that, we could fully understand the big bang, or any other singularity.





> Science ONLY deals with the reality we occupy, which includes time. Science has absolutely nothing to say about anything outside of space or time, which you already admitted includes God, so how would you suggest a 'scientist' like yourself observes it/him? Answer that.


 
An explanation of the origin of space-time would only explain how God did things. It wouldn't necessarily explain who or what he is. I don't understand the question.



> And just as a side note, what kind of bullshit non answer is that anyway? He's outside of space and time... Shroomer, dude, can't you see that's just a fallback they came up with designed SPECIFICALLY so that that question cannot be answered logically? That is clear as day.


You are a fool. The fact that God is outside of time is an incredible scientific breakthrough. THIS IS WHAT GENERAL and SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS ALL ABOUT!!!! Ever hear of them? You certainly don't understand them.

This is a perfect example of how science solved biblical paradoxes that have perplexed theologians for centuries and/or millenia. This is why I am in love with science and always will be. Too bad you don't understand the first thing about it.



> Statistics are against you my friend.
> 
> http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html
> 
> ...


whoopdee freaking do. I can tell you what I have seen: many great physicists are "religious", by your definition. 7% is still a large amount. Are these 7% bad scientists????
That was my point.

Stop reacting in emotion and deal with logic.




> Also, the scenario was essentailly... "believe in God or die", whether you actually believe or just "believe"... it's that or die. Hey uhh... I choose "believe"! No question. If that were the scenario today, you don't think I'd lie out my ass about how much I believed in God to not be killed by all the crazy people around me?? Think it through buddy, you'd do the same.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, that's not to say those men weren't actually truly believers in their faith, I'm just saying that was the law back in the day, you can't rule anything out.
> 
> ...


This is not an appeal to authority. A statement was made that stated that good scientists aren't religious. My counterexamples proved the statement wrong.

Also, Schrodinger and Heisenberg were after Darwin.

Dear God, you are not very logical.



> Doesn't hold any water with me... it doesn't matter to me what any other 'scientist' believed, or what anyone thinks they may have believed. Fact is, they could be extremely smart but incredibly ignorant, anyone could be.


Again. I'm not trying to appeal to their authority as 'scientists.'



> Someone else's belief or disbelief in a God doesn't mean and shouldn't mean anything, it does not have the power to influence my decisions. Those men you listed were no doubt geniuses in their fields and contributed a ton to humanity, but not everyone is right about everything all the time.
> 
> 
> 
> DING DING DING! Give this man some +rep!


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 18, 2009)

> Get it right. 3 degrees.
> This shows how ignorant you are, along with CrackerJax. The dream of a unified field theory is one that is independent of a background space-time, one that at least explains the origin of space-time. Hence, a field theory independent of space-time, so to speak. This is the Holy Grail of physics. You are just as ignorant as CrackerJax on this one. You have no idea what high energy physics is about. I do. I have a degree in it. CERN has computer programs that I wrote, tracking particles through CMS's endcaps. Their cooling system for their electronics is partially my work. I am tired of you fools trying to tell me what science is really all about. I live it!!
> Try reading Lee Smolin's Three Roads to Quantum Gravity. He does a good job of explaining what I am talking about, and he is an atheist, as far as I can tell. He actually has theories about cosmology and natural selection that you would enjoy. You'll see what I am talking about. The point is:
> 
> ...


What does that have to do with Religion? 








> An explanation of the origin of space-time would only explain how God did things. It wouldn't necessarily explain who or what he is. I don't understand the question.


This sort of skewed perspective is EXACTLY why the vast majority of scientists don't carry a faith with them. It alters perceptions before they even begin. The space time continuum should be studied and theorized WITHOUT an objective already in mind. I hope you don't bring that altered perception to work with you.




> You are a fool. The fact that God is outside of time is an incredible scientific breakthrough. THIS IS WHAT GENERAL and SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS ALL ABOUT!!!! Ever hear of them? You certainly don't understand them.


General and special relativity are NOT a scientific breakthrough FOR the existence of G*D. Now I'm starting to think you are working in your garage.



> This is a perfect example of how science solved biblical paradoxes that have perplexed theologians for centuries and/or millenia. This is why I am in love with science and always will be. Too bad you don't understand the first thing about it.


Seems you don't understand the role of science.





> whoopdee freaking do. I can tell you what I have seen: many great physicists are "religious", by your definition. 7% is still a large amount. Are these 7% bad scientists????
> That was my point.
> 
> Stop reacting in emotion and deal with logic.


7% is NOT large. it is very small. Very. 93% are not religious....that would be called, the VAST majority. Rightfully so of course....rightfully so. Unless a scientist is in a protected position, they will keep mum about their religious beliefs, if they want to be taken seriously that is. 






> This is not an appeal to authority. A statement was made that stated that good scientists aren't religious. My counterexamples proved the statement wrong.


No, 7% means you are wrong.... incredibly wrong.



> Also, Schrodinger and Heisenberg were after Darwin.
> 
> Dear God, you are not very logical.
> 
> ...


Again, a few needles in the haystack. Far more (thankfully) go the other way.... the way of true logic, sans religion, which is empty of logic.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 18, 2009)

Good post CJ, I can't +rep you but you deserve it!




> Get it right. 3 degrees.


As I said...




> they could be extremely smart but incredibly ignorant, *anyone could be.*





> This shows how ignorant you are, along with CrackerJax. The dream of a unified field theory is one that is independent of a background space-time, one that at least explains the origin of space-time. Hence, a field theory independent of space-time, so to speak. This is the Holy Grail of physics. You are just as ignorant as CrackerJax on this one. You have no idea what high energy physics is about. I do. I have a degree in it. CERN has computer programs that I wrote, tracking particles through CMS's endcaps. Their cooling system for their electronics is partially my work. I am tired of you fools trying to tell me what science is really all about. I live it!!





> Try reading Lee Smolin's Three Roads to Quantum Gravity. He does a good job of explaining what I am talking about, and he is an atheist, as far as I can tell. He actually has theories about cosmology and natural selection that you would enjoy. You'll see what I am talking about. The point is:
> 
> YOU ARE WRONG.
> Science, at its highest level, that is, high energy physics, is ALL about what happens outside of time. If we understood that, we could fully understand the big bang, or any other singularity.


I think you missed my point. The tools we have today, at present, do not have the ability to measure anything outside of our universe. You already admitted this would include God. How do you suggest a scientist like yourself would measure the existence of God? Pretty simple question right? 

Explain to me how high energy physics explains what happens outside of time. 




> An explanation of the origin of space-time would only explain how God did things. It wouldn't necessarily explain who or what he is. I don't understand the question.


wtf are you talking about? An explination of the origin of space-time wouldn't explain anything about a God at all. If we figured out exactly how everything happened, you're saying it would all lead right back go "God did it!"!? 

That seems like a bit of a conflict of interest in the persuit of genuine knowlege to me buddy... 

So when you get to the end of the rabbit hole and there's no magic man to give you marshmallows, do you think your mind would be able to handle it, or would there be one there regardless of what reality had to say about it?




> You are a fool. The fact that God is outside of time is an incredible scientific breakthrough. THIS IS WHAT GENERAL and SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS ALL ABOUT!!!! Ever hear of them? You certainly don't understand them.





> This is a perfect example of how science solved biblical paradoxes that have perplexed theologians for centuries and/or millenia. This is why I am in love with science and always will be. Too bad you don't understand the first thing about it.


Well, first problem with that is... yeah, we have not positively identified God yet so uhh.. how would that be considered an "incredible scientific breakthrough"? Going by that standard, I have tons of "incredible scientific breakthroughs" sitting in my living room! 

Didn't really address the point I made, that is, how authors of these texts inserted things like that, illogical reasoning and circular logic, the fact one must have faith, and essentially believe because someone told you to believe and nothing else, just so people would feel comfortable with themselves about lying to themselves. Fact is, most of them don't even ever realize it, they don't think about it, they think they're being good believers and they're going to be rewarded in the end, thoughts like that don't pass through your mind until you start questioning your actual belief system, reality, existence. 

Howbout all the other seemingly contradictory claims the bible makes that science slaps back in it's place and the churches have to apologize for or admit defeat? 





> whoopdee freaking do. I can tell you what I have seen: many great physicists are "religious", by your definition. 7% is still a large amount. Are these 7% bad scientists????





> That was my point.
> 
> Stop reacting in emotion and deal with logic.


What world do you live in where 7% is a "large amount"??? 

Your point is stupid. So what if a religious scientist is good. What the hell does that prove?? Same thing it would about an atheist scientist being good. Nothing... The point being made here is that there are clearly more scientists who do not believe in a personal God. 

What that is saying is that the more a person is educated, the smarter a person is, the less likely they are to hold a religious position. Now think about that... why would more intelligent people, you know, the ones who have studied the sciences of the earth, geology, astronomy, chemestry, physics, biology, etc. believe there is no God, and the less intelligent people, that of the general public, believe there is?... This is where I'd say "it doesn't take a rocket scientist.." but you have three science degrees! You might actually be one! 




> This is not an appeal to authority. A statement was made that stated that good scientists aren't religious. My counterexamples proved the statement wrong.





> Also, Schrodinger and Heisenberg were after Darwin.
> 
> Dear God, you are not very logical.


lol, bringing your religion into it again? Didn't you say earlier how I argue from a position of emotion?.. (that argument being common among believers, again.. *seriously I've heard everything before.. this is kind of dissapointing..*, I'm angry at God! I don't want him infringin' on the way I live my life so I'm going to choose to not believe in him.. yeah, I just wanna sin man.. I love it, I love sinning, it makes me feel great...) 

How far after Darwin? You realize there are plenty of people today who do not accept the theory of evolution... the MODERN theory..  yeah...just sayin'.. (...like, I know a couple of them.. that's pretty damn common if you ask me)


----------



## tip top toker (Aug 18, 2009)

with god, it's not just a question of beliefe or not, it's the question of just why do i want or need him in my life? all these christians saying "oh life is so good knowing that god is with me everywhere i go, i feel content and blah blah".

well you know what, i feel no different to you in any way, except that you seem to need to rely on someone to get through your day, i just get through it. are we stronger people, emotionally and mentally than christians then? as we're both getting the same out of life, yet you need someone to point you the right way, well, his way, etc etc 

as said, i see no reason to accept god into my life whether he be real or not, he's got nothing to offer me


----------



## fish601 (Aug 18, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Statistics are against you my friend.
> 
> http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html
> 
> ...


 

About two-thirds of scientists believe in God Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God. http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html







.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 18, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Explain to me how high energy physics explains what happens outside of time.


It doesn't!
That is not what I said.
What I said was that a theory independent of a space-time background is the dream of high energy theorists. Smolin's book does a great job of explaining what I am talking about.


This is important because if we can get a good theory that's independent of space-time, we can understand quantum gravity and how the big bang singularity came into being. By extension, we will also understand black holes. 
So. Yes. This is a very important question to physics, and it is all outside of time.


You stated earlier that:


> To a scientist, nothing is outside of time, as that's NOT WHAT SCIENCE DEALS WITH.


I am simply stating that science, at its deepest level (high energy theory), is desparately looking for a theory that describes exactly what happened outside of time that gave rise to all space-time.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 18, 2009)

fish601 said:


> About two-thirds of scientists believe in God Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God. http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah? Find me a source. Everything I typed into google came up more atheist scientists, less religious ones.



And Shroomer, address the rest of my post please. I made a few points I wanted you to specifically reply to.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 19, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Yeah? Find me a source. Everything I typed into google came up more atheist scientists, less religious ones.
> 
> 
> 
> And Shroomer, address the rest of my post please. I made a few points I wanted you to specifically reply to.


you didnt like the link i gave you?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 19, 2009)

fish601 said:


> you didnt like the link i gave you?


 
All it was was a page saying what you stated, 38%.. I looked for the poll the information was gathered from, couldn't find it, looked for the guys background information, couldn't find that.. It was just a story this guy wrote up with no sources to independently confirm any of the information.

Every single thing I've ever read or seen says there are far more atheist scientists than there are religious ones, this is the only thing I've seen that says otherwise, but it doesn't cite anything. What is the name of the poll this paper is based on?

Like I said, try to find me another source that says otherwise.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 19, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> All it was was a page saying what you stated, 38%.. I looked for the poll the information was gathered from, couldn't find it, looked for the guys background information, couldn't find that.. It was just a story this guy wrote up with no sources to independently confirm any of the information.
> 
> Every single thing I've ever read or seen says there are far more atheist scientists than there are religious ones, this is the only thing I've seen that says otherwise, but it doesn't cite anything. What is the name of the poll this paper is based on?
> 
> Like I said, try to find me another source that says otherwise.


*Based on previous research*, we thought that social scientists would be less likely to practice religion than natural scientists are, but our data showed just the opposite," Ecklund said.
according to a new survey *by University of Buffalo sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund*,
According to the study nearly 38% of natural scientists  physics, chemistry, biology, etc  said they did not believe in God, and only 21% of social scientists do not believe
i dont think you looked to hard

In separate work at the University of Chicago, released in June, 76 percent of doctors said they believed in God


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 19, 2009)

fish601 said:


> *Based on previous research*, we thought that social scientists would be less likely to practice religion than natural scientists are, but our data showed just the opposite," Ecklund said.
> according to a new survey *by University of Buffalo sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund*,
> According to the study nearly 38% of natural scientists  physics, chemistry, biology, etc  said they did not believe in God, and only 21% of social scientists do not believe
> i dont think you looked to hard
> ...


 
Doctors aren't scientists.

Are you making the claim that there are more religious scientists than there are atheist ones? 

If not, what is the point of that poll?

I'm making the claim that there are much more atheist scientists than religious ones. Or agnostic scientists, the type that would say they're 'spiritual' but do not believe in a personal God.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

All of this started because CrackerJax said that you can't be a good scientist and be religious at the same time, which is now proved wrong, whether it's 7% or 62% or whatever.
You can be a great scientist and be religious. You can also be an atheist and be a great scientist.

Your worldview doesn't define your scientific ability.

Case closed.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 19, 2009)

I never said EVERY scientist is an atheist. The polls do bear out that the OVERWHELMING majority of scientists are not religious, which again makes sense. Going in with a predisposition is never a good way to stay objective. Religious beliefs can skew perspectives and is almost always met with disdain in the scientific community.

Case closed.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> A good scientist has no religious beliefs.


ummm.....
Sounds logically equivalent to:
"Every good scientist is an atheist"

Lets break it down logically.
If you have no religious beliefs, you are an atheist. TRUE, right?
If you are an atheist, you have no religious beliefs. TRUE, right?
OK then. The phrase 'has no religious belief' is equivalent to 'atheist'.

So we now have:
A good scientist is an atheist.
Better phrasing:
Any good scientist is an atheist.

For any element of the set GS, say gs, gs is an element of the set A. So GS is a subset of A.
GS - set of all good scientists
A - set of all atheists


----------



## fish601 (Aug 19, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Statistics are against you my friend.
> 
> http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html
> 
> ...


