Through The Wormhole: Is There A Creator?

It's perhaps the biggest, most controversial mystery in the cosmos. Did our Universe just come into being by random chance, or was it created by a God who nurtures and sustains all life?

The latest science is showing that the four forces governing our universe are phenomenally finely tuned. So finely that it had led many to the conclusion that someone, or something, must have calibrated them; a belief further backed up by evidence that everything in our universe may emanate from one extraordinarily elegant and beautiful design known as the E8 Lie Group.

While skeptics hold that these findings are neither conclusive nor evidence of a divine creator, some cutting edge physicists are already positing who this God is: an alien gamester who's created our world as the ultimate SIM game for his own amusement. It's an answer as compelling as it is disconcerting.

This is the first episode. See the list of all episodes here: Through The Wormhole.

Watch the full documentary now. Available only in United States.

3.1k
8.34
Ratings: 8.34/10 from 163 users.

More great documentaries

1. 420 Vision

Thanks for posting this beautiful documentary, well worth the watch.

2. BobbyD

Oh Boy, doubt there'll be any controversy on this one!

"While skeptics hold that these findings are neither conclusive nor evidence of a divine creator, some cutting edge physicists are already positing who this God is: an alien gamester who’s created our world as the ultimate SIM game for his own amusement. "

3. mugen

@ bobbyD i think that god would have created us just as we have created virtual reality i agree. but for amusement i do not think so. possibly just because he could i mean why does man do or create anything these days? because he can. and gods interlect would be so vast that he/she would only ever create something if he felt like making it a reality to him/herself.

4. esmuziq

is this narrated by morgan freeman ?

5. Dannyboy

quiet bazaar to hear new thought of life that can absolutely change your way of thinking :S

6. Chris

Gee. That was hardly expected. Glad to see.

gay

God creates out of necessity; out of the realization of His own solitude. Reality is God's distraction from this pain. By dividing and manifesting consciousness from an indivisible one into many (Us), God (We) forgets His (Our) divinity and crushing lonliness. JMHO. : )

9. capricious

This was a tough watch as a militant anti-theist. So many BS lines in it presupposing god exists for no good reason.

Fine tuning of the universe is not a valid argument at all. If I take a jar of coins and flip them one by one (lining each coin up in a row after each flip) I will end up with a crazy 1 in 10 billion pattern. Does this mean god flipped my coins? Of course not. This argument is blatantly preying on the known mathematical weaknesses of the general public.

Too bad no one ever explained these things to Morgan. Kind of lost some respect for him after this one... it had to be a project of choice and not one done to put food on the table.

10. Oli

Didn't know there where sci-fi movies on this site.

11. MILITANT TRUTHSEEKER

Looking at these comments makes me wonder if there is much intelligence in the universe at all. I think there is a mathematical equation showing that the angrier the person - the longer it's been since they've been laid. Since when is "gay" a comment? Or was that an ANNOUNCEMENT? Anyway I think it's great even if I don't believe in (or understand for that matter) everything they explain. I'd love to see some angry little piss-ant try to EXPLAIN things to Morgan Freeman. I'd PAY to see that!!!
Once again VLATKO my man - you are the KING!

12. Epicurean_Logic

wow this is really good! A new possibility for the theory of everything and more evidence to suggest that electro/magnetic activity in the temporal lobes induces religous experience, i.e. that of being observed by an external entity!

I was expecting a unsubstantiated, speculative, pseudo scientific, god theorizing account and was pleasantly surprised that it was not. I don't like a god model of how/why are we here because it's too simplistic and usually works on the principle that - we don't know why (a) happens implies god did it. Not very useful at all. In fact it's quite regressive...

Re: The fine tuning of the universe.
Apply the anthropomorphic argument, it's very rational and says that because we are here in the form that we now observe the conditions of the universe are such that encourage our form of life. If the roll of the cosmic dice created a different physics with different constants then life would have evolved differently. Thanks.

13. Oli

When i posted my comment about this being sci-fi, I had only read the description. I honestly thought that this was some sort of ID documentary. I thought they where saying they literally proved the god of the bible. But this was actually a very interesting documentary.

14. bill

Amazing! Don't you wonder how there can still be those who doubt a single God!

15. dingdong

It is beyond me how people still believe in god. God is dead- F. Nietzsche. good duc though.

16. Chris

Consider this: This film would not have been made unless there were a substantial number of main stream researchers across the globe coming up with the same answer. That is, the observations and associated mathematical models are far too fantastic to have come about through a throw of lucky dice.

You may prefer that answer, but that has little to do with it.

It's not a proof for the existence of God. But it is evidence that things could not have happened simply by natural causes. It's supposed to get you to think and to calmly reconsider your cast-in-stone convictions. To cover your ears while shouting, "I'm not listening to you!" is a childish as blindly believing in religion.

17. Epicurean_Logic

@Chris.Mathematical models do not,

'come about through a throw of lucky dice.'

I don't think that you understand the nature of mathematical modelling? They are abstractions (simplified versions)of an observed event. i.e. You look at some phenomenon; think about it really hard, and then use existing mathematical tools to describe the situation with a view to finding out some new and unknown information.