 


PadawanBater said:


> Doctors aren't scientists.
> 
> Are you making the claim that there are more religious scientists than there are atheist ones?
> 
> ...


i am not making the claim, someone else is.

you dont get the point?

so you dont believe this? 
*Based on previous research*
*38%* of natural scientists  physics, chemistry, biology, etc  s*aid they did not believe in God*, and only *21%* of social scientists *do not believe
*


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Religious beliefs can skew perspectives and is almost always met with disdain in the scientific community.
> 
> Case closed.


 
No they aren't. At least not in math or physics. You are speaking out of ignorance again.

Religious beliefs are rarely met with disdain in the scientific community. It does happen though, I will admit that, but it isn't a common thing. Most of my fellow physicists are laid back and mellow and have a 'go your own way, and i'll go mine' attitude.

How much time have you spent in the scientific community?

You are forcing your worldview on the scientific community.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I never said EVERY scientist is an atheist.


That is exactly what you said.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 19, 2009)

As I have said previously, why take up your belief of an aberhamic god with athiests? Are they the ones who threaten your gods existance? And if they do do that, your god wasnt worth a shit to begin with.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Yeah? Find me a source. Everything I typed into google came up more atheist scientists, less religious ones.
> 
> 
> 
> And Shroomer, address the rest of my post please. I made a few points I wanted you to specifically reply to.


I'll get to it.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 19, 2009)

fish601 said:


> i am not making the claim, someone else is.
> 
> you dont get the point?
> 
> ...


 
No, I do not believe that data is accurate.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

This is really good:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=988134574542478162

Does anyone know how to post this video?
I can do youtube vids, but not google vids:

[youtube]ZCSaR1nGYog&feature=fvst[/youtube]


----------



## fish601 (Aug 19, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> No, I do not believe that data is accurate.


guess you dont have to believe but i am not making this up, about 40% believe in god but all that means is alot of scientist are going to hell 

In the US, according to a survey published in Nature in 1997, four out of 10 scientists believe in God. *Just over 45% said they did not believe*, and 14.5% described themselves as doubters or agnostics. This ratio of believers to non-believers had not changed in 80 years. 

LONDON, April 2 (Reuter) - Most U.S. scientists do not believe in a god,
but *40 percent do -- the same percentage as did in 1916*, researchers reported
on Wednesday.

*40 percent of scientists acknowledge there is a God* or higher power behind everything

*Collins said that about 40 percent of scientists believe in God*, and my unscientific survey generally agrees, putting the figure at 38 percent


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 19, 2009)

I used to think like CrackerJax and Padawan in many ways.
One of the things I used to believe was that scientists didn't believe in 'religion', and that a Christian physicist was rare.
I was shocked when I got to grad school and found tons of fellow Christians who were getting their PhDs in physics like me. I still get shocked when I see, year after year, all the grad students that come in who are strong Christians.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 19, 2009)

*Pew Survey: A Huge God Gap Between Scientists and Other Americans*

July 16, 2009 02:18 PM ET |  Dan Gilgoff | Permanent Link | Print 
By Dan Gilgoff, God & Country
An eye-opening new Pew survey on science and religion reveals a huge God gap between scientists and other Americans. Eighty-three percent of Americans say that they believe in God, while just 33 percent of scientists do. Just 17 percent of Americans are religiously unaffiliated, while nearly three times as many scientists are.
The numbers are a testament to what an odd bird Francis Collins, the prominent geneticist and evanglical who is President Obama's nominee to run the National Institutes of Health, is.
This graph gives the full picture:


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 19, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> I used to think like CrackerJax and Padawan in many ways.
> One of the things I used to believe was that scientists didn't believe in 'religion', and that a Christian physicist was rare.
> I was shocked when I got to grad school and found tons of fellow Christians who were getting their PhDs in physics like me. I still get shocked when I see, year after year, all the grad students that come in who are strong Christians.


 
Give me some evidence in physics that suggests there is some sort of higher power behind everything. I must be missing something...


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 19, 2009)

I highly doubt you have ever thought my way. Once you step outside of the myth and encounter the clarity, it would be impossible to step back into the fog. At least for me, certainly. 

This Bozo got off the bus.....


----------



## zorkan (Aug 19, 2009)

i think we all were raised going to school where they teach evolution so i think u have it backwards me and you might need to "step outside of the myth and encounter the clarity" 

they kicked me off tha bus because i kept taking my helmet off so i could lick the window....


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 19, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I highly doubt you have ever thought my way. Once you step outside of the myth and encounter the clarity, it would be impossible to step back into the fog. At least for me, certainly.
> 
> This Bozo got off the bus.....


 
I feel the same way. That's why it's so hard to take these "I used to be an atheist" stories seriously... It's kinda like that "once you go black you never go back" saying... "once you go atheist you never go back". I can't imagine how one would commit to acknowledging there is no God, or that it's highly unlikely that there is a God, then be shown some "evidence" (use that word loosly as fuck) and convert immediately... but then when someone like me asks "well what's the evidence?" all we ever get is anectodal sob stories that we have no problem rationalizing from a subjective viewpoint, but the guy experiencing Jesus can't ever see the difference... 

You know what it would take for me to convert to Christianity? A little more than my own subjective interpretation of some experience I had, especially if I was in an unstable, emotional state of mind at the time... 

There is nothing beyond personal experiences that points to a God's existence, which means as far as we know, it's imaginary.


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Aug 19, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I highly doubt you have ever thought my way. Once you step outside of the myth and encounter the clarity, it would be impossible to step back into the fog. At least for me, certainly.
> 
> This Bozo got off the bus.....


LOL!

*This* Bozo got out of the clown car.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 19, 2009)

Anyone remember Firesign Theatre? "I think we're all Bozos on this bus".


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 19, 2009)

Lets acctually try to imagine a religion of no religion. Im already pre giggleing at how this is going to be interpreted. Presenting an idiots lesson in Zen biology. Served cold. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9BBy3aidRE


----------



## fish601 (Aug 20, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> You know what it would take for me to convert to Christianity? A little more than my own subjective interpretation of some experience I had, especially if I was in an unstable, emotional state of mind at the time...
> 
> There is nothing beyond personal experiences that points to a God's existence, which means as far as we know, it's imaginary.


what kind of evidence would be you like to see to believe in a god?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 21, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Anyone remember Firesign Theatre? "I think we're all Bozos on this bus".


We all may be Bozos, but I like your Asian boobs, Jax.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 21, 2009)

So I went out drinking with my fellow physicists, and I asked if they believed in any form of God. Of the 6 there were, 6 said that they didn't know and confessed to agnosticism. One said he was a militant agnostic and one said that he'd be an atheist if he really thought about it, but he didn't want to upset his mother. I was the only Christian.
So there, for whatever it's worth.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> what kind of evidence would be you like to see to believe in a god?


 
You ever see the movie "The Knowing" with Nicolas Cage? Pretty recent movie..

If stuff like that started to happen, yeah, I'd become a believer no question.

If any actual evidence were shown to me I would become a believer. I am not choosing not to believe in God, I simply have not seen anything that will allow my brain to believe a God exists... Choice does not come into the equation.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 21, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> You ever see the movie "The Knowing" with Nicolas Cage? Pretty recent movie..
> 
> If stuff like that started to happen, yeah, I'd become a believer no question.
> 
> If any actual evidence were shown to me I would become a believer. I am not choosing not to believe in God, I simply have not seen anything that will allow my brain to believe a God exists... Choice does not come into the equation.


Now I need to see this movie.
I will say that if you saw what I saw, you'd either believe or go insane. But that's just me. You are right in that choice does not come into the equation.
I definitely did not choose to believe. I just couldn't ignore reality. The reality was that demons and angels were indeed real. 
I didn't see anything that would allow my brain to believe a God exists. That is, until June 2nd 1994....


----------



## Froman (Aug 21, 2009)

shit i am Lucifer


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 21, 2009)

Froman said:


> shit i am Lucifer


 
Get thee behind me Satan!!!


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 21, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> Now I need to see this movie.
> I will say that if you saw what I saw, you'd either believe or go insane. But that's just me. You are right in that choice does not come into the equation.
> I definitely did not choose to believe. I just couldn't ignore reality. The reality was that demons and angels were indeed real.
> I didn't see anything that would allow my brain to believe a God exists. That is, until June 2nd 1994....


 
Well what did you see?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 21, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Well what did you see?


a veil of reality being torn....scales being lifted from my eyes, if you will....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> a veil of reality being torn....scales being lifted from my eyes, if you will....


 
Once I realized that the universe didnt just happen by chance is when i gave god a chance.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 21, 2009)

There is no way of knowing what is behind the Big Bang...if anything. It's a very far flung idea to take a creation point of the Universe (which is quite large I'm told) and come up with a personal G*D interested in our species. The first part (creation) is verifiable, the sentientcy behind it is not. Besides, we're in the Backwater,West Virginia location wise in the Galaxy.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> Once I realized that the universe didnt just happen by chance is when i gave god a chance.


Honestly...i'd believe more that it happened by chance...rather than one being creating EVERYTHING...including the 100 billion galaxies? Or maybe the 10 billion trillion stars? Seems like a lot of work.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

kinda funny how, if your right, we evolved into what we are today and are able to think about if there is a god and how the universe was created. I consider myself luck to of been born a human. Its also kinda neat how we are the most advanced creatures by far makes me wonder how come there is nothing a step below us kinda like a half monkey half man, it just goes from monkey to man with nothing inbetween. on that thought would be neat if there was something above us like a more advanced man, maybe an alien if there are aliens why not something inbetween... is there anything between monkey and man? if not, why? ( i yahooed (<-- that right?) couldnt find anything)


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> Honestly...i'd believe more that it happened by chance...rather than one being creating EVERYTHING...including the 100 billion galaxies? Or maybe the 10 billion trillion stars? Seems like a lot of work.


 
seems like a lot that happend by chance


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> seems like a lot that happend by chance


Still...more likely chance. Everything is in some way an reaction to something else...that's how things work.

Has anyone seen the previews for that show about the star that may explode and mess with earth? Don't think it's for a while...but damn...God must have been planning this one for a while, eh?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 21, 2009)

For a billion years there was no "higher order". It's not a culmination process towards perfection.....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

how about the in between


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 21, 2009)

> a veil of reality being torn....scales being lifted from my eyes, if you will....


Dude, it really seems like you're trying to dodge my question...

This is the third time now I've asked you to explain your situation to me, each time you come back more vague than the last...

I'm not asking you for metaphors, I'm not asking you for visions. I am asking you specifically what happened to you to make you believe in a God, the key word there is 'specifically', meaning in as much detail as possible. Everything. I want to put myself into your position and see if the same thing would happen to me or if I would find some other way to rationalize it out. That's simple enough right?



> Once I realized that the universe didnt just happen by chance is when i gave god a chance.


Your statement doesn't make any sense. It's illogical to say the universe happened by chance. That's kind of like asking what the color purple tastes like.. The only logical way I can make any sense out of that is that if it is random, there is a 50% chance the universe would come into existence, right? Between the universe existing and the universe not existing... 50/50, those are the odds from the existence we sit. Seems pretty damn good to me...

It amazes me that you guys can give every single little supernatural explination for God and how he came into existence, but then when science hasn't discovered the mechanism for how something works yet, you automatically assume it MUST be God! Why is that? Why do you guys limit knowledge and give up like that? Just because we don't know the answer now doesn't mean we won't come up with it later. Saying God did anything is exactly like saying "I give up". It doesn't answer shit or explain anything.



> kinda funny how, if your right, we evolved into what we are today and are able to think about if there is a god and how the universe was created. I consider myself luck to of been born a human. Its also kinda neat how we are the most advanced creatures by far makes me wonder how come there is nothing a step below us kinda like a half monkey half man, it just goes from monkey to man with nothing inbetween. on that thought would be neat if there was something above us like a more advanced man, maybe an alien if there are aliens why not something inbetween... is there anything between monkey and man? if not, why? ( i yahooed (<-- that right?) couldnt find anything)


There are tons of steps below us in intelligence, Dolphins, Chimps.. I'd even go so far as to say there may be a few animals out there who are smarter than a few humans... Half monkey half man wouldn't make any evolutionary sense at all. There are different stages of human that came before homosapiens, all the way back to around 4 million years ago. They're earlier anscestors, not quite fully human, not quite fully ape, a transition.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Your statement doesn't make any sense. It's illogical to say the universe happened by chance. That's kind of like asking what the color purple tastes like.. The only logical way I can make any sense out of that is that if it is random, there is a 50% chance the universe would come into existence, right? Between the universe existing and the universe not existing... 50/50, those are the odds from the existence we sit. Seems pretty damn good to me...
> 
> It amazes me that you guys can give every single little supernatural explination for God and how he came into existence, but then when science hasn't discovered the mechanism for how something works yet, you automatically assume it MUST be God! Why is that? Why do you guys limit knowledge and give up like that? Just because we don't know the answer now doesn't mean we won't come up with it later. Saying God did anything is exactly like saying "I give up". It doesn't answer shit or explain anything.
> 
> ...


 
50/50 huh?

there are no "not quite fully human, not quite fully ape, a transition" but if you can show me evidence i am willing to believe


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> kinda funny how, if your right, we evolved into what we are today and are able to think about if there is a god and how the universe was created. I consider myself luck to of been born a human. *Its also kinda neat how we are the most advanced creatures by far makes me wonder how come there is nothing a step below us kinda like a half monkey half man, it just goes from monkey to man with nothing inbetween.* on that thought would be neat if there was something above us like a more advanced man, maybe an alien if there are aliens why not something inbetween... is there anything between monkey and man? if not, why? ( i yahooed (<-- that right?) couldnt find anything)


Man is little more than a hairless ape.



> Scientists have sequenced the genome of the chimpanzee and found that humans are *96 percent similar* to the great ape species. "Darwin wasn't just provocative in saying that we descend from the apes&#8212;he didn't go far enough," said Frans de Waal, a primate scientist at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. "We are apes in every way, from our long arms and tailless bodies to our habits and temperament."
> 
> Because chimpanzees are our closest living relatives, the chimp genome is the most useful key to understanding human biology and evolution, next to the human genome itself. The breakthrough will aid scientists in their mission to learn what sets us apart from other animals.
> 
> ...


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> 50/50 huh?
> 
> there are no "not quite fully human, not quite fully ape, a transition" but if you can show me evidence i am willing to believe


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

Scroll down to the bottom where it says Human Evolution.

There are pictures and descriptions of each one, starting with Ida 47 million years ago, the most distant known relative to modern homosapiens.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils
> 
> Scroll down to the bottom where it says Human Evolution.
> 
> There are pictures and descriptions of each one, starting with Ida 47 million years ago, the most distant known relative to modern homosapiens.


 

check out the pics at bottom this is the 2million year old one..i figured if this was close i would look at the rest but.....
java man they find a few bones (_The skull-cap may have belonged to a large extinct ape, and the leg bone to an ordinary human_)and reconstruct an entire head and face calling it half ape half man  *see pic below*

Java turn out to be as young as 100,000 years, as some researchers believe, then erectus was still alive on Java at the same time that fully modern human beings were living in Africa and the Middle East. http://discovermagazine.com/1994/sep/ierectusirising420











no ancestor for man has ever been documented. The &#8220;missing links&#8221; are still missing. Here is a summary of facts relating to some of the most well known fossil discoveries.