The physical application side of things is like an artist drawing a sunset over the beach; you recreate a simplified picture of a physical situation.

'EVIDENCE that things (could) may not have happened simply by natural causes.'

is OK. Will it translates to workable, real, useful answers to relevent questions? I doubt it.

18. Achems Razor

Fine tuning, always Fine tuning. becoming redundant!

Fine tuning is not a substantial argument at all for creation...

The Universe (including the Earth) and its constants are "not" fine tuned for life and humanity; instead life and humanity, through "Evolution", are fine tuned to the Universe (especially the Earth) as it is.

19. Roger

That helmet was pretty scary. Massive possibility for manipulation of people...

20. Lucia

If you look from the sky and see civilization, it resembles the way cancer would move.

21. HaTe_MaChInE

If god was Omnipotent he would already know the outcome of anything we could possible do. He would know all outcomes of everything. Why experiment? Would it be better to never have created man or to have let hundreds of millions of men die horrible deaths. What kind of monster kills for no reason. Free will is an excuse people use to justify the lack of a god or the indifference of a god.

If god loves us why does he kill our children. Either he cant stop the death of our children or he likes the death of our children.

I hope god kills my children so I can prove I will never lose my faith in him.

I once wanted to sell my soul to the devil for knowledge to cure cancer... he never showed up.

22. HaTe_MaChInE

Did I mention that that Dominica girl was really hot?

23. Yahweh is Salvation

The Creator is not a God!

24. JonasX

If God can create anything he wants, why didn't he make human the way he want us to be, IE Believers.
Why does he need worshipers and why does he condemn people who does not believe or happens to sin? Why doesn't he show up and tell us that he is real. Cant he speak for himself? And why does he need priests or preachers that make good money in spreading the lie when he could just program us with the bible in our mind from start?
There is no creator or God, period.

25. BJ

Is god a he or she? What does the evidence point to on that?

26. RIP

I Love this. Peace Vlatko.

27. Michel

God doesn't care. If he did, he'd give us all hugs.

28. TRUTHSEEKER

Epecurean, I think Chris was saying the same thing you are.

29. Love-Machine

AHAHAHHAA morgan freedman pierced the wrong ear!

30. Achems Razor

Oh! there you are @ Allan: with your one liners... knew you would show up sooner or later to give us your profound wisdom with your nonsensical monosyllabic platitudes. Now I can go to bed a happy man.

31. John

Possible Refutations of the Fine Tuning Argument:

1: It is possible that many universes have come into and out of existence. Some of these universes contain parameters which are suitable to life whereas others do not. Given that life only "appears" to exist within a restricted, yet specified range (something our universe currently has)the vast majority of the generated universes will be without life. However, if we assume that the generation of each universe is random, over enough time it is within the nature of probability that the improbable will happen--namely universes with these parameters will exist.

2. In some ways determinism may be used to refute these claims. For example, it is possible that the parameters for sustaining life cannot vary due the result of some unknown causal mechanism. In other words, the parameters that we currently see are the only possible parameters--they must be this way.

3. Problem of Induction - The constants which are necessary for sustaining life are derived from our own understanding of life, and there is no clear reason why life would not evolve in conditions drastically different from those of earth. It is possible that "odd" forms of life may evolve to exist inside a star or even in conditions we could barely comprehend. In other words, the fine tuning argument takes one version of life and attempts to construct the universe around this version. If this is the case the parameters for sustaining life may be beyond our best estimates.

4. The picture given from fine tuning could lead to an infinite regress. Does the "fine-tuner" itself require fine-tuning, and so on.....

These were just some thoughts and in no way are these thoughts conclusive.

32. Allan

2 Certain proofs for the the Fine Tuning Argument
1 - The Holy Bible
2 - Jesus rising from the grave after dieing for your sins
G-d made this universe for us so we can praise him

33. pheldespat

Fine tuning, always fine tuning.

We could exist in a universe without weak force. Where is the fine tuning now? In fact, hundreds of universes suitable for life as we know it can be simulated switching the magic knobs so precisely adjusted for life in this universe.

Also, the fine tuning argument fails because it is us the ones who have adapted to the conditions of this universe. Is is the fish who adapted to life in the ocean, the ocean is not fine tuned for fish.

In an universe incompatible with life there would be no one there to wonder about fine tuning. This universe is not fine tuned for life. It is fine tuned against life. Life as we know it is only possible in very few selected spots compared with the vastness of space: in planets with the right size, orbiting the right star, with the right temperature, with the right atmosphere, with the right elements. These planets are far less abundant than life-hostile planets. This universe is hostile to life. Life is possible in it, but the universe is not life-friendly.

34. Chris

@John

The problem with the many universes solution to the fine tuning problem is that, considering the extremely high and unlikely degree of fine tuning that exists in our universe, it would literally take an infinite amount of other universes in order to have randomly produced one like ours. In other words, the odds of our fine-tuned universe coming into existence by chance are about the same as a multiverse producing a universe like ours. Of course, a multiverse also has the additional problem of infinite regress and absolute infinities, which are not possible.

@Pheldespat

Your dismissal of the fine-tuning problem shows that you do not appreciate the conundrum it hands to cosmologists. The point is that you CANNOT just randomly turn the knobs of the universe and produce an environment where life is possible.

35. John Seals

@ Chris

You said, "It’s not a proof for the existence of God. But it is evidence that things could not have happened simply by natural causes."

Again this is not necessarily true. We do not know enough about certain natural phenomenon to say that they could not have created the universe. Quantum theory for instance, while possibly incomplete, can not be ruled out if for no other reason than we know it may not be complete. We do not fully understand black holes, gravity, planet formation, etc., etc., etc. So to say that we know a natural cause is not the culprit is premature. You may see some more evidence here to help support your theory, but it is not a conclusive theory yet as it rests on eliminating things that have not yet been discovered. I will say that you come closer than most though Chris, I will definelty say that. peace and good luck.

36. jane haydon

Sacred Geometry ring a bell with anyone? I really enjoyed the video, thankyou.

37. John Seals

@ Chris

Also, saying that this movie would not have been created if it did not reflect a huge movement in the field toward the supernatural may not be correct. This was created for the Discovery Science chanell, I watched it thier a few days ago. This is a network concerned more with making money than premoting truth or real science. Ninety percent of thier target audience is christian, thierfore they have a lot of these end of the world, sensationalized, psuedo-science shows on. Watch if you do not believe me. Every other day they are looking for Noah's ark or giving scientific explanations for the biblical plagues in Egypt. If that isn't on then it's "Oh god we are going to die from earth quakes, gamma ray bursts, super valcanoes, killer bees, or a viral out break." All I'm saying is that a few scientists would be all it took cause this show is perfect for thier target audience, it suggests spiritualism as an answer, and it makes a great tv tag line. I mean " Through the Worm Hole Is thier a creator" it's a great hook, I watch it and I am a staunch supporter of the natural cause theories. It may be just as you said, that thier is a huge movement and this proves it, but I doubt that very much.

38. John

@Chris

The idea of having an infinite number of universes, or perhaps some 'random universe generator' does indeed pose more questions. Such a generator would guarantee the eventual existence of a universe with these parameters - at least with enough time. The problem with this idea is that it too would be in need of an explanation.

I find the fine tuning arguments a bit difficult to deal with because I'm not a physicist. I have read an article which argues that when comparing the atheistic and theistic hypotheses the existence of fine tuning increases the probability of the theistic hypothesis being correct. Even if we assume that this is indeed true, many problems remain unanswered. How do you get from fine-tuning to a personal deity? How do you reason from fine tuning to the existence of an afterlife? Much work remains to be done if one wishes to use fine tuning to support particular religious claims.

39. John Seals

@ Jane Haydon

Sure it rings a bell, I was around in the seventies as well. Fractal geometry is what youre referring to, right? I love this feild of study, it's over my head but I still love it. If Epicurean_logic is around he probably understands more about it than me, my math is not the best now days. I always got confused about how they came up with those cool pictures. I think you run a set of numbers, like the Mindlebrot set, throuh an equation and then place dots on a graph accordingly. Then the dots get a certain color if they are moving toward the center or going toward the edge of the graph. I am not sure though. Help Epicurean_logic we have a math issue.

40. John Seals

I would agree that the universe is not fined tuned to us but us to the universe. This is the product of evolution. The universe doesn't seem friendly to life at all to me. Look how big it is and yet we have only one small place where life is known to exist. Besides if one thing is all you know it can not be called perfect. You have nothing to compare it to, so it is what it is and nothing more. Why does it seem perfect, because you are able to say it is. What happened to faith? I was always told by my grandfather the preacher, "It's all about faith. You can't look for proof." Every one that is religiouse now seems to want to advance some proof for at least a god if not thier God. I don't think it is possible. Religion is about faith, always has been and always will be.

41. Chris

Here is one example of the fine tuning of the universe.

The cosmological constant/dark energy/or whatever you want to call it has the potential to either be strong enough to expand the universe faster than would make it possible for galaxies to have formed, or weak enough to have allowed the universe to have collapsed upon itself long ago. The balance point is the ratio between the energy density due to the cosmological constant and the critical density of the universe.

The precise value of the cosmological constant had to have been set near to the beginning of the universe in order for us to have the flat universe we have now. That value would have little or no effect on the observable universe for the first couple of billion years. It is only now that we can see how precise it was set. Like a rocket sent to a far destination (without the capacity for course correction en route), the slightest course deviation could result in thousands of miles off course.

The observed energy density is exactly what one would expect to get a flat universe. How finely tuned must this energy density be to get a flat universe? One part in 10 to the 120th power. This is an unnatural number, made further bizarre in that it is not required by any law of physics.

There are other examples of fine tuning that are equally astounding. Taken as a whole, the math makes a convincing case.