_Homo sapiens neanderthalensis_ (Neandertal man) - 150 years ago Neandertal reconstructions were stooped and very much like an 'ape-man'. It is now admitted that the supposedly stooped posture was due to disease and that Neandertal is just a variation of the human kind.
_Ramapithecus_ - once widely regarded as the ancestor of humans, it has now been realized that it is merely an extinct type of orangutan (an ape).
_Eoanthropus_ (Piltdown man) - a hoax based on a human skull cap and an orangutan's jaw. It was widely publicized as the missing link for 40 years.
_Hesperopithecus_ (Nebraska man) - based on a single tooth of a type of pig now only living in Paraguay.
_Pithecanthropus_ (Java man) - now renamed to Homo erectus. See below.
*Australopithecus africanus - this was at one time promoted as the missing link. It is no longer considered to be on the line from apes to humans. It is very ape-like.*
_Sinanthropus_ (Peking man) was once presented as an ape-man but has now been reclassified as Homo erectus (see below).
*Currently fashionable ape-men*


These are the ones that adorn the evolutionary trees of today that supposedly led to Homo sapiens from a chimpanzee-like creature.

_Australopithecus_ - there are various species of these that have been at times proclaimed as human ancestors. One remains: _Australopithecus afarensis_, popularly known as the fossil 'Lucy'. However, detailed studies of the inner ear, skulls and bones have suggested that 'Lucy' and her like are not on the way to becoming human. For example, they may have walked more upright than most apes, but not in the human manner. _Australopithecus afarensis_ is very similar to the pygmy chimpanzee.
_Homo habilis_ - there is a growing consensus amongst most paleoanthropologists that this category actually includes bits and pieces of various other types - such as _Australopithecus_ and _Homo erectus_. It is therefore an 'invalid taxon'. That is, it never existed as such.
_Homo erectus_ - many remains of this type have been found around the world. They are smaller than the average human today, with an appropriately smaller head (and brain size). However, the brain size is within the range of people today and studies of the middle ear have shown that _Homo erectus_ was just like us. Remains have been found in the same strata and in close proximity to ordinary _Homo sapiens_, suggesting that they lived together.
*There is no fossil proof that man is the product of evolution. Could it be that the missing links are still missing because they simply do not exist.*


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> check out the pics at bottom this is the 2million year old one..i figured if this was close i would look at the rest but.....
> java man they find a few bones (_The skull-cap may have belonged to a large extinct ape, and the leg bone to an ordinary human_)and reconstruct an entire head and face calling it half ape half man  *see pic below*
> 
> Java turn out to be as young as 100,000 years, as some researchers believe, then erectus was still alive on Java at the same time that fully modern human beings were living in Africa and the Middle East. http://discovermagazine.com/1994/sep/ierectusirising420
> ...


There's also no proof whatsoever of a God. Maybe because he simply doesn't exist?

There's still more evidence leaning towards evolution.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> There's also no proof whatsoever of a God. Maybe because he simply doesn't exist?
> 
> There's still more evidence leaning towards evolution.


What kinda proof would you like to see?


----------



## Froman (Aug 21, 2009)

well if you really want to believe your a fucin ape, go for it, thats on you 


no god eh? you want proof, kill your self and see what happens


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 21, 2009)

Anyone here not have solid proof of aliens, but still believe in them?


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 21, 2009)

Really? You dont see the nature of your question as finite and transient? What would YOU like to see? God is not of the ego conciousness. Those ideas and concepts die when you die.


----------



## zorkan (Aug 21, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Really? You dont see the nature of your question as finite and transient? What would YOU like to see? God is not of the ego conciousness. Those ideas and concepts die when you die.


 
finly someone said sumting that made sense


----------



## ramp (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> check out the pics at bottom this is the 2million year old one..i figured if this was close i would look at the rest but.....
> java man they find a few bones (_The skull-cap may have belonged to a large extinct ape, and the leg bone to an ordinary human_)and reconstruct an entire head and face calling it half ape half man  *see pic below*
> 
> Java turn out to be as young as 100,000 years, as some researchers believe, then erectus was still alive on Java at the same time that fully modern human beings were living in Africa and the Middle East. http://discovermagazine.com/1994/sep/ierectusirising420
> ...


 
I heard it was 700,000 years old


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

ramp said:


> I heard it was 700,000 years old


dating methods are flawed


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 21, 2009)

Science is flawed to you because it contradicts your belief. Its that simple, so drum up all the rediculous fantasies you want. Just because your bible isnt verifiable doesnt mean to shit all over the knowledge, what little we have, of that which points to something different and verifyable. God seems to hate diversity.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 21, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Science is flawed to you because it contradicts your belief. Its that simple, so drum up all the rediculous fantasies you want. Just because your bible isnt verifiable doesnt mean to shit all over the knowledge, what little we have, of that which points to something different and verifyable. God seems to hate diversity.


 
Prove the bible wrong with science.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 21, 2009)

Its just a game of semantics. If you argue right you can be correct about anything.


----------



## Brazko (Aug 21, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> Really? You dont see the nature of your question as finite and transient? What would YOU like to see? God is not of the ego conciousness. Those ideas and concepts die when you die.





zorkan said:


> finly someone said sumting that made sense


I would like to 2nd that statement, matter of fact I think I would perhaps just Rep A donia for locking page #57 down!!


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 21, 2009)

fish601 said:


> Prove the bible wrong with science.


There is nothing wrong with the dating methods fish, you may get a contaminated sample here and there, but the overall dating methods we've devised work perfectly fine at dating things of most ages pretty accurately. If they didnt, we wouldn't use them. If you were right and none of them worked or were really inaccurate, we'd throw em out and forget about em, why don't we do that? 


And this quote here is another thing I found pretty funny... That's exactly what science has been doing for the past 400 years!

Remember when they locked up Galileo? 

-science has PROVEN the earth is not flat, which the bible says it is, a "circle" is not a "sphere", a 'circle' is flat on both sides and round along the outside, a sphere is round on all sides. You telling me your God didn't know that?

-science has PROVEN no flood ever took place

-science has PROVEN genetic changes happen over time, ie EVOLUTON

-science has PROVEN supernatural events and people rising from the dead are impossible

-science has PROVEN we share common ancestors with modern apes

-science has PROVEN the earth and the cosmos are much older than 6,000 years

...do you need me to list anymore?

Science has gotten as close as you can get to proof that there is no God. The one and only reason it hasn't actually PROVED there is no God is because THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED YOUR RELIGION MADE IT SO IT IS NOT PROVABLE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. That is the very foundation of the faith you believe in. So you asking me to prove it wrong is like me asking you to prove it right. Both are impossible. 

The difference is, science isn't asking you for your faith, it's not asking you to believe, it doesn't even give a damn if you do or not. Science says "here I am, this is reality, believe it or not, it's up to you" - Isn't that fuckin' great?! I kinda like that proposition as opposed to "believe me based on nothing or burn for eternity!"...


----------



## coomsual (Aug 21, 2009)

there is no devil,god,jesus,good,bad,time....humans created it all to answer questions we cant comprehend, there is no meaning to anything before or after right now.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 21, 2009)

coomsual said:


> there is no devil,god,jesus,good,bad,time....humans created it all to answer questions we cant comprehend, there is no meaning to anything before or after right now.


 
I agree to some extent.

I'd like to ask you how you feel about existence with an outlook like that? 

Do you feel that killing someone for example wouldn't really matter all that much if you got away with it 100% clean? Like, do you think down the road you would feel anything about doing something like that?

This is something I've recently been thinking about... how do you feel about things like sports games or dating? Do you feel as if those things are kind of pointless or meaningless? They're just going to come and go, who really cares about the outcome..


----------



## Operation 420 (Aug 22, 2009)

Everything is an illusion. Atoms are hollow. The devil is a made up character to hide the real evil....MAN.....


----------



## fish601 (Aug 22, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> *There is nothing wrong with the dating methods fish,* you may get a contaminated sample here and there, but the overall dating methods we've devised work perfectly fine at dating things of most ages pretty accurately. If they didnt, we wouldn't use them. If you were right and none of them worked or were really inaccurate, we'd throw em out and forget about em, why don't we do that?
> 
> 
> And this quote here is another thing I found pretty funny... That's exactly what science has been doing for the past 400 years!
> ...


*nothing wrong with dating methods?* why do they keep changing the age of Lucy? The radiometric dating of "Lucy" is an example. After the *original date of 3.6* million years became unpalatable, a geologist suggested that the date should be *revised downward to 3 million* years based upon comparative dating of similar volcanic tuff. *Another date was 2.6 million* years, *then 2.9 million* years, and *then 1.8 million* years. *Now, they believe that "Lucy" should be about two million years old.*10 http://www.rae.org/revev3.html

The bible does not teach round or flat earth his lockup has nothing to do with the bible

science showes there was a great flood
and i dont care how old the earth is

you said "science isn't asking you for your faith, it's not asking you to believe, it doesn't even give a damn if you do or not." it is aking for you to believe because most of it they cant prove


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 22, 2009)

*



nothing wrong with dating methods?

Click to expand...

*


> why do they keep changing the age of Lucy? The radiometric dating of "Lucy" is an example. After the *original date of 3.6* million years became unpalatable, a geologist suggested that the date should be *revised downward to 3 million* years based upon comparative dating of similar volcanic tuff. *Another date was 2.6 million* years, *then 2.9 million* years, and *then 1.8 million* years. *Now, they believe that "Lucy" should be about two million years old.*10 http://www.rae.org/revev3.html
> 
> The bible does not teach round or flat earth his lockup has nothing to do with the bible
> 
> ...


Fish, you're killin' me man... 

The bible does teach the earth is flat, just like any other piece of it, it's incredibly vague and the takes a little interpretation by the reader, but when they say things like "Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their glory." Matthew 4:8, or "Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him..." Revelation 1:7... How could you see "all the kingdoms of the world" on a round planet? How could "every eye" see anything unless the entire planet was flat?... shit like that, see what I mean?

Please provide me with any amount of evidence to support a "great flood". Where do you suppose all that water came from, and then went? 

*Are you suggesting that the story of Noah's arc is accurate?*

"and i dont care how old the earth is" - Clearly! Why is that? Could it be because it doesn't fit with your already established, unchangable beliefs? Don't you feel that is a block that is limiting your ability to gain accurate knowledge about the real world? Your letting a belief in a magic man make you disbelieve something that is happening right there in front of you in reality. In any other context, you would see how unbelievably *insane* that is. 

Fish, I wan't to make this perfectly clear to you OK... Science, the shit I've been talking about is *SCIENCE* because *IT CAN BE PROVED*. If it cannot be proved, like your God/Christianity hypothesis, it is *NOT* science. Just like intelligent design, same shit with that, that is not science because there's nothing to test about it... The scientific method *DEPENDS* on *CONSISTENCY* and *ACCURACY* and *REPEATABLE EXPERIMENTS*... I seriously do not get what you can't understand about that. That is how it's so easy for someone like me to determine what is science and what is not science. Can you test it? - yeah? Science... - no? Not science... pretty easy. There are scientific theories and ideas floating around that are completely speculation, 100% hypothetical... but that's the thing, they are only ideas, nobody is saying any of them are fact. The stuff they've stated as fact are already determined to be true through multiple tests and experiments, the big bang theory is the most accurate model that supports the evidence for the beginning of the universe, evolution is the most accurate model available that supports the diversity of life on earth... *What can you test about religion?* These are the important differences between *SCIENCE* and *RELIGION*. 

There's not a shred of 'faith' in the same sense as religion involved in any aspect of science. 

By the way, you source is littered with errors and disinformation, take a look;




> Piltdown man and the Nebraska man are two examples of how much speculation and presupposition plays a part in evolutionary thinking. Piltdown man was a hoax that fooled specialists for forty years: ape and human fossils doctored to look like they belonged together. The bones were treated with iron salts to make them look old, and the teeth filed to make them look like ape's teeth.


 
-what kind of logic is it to determine from two fake, and deliberately forged fossils that the whole of the theory of evolution is false? What about the THOUSANDS of other fossils that all support the theory of evolution, every single one of them?




> Scientists have found over sixty specimens of Neanderthal Man. Evolutionists have for years used Neanderthal man to prove their theory. But, some experts say that if you put a coat and tie on Neanderthal man, you couldn't tell him from anyone else walking down the street.


 
- omg the stupidity of the author is unbearable! Did somebody write that as a joke, seriously, that's funny! 

- the entire goddamn bone structure is different! - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Neanderthalensis.jpg

- they were stronger, shorter, had much more hair and had less brain capacity than modern humans do, they would be unbelievably easy to spot in a crowd of modern humans. If any scientist or doctor were to mistake a neanderthal fossil for a modern homo-sapien one, they would be bitch slapped for their stupidity, as well they should be.




> Early human fossils are dated from their strata. This means that the dating of these fossils is dependent upon the assumptions of evolution. The problem is, truly human fossils were discovered in strata dated older than Australopithecines, supposedly the oldest ancestor to man. Where the radiometric date does not agree with evolutionary thinking, it is surprising how they adjust and massage the data to fit the theory. The radiometric dating of "Lucy" is an example. After the original date of 3.6 million years became unpalatable, a geologist suggested that the date should be revised downward to 3 million years based upon comparative dating of similar volcanic tuff. Another date was 2.6 million years, then 2.9 million years, and then 1.8 million years. Now, they believe that "Lucy" should be about two million years old.


 
- 100% WRONG SON! "Lucy" aka Australopithecus is estimated to be 3.2 million years old. 

- The discovery of this hominin was significant as the skeleton shows evidence of small skull capacity akin to that of apes and of bipedal upright walk akin to that of humans, providing further evidence that bipedalism preceded increase in brain size in human evolution.
 
- I also like how the guy doesn't list any names of people who are tinkering with the evidence... 




> Fossilized skeletons of Cro-Magnon Man had a superior size and brain capacity to modern man. We could explain this with the Biblical idea that before the flood people lived longer and were healthier because God made the environment with the purpose for man to live forever.


 
- ...as we know, brain size does not determine intelligence level, nothing uncommon about that... What I'd like to know is where the hell the author got the evidence to support that crazy shit he just layed down! 

One other thing... that source is from 1994, what's that.. 15 years?... way to stay current bro.

If you're reading shit like this it's no wonder why you hold the beliefs you do...


----------



## northwoodsmoker (Aug 22, 2009)

cream8 said:


> i couldnt agree more. we create these heavens and hells ourselves that we live in in the present moment. because thats all there really is.


 i believe that too.. we create our own personal heaven or hell but that bout it..


----------



## fish601 (Aug 22, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> *Fish, you're killin' me man... *
> 
> *The bible does teach the earth is flat, just like any other piece of it, it's incredibly vague and the takes a little interpretation by the reader, but when they say things like "Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their glory." Matthew 4:8, or "Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him..." Revelation 1:7... How could you see "all the kingdoms of the world" on a round planet? How could "every eye" see anything unless the entire planet was flat?... shit like that, see what I mean?*


he was on a high moutain obviously it wasnt flat 

coming with the clouds wouldnt they be looking up, and the "every eye" part LOL you think they could see people from the next town? whew nowonder you dont believe the bible you have no clue what its talking about in those verses



haha and i am killing you?


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 22, 2009)

fish601 said:


> he was on a high moutain obviously it wasnt flat
> 
> coming with the clouds wouldnt they be looking up, and the "every eye" part LOL you think they could see people from the next town? whew nowonder you dont believe the bible you have no clue what its talking about in those verses
> 
> ...


You could not see "all the kingdoms of the world" unless the earth was flat, I don't give a fuck how tall your mountain is.

That second quote is talking about the second coming of Christ. It clearly means every single human on earth will see Christ when he comes, not all the humans in _______ town will. That's just absurd, even you can admit that.

What about the rest of my post? The other 95% you seemingly missed...


----------



## fish601 (Aug 22, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> *"and i dont care how old the earth is" - Clearly! Why is that? Could it be because it doesn't fit with your already established, unchangable beliefs? Don't you feel that is a block that is limiting your ability to gain accurate knowledge about the real world? Your letting a belief in a magic man make you disbelieve something that is happening right there in front of you in reality. In any other context, you would see how unbelievably insane that is. *
> 
> *Fish, I wan't to make this perfectly clear to you OK... Science, the shit I've been talking about is SCIENCE because IT CAN BE PROVED. If it cannot be proved, like your God/Christianity hypothesis, it is NOT science. Just like intelligent design, same shit with that, that is not science because there's nothing to test about it... The scientific method DEPENDS on CONSISTENCY and ACCURACY and REPEATABLE EXPERIMENTS... I seriously do not get what you can't understand about that. That is how it's so easy for someone like me to determine what is science and what is not science. Can you test it? - yeah? Science... - no? Not science... pretty easy. There are scientific theories and ideas floating around that are completely speculation, 100% hypothetical... but that's the thing, they are only ideas, nobody is saying any of them are fact. The stuff they've stated as fact are already determined to be true through multiple tests and experiments, the big bang theory is the most accurate model that supports the evidence for the beginning of the universe, evolution is the most accurate model available that supports the diversity of life on earth... What can you test about religion? These are the important differences between SCIENCE and RELIGION.
> 
> ...


*


The age of the earth has nothing to do with the bible or my beliefs that is why i dont care*


----------



## fish601 (Aug 22, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> *Fish, you're killin' me man... *
> 
> *The bible does teach the earth is flat, just like any other piece of it, it's incredibly vague and the takes a little interpretation by the reader, but when they say things like "Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their glory." Matthew 4:8, or "Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him..." Revelation 1:7... How could you see "all the kingdoms of the world" on a round planet? How could "every eye" see anything unless the entire planet was flat?... shit like that, see what I mean?*
> 
> ...


*



PadawanBater said:



You could not see "all the kingdoms of the world" unless the earth was flat, I don't give a fuck how tall your mountain is.

That second quote is talking about the second coming of Christ. It clearly means every single human on earth will see Christ when he comes, not all the humans in _______ town will. That's just absurd, even you can admit that.

What about the rest of my post? The other 95% you seemingly missed...

Click to expand...

 
missing 95% you dont even understand what i just said why finish LOL

think about this... 
you said you can not see all the kingdoms of the world unless the earth was flat so if the earth was flat you could see all the kingdoms even the ones thosuands of miles away 
to get the earth is flat out of that verse you must assume they could see really good not to mention there might be another High mountain they cant see over
really man did u even think about this one? i am half goofing around on this verse there are much much bigger problems with thinking that verse was talking about earth being flat feel free to delete your post*


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 22, 2009)

Science changes. The picture that science painted in the 1700s is different than the picture in the 1800s 1900s 2000s and on and on. And it will continue to evolve. 
Science can never prove if you love your wife or children. But there is a reality of love for children and people.
The world is bigger than science. Science is awesome! Jah is awesome!!! Science is the handiwork of God.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 22, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> *Fish, you're killin' me man... *
> 
> *The bible does teach the earth is flat,*


 
just ran accross this thought i would show it to you [FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*Isaiah 40 *_Read This Chapter_[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]*40:22* He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth[/FONT]


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 22, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> Honestly...i'd believe more that it happened by chance...rather than one being creating EVERYTHING...including the 100 billion galaxies? Or maybe the 10 billion trillion stars? Seems like a lot of work.


So your saying that you would rather believe that some speck in the middle of non existence exploded and brought all of us here to this planet with all these amazing plants, animals, etc... that all require each other to live in harmony instead of thinking, "hey, maybe there is a dude out there that made us...?"

That's fine by me. Personally, I'd rather spend the rest of my life doing my best to be my best and believing that one day I'll be in a place that's perfect. Actually, it makes me feel good.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 22, 2009)

FoxCompany426 said:


> So your saying that you would rather believe that some speck in the middle of non existence exploded and brought all of us here to this planet with all these amazing plants, animals, etc... that all require each other to live in harmony instead of thinking, "hey, maybe there is a dude out there that made us...?"
> 
> That's fine by me. Personally, I'd rather spend the rest of my life doing my best to be my best and believing that one day I'll be in a place that's perfect. Actually, it makes me feel good.


Believing in something doesn't make it true. No one would have a problem with Christianity if it behaved like Buddhism or Judaism..... just two examples of religions that do not actively recruit or "spread the word". It's the insistence of correctness and the desire to envelope the world with its doctrines which get ppl ticked off.

But like you said...... "So your saying that you would *rather* believe that some speck in the middle of non existence exploded and brought all of us here to this planet". 

It's really about comfort......not being correct.


----------



## cbtwohundread (Aug 23, 2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKGzbh77B88&feature=related 

DEVILS DEAD.,.,DEVILS DEAD^,I WAS TALKING TO A CLOUD EARLIER,SHE TOLD ME A ROCK WOULD KNOW WAT HAPPEND TO THE DEVIL SO I WENT TO TALK TO THIS ROCK/.,.THIS ROCK SENT ME TO A VOLCANO,.,I WENT TO THIS VOLCANO, IT SENT I TO THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE,THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE TOLD ME THAT IT SENT THE DEVIL TO A EMPTY DIMINSION 6HUNDREAD AND 65 1/2 MILES FROM PLUTO WHERE HE FROZE .,.,SO I DROVE MY UNICORN OUT TO OUTERSPACE AND FOUND HIM,I TRAPED HIM IN A GENIE LAMP AND BURIED ON A METEOR HEADED FOR THE BLACK HOLE.,.,.KAPOOF HES GONE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9PcNQxM_cQ&feature=related


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 23, 2009)

> So your saying that you would rather believe that some speck in the middle of non existence exploded and brought all of us here to this planet with all these amazing plants, animals, etc... that all require each other to live in harmony instead of thinking, "hey, maybe there is a dude out there that made us...?"
> 
> That's fine by me. Personally, I'd rather spend the rest of my life doing my best to be my best and believing that one day I'll be in a place that's perfect. Actually, it makes me feel good.


It has nothing to do with what you would rather believe. I'm not sitting here deciding between creationism and evolution... I'm sitting here looking at the data available, and then concluding that yeah, evolution is clearly the correct answer to the question of how there is so much diversity of life on earth. All the data adds up. It all matches. It all fits. All of it. There's fakes and forgeries? OK, big deal, what about the rest of the data and evidence? The dating methods are innacurate? No they're not, people who make that claim (like fish and shroomer) do not understand how they work. All the dating methods used are completely accurate and they all agree with eachother to verify eachother independently, the only way that could possibly happen is if they all worked. Why do rocks from one layer equal a certain age, then the lower you go the older the rocks get? Why is that? The lower forms of life are less complex and as you go higher they become more complex, why is that? 

"hey, maybe there is a dude out there that made us.." - sir, even if that were the case, that doesn't answer any questions. That's the point. Even if the bible and Christianity were true (to which I'd guess you and the rest of the believers haven't really thought that one through all the way, which is the topic of another thread...heaven and all it's "glory") it doesn't say anything about how it all happened, or why, just that God did it. 

If living a lie makes you feel good... be my guest, just don't try to get laws passed or pass judgement onto other people in society based on your religious beliefs, it doesn't make much sense.



> Science changes. The picture that science painted in the 1700s is different than the picture in the 1800s 1900s 2000s and on and on. And it will continue to evolve.
> Science can never prove if you love your wife or children. But there is a reality of love for children and people.
> The world is bigger than science. Science is awesome! Jah is awesome!!! Science is the handiwork of God.


Science changes - that's the point. Are you saying that's a bad thing?

Science can prove if you love your wife or children.



> missing 95% you dont even understand what i just said why finish LOLthink about this... you said you can not see all the kingdoms of the world unless the earth was flat so if the earth was flat you could see all the kingdoms even the ones thosuands of miles away?
> to get the earth is flat out of that verse you must assume they could see really good not to mention there might be another High mountain they cant see over
> really man did u even think about this one? i am half goofing around on this verse there are much much bigger problems with thinking that verse was talking about earth being flat feel free to delete your post


Then why did that verse in the bible say "all the kingdoms of the earth" if it did not mean it? - wouldn't you agree that's a clear example of incorrect information?

Do you believe the bible is the word of God, or influenced by God and written by men?


----------



## BradyBoe (Aug 23, 2009)

Im saying that as soon as we come to world order and the world is controlled by one group of people. Then the religion's are going to change quickly. People are going to start picking up on the whole concept of there being no god and no heaven or hell. It's called evolution. We will evolve farther and farther away from the concept, that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sin's. We will embrace the thought that we are nothing but energy and energy never goes away, it just changes form. Go back into the 1700 century, look at how serious people took their religion, now it's almost become a joke if you're religious. There are so many religion's, which one is right. And the answer to that, is all of them. They are all right, because they make you focus your attention on something that makes you feel good on the inside, and that's all that life is, it's about us doing thing's that make us honestly feel good on the inside. Whatever you need to do to get that feeling of ease and knowing that life is great, do it. Whether it be Jesus Christ that makes you focus your attention on feeling good or just knowing in your heart of heart's, what is right and what will make you feel good, DO IT!!!! Hope you guy's enjoyed my idea's and thought's. Take care all!!!


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

I'm pretty sure the Christians would go for Armageddon before they allowed that to happen. 

That's the trouble with nutty prophecies....ppl try to make them happen.


----------



## cbtwohundread (Aug 23, 2009)

god is that truthful voice in your head that tells you rite from wrong up fom down and round from round.,.,.,.,to me that voice is god,because the voice in my head always tells truths.,and if it lies i die instantly,so if it was that god influenced a man to rite the bible i find that just as go0d.as if god himself wrote it.,.we can overstand each others words,but god speaks in a tongue of wisdom so deep our shallow minds cant float , god lives thru i.,.,and i live thru god.,.,u cant take life from the life giver,.,so if u ask i god is always here as simple as a lamb.,.,.,none sees the simple things anymore,its a shame.,.,fo0lish is the man that says theres no god
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Do6-60yLSw&feature=PlayList&p=27C5A6236AE80E4A&index=40&playnext=6&playnext_from=PL


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Believing in something doesn't make it true.


 Didn't say anything about truth. 



> No one would have a problem with Christianity if it behaved like Buddhism or Judaism..... just two examples of religions that do not actively recruit or "spread the word".


 So your saying we should not allow others to support what they believe?



> It's the insistence of correctness and the desire to envelope the world with its doctrines which get ppl ticked off.


 Are you yourself not being insistent?



> But like you said...... "So your saying that you would *rather* believe that some speck in the middle of non existence exploded and brought all of us here to this planet".
> 
> It's really about comfort......not being correct.


So you caught on at the end there, good for you. 



PadawanBater said:


> All the data adds up.


To a big unanswered question. 



> "hey, maybe there is a dude out there that made us.." - sir, even if that were the case, that doesn't answer any questions. That's the point.


That's just fine and dandy. That was _my_ point the first time.



> it doesn't say anything about how it all happened, or why, just that God did it.


 We still don't know exactly how or why gravity works, but we believe in it, right? 



> If living a lie makes you feel good...


How can you label something a lie when you yourself believe in something that has no answer.


> just don't try to get laws passed or pass judgement onto other people in society based on your religious beliefs, it doesn't make much sense.


 What laws have _I _pushed?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

cbtwohundread said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKGzbh77B88&feature=related
> 
> DEVILS DEAD.,.,DEVILS DEAD^,I WAS TALKING TO A CLOUD EARLIER,SHE TOLD ME A ROCK WOULD KNOW WAT HAPPEND TO THE DEVIL SO I WENT TO TALK TO THIS ROCK/.,.THIS ROCK SENT ME TO A VOLCANO,.,I WENT TO THIS VOLCANO, IT SENT I TO THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE,THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE TOLD ME THAT IT SENT THE DEVIL TO A EMPTY DIMINSION 6HUNDREAD AND 65 1/2 MILES FROM PLUTO WHERE HE FROZE .,.,SO I DROVE MY UNICORN OUT TO OUTERSPACE AND FOUND HIM,I TRAPED HIM IN A GENIE LAMP AND BURIED ON A METEOR HEADED FOR THE BLACK HOLE.,.,.KAPOOF HES GONE
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9PcNQxM_cQ&feature=related


You are the freakiNG MAN!!!!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

I am very upset with you CrackerJax. Where is the big titted asian softballer????


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Believing in something doesn't make it true. No one would have a problem with Christianity if it behaved like Buddhism or Judaism..... just two examples of religions that do not actively recruit or "spread the word". It's the insistence of correctness and the desire to envelope the world with its doctrines which get ppl ticked off.


 
Really???
There is something more to the Christian message than what other 'religions' teach. That is why it pisses people off. As for Judaism, it is the same thing as Christianity, whether you overstand it or not.




anhedonia said:


> Really? You dont see the nature of your question as finite and transient? What would YOU like to see? God is not of the ego conciousness. Those ideas and concepts die when you die.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> Really???
> There is something more to the Christian message than what other 'religions' teach. That is why it pisses people off. As for Judaism, it is the same thing as Christianity, whether you overstand it or not.


You have it backwards. Christians are Jews.......rebellious Jews. They were referred to as Christian Jews. 

Religion doesn't teach anything that hasn't already been done. Everyone thinks the Bible is somehow an original book.... it is not. It's just a rehash of what was written before.....nothing more.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 23, 2009)

*There's a difference between supporting what you believe in, and cramming your beliefs down someones throat.
*


----------



## Froman (Aug 23, 2009)

Just Kill Yourselves already or stop posting in here, no one is gonna win, just a bunch of pointless arguments, like any of you really have a say on anything, like you all know what your talkin about, sounds like a bunch of big headed people who think their right, who gives a fuc, really, go on with your life why even worry about this or that, yall needa wake up if anything


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 23, 2009)

Froman said:


> Just Kill Yourselves already or stop posting in here, no one is gonna win, just a bunch of pointless arguments, like any of you really have a say on anything, like you all know what your talkin about, sounds like a bunch of big headed people who think their right, who gives a fuc, really, go on with your life why even worry about this or that, yall needa wake up if anything


 
Well, because things like religion have very important implications on the rest of society.

To hell with letting some self righteous group of asshats tell me how to live my life. 

That being the most important issue, for me personally, but another important part of it is educating the public, such as yourself. 

The fact you don't see how important this stuff really is, just like the majority of the public, is the biggest underlying problem we face today. It's the reason we keep living life day by day with such things like war, poverty, famine, genocide, and on most levels even murder, theft and rape so common within society. 

You sir, need to wake the fuck up.