As a final note, the author of the 2003 computer simulation paper that started the current simulation craze, Professor Nick Bostrom, Director of the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University, does NOT believe that we are living in a computer simulation. It's really just an exercise in logic.

42. mugen

it is simple there must be a creator. otherwise there wouldn't be existence at all. i mean the universe couldn't exist without some were for it to exist. there must have been something before the big bang for the universe to park its self into, no? or maybe the elements that caused the big bang must have existed some were. i refuse to believe that existence occurred in nothing it makes no sense. can someone help me understand?

43. logically

Pixels,Nano critters,atoms,fractals,dot drawings,Magic eye pictures(sort of) there is a mathmatical sequence,in these documentaries i think related to fractals that has a sequence that if looked inside is made up of exactly the same sequence on and on ,this was an incredibly thought provoking documentary to me ,no wonder Morgy Freeman had to say something

44. John Seals

@ Mugen

I think your haaving a issue understanding the space time continuum. I have the same problem but I'll try and explain it, for both of us. Einstien said, and now most scientists agree, that space and time where not two seperate things but one thing called spacetime. In fact we now know that you experience time at different rates depending on where you are and how fast you are moving. I know that sounds crazy but it is a fact, they have to make adjustments for this concerning GPS sattelites because the clocks don't match our clocks on earth. They experience time faster than we do, I'm not sure of the difference but its very small like our minute is like 59.xx seconds for the sattelite. But the faster and further you go from earth the faster time goes compared to on earth. Or maybe it's that they experience it slower by a little, I can't remember but it's different then here because of gravity and speed. Really huge things slow down time when you get near them. Any way the theory is that this spacetime was created at the same time as the universe.This is why thier did not need to be an empty space to put the universe in, because the universe is space and time, sort of. Boy I really sound conviencing, somebody else explain this please.