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> *There's a difference between supporting what you believe in, and cramming your beliefs down someones throat.
> *


So your saying that everyone who believes in Christianity, or God for that matter, is trying to force you to believe. There may be those people, but that makes up a small percentage. Are you not now debating in the exact same way?



Froman said:


> Just Kill Yourselves already or stop posting in here, no one is gonna win, just a bunch of pointless arguments, like any of you really have a say on anything, like you all know what your talkin about, sounds like a bunch of big headed people who think their right, who gives a fuc, really, go on with your life why even worry about this or that, yall needa wake up if anything


That sort of sums up what I was trying to say. Science and Religion hasn't proven anything, except that we don't understand anything. Everytime science "proves" something, we have more questions than when we started. With religion, we still have unanswered questions. Which brings me back to _my _original point, are you happy? 



CrackerJax said:


> You have it backwards. Christians are Jews.......rebellious Jews. They were referred to as Christian Jews.
> 
> Religion doesn't teach anything that hasn't already been done. Everyone thinks the Bible is somehow an original book.... it is not. It's just a rehash of what was written before.....nothing more.


Once again you are speaking of something you don't know.


----------



## Sure Shot (Aug 23, 2009)

I just hope your mystical, magical, miracles, work in catastrophes!


----------



## Froman (Aug 23, 2009)

hell yea, im happy as can be, not gonna sit here and worry about this or that, or if its true or not, i mean its like i said, if you really want to believe you were once an ape, oe there is no god, its on you, i'd rather believe something then go about my life thinking all this is for nothing


----------



## Froman (Aug 23, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Well, because things like religion have very important implications on the rest of society.
> 
> To hell with letting some self righteous group of asshats tell me how to live my life.
> 
> ...



haha how big is your head gonna get before it pops, its on thing to state how you feel, but you act like your so much better and more knowing then everyone else, worry about yourself then, your just as bad as the people trying to put their religions on some one else  



haha im done, unsubscribed


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 23, 2009)

Froman said:


> haha how big is your head gonna get before it pops, its on thing to state how you feel, but you act like your so much better and more knowing then everyone else, worry about yourself then, your just as bad as the people trying to put their religions on some one else
> 
> 
> 
> haha im done, unsubscribed


What part of "I want to live my life according to my own terms" don't you understand? 

Religion makes people stupid, there is no other way to say it. Stupid to real information, stupid to actual things that save peoples lives... 

I don't know you personally, but I have a ton of friends who think just like you. Like I take this stuff way too seriously and it's not that big of a deal, but that's the problem. It is a big deal, the reason nothings changed about it in so long, or it goes so goddamn slow is because there are so many people like you holding up progression, and you sit there and ignorantly enjoy it without even ever realizing the consequences. People die because of the stupid shit people believe.


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> What part of "I want to live my life according to my own terms" don't you understand?


Then let it be...


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 23, 2009)

FoxCompany426 said:


> So your saying that everyone who believes in Christianity, or God for that matter, is trying to force you to believe. There may be those people, but that makes up a small percentage. Are you not now debating in the exact same way?
> 
> 
> Once again you are speaking of something you don't know.


LOL! Speaking of something you dont know. Thats hilarious. Nice retort.

A SMALL percentage you say! Once again you are speaking of something you dont know. LOL


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> LOL! Speaking of something you dont know. Thats hilarious. Nice retort.
> 
> A SMALL percentage you say! Once again you are speaking of something you dont know. LOL


Yet _you _respond in the same manner.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 23, 2009)

It was a joke. being facetious. But really. You said a small percentage.


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> It was a joke. being facetious. But really. You said a small percentage.


I know, I shouldn't have said that. This is what I should have said, "according to my experience, that is a small percentage."


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

> Once again you are speaking of something you don't know.


Yah, just keep digging yourself further in. 

Jesus was (gasp) a Jew. He wasn't talking to NON Jews..... you don't know the very history of your own belief. 

Something you don't know......


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 23, 2009)

FoxCompany426 said:


> I know, I shouldn't have said that. This is what I should have said, "according to my experience, that is a small percentage."


 
They have their own lobby, I wouldn't call that small.

Not to mention all their asshat preachers and spokespeople like Robertson, Hovind, Fallwell, etc. all send the same fanatical message about their own personal view of Christianity, and they have millions of people who follow them. 

If the normal, private practicing Christians would come out of the woodworks like the rest of us have been and condemn these idiots for poisoning your religion, there'd be a clear distinction between the two, but nobody does that... It's like the retard cousin at a party, you just let him be because it's more trouble to tell him to stop being an idiot than to just leave him alone... 

If someone says something stupid or incorrect about your religion, it's your responsibility to correct them, and it's even better if it's public. 

This post isn't directly referring to anyone by the way..


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yah, just keep digging yourself further in.
> 
> Jesus was (gasp) a Jew. He wasn't talking to NON Jews..... you don't know the very history of your own belief.
> 
> Something you don't know......


Jesus wasn't a Jew (gasp again). Unfortunately, you have now lost all credit. That puts this debate at an end. Thanks for playing.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

You must be high......so what was he? A Pagan?


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Aug 23, 2009)

FoxCompany426 said:


> Jesus wasn't a Jew (gasp again). Unfortunately, you have now lost all credit. That puts this debate at an end. Thanks for playing.


Um, yeah. 

According to the *gospels* of *Matthew* and *Luke*, the lineage of Jesus of Nazareth goes back to King David, and Abraham beyond him.

Someone has lost all credibility all right. But the debate is far from over.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

Was Jesus a Jew? Of course, Jesus was a Jew. He was born of a Jewish mother, in Galilee, a Jewish part of the world. All of his friends, associates, colleagues, disciples, all of them were Jews. He regularly worshipped in Jewish communal worship, what we call synagogues. He preached from Jewish text, from the Bible ( a Jewish text). He celebrated the Jewish festivals. He went on pilgrimage to the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem where he was under the authority of priests.... He lived, was born, lived, died, taught as a Jew. This is obvious to any casual reader of the gospel text. What's striking is not so much that he was a Jew but that the gospels make no pretense that he wasn't. The gospels have no sense yet that Jesus was anything other than a Jew. The gospels don't even have a sense that he came to found a new religion, an idea completely foreign to all the gospel text, and completely foreign to Paul. That is an idea which comes about only later. So, to say that he was a Jew is saying a truism, is simply stating an idea that is so obvious on the face of it, one wonders it even needs to be said. But, of course, it does need to be said because we all know what happens later in the story, where it turns out that Christianity becomes something other than Judaism and as a result, Jesus in retrospect is seen not as a Jew, but as something else, as a founder of Christianity. But, of course, he was a Jew.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 23, 2009)

FoxCompany426 said:


> Jesus wasn't a Jew (gasp again). Unfortunately, you have now lost all credit. That puts this debate at an end. Thanks for playing.


I really hope that you're not being serious.


----------



## Brazko (Aug 23, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> They have their own lobby, I wouldn't call that small.
> 
> Not to mention all their asshat preachers and spokespeople like Robertson, Hovind, Fallwell, etc. all send the same fanatical message about their own personal view of Christianity, and they have millions of people who follow them.
> 
> ...


Paddy Cakes; I think this was an excellent post in my opinion, Very true that Christians should speak UP, Just AS I feel Atheist should Speak Up....But Neither Do because each side Feels That their Buddy's Heart and Intentions are in the Right Direction.....However, So Wrong their Projection of Thought may Be

So What Do You Do, Exactly opposite Of What you Said, You Make A Distinction, More so, You identify with the Individual..

An Athiest/Chistian Believer, will Only Sink their Teeth in Deeper when they feel pressure of being attacked from the Other Side, Regardless of how Logical, Reasonable, Technical, Considerate or Inspirational the opposing Arguement is.

I would have done the Same, being Ignorant to any said topic that I felt was Wrong, Simply because I was Ignorant, not Right...

I've found and Came to understand that You must present your opinion/feelings/facts and leave the verbal assaults out and allow whom ever to come to a higher understanding, Themselves and Yes its' Hard, it Ain't Easy, I KNOW...but you in turn become a better Person, and that's about the Only Person you can Change




PS. I'm not SAying you Have to Lie down either, I haven't Got that Far Yet


----------



## fish601 (Aug 23, 2009)

Brazko said:


> An Athiest/Chistian Believer, will Only Sink their Teeth in Deeper when they feel pressure of being attacked from the Other Side, Regardless of how Logical, Reasonable, Technical, Considerate or Inspirational the opposing Arguement is.
> 
> 
> I've found and Came to understand that You must present your opinion/feelings/facts and leave the verbal assaults out and allow whom ever to come to a higher understanding, Themselves and Yes its' Hard, it Ain't Easy, I KNOW...but you in turn become a better Person, and that's about the Only Person you can Change
> ...


I want people to attack my beliefs it will either build my faith if they are wrong or if they are right i will change what i believe.

I am open, I mean if evolution (monkey turning into man) could be proved without a doubt i would have to change my beliefs. If you could prove that jesus didnt exist i would have to change my beliefs. I am searching for the truth and believe i have found it but that will not stop me from being open to other beliefs.
If i am wrong about christianity then i need to see that and find something else, what would be the point of being a christian if it wasnt true?


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 23, 2009)

fish601 said:


> I want people to attack my beliefs it will either build my faith if they are wrong or if they are right i will change what i believe.
> 
> I am open, I mean if evolution (monkey turning into man) could be proved without a doubt i would have to change my beliefs. If you could prove that jesus didnt exist i would have to change my beliefs. I am searching for the truth and believe i have found it but that will not stop me from being open to other beliefs.
> If i am wrong about christianity then i need to see that and find something else, what would be the point of being a christian if it wasnt true?


Isn't there a difference between believing in jesus and believing in God?


----------



## fish601 (Aug 23, 2009)

g00sEgg said:


> Isn't there a difference between believing in jesus and believing in God?


If you believe the God of the bible then you believe in Jesus


----------



## Brazko (Aug 23, 2009)

fish601 said:


> I want people to attack my beliefs it will either build my faith if they are wrong or if they are right i will change what i believe.
> 
> I am open, I mean if evolution (monkey turning into man) could be proved without a doubt i would have to change my beliefs. If you could prove that jesus didnt exist i would have to change my beliefs. I am searching for the truth and believe i have found it but that will not stop me from being open to other beliefs.
> If i am wrong about christianity then i need to see that and find something else, what would be the point of being a christian if it wasnt true?


I don't understand, what would be the point of being a Christian if what wasn't true?

Needing people to Attack You isn't going to build you up either!! Matter of fact it will do quite the opposite, but maybe that is what you Need to be able to truly Recieve.


Evolution has doubts you say, but The Christian Religion is Without , You a Funny Mutha$#@&.

The Way of Christ is w/o Doubt and Yet it is Not the ONly Way


----------



## Brazko (Aug 23, 2009)

fish601 said:


> If you believe the God of the bible then you believe in Jesus


 
Jesus didn't believe in the God of the Bible


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Was Jesus a Jew? Of course, Jesus was a Jew. He was born of a Jewish mother, in Galilee, a Jewish part of the world. All of his friends, associates, colleagues, disciples, all of them were Jews. He regularly worshipped in Jewish communal worship, what we call synagogues. He preached from Jewish text, from the Bible ( a Jewish text). He celebrated the Jewish festivals. He went on pilgrimage to the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem where he was under the authority of priests.... He lived, was born, lived, died, taught as a Jew. This is obvious to any casual reader of the gospel text. What's striking is not so much that he was a Jew but that the gospels make no pretense that he wasn't. The gospels have no sense yet that Jesus was anything other than a Jew. The gospels don't even have a sense that he came to found a new religion, an idea completely foreign to all the gospel text, and completely foreign to Paul. That is an idea which comes about only later. So, to say that he was a Jew is saying a truism, is simply stating an idea that is so obvious on the face of it, one wonders it even needs to be said. But, of course, it does need to be said because we all know what happens later in the story, where it turns out that Christianity becomes something other than Judaism and as a result, Jesus in retrospect is seen not as a Jew, but as something else, as a founder of Christianity. But, of course, he was a Jew.


Well, if you're not going to give PBS a credit for that plagiarized post, then I will have to do it myself. Here is a link to where you got it, just in case you forgot.

Was Jesus a Jew? 

Jesus' mother Mary was of Jewish and Levitical descent, but, Jesus was God through man. Did you forget about that part?


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

fish601 said:


> I want people to attack my beliefs it will either build my faith if they are wrong or if they are right i will change what i believe.
> 
> I am open, I mean if evolution (monkey turning into man) could be proved without a doubt i would have to change my beliefs. If you could prove that jesus didnt exist i would have to change my beliefs. I am searching for the truth and believe i have found it but that will not stop me from being open to other beliefs.
> If i am wrong about christianity then i need to see that and find something else, what would be the point of being a christian if it wasnt true?


1st of all, 'evolution' is much more than monkey turning into man. It is dead matter turning into man.
Even if it was proven that we came from monkeys, there would be no reason to abandon Christ or the Bible. I used to believe that God just worked through evolution. I was a person who believed wholeheartedly in random mutation/natural selection driven evolution, then I became a Christian. I was still an 'evolutionist'. I just thought that God somehow planned our evolution. Through a few more years of studying, I found that random mutation/natural selection driven 'evolution' is totally wrong and doesn't have a shred of proof. I was just as much of a Christian believing in random mutation/natural selection driven 'evolution'. My transformation into believing that all that 'evolution' crap is indeed crap was a scientific one, not a religious one.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

Jesus was a freaking Mexican. I mean, why else would they call him Jesus?


----------



## cbtwohundread (Aug 23, 2009)

yes yes just love love .,.,.,smoke ya pipe ya will fe3l alrite.,.,smoke a spliff uplift,.,ras smoke ya chalice throw away all malice,.,.,love witcha mind think witcha heart.,.,.,dont skylark


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

I did not claim it as my own so what's your point, other than to not admit you are wrong. deflect away all you wish, but Jesus (if he ever existed) was most certainly a Jew, talking to Jews about being Jewish, the Jesus way. It was rejected...and the rebel Christian Jews have been pissed ever since. The new sect was never called Christians in the beginning, but instead Christian Jews, which was an accurate label. Only later was the reference to Jews dropped. It's no coincidence that the Old Testament is the Jewish Bible, another indication of a hijacked religion gone bad.


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

Brazko said:


> I don't understand, what would be the point of being a Christian if what wasn't true?


Christianity is based on absolute TRUTH. So being a Christian means that there is no room for LIES or falsehoods.

Yes people, Christianity is all about TRUTH!!!!!


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 23, 2009)

I would just like to say that I love all you people on this thread. You guys, and at least one gal, make it so much fun! Woohooo.
But now I am going to have a Duvel and watch Tyson.
Peace out playas!!

Keep searching for all that is real and true!!


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

Christianity is hardly based upon truth. More like hearsay and heavy editing......


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Christianity is hardly based upon truth. More like hearsay and heavy editing......


What is history based on?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

The Bible isn't history though...... there in lies it's inherent problem.


----------



## FoxCompany426 (Aug 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> The Bible isn't history though...... there in lies it's inherent problem.


My point wasn't in the Bible, yet in history itself. All history, at one point and time, was only the view of the one who was retelling the story.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 23, 2009)

FoxCompany426 said:


> My point wasn't in the Bible, yet in history itself. All history, at one point and time, was only the view of the one who was retelling the story.