45. capricious

@Mugen - that is the $10 trillion dollar question - what is outside of our universe? Is it empty? Is it a vacuum? Is it something none of us would have ever guessed and is totally bizarre? We just do not know yet. Regarding where the singularity would be parked, it would have had to be in something, which is why I always leaned towards there being something outside of the universe. There almost has to be.... at least, my minds cannot comprehend true emptiness. There is no creator though. At least, none that has been described in any holy document ever written. If there is a creator, it is more likely to be scientists from a much larger species and we're simply floating in a petry dish being observed :) I would humor that idea 100x more than some magical and undetectable deity who REALLY cares if we masturbate or not. That just has "man-made" written all over it any way you slice it. 46. Epicurean_Logic @jane hayden and john seals. Its the mystical side of the subject. I will give you the same advice about sacred geometry that my physics teacher did in 1987 when i exitedly told him that i wanted to learn 'physics' and gave him a book on sacred geometry and hermetic motion. It's not factual and doesn't provide any meaningful testable results. Stick to the real thing. Its much more interesting and useful! 47. Epicurean_Logic @Chris. It's the anthropomorphic argument all over again. If the constants weren't tuned the way that they are, we wouldn't be here to observe them. If they were different, then we would also be different as would our observations. It's not such a big deal and doesn't require a creator. 48. Achems Razor @ mugan: Re: "your refusal to believe that existence occurred in nothing makes no sense". Will add again "Null Physics" that I have included on other doc's. Null physics states that the universe began from the number "zero". Physicists hypothesize that the state of "nothing" is actually" "something", because if there is nothing, there would have to be something, that has become nothing. Nothing is filling something, this goes as far as to say, that the universe is nothing, and does not exist. The reason for this is, if everything is to the value of zero, which is the "something" of "nothing", then you would have nothing. Almost like multiplying a negative times a positive. Physicists call the zero's that make up the universe geometric points, which are similar to singularities, but do not condense matter. Geometric points only represent what is not there. And this is how the universe exists. 49. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurean_logic "It’s the anthropomorphic argument all over again. If the constants weren’t tuned the way that they are, we wouldn’t be here to observe them. " --Yes. "If they were different, then we would also be different as would our observations." -- No, we wouldn't be different. We wouldn't be. If the constants were not the way they were, atoms could not even exist. You can argue that something else may result that may have the capacity to evolve into something like us. But there is no evidence for this, as far as the mathematical models show. What it does show is that when the constants are altered, even just infinitesimally, the result would be a dead universe. That's why scientists love the 'multiple universe' theory so much. So, yours is a very effete characterization of the fine tuning argument. 50. Epicurean_Logic @ilovemyselfmorethani 'You can argue that something else may result that may have the capacity to evolve into something (like us)' It doesn't necessarily have to be like us at all. In fact it's impossible to predict with or without models what the results would be. Green balls of slime could be the 'norm' given different conditions. Large scale self ordering is not such a simple concept. Models are specific bespoke creations relating to any given observation, so to use a current model and change the fundamentals to suit another model is too simplistic an approach. It's like creating a model for the long jump and trying to tweak the equations to turn it into a model for a toy glider. It's not that sraight forward. You have to take the new data and laws of physics into account and then create a new model. 51. John Seals @ Epicurean_logic Actually I looked into it and fractal geometry and sacred geometry are really different things. Fractals are what I am interested in and they are far from useless. Fractal geometry is just a mathmatical explanation for the geometry of nature, like the way a tree is shaped or the way a mountain is all cut up in different angles. Computer graphic artist use fractal geometry to recreate naturally occurring redundant shapes, like a tree. They don't sit and design every branch on every tree in the forest, this would take forever. Insted they give the computer a fractal equation and it builds the trees for them. You should check out "Fractals the Colors of Infinity" you will love it, I bet. It is all about fractals and how they work and why they are important for us to understand as they give us a glimpse of the mathmatics used by nature to create the world we know. I realize that thier was a huge bunch of phsychedelic hippies that tried to make it all mystical and all, I was one of them, we have all done things we wish we could take back. But in reality it is an important field of actuall mathmatics that is used daily. If you already know all this and still think it is useless, well to each his own I suppose. I think it is really cool that they have found out how nature creates say a snow flake or a sea shell, thier both fractal shapes. 52. John Seals I can't believe that we are still arrogant enough as a species to actually think that the universe was designed specifically for us. We, through evolution, have become perfect for the universe not the other way around. If one force where changed and something else existed it would be saying this same thing, "look how perfectly it all fits together for my benefit." I feel this starting place, belief that the universe is designed for us, ends at us being horrible stewards of our world. It makes people think they have a right to exploit the earth and all it has to offer. Truth is we live in a cosmic shooting gallery with comets, mereors, gamma ray bursts, and exploding stars constantly threatening our very existance. When we finally get hit by one of these phenomenon I wonder how perfect and "designed for us" the univesre will feel. Just a thought, believe what you want. 53. Epicurean_Logic Hey John Seals. I didn't say that fractal geometry, Mandelbrot set and also Julia sets are useless. you are right about them being the language of nature. I was talking about occult geometry. In fact, fractal/chaos/complexity may just be the mathematics of the 22nd century it's that far ahead of our understanding at the moment. 54. mugen @capricious: love the way you describe us in a patry dish lol that would be interesting. but when i say creator i just mean something that created matter or dark matter. Achems Razor: "Null physics states that the universe began from the number “zero”." how can we think that the universe must have started with nothing when even the number zero is something. if zero is nothing how can you comprehend it? i understand what you explained yet i still find it difficult to get my head around the fact that the state of “nothing” is actually” “something”, because if there is nothing, there would have to be something, i mean if there is nothing do you mean there must have been something there in order for that space to exist? because if that is so isnt space acctually made of dark matter? would love a reply thanks man. 55. mugen John Seals: yh but what made spacetime? and how did it split into 2? i think the universe and space and time was all formulated to evolve in the way it has. and whatever made this formula is unreachable. love to hear your thoughts. 56. Achems Razor @ Mugen: One way to do it, is try to picture oblivian. No such state exists, oblivian means just that, nothing. how can you picture it? you can't, because you have to be conscious to picture it, don't you. Therefore a state of nothing doesn't exist, there is always something. that is why "nothing" always fills "something". As an analogy, if you had an operation and you where out say for 6 hours, when you awoke, where did the 6 hours go, no-where, because there was no spacetime involved for you when you where out, it was instant. The same for null physicis. No time involved, no spactime. Always something. To me it is the same when we die, there is no nothing, no oblivian, because not definable. We are always here in some form or another. Spacetime is a product of our consciousness, so says Einstein, and QM. They say, it is illusion. 57. Chris Lovely conversation. It's quite interesting watch everyone go merrily down the rabbit hole. @ Epicurean_Logic "It’s the anthropomorphic argument all over again." No it's not. The anthropomorphic argument states that the universe was built for us. The fine tuning argument states that initial conditions needed to create the universe we observe are highly unlikely, especially given the fact that few of these parameters are required by the laws of physics. There is no reason for these numbers. It's worse than drawing a royal flush 10 times in a row, or throwing snake-eyes 100 times consecutively. After how many throws do you start to wonder what is going on? Naturally occurring events most often assume the least organized and least energy state, sooner rather than later. Some of the universal parameters are set on a knife-edge balance. And this is true whether we are here or not. To everyone else: Before every one starts digging their silos, consider that these questions are debated in high circles by Ph.D's. Millions of dollars are being spent trying to find ways around some of the observations that indicate fine tuning. Books and papers are written, published, read and debated again, and again, and again. You are not going to solve it here, with or without Morgan Freeman's help. Most of us are far too isolated in our own struggles and environment to make meaningful contributions. Most, if not all, of what is spoken of in these discussions is merely a repeat of what was read in a book, heard in class, or watched on YouTube. The whole point, as I stated in an above post, it that reasonable people would reconsider the comforting belief system security blankets they have wrapped around themselves in order to protect themselves from the monsters under the bed. Atheist and theists alike believe the most convoluted out-dated nonsense, and BOTH need to start acting and thinking like reasonable adults. When the open minded thinking stops, wars start. Atheists: Don't be so smug. You are never going to be able to prove that God does not exist. It borders on a religious viewpoint. Agnostics are far more honest. The numbers and observations, and their possible implications, cannot be so carelessly dismissed. Doing so means you are hiding your head in the sand as much as religion. Theists: Don't be so close minded to the facts and advancements of science. You are never going to be able to prove, especially to atheists, the existence of a God who clearly states that He hides Himself. He is found by those who seek Him. If some do not seek Him, He will not be found by them. One side or the other is fine. The only thing I find objectionable is where either side insists upon pushing their view as the only view, without credible, current, verifiable, science, logic or observations. Or worse, with discredited, outdated information. Cheers! 58. Epicurean_Logic @Chris. We can agree that you cannot prove that god does or doesn't exist. This cannot change and the main reason for this is that he was designed by man in that way. After the bashing that the earlier gods took from the hands of the classical Greeks, smacked about from pillory to post, the powers that be decided to make god invisible and not of our universe. Thus forever making him unreachable to the rational mind (a good strategy with hindsight!). A clear distinction from the naturalistic pre- monotheistic gods! It's just the way god was designed gringo. 59. Chris @Epicurean_Logic In your humble opinion, of course. 60. Collette Very intereting. What if it is not only we who cannot get to God but also God himself cannot get to us. If we creat a simulated world that gets to the point of leading his own way, and we only observe it on the screen, that simulated created people will probably start asking the same questions if there is some creator. We know they do, but in the world they make themselves (and we are only observers) we cannot reach them to tell them so, without desturbing their way of life, without disturbing their blieve they are real nd their world is real. 61. John Seals @ Mugen That is above my head, I'm not sure what particles or forces combined or didn't to create spacetime, maybe someone else could help us both on that one. I know that the theory says it was created by the big bang so it did not exist befor hand. At least not the spaectime we know and are familiar with. They say the best way to picture it is like it is a huge rubber sheet. All the things of huge mass, like the sun or planets , can be thought of as maybe a bowling ball or something resting on this sheet that is suspended at each corner. See how the bowling ball distorts the sheet as it's mass creates a funnel shaped depression. This is what the stars and planets do to spacetime. We actually see this when photons travel around a object due to gravitational lensing. The photons are just following the shape of space time, think of them as traveling inside the sheet, see how when they come to an object they have to follow the countour of the sheet thier by going around the object. I know it is hard to concieve but it is the most logical explanation for gravitational lensing, the tendency for small bodies to orbit larger bodies, and many other naturally occurring phenomenon so far. It's a trip to me that Einstien was able to figure this stuff out through thought experiments. He let some one else actually go out and make the observations that supported his theories. I can't even imagine coming up with this solution after seeing gravitational lensing, he actually predicted this odd behavior and was right. As far as my take on weather this was all predestined or is just the way things turned out, I think it just happened. I know that everything seems so perfect and designed but that's because you have adapted over thousands of years to this particular environment. So has every other living thing you know. I will say that i am having some doubts lately, my dad is about to die see. I would love to think I could see him again or that he would be rewarded for the hard life he has lived, but i don't. I have based my hole acedemic carreer on the study of history, theology, and science in an atempt to try and understand what is happening around me or to feel some connection to others, but I don't. I am sort of in the middle of a break down right now, so maybe you should ask some one else about thier feelings about god. I don't think I know what i think anymore. Don't mean to be a downer though, thanks for the conversation. 