I think perspectives may get skewed, and that's only natural. The events are usually in synch however. This is where the Bible falls away. Nothing proves the Bible, except, the Bible. Not so with History........ They are not the same.


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 23, 2009)

> 1st of all, 'evolution' is much more than monkey turning into man. It is dead matter turning into man.





> Even if it was proven that we came from monkeys, there would be no reason to abandon Christ or the Bible. I used to believe that God just worked through evolution. I was a person who believed wholeheartedly in random mutation/natural selection driven evolution, then I became a Christian. I was still an 'evolutionist'. I just thought that God somehow planned our evolution. Through a few more years of studying, I found that random mutation/natural selection driven 'evolution' is totally wrong and doesn't have a shred of proof. I was just as much of a Christian believing in random mutation/natural selection driven 'evolution'. My transformation into believing that all that 'evolution' crap is indeed crap was a scientific one, not a religious one.


Dude, will you please provide me with some proof of your experience in whatever scientific field you're involved in via this thread or pm? 

The theory of evolution is change in a species over time. THAT'S IT. That's part of the reason for the previous request, any person, especially any serious scientists would already know that. It's not in any way ''dead matter turning into man''. That would be a-biogenesis. The valid scientific theory that states certain chemical elements and certain atmospheric conditions gave rise to the very first single celled organisms, also, evidence to back it up. They've actually recreated the conditions in labs and created amino acids that are the basis of RNA, that would be the start of DNA, which would create single celled organisms, synthetic life. 

That makes me believe you haven't even studied the basic concept of the theory, which I'd argue is the MAIN reason people do not believe it... because they don't WAN'T to believe it, they choose to avoid the evidence, just like you've been doing. Every post I make you avoid the entire thing, pick one thing out and complain about it, like you'll probably do with this one... So be honest, do you actually understand all the mechanisms involved in the theory of evolution... that natural selection is the complete opposite of ''random''... that it takes millions of years for changes to occur... Or did you just read some propaganda from some Christian website or hear it from the leaders at your church? You say you're educated in science, but I have a really hard time believing that if you don't even know the basic differences between two HUGE theories in two completely different fields of study.


----------



## Brazko (Aug 24, 2009)

shroomer33 said:


> Christianity is based on absolute TRUTH. So being a Christian means that there is no room for LIES or falsehoods.
> 
> Yes people, Christianity is all about TRUTH!!!!!


 
Absolute Truth isn't static, It is Formless, It's Not something that CAn be bottled Up and Held Captive by the Christian Religion....

But indeed it was spoken through Christ...

That Cramped up Room Was part of the Reason for his Krewsufiction was it NOt, allowing room for the Other Guy, spreading Lies and Falsehoods...

Luv U 2 Bro.. 

I'm through fucking with the PH , Goodnight


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 24, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Dude, will you please provide me with some proof of your experience in whatever scientific field you're involved in via this thread or pm?


I don't know why it really matters, but some of my stuff is here:
http://cms-emu-slicetest.web.cern.ch/cms-emu-slicetest/904/Documentation/



> The theory of evolution is change in a species over time. THAT'S IT.


This is not the Darwinian theory of evolution. Darwin didn't write, "How established species change over time." He wrote a book called, "The Origin of (ALL) Species..."

Textbook Darwinian theory states that random mutations subjected to natural selection will give rise to ALL species.

This is an example of why I HATE the term 'evolution.' The term is a loaded term. What does it mean? That is why I call it random mutation/natural selection driven 'evolution', just to try and make clear what I mean when I say 'evolution.'

Your definition of 'evolution' is much different than mine (and Darwin's). I wouldn't dare deny your definition of 'evolution.' Species clearly change over time. No argument there.


> That's part of the reason for the previous request, any person, especially any serious scientists would already know that. It's not in any way ''dead matter turning into man''.


It is true that Darwin did NOT speculate on the origin of life, except in a letter to some guy in the 1800s. He only had a theory of how established life changed into higher forms through random mutation AND natural selection.

Again, the term 'evolution' is screwing this whole discussion up. To me, 'evolution' also means how life began in some pond with certain compounds and electricity (Miller experiment.)



> That would be a-biogenesis. The valid scientific theory that states certain chemical elements and certain atmospheric conditions gave rise to the very first single celled organisms, also, evidence to back it up. They've actually recreated the conditions in labs and created amino acids that are the basis of RNA, that would be the start of DNA, which would create single celled organisms, synthetic life.


The Miller experiment was one of the things that floored me when I learned about it (my pro Darwinain evolution days). One of the many problems with it is that it doesn't explain the INFORMATION content of DNA. What good are amino acids without DNA (and all the other machines in the cell) to tell it how to create proteins. In order for there to be life, there needs to be INFORMATION. Where did the information come from? Random mutation and natural selection are totally insufficient to explain the information content in DNA, even for the simplest of life.



> That makes me believe you haven't even studied the basic concept of the theory, which I'd argue is the MAIN reason people do not believe it... because they don't WAN'T to believe it, they choose to avoid the evidence, just like you've been doing.


Like I said in the original post, I did believe all this stuff, and it wasn't a problem with my Christianity. So if it wasn't a problem with my Christianity, why would I NOT want to believe it?
Again, my conversion was based on science, not my Christianity.



> Every post I make you avoid the entire thing, pick one thing out and complain about it, like you'll probably do with this one... So be honest, do you actually understand all the mechanisms involved in the theory of evolution... that natural selection is the complete opposite of ''random''...


I totally get it. I am not a researcher in the field though, but you don't need to be a physicist to understand F=ma.
Natural selection selects things that are beneficial to the organism. The Darwinian thought is that these beneficial things result from random mutations. Natural selection is not random, but mutation is.

The way I understand life's evolution, which is not _totally _Darwinian, is that some random mutations (like the whole peppered moth thing) are actually adaptations from what is already encoded in DNA. These codes just need to be 'acitvated' by external stimuli, such as smog. 
Bruce Lipton talks about this kind of stuff.



> that it takes millions of years for changes to occur... Or did you just read some propaganda from some Christian website or hear it from the leaders at your church? You say you're educated in science, but I have a really hard time believing that if you don't even know the basic differences between two HUGE theories in two completely different fields of study.


The leaders at the churches I have been a member of have never talked about such things. As for websites, I don't go such places because most of the time they are quite unscientific and outdated.
I am not one to fall into propaganda. I never have been. 


Which two fields? You lost me.


Any more questions???? I hope I addressed your questions, at least somewhat to your satisfaction.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

He is quite trapped by the vortex of his myth......it may be better to just let him dance to the tune playing in his own head.


----------



## meandmyplants (Aug 24, 2009)

budduh says that there is no god and no devil that you must strive to attain perfection in you and you will become godlike!


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

If there is no G*D, then what is G*Dlike? 

Yes, Buddha was the man..... the true prophet of peace.


----------



## Brazko (Aug 24, 2009)

Buddha/Buddhist did & do NOt believe in a Bearded Deity God who is Preoccupied with A Puppet Show, And Yet many do believe in a God concept, Some don't know, and some do not, it lacks importance in their philosophy with emphasis towards the suffering of Humankind....

However, they do believe in gods, Heaven and Hell.... afterlife and rebirth

So go figure


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

If you want to see Hell, all you need do is look around....


----------



## Roseman (Aug 24, 2009)

*There is no Devil.* 

Yes there is, I was married to his sister once.


----------



## cbtwohundread (Aug 24, 2009)

if wat ure thinking is not rite go to hell.,.,


----------



## shroomer33 (Aug 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> If you want to see Hell, all you need do is look around....


There are way too many flowers and kittens for this to be hell.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

A flowers life is one of quiet desperation.

A kitten is always hungry, a long life of killing ahead of it.

The planet is violent to the extreme. Almost...... beyond belief.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 24, 2009)

Ive seen hell here. Everything seemed like a rediculous parody. A pretty mean spirited one.


----------



## fish601 (Aug 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> He is quite trapped by the vortex of his myth......it may be better to just let him dance to the tune playing in his own head.


do you look into a mirror when you write this stuff?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

.sdrawkcab eb dluow neht esauceb oN


----------



## fish601 (Aug 24, 2009)

lol bored?


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

More like unchallenged...


----------



## fish601 (Aug 24, 2009)

oh i think you are challenged  mentaly j/k


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 24, 2009)

fish601 said:


> oh i think you are challenged  mentaly j/k


Hahahahahahahaha...coming from you...haha.


----------



## Sure Shot (Aug 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> More like unchallenged...


Ya, you owned him with the kittens and flowers.
Felines are superior killing machines and sometimes kill for pure fun and social stature.


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 24, 2009)

I think, since you believe an elderly man built a HUGE ark...then rounded up 2 of every species and loaded em up, you would be the mentally challenged one. 

herm.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 24, 2009)

This sure is a blood thirsty world....


----------



## PadawanBater (Aug 24, 2009)

> This is not the Darwinian theory of evolution. Darwin didn't write, "How established species change over time." He wrote a book called, "The Origin of (ALL) Species..."





> Textbook Darwinian theory states that random mutations subjected to natural selection will give rise to ALL species.
> This is an example of why I HATE the term 'evolution.' The term is a loaded term. What does it mean? That is why I call it random mutation/natural selection driven 'evolution', just to try and make clear what I mean when I say 'evolution.'
> Your definition of 'evolution' is much different than mine (and Darwin's). I wouldn't dare deny your definition of 'evolution.' Species clearly change over time. No argument there.


The book is called _On the Origin of Species. _I've read a lot of it, he clearly states the mechanisms involved in his theory. His theory includes the idea that all life present on earth came from the same form of life billions of years ago, but the book mainly focuses on the observed changes in specific species over time, like dogs and birds, finches in particular, and his travels to the Galapagos Islands where he started putting everything together after observing the nature around him. This book was published in 1859.. that's 150 years ago. The theory of evolution back in that day was at it's most basic level, nowhere near where it is today, so the point you're trying to make, even if it was valid, is moot because the theory is not the same today and nobody believes the exact same things Darwin did, that's why it's sort of silly to call someone a "Darwinist" or an "Evolutionist" (also why you only hear those terms from the religious community, also another reason I think you are not telling me the full truth to your background, scientists don't use those terms, those words were made up to make the theory seem less valid to the layman who doesn't understand it).. it makes about as much sense as calling someone a "Newtonian" or a "Gravitationist" if they believe in the theory of gravity, or a "Einsteinian" or a "Relativist" if they believe in the theory of relativity.. 

It does state that, but it also states a lot of other things too. It's not just natural selection that drives evolution, there are five other (known) factors involved. What's the point?

So basically what you're saying is you accept 'micro-evolution' - that is, change in the same species over time, ex. dogs, birds, cats, etc. but you deny 'macro-evolution' - that is, change from one species to another totally different species (the definition of that simply being one species one generation then another species a few generations later that is incapable of breeding fertile offspring with the original species, which we've observed multiple times aleady..) ex. land animals evolving into whales, dinosaurs evolving into birds, reptiles/amphibians evolving into mammals. - Is that right?

To that I ask, what's the difference? What if I changed a million different things about you, do you think people would still be able to recognize who you are?




> It is true that Darwin did NOT speculate on the origin of life, except in a letter to some guy in the 1800s. He only had a theory of how established life changed into higher forms through random mutation AND natural selection.





> Again, the term 'evolution' is screwing this whole discussion up. To me, 'evolution' also means how life began in some pond with certain compounds and electricity (Miller experiment.)


That's not what it is though, you can't just call something what you think it is and go from there.. How life began is a-biogenesis, not evolution. It's a very important distinction, one has nothing to do with the other.





> The Miller experiment was one of the things that floored me when I learned about it (my pro Darwinain evolution days). One of the many problems with it is that it doesn't explain the INFORMATION content of DNA. What good are amino acids without DNA (and all the other machines in the cell) to tell it how to create proteins. In order for there to be life, there needs to be INFORMATION. Where did the information come from? Random mutation and natural selection are totally insufficient to explain the information content in DNA, even for the simplest of life.


Amino acids are the building blocks OF DNA. They are what hold the information within the DNA code. They have recreated these in the lab, established the beginning stages of synthetic life, that is amazing. What will you guys say when they actually create single celled lifeforms under laboratory conditions? - that they're not actually 'alive'? (probably because they don't have ''souls''... am I right?)

Also, explain to me why every single living thing on earth is coded with DNA and carbon based. Why would an intelligent God do that? Doesn't the fact that every single living organism on earth ever discovered all have the exact same information structure - that is DNA, with the base pairs being Guanine, Cytosine, Adenine and Thymine - suggest that all living things on earth are related? You would think, out of all of them, all the millions of species ever studied, ONE would come out with some other element to be based on other than Carbon, right? 





> Like I said in the original post, I did believe all this stuff, and it wasn't a problem with my Christianity. So if it wasn't a problem with my Christianity, why would I NOT want to believe it?





> Again, my conversion was based on science, not my Christianity.


If you believe in evolution, what reason would you have to believe in God? Where does God come into play in this equation? What indicates, to you, that God had anything to do with the process of evolution on earth (even after already admitting that macro-evolution is impossible)? I think this is a weak position to hold because you don't have to choose a side, you can pick the happy middle and figure it's all good. But to me, the problem still exists. I don't see a reason to believe in God (honestly, regardless of if evolution were true or not), so how would evolution being false make creationism correct? I see no evidence to suggest God had anything to do with the process, what evidence do you see?





> I totally get it. I am not a researcher in the field though, but you don't need to be a physicist to understand F=ma.





> Natural selection selects things that are beneficial to the organism. The Darwinian thought is that these beneficial things result from random mutations. Natural selection is not random, but mutation is.
> The way I understand life's evolution, which is not _totally _Darwinian, is that some random mutations (like the whole peppered moth thing) are actually adaptations from what is already encoded in DNA. These codes just need to be 'acitvated' by external stimuli, such as smog.
> Bruce Lipton talks about this kind of stuff.


So then why is it hard to believe that all these little changes would be passed down to the next generations, all of them would slowly add up and create new species that are incapable of producing fertile offspring, after thousands of generations? I don't understand, what is stopping the larger changes from happening that is not stopping the smaller ones?





> The leaders at the churches I have been a member of have never talked about such things. As for websites, I don't go such places because most of the time they are quite unscientific and outdated.





> I am not one to fall into propaganda. I never have been.
> Which two fields? You lost me.
> Any more questions???? I hope I addressed your questions, at least somewhat to your satisfaction.


Biology and Chemistry

And yes, that was much better, thank you for taking it point by point.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 25, 2009)

meandmyplants said:


> budduh says that there is no god and no devil that you must strive to attain perfection in you and you will become godlike!


That is false.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 25, 2009)

anhedonia said:


> That is false.




Because?......


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 25, 2009)

Being god like?? That is not what enlightenment is about.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 25, 2009)

Well, strictly speaking when a Buddhist says G*D like, they aren't talking about the Christian interpretation of G*D.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 25, 2009)

Buddhism is a non-thiestic religion. If you lead a moral life and have good karma, you can be reborn into a godlike realm where you would be I guess god-like, but even then you eventually will succumb to death and rebirth. Being a human is the perfect vehicle to attain enlightenment. It is one of the reasons buddhists consider human form so precious.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 25, 2009)

Buddhism is truly a way of true hope and enlightenment. It makes Christianity look like WalMart.


----------



## bigtomatofarmer (Aug 25, 2009)

So, what do YOU believe will happen after you die?
Heaven? Hell? Purgatory? Ghosts? Nothing?


----------



## g00sEgg (Aug 25, 2009)

bigtomatofarmer said:


> So, what do YOU believe will happen after you die?
> Heaven? Hell? Purgatory? Ghosts? Nothing?


No way of telling, whatsoever. In my mind...this is one of the hardest things for me.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 25, 2009)

Same here.... I haven't the FOGGIEST idea what happens IF ANYTHING. It will be a complete surprise either way... I don't worry about it though....I was given life...I owe a death. I accept it because I have to.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 25, 2009)

In Tibetan Buddhism they have a manual which is basically what the mahayana Buddhist believe what happens at death. The Tibetan book of the dead. They say that at death you go into a state where full realization can be attained. I think its all contingent on karma and the state of mind you are in at the point of death.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 25, 2009)

I have a copy of that book..... it's a great read.


----------



## anhedonia (Aug 25, 2009)

The translation I read had all the sanskrit words that confuse the hell out of me. Its hard trying to remember all that stuff.


----------



## CrackerJax (Aug 25, 2009)

I don't worry about remembering that book. It's all about building foundations to attain true enlightenment. I'm pretty sure I have a long way to go....


----------



## blakkmask (Aug 29, 2009)

Ive always Imagined that, since we are said to have a soul, that your soul would be made of energy. Science 101 states that energy never dies it just changes form. All the heat and electrical impulses from the body have to dissipate and go somewhere. People report ghosts as balls of light and illuminated figures and it gets extremly cold when in the presence of an apparition. For a ghost to create enough energy to be seen by the living it must produce a large amount of energy which explains the coldness...they absorb heat from the surrounding atmosphere to illuminate themselves coalesce into a visible form. And as Anhedonia said, the state of mind of the person at the time of death determines the state of mind of the spirit. A violent horrible death leads to an angry, spiteful spirit whos psyche is shattered and twisted. Those who die a natural, peaceful death become Inlightened. Their mind is clear they remember loved ones and still have understanding.


----------



## shroomer33 (Nov 5, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> The book is called _On the Origin of Species. _




It is actually called:

_On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life_.

...favored races huh.....

I think we all know what the book is called.



> I've read a lot of it, he clearly states the mechanisms involved in his theory.




He also clearly states the downfall of his theory.
Which now is (his theory's downfall is a reality. he didn't know that at the time.) clearly established in the fossil record.

_(forgive me here. kind of tripping balls....)_



> His theory includes the idea that all life present on earth came from the same form of life billions of years ago, but the book mainly focuses on the observed changes in specific species over time, like dogs and birds, finches in particular, and his travels to the Galapagos Islands where he started putting everything together after observing the nature around him. This book was published in 1859.. that's 150 years ago. The theory of evolution back in that day was at it's most basic level, nowhere near where it is today,




we now know it is a joke because of the fossil record.
we have a clearer picture of the fossil record and what it means.
And to his credit, much of what he said was true.
but his conclusions were WAY wrong.



> so the point you're trying to make, even if it was valid, is moot because the theory is not the same today and nobody believes the exact same things Darwin did,




wrong. Darwin's theory is the basis of modern evolutionary theory.


> that's why it's sort of silly to call someone a "Darwinist" or an "Evolutionist"




I hate the term 'evolution' because it has soooo many meanings.



> (also why you only hear those terms from the religious community, also another reason I think you are not telling me the full truth to your background, scientists don't use those terms,




well, I do.
physics has nothing to do with evolution.



> those words were made up to make the theory seem less valid to the layman who doesn't understand it)




these words create confusion. lets define our terms before a debate.



> .. it makes about as much sense as calling someone a "Newtonian" or a "Gravitationist" if they believe in the theory of gravity, or a "Einsteinian" or a "Relativist" if they believe in the theory of relativity..
> 
> It does state that, but it also states a lot of other things too. It's not just natural selection that drives evolution, there are five other (known) factors involved. What's the point?


random mutation would be one of them.
yeah, what is your point?




> So basically what you're saying is you accept 'micro-evolution' - that is, change in the same species over time, ex. dogs, birds, cats, etc. but you deny 'macro-evolution'




Right. There is NO proof for macroevolution. 
Darwin thought they'd be discovered. They haven't.


> - that is, change from one species to another totally different species (the definition of that simply being one species one generation then another species a few generations later that is incapable of breeding fertile offspring with the original species, which we've observed multiple times aleady..) ex. land animals evolving into whales, dinosaurs evolving into birds, reptiles/amphibians evolving into mammals. - Is that right?
> 
> To that I ask, what's the difference? What if I changed a million different things about you, do you think people would still be able to recognize who you are?


no. they wouldn't. I wouldn't be me.

whoa. that's trippy man.
I wouldn't be me...
then who would I be????
who you made me to be....
but that's not me.


whewwww
I am still tripping balls.



> That's not what it is though, you can't just call something what you think it is and go from there.. How life began is a-biogenesis, not evolution. It's a very important distinction, one has nothing to do with the other.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah. They carry the information. Where did the information come from.???!!!!!!!!


> They have recreated these in the lab, established the beginning stages of synthetic life, that is amazing. What will you guys say when they actually create single celled lifeforms under laboratory conditions? - that they're not actually 'alive'? (probably because they don't have ''souls''... am I right?)
> 
> Also, explain to me why every single living thing on earth is coded with DNA and carbon based.




Why does every car have an engine?




> Why would an intelligent God do that?




Why wouldn't an intelligent God use what works? 
Carbon and DNA.



> Doesn't the fact that every single living organism on earth ever discovered all have the exact same information structure - that is DNA,



life is bigger than the DNA



> with the base pairs being Guanine, Cytosine, Adenine and Thymine - suggest that all living things on earth are related?




Computer programs can be written in many different languages, but you only need to use a language that suits your needs and likes as a programmer. That doesn't change
The conclusion:

dude. tripping balls...
gotta move on for now....


> You would think, out of all of them, all the millions of species ever studied, ONE would come out with some other element to be based on other than Carbon, right?


So are you asking why we don't see Java programs in a C++ world?



> If you believe in evolution,




This is my point here!!
WTF do you mean evolution???
I do believe in 'evolution'!!



> what reason would you have to believe in God? Where does God come into play in this equation?



It's a matter of what best fits the evidence.
We see INFORMATION in the cell. How did it get there?
Darwinian processes aren't enough to explain it!

Some form of intelligent life is responsible for our life. There is no escaping that SCIENTIFIC discovery.

Now is it aliens????

I say HELL NO. But thats another story.



> What indicates, to you, that God had anything to do with the process of evolution on earth (even after already admitting that macro-evolution is impossible)?




The Cambrian Explosion.



> I think this is a weak position to hold because you don't have to choose a side, you can pick the happy middle and figure it's all good. But to me, the problem still exists. I don't see a reason to believe in God



Where did the information in the cell come from?


> (honestly, regardless of if evolution were true or not), so how would evolution being false make creationism correct?
> 
> 
> I see no evidence to suggest God had anything to do with the process, what evidence do you see?


information in the dna. but there is a ton more evidence in areas other than science.




> So then why is it hard to believe that all these little changes would be passed down to the next generations, all of them would slowly add up and create



cause there is NO evidence to believe it (new body types, that is).

science is evidence based.
you can do anything with math, but is your theory _real?_



> new species that are incapable of producing fertile offspring, after thousands of generations? I don't understand, what is stopping the larger changes from happening that is not stopping the smaller ones?


the larger changes are changes in body types and such. I guess that would be phyla.
We don't see small, slow change in the fossil record. We see jumps.
Darwin's theory is wrong, and he knew it. He just had faith that the fossil record would show him to be right. It hasn't. As a matter of fact, he's wrong. And he understood why.



> Biology and Chemistry
> 
> And yes, that was much better, thank you for taking it point by point.


Peace out bitches.....
And if your name is Eugene, be careful with that freaking axe....bitch....


I loved the episode of South Park where Butters becomes a pimp.

peace out my niggaz and crackaz.

And please don't hate on a playa.
Mad love to you all. For God so loved the world that He gave His Son for it.

It is all about LOVE!!!

If you ain't down with that, then you got problems...


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 5, 2009)

blakkmask said:


> Ive always Imagined that, since we are said to have a soul, that your soul would be made of energy. Science 101 states that energy never dies it just changes form. All the heat and electrical impulses from the body have to dissipate and go somewhere. People report ghosts as balls of light and illuminated figures and it gets extremly cold when in the presence of an apparition. For a ghost to create enough energy to be seen by the living it must produce a large amount of energy which explains the coldness...they absorb heat from the surrounding atmosphere to illuminate themselves coalesce into a visible form. And as Anhedonia said, the state of mind of the person at the time of death determines the state of mind of the spirit. A violent horrible death leads to an angry, spiteful spirit whos psyche is shattered and twisted. Those who die a natural, peaceful death become Inlightened. Their mind is clear they remember loved ones and still have understanding.


You started out with the flaw however.

No evidence of any soul....anywhere.

=======================================================

Shroom, yes u were trippin...... come down to reality before u post.... mostly gibberish.


----------



## morgentaler (Nov 5, 2009)

Wow. Zombie thread walks the earth.

@Shroomer:

Your argument for the lack of evidence in the fossil record is based on 150 year old creationist drivel, whether you believe in evolution or not.

There is now substantive evidence in the form of transitional fossils and DNA, ERVs and mitochondrial DNA linking species.

---

This conversation seems to be a roundabout argument for the existence of "God". When lacking proof of a god, using gaps in knowledge in unrelated subjects is a poor tactic and hardly scientific. 

If you want to prove a god, then prove it by addressing the god directly. Saying "Well, we don't understand concept X yet, hence GOD!" is a common tactic and completely useless and irrelevant.

Evolution neither proves nor disproves god. It is the gradual change over time of organisms into divergent species. So feel free to leave evolution out of religion, and religion out of evolution.


----------



## PadawanBater (Nov 5, 2009)

> It is actually called:





> _On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life_.
> ...favored races huh.....
> I think we all know what the book is called.


Pretty typical accusation there Shroomer... But I think you should work on the subtlety a little bit. Darwin was not a racist, he wasn't sexist, he wasn't the Nazi parties first member... but consider this; even if he was, how would that make his theory any less valid? The theory stands on it's own with or without Darwin, so I don't understand how any of the mans personal opinions weigh in on the validity of the theory of evolution. It would remain just as valid if Adolf Hitler himself came up with it. 




> He also clearly states the downfall of his theory.





> Which now is (his theory's downfall is a reality. he didn't know that at the time.) clearly established in the fossil record.


What exactly do you mean when you say the fossil record is the downfall of the theory of evolution? Every single fossil that has been accepted into the scientific community is evidence *supporting* the theory. We are talking litterally *millions* of fossils all over the world, each and every single one of them was found in the correct, *predicted,* strata layer, organisms go from basic in the early Earth to more complex the older the planet gets. There's absolutley nothing in the fossil record that contradicts the theory of evolution, not one thing. If there is, point it out. Again, you can't just say "it's wrong because I say it's wrong" and not provide any evidence. So why exactly do you feel the fossil record is not valid?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils





> wrong. Darwin's theory is the basis of modern evolutionary theory.


Right, but like I said, the form of evolution Darwin came up with is the most basic version of his theory. A good comparison would be something like saying modern michanics are reading the manuals to repair the ancient model T's, the first cars to come off the assembly line in the early 1900's. See what I mean, if they were to only read those manuals, they'd have no idea how to work on any of the modern cars with the computer and electrical systems we have today right? The theory of evolution has had 150 years to build upon. 




> I hate the term 'evolution' because it has soooo many meanings.


"Evolution" means only one thing - change in a living organism over time. If you accept the theory of evolution, you accept that all living organisms on Earth today came from the same common anscestor some time in the distant past. 
There are other terms to describe other components of the theory, to be more specific, but that's what the theory describes.




> Right. There is NO proof for macroevolution.





> Darwin thought they'd be discovered. They haven't.


Totally wrong. Macro evolution has been *observed* in *living organisms.* 

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2487,Lizards-Undergo-Rapid-Evolution-After-Introduction-To-A-New-Home,Science-Daily




> "As a result, individuals on Pod Mrcaru have heads that are longer, wider and taller than those on Pod Kopiste, which translates into a big increase in bite force," says Irschick. "Because plants are tough and fibrous, high bite forces allow the lizards to crop smaller pieces from plants, which can help them break down the indigestible cell walls."


That is a *direct observation *of macro evolution, physical changes in a daughter branch of the same species of lizards via natural selection, just as Darwin predicted. 

http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/evol/lizard.html




> "One well known macroevolutionary event is the specialization of lizards on Caribbean islands. Lizards have evolved into 150 different species spread across these islands. Losos and his colleagues write that their lizard experiment suggests that* macroevolution is simply microevolution observed over a much larger time period*."





> Yeah. They carry the information. Where did the information come from.???!!!!!!!!


There's a good talk by Lawrence Krauss about this exact issue. Watch this video;

[youtube]7ImvlS8PLIo[/youtube]

The entire thing is worth watching. He explains in detail how modern science deals with the issue of "everything coming from nothing". 

The real issue is the question. You don't understand that you are asking an illogical question. Just like if I were to ask you what the color purple tasted like. How would you answer that?.. Just like "what was before the big bang?" -- that doesn't make any sense, as time did not exist yet, so you wouldn't be able to say anything was _before_ the big bang.. Some questions just don't make any logical sense. 

Explain to me what information you're talking about exactly? Or why you would describe it as such? I don't see any reason why random mutations influenced by the environment the organism is in couldn't manipulate the genes into developing any sort of new beneficial physical feature. Why couldn't it? We've *observed it*. We know it happens. It does happen. Is God behind the scenes still creating new creatures? Did God give man the ability to manipulate genes and animals environments and breeding conditions to create animals with traits that appeal to us? 




> Why does every car have an engine?


But why Carbon? Can you tell me what's so special about that element Shroomer? 




> Why wouldn't an intelligent God use what works?





> Carbon and DNA.


Listen to yourself. You're talking about a supernatural being with unlimited power. *Anything* would work. The *only* reason a god would base every single existing life form we know of off the same element, Carbon, would be to attempt to deceive us. That fact alone suggests all life on Earth is related at the very least. Why do the species that most resemble us have the most in common with our genetics? Why do all mammals have four limbs?




> So are you asking why we don't see Java programs in a C++ world?


I'm asking why a god would attempt to deceive us?




> It's a matter of what best fits the evidence.





> We see INFORMATION in the cell. How did it get there?
> Darwinian processes aren't enough to explain it!
> Some form of intelligent life is responsible for our life. There is no escaping that SCIENTIFIC discovery.
> Now is it aliens????
> I say HELL NO. But thats another story.


Duuuuuuuuuuude... you are killing me.. Please look at this and seriously consider what I'm saying. This is important. You make a HUGE ERROR in judgement when you do this. 

Say that we had no explination for the information retained inside the cell, we knew NOTHING about it at all, not a damn thing. That's totally false, we have really good theories about the cell, it's evolution, it's components, their jobs, how they all work, etc... we know a shit ton about the cell and how it works... but just for the sake of this hypothetical, say we didn't... ... ... 

k... now, go ahead with your theory. "God did it!"? --... OK... What makes you say that? Where is your evidence to support your claim? Your evidence amounts to "the cell is too complicated, I can't understand how it works or how it could have come into existence... so that means God did it!"... Really? ...really? You think that is evidence in support of your theory? No man, that is not how SCIENCE works. A SCIENTIST would know that.




> The Cambrian Explosion.


WTF? The Cambrian Explosion took place 530 million years ago! 




> the larger changes are changes in body types and such. I guess that would be phyla.





> We don't see small, slow change in the fossil record. We see jumps.
> Darwin's theory is wrong, and he knew it. He just had faith that the fossil record would show him to be right. It hasn't. As a matter of fact, he's wrong. And he understood why.


You seriously *are *trippin' man! We have evidence of slow gradual changes of tons of different species of animals today. We've got their entire lineage all the way back, millions of years ago to the very beginning of some of them! We've got almost 5.5 million years verified homo evolution with the recent discovery of Ardi. All of them line up perfectly with the predictions of evolution, again, thousands of them..


----------



## fish601 (Nov 6, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> You seriously *are *trippin' man!




​
 
_................................ _


*Acts 17:24-31 *The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. *25* And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. *26* From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. *27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. **28* 'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.' *29* "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone--an image made by man's design and skill. *30* In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. *31* For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."

are we alive just to be alive?
can you find an answer for anything you look for?


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 6, 2009)

There is simply no evidence that nature is goal oriented. Species come and they go. T Rex lived for MILLIONS of years.... Millions!! To no avail.... no goal. Now nature has created a being that can spend time contemplating mortality and all the trappings that go along with that. This does not mean that nature has suddenly invented a goal for that being. That is wishful, perhaps ego centric thinking. Has nature made a long lived species? Is being sentient enough of an advantage to keep us from going extinct? No one knows..... there is no plan. There is no pattern to guide nor predict.


----------



## fish601 (Dec 5, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> T Rex lived for MILLIONS of years.... Millions!! .


 
millions haha hoax jokes its all fun


----------



## biggun (Dec 6, 2009)

The Devil is all the guilt we carry inside? But what about the guiltless who do evil things? where does that evil come from? I think it is some sort of chemical imbalance in their heads. But if you believe that then you have to except that god is not perfect and accidentally fucked up a few. So then let me ask you does god feel guilty about them, I mean just suppose the evil doer really does not know he is doing wrong, then how does god judge them or does he never judge and accepts all into heaven? Judging man by what is in his heart and not by his deeds?


----------



## PadawanBater (Dec 6, 2009)

fish601 said:


> millions haha hoax jokes its all fun


 
Hey fish... if the dating methods don't work, like you insist they don't, then why don't some creationist 'scientists' just fake a fossil as evidence for creationism? They could *easily* fake a fossilized bunny in some precambrian strata layers if they did it right, and according to you, the real scientists wouldn't know the difference, because they wouldn't be able to accurately date it! Creationism FTW!! 

So... why don't they do it?
























































*BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE DATING METHODS ARE ACCURATE, AND IF THEY TRIED SUCH A BULLSHIT STUNT, IT WOULD BE DISCARDED IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE THE DATES WOULD ALL INDEPENDENTLY LINE UP WITH THAT OF A FABRICATED FOSSIL.*


----------



## krustofskie (Dec 8, 2009)

fish601 said:


> millions haha hoax jokes its all fun


A fan of Kent Hovind by any chance. You seem to use his arguments quite often, if not his arguments then very close to. If so you should check this out.

http://www.kent-hovind.com/


----------



## anhedonia (Dec 11, 2009)

Ive had dreams of being absorbed into a white light and feeling an intense overwhelming sense of love and peace that ive ever felt. Only lasts for a few seconds before it goes away. Other dreams Ive experienced this feeling watching a flock of birds land next to a fence in the distance and also these beautiful webs of water forming in the sky gave me that same sense of well being, love and peace.
I can see people saying its god but it isnt. When I first had one of those dreams I mentioned it to an evangelical minister and he told me it was satan. Pretty funny. But it takes no belief in a god to experience states of love peace and joy.


----------



## kronic1989 (Dec 11, 2009)

He told you it was satan? Such peaceful dreams? I wonder what he had nightmares about...


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 11, 2009)

Uhhh, dreams aren't real. 

There, one problem solved for you!


----------



## Brevity, The Soul Of Wit! (Dec 11, 2009)

BrotherJay said:


> Folks... there is no devil outside of yourself. When Jesus spoke of evil, he was referring to the ego that is inside each and every one of us. The ego is responsible for the pain and suffering in this world because it is the outright denial of God (who has no opposite).


Nooo.. Your ego is the reason you walk talk and have organized thought.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 13, 2009)

Uhhh, dreams are real.

If you believe in Atom Bombs,

then radioactive Carbon half lives are easier to accept as real things too.


----------



## Mcgician (Dec 13, 2009)

Classic. This thread is illustrates the need for that vintage "outsider" Uncle. Always and never are the realm of the closed-minded. That is all.



edit: "Hi, I like to say something vague in every thread." Lol.

Who am I?


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 13, 2009)

The steady state radioactivity concentration of exchangeable carbon-14 being about 14 disintegrations per minute (dpm) per gram is indeed quite vague.

Especially if you are Aware of the number seven.

1243


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 13, 2009)

Dreams are perceptions, but are not real. It's a hard drive defragmenter, nothing more.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 13, 2009)

Dream = Perception = Brain Activity = EEG recording = Reality

Thought became thing.

You would be scared if you were aware of spooky mind controls.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 13, 2009)

Uhh, no.....


----------



## anhedonia (Dec 13, 2009)

How about dreaming about doing something that you were never able to do then the next day your able to do it based on what you experienced in the dream..for instance playing a musical instrument or for sports.
Jazz legend Rahsaan roland kirk was inspired to play multiple instruments to create a unique sound from dreams.
A bit off topic but here he is. [youtube]deUqwy38Q40[/youtube]


----------



## morgentaler (Dec 13, 2009)

Woodstock.Hippie said:


> Dream = Perception = Brain Activity = EEG recording = Reality
> 
> Thought became thing.
> 
> You would be scared if you were aware of spooky mind controls.


Sigh. This whole "thought becomes things" thing you keep spouting is a pointless pile of BS.

You can have a thought and then apply it to actions to create something, but you will not merely will something into existence.

Science is for people who take action to understand the workings of the universe.

Philosophy is for people too pretentious to think scientifically.

And religion is for people who want other people to think for them.


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Dec 13, 2009)

morgentaler said:


> Sigh. This whole "thought becomes things" thing you keep spouting is a pointless pile of BS.
> 
> You can have a thought and then apply it to actions to create something, but you will not merely will something into existence.
> 
> ...


*Ignore* is a wonderful feature.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 13, 2009)

We are Good friends with Pretentious Religious Philosophy Scientists that appear to be Aware and perhaps understand what it Attracts when people who take action to understand the workings of the Multiverse and let people dream.think for themselves.

We are glad there is no devils because Our Father went into the hospital today, twelve days before Christmas.

We are happy he now has a Dilaudid pump in his hand.

Thank Goodness.

Ignoring can be Mean, unless you are ignoring a Meanie.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 13, 2009)

Reality is not for the timid.


----------



## PadawanBater (Dec 13, 2009)

Here's a better question... Why do these people with imaginary friends think that _belief_ is the default position...? 

Isn't that some bullshit...

Shouldn't it be crystal clear logic for someone to see "I don't believe in fairies, just like I don't believe in God" ---> pretty damn simple to me...


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 13, 2009)

It's perspective Paddy. 

Brain wise, someone who is complex has no difficulty looking back at simplicity. 

But if the scenario is reversed, a simple person looking at the complex (science) things can get quite tricky. 

Religion is the default cop out.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 14, 2009)

"Why do these people with imaginary friends think that _belief_ is the default position...?"

To believe is to be Human

no belief, no Human.

Humanities Believe, 

if only and solely for the pure and singular reason not to.

You (by default) must possess Belief to choose not to.

For example:

""I don't believe in fairies, just like I don't believe in God""

You must believe in Fairies enough to Choose not to believe in Fairies

Fairies, like many things, is a Spectrum of Belief, 

not a 0 Or a 1

We choose to Believe in Fairies, because Few are friendly.

Please define the God and Fairies you do not believe in, Padawan.

Be forewarned my friend, 

Phat Rabbits are Infinitely Everywhere.


----------



## potrick (Dec 14, 2009)

Fairies, harpies, gorgons, and santa claus certainly do not exist in the same sense that you and I exist. They do not exist in this Universe outside of our ideas of them.


----------



## PadawanBater (Dec 14, 2009)

potrick said:


> Fairies, harpies, gorgons, and santa claus certainly do not exist in the same sense that you and I exist. They do not exist in this Universe outside of our ideas of them.


 
First post and an intelligent mind can grasp it. +rep

Hippie, real in your head and real in reality are two completely different kinds of "real". There is a distinction you should recognize.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 14, 2009)

I want some popcorn!!


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 14, 2009)

Please define the distinction, my padawan.


----------



## PadawanBater (Dec 14, 2009)

Woodstock.Hippie said:


> Please define the distinction, my padawan.


It's pretty simple, anything science can test - is real. Anything that cannot be tested by science - is not real.

Dreams are real in the sense that yes, you have them, they exist, but they're nothing more than chemical reactions in your brain corresponding with electrical impulses that you perceive as reality. They're just like video games, is a video game "real"? In the sense they exist, just like dreams, yes, they're real, but the gameplay is not "reality", just like your dreams are not "reality".


----------



## Brevity, The Soul Of Wit! (Dec 14, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> I want some popcorn!!


I no rite! THis is entertaining shit!


----------



## Woomeister (Dec 14, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> It's pretty simple, anything science can test - is real. Anything that cannot be tested by science - is not real.
> 
> Dreams are real in the sense that yes, you have them, they exist, but they're nothing more than chemical reactions in your brain corresponding with electrical impulses that you perceive as reality. They're just like video games, is a video game "real"? In the sense they exist, just like dreams, yes, they're real, but the gameplay is not "reality", just like your dreams are not "reality".


 Is emotion real then?


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 14, 2009)

sure, emotion can be tested.


----------



## Woodstock.Hippie (Dec 15, 2009)

"sure, emotion can be tested"

How much is Your Love Our pain? 

If you Believe in Quanti, would it be possible to Quantify Your emotional spectrum?

https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/262635-can-god.html

Has anyone seen Alice?


----------



## PadawanBater (Dec 15, 2009)

Woomeister said:


> Is emotion real then?


 
Absolutely, it can be measured.


----------



## Woomeister (Dec 16, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> sure, emotion can be tested.


 You cannot possibly quantify emotion. You know it is present that is all...


----------



## Woomeister (Dec 16, 2009)

PadawanBater said:


> Absolutely, it can be measured.


 This is laughable...

Put me in a lab and test me to see how much I love my wife... You could use a really technical scale of, let's say, 1 to 10....pffff.


----------



## Woomeister (Dec 16, 2009)

http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/intropsych/pdf/chapter6.pdf

Read the intro for my argument.


----------



## skywalker39963 (Dec 16, 2009)

the greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing the world he didnt exist- KYSER SOSAE


----------



## sunshine1754 (Dec 16, 2009)

The devil surely exsits he makes you ingnorant of my Father. So repent and ask for forgiveness and love Him and think of Him for He is your source.


----------



## Johnnyorganic (Dec 16, 2009)

sunshine1754 said:


> The devil surely exsits he makes you ingnorant of my Father. So repent and ask for forgiveness and love Him and think of Him for He is your source.


Man created the Devil *and* your father. You keep *yourself* ignorant.

I'll let the illiteracy speak for itself.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 16, 2009)

Woo, you asked if emotion is real.

It is.

Animals have emotions and so do we.


----------



## TheSeawulf (Dec 16, 2009)

I respectfully doubt all religion. Anything beyond pondering the source of all things is beyond me. I want to do more research to figure out if my suspicions of Christianity are correct; being more a method of control than an actual practice of "finding GOD". A Christian friend of mine just yesterday had dinner at our favorite Chinese place and he was telling me how much he disliked his job. After he was wrongfully let go of his career position he took a job at Target in the stock room. He told me they have "huddles" because they're a "team" and revealed he felt disgusted at the suggestion that he should be "STOKED" to sell things like Target credit cards with every purchase over $50.00 (as the managers would try to "rev up" the "team" to be excited). He's preaching to the choir here but the point is that he related it to being kind of like the Wal-Mart workers that you may have seen before; cheering and jumping up and down that they work for Wally-World. I've never seen anyone so happy to be getting SCREWED in my LIFE! My friend asked me "What would you think if all those workers were screaming "Jesus" instead of "Wal-Mart"? You'd think it's a cult or something right?" and I replied simply:

"I'd think I'm in church?"

I use to feel really bad like something was wrong with me for not feeling the same as others around me concerning Christianity. I just have a hard time believing in it. Trust me it doesn't make it easier for me.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 16, 2009)

The church system is a socialist system, never forget that.

Read up on Dawkins. He has a razor sharp mind and was recently voted top thinker in Britain, which is no small achievement.

He explains religion well, and correctly.


----------



## godhand (Dec 16, 2009)

idk if their is a devil but last year i spoke to a demon/spirit, he offered me the same power/gift whatever u want to call it. to get rich, fame, power, drugs, woman. n i turned it down, but before i did i had a taste of his power and he let me use the power or singing for 2weeks. in those 2weeks i showed all my friends n some cuzzins and their jaws was in the floor. it was very powerful. i didn't ask for this to happen to me but it did and now i know that people sell their souls for riches and fame. and their are "forces" controlling peoples fates. 

believe me or not, many don't but i don't care we will all find out when we die.

also i had experience of ghost in the past, i know im not crazy cuz not only did i see it, but 3 of my friends, my sister, n some others.


----------



## Brevity, The Soul Of Wit! (Dec 16, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> The church system is a socialist system, never forget that.
> 
> Read up on Dawkins. He has a razor sharp mind and was recently voted top thinker in Britain, which is no small achievement.
> 
> He explains religion well, and correctly.


I would like to rep you for the fixating Asian tit avatar. I've enjoyed it and would gladly pay you today for that hamburger Tuesday if you know what I mean.


----------



## Woomeister (Dec 16, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Woo, you asked if emotion is real.
> 
> It is.
> 
> Animals have emotions and so do we.


 my comment was rhetoric....You cannot quantify emotions though, which was my point in response to the science based reality comment.


----------



## Brevity, The Soul Of Wit! (Dec 16, 2009)

Is this, a little mad? 

Is this, a lot of mad? 

Hmm..


----------



## Woomeister (Dec 16, 2009)

I can hear sniffing????? Oh Its Brevity ^^^^ chop, chop, sniff, sniff....lol!


----------



## Brevity, The Soul Of Wit! (Dec 16, 2009)

Why Yes! Yes You Can!! It's The White Devil!!!


----------