62. Epicurean_Logic @John Seals. My heart goes out to you brother. I have free calls to the US (if thats where you are) and i would really like to talk with you about your personal situation if you want to. You know that i'm in a similar situation and it sometimes help to get things off your chest with someone who understands and has similar experiences. If not. don't worry, if you do though, encode your phone number in the digits of Pi (lol) and give me the code. I'll call you. 63. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor - "oblivian means just that, nothing. how can you picture it? you can’t" Just because YOU cant picture it doesn't mean the rest of us cant. For instance. U(o)=oblivian... now, not only can I picture it but now I can use it in formulas. Unlike any of your diminutive fancies scientists have to prove their theories. Proofs, formulas and equations are the bases of physics, science, and nature in general. Please do not infer that the rest of the population is incapable just because you are. 64. igbymac That is a real stretch by the Christian right (or revealed god advocates)to give themselves credence. Cool documentary, but it changes nothing except confirming god's only language is that as math. 65. John Seals @ Epicurean logic Thanks man, you are always helpful. I know that sounds corny but it is true. I really don't want to talk to anyone about it in person cause I have trouble showing real emotion or connecting with people when on the phone or in person, besides I already talk with my mom and a counselor from hospice till I'm blue in the face every week. It helps though to see that someone else would care enough to call when they don't know me at all. That is the most selfless and kind act I have witnessed in a long time. I am in the US, the southeast at that. Imagine that an athiest living in Alabama, you know I am popular. I've been thinking about finding an outlet online so I can write a description of my dad and his amazing life. He was born in the depression and spent his early childhood in poverty and innocents. This would soon change though as his mother was clinically diagnosed as well "crazy" basically. All I know is she was taken away and institutionalized and died before my dad saw her again. His father turned out to be an alcholic so he spent the next few years trying to provide for the rest of his family ending all hope for an education or a way out of poverty. Long story short he ran off and joined the Navy. He went on to see action in Korea and Vietnam while supporting his family and gaining a education. He completed two civilian degrees after his service and ended up working in a coal mine until retirement. He is also a wonderful folk musician and luthier. He is now dieing of a condition he more than likely developed as a direct result of working in the coal industry, COPD. He is the most courageouse and disciplined man I have ever known, not to mention resourceful and honest. The details of his life read like a great American novel, full of pain, sacrifice, passion, and adventure. Of course to me he is just dad, the most important person in my life. As soon as I find out where I can tell his story and get it all written out I will post a link here for anyone who cares to meet him. Thaks again Epicurean_logic, believe it or not it is the small things that make us who we are. To every one else you know what, I hate to say this but Chris is right. We should all back up and be more kind when dealing with others who feel differently. I don't think any one here really means harm but when you back off and read some of the statements we sound like a bunch of ranting angry children sometimes, me included. I will make a conscience effort to correct this flaw, I hope every one else will too. Of course you all have the right to be complete a**holes as well, so you choose. 66. mugen HaTe_MaChInE hit the nail on the head. to be honest Achems Razoryou seem inteligent yet say summin like that. i mean i noe that something is allways there. final thought if there is nothing then nothing can exist unless existance minipulates nothing. for example 0+0=0 but if i take zero and do this 0+1=1 see existance is nessacery for existance within nothing. i rest my case. any thoughts ppl? 67. ilovemyselfmorethani @ John Seals I know you're an atheist, but allow me to say a prayer for your dad. 68. John Seals @ ilovemyselfmorethani I would be honored for you to pray for my dad. I think many aspects of religion are beautiful, like someone asking that another be well or have peace. This is a selfless act that shows compassion and a sence of brotherhood. I used to say stuff like , " Oh ar you going to sacrifice a goat as well?" a smart a## line I picked up from Richard Dawkins but, not anymore. I think, much like when I discovered we all had it over simplified as teens, I am growing up a little. I see now that while I may be athiest and not believe I have no right to make such derrogatory statements toward well meaning people. So by all means feel free to pray for me and my dad, we wish you peace and happiness as well. 69. Epicurean_Logic @John Seals. There's so much i'd like to say to you... nothing you havn't heard from your loved ones and others i suspect, but your story really hit home for me. It's put me in a over emotional state of mind, something i havn't felt since my ex-mother in law died, an incredible lady. It's healthy for all of us to let out the emotions once in a while as most of the time we have a more practical and logical outlook; and then bam it hits, that bitter-sweet over emotion... it's overwhelming, and as the feelings increase logic takes a back seat for a while until practical reality rises to the forefront once again. Life is a tragedy because you die at the end and i'm just venting JS so i hope that i'm not to far off the mark with these words. 70. John Seals @ Mugen To say that something is always thier is very vague and sounds sort of incorrect. I would say that something and nothing are human constructs that only imply a meaning insted of having a natural identity. What we have called nothing for thousands of years turns out to be the dominate mass and energy in the universe (dark matter and dark energy). So what is nothing? the absence of something. What is something? what ever we decide it is. We speculate that a singularity existed befor the big bang, but if thier was no spacetime how can we say that. Thier was no where to be and no time to be in, so the singularity may have always been existing only in a demension that we can not understand or define. And since in a universe of no time and no space causation would break down along with effect, the singularity may still exist in that other demension, perhaps waiting to bring forth another universe, perhaps it already has. See the possibilities go on for ever in both directions, toward a devine influence and away. I'm starting to think what matters is what you feel in your heart. I do not feel as if a god created me but you may, and that is just as valid and correct as what I think. I hope you find the answers you are looking for, becarefull not to let all the jargon and circular logic fool you. You know the answer in your heart. It's your answer and yours alone, good luck. 71. John Seals @ Epicurean_logic I hope I didn't get you upset or anything. I know sometimes its right under the surface and once it starts it pours out. It is good to let it go though. I just don't feel comfortable doing it in front of others. I go off alone and cry and deal with that way. I don't bottle things up I just keep them private. I can talk openly when online though, I don't know why. I guess because no one can see or hear me, I know this shows I have some issues but, I deal with that later. first I have to get through this. I just look at it one day at a time. I still have him right now so make the most of it. Speaking of which I want to go spend some time with him now. I will hollar at yall later, after he goes to sleep. Thanks again to everyone, especially those who took personal interest. Your sentiments and kindness has really made a difference. And believe it or not thanks to all those I have argued with about belief in a god. If nothing else I have learned much about how to communicate better and try to understand those that are not like me. I have not changed my mind about his existance but I am starting to question my own stance's static nature. I should start getting the class involved on this site, if it could help them I would be eternally gratefull. 72. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor- "if you had an operation and you where out say for 6 hours, when you awoke, where did the 6 hours go, no-where, because there was no spacetime involved for you when you where out, it was instant." Just because Im not laying down memories at the moment doesn't mean that space time has ceased to exist. That is just about the dumbest thing I have ever heard. If I take a sleeping pill and a laxative... does that mean the mess that i wake up in didnt happen in time and space? "Spacetime is a product of our consciousness, so says Einstein, and QM. They say, it is illusion." Einstein said no such thing... and no where in quantum mechanics is there mention of "consciousness". Stop trying to convert people to your religion called "Quantum". You are obviously obsessed with your faith in the pseudo-science religion you have adopted from the internet. Do the preachers in your religion promise some form of after life? Maybe extra dimensions where all the good people go? Do they make you warm and fuzzy spewing their falsities. Do you accept "consciousness" into your heart? Are you a born again "quantum'? Have you been baptized in the "spacetime'? Do they tell you exactly what you want to hear? No one wants to hear the rantings or your internet quantum cult. Stop being the sheep and blatting your youtube scriptures. You take a beautiful thing like science and corrupt it with you gospel of quote-mined analogies, then you spread your foul ideas like some failed televangelist who lost his camera and can only find the keyboard. I say to you. Stop lying to yourself and more importantly stop lying to everyone else. You are not an apostle of quantum. Your are the regurgitater of the pseudo. 73. Achems Razor @ H.M: I know that you are obsessed with me, but stop following me around. You are not my type, sorry. Why do you always want to kill the messenger? if you do not like it bring it up with "Null Physics" The physicists there I'm sure, are much smarter than you. So pray tell me how you picture "Oblivion" and with what do you picture it with. You feel like you want to stop all blogs that give food for thought do you? If it goes against your grain. Well, go ahead, knock yourself out! you are hilarious! It is all "QUANTUM", QUANTUM I say, "No Oblivion" (LMAO) @ Mugan: Just relaying alternate theories that is all, To get further info google "Null physics". 74. Achems Razor @ John Seals: I can't pray for you, but I feel for what you are going through. I have went through all that and more. Both parents, and younger brother that committed suicide when he was 28 years old. Time does not quite heal all wounds but makes them more bearable. I know that you are a good man, so be good to yourself. Peace. 75. Achems Razor @ H.M.: Sorry, like I said before, am not your teacher, find out stuff for yourself. 76. HaTe_MaChInE @ John Seals - Time in physics is not at all the same concept as time we think of in our day to day lives. "We speculate that a singularity existed befor(e) the big bang" This statement is not accurate. There really isnt a before. If people are speculating about it that is all it is "speculation". Modern science is working on getting as close as possible to understanding the early moments of our universe. Remember that our brain is a 1 dimensional time flowing, three dimensional vector interpolater with automatic image recognition hooked to lizard parts all being ran by a sangria of misfiring chemicals. You are not made to understand quantum mechanics. You are made to understand Newtonian physics. The odd part of physics is that its not up to debate whether it makes sense or not... the debate is whether it can be observed and reproduced. The observable and testable universe tells us that all spacetime and energy are a RESULT of the bigbang... I challenge you to master the concept of gravitational time dilation. After you wrap your noodle around that stuff you will never look at the word "before" the same way again. The nature of everything outside of our 3 dimensions and time is the realm of speculation. Take it with a brain of salt. 77. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor- "So pray tell me how you picture “Oblivion”" I picture "Oblivion" by writing it down on a sheet of paper. "and with what do you picture it with." My eyes! Braille for those with better touch then sight. Your concepts are lacking in realism. Your expressions are lacking in solidarity. You are full of fail. 78. Achems Razor @ H.M.: If you are in supposedly oblivion, you do not exist, so write all you want and use your braille all you want, and good luck!! Talk about fail!! 79. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor - "If you are in supposedly oblivion, you do not exist, so write all you want and use your braille all you want, and good luck!!" Do you have math to back this up or is it just opinion? What is the difference between "supposedly oblivion" and regular oblivion... or did you just fail at grammar too? 80. Achems Razor @ H.M.: Nice try, but nonsensical, you sound like a school girl throwing a hissy-fit. Give it up! not interested. 81. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor - If my statements are unclear to you I will elaborate. What statements are you having trouble making sense of? I have no problem backing up anything I say with something a little more substantial then "The physicists there I’m sure, are much smarter than you." 82. Achems Razor @ H.M.: I am done arguing with you, why don't you ask "Stephen Hawking" why he said, "the universe probably came from nothing"! From soap bubbles yet.(LOL) The doc. is here on TDF. find it yourself. 83. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Hate Machine Have you read some of the work of Stuart Hameroff? (I think I got the name right). He has made some persuasive arguments about the mind being somehow connected to Quantum mechanics --and all of this somehow accounting for free-will. I may have been slightly persuaded though because of my illiteracy in so deep a field. But I thought everything seemed plausible. I wonder what's your take on this. 84. John Seals @ hate Machine Calm down a bit man, I did not mean that science speculated that a singularity existed before the big bang. I meant that several people had said that in this thread, and if you noticed I said that it was impossible as thier was not time or space for it to exist in. I also said that time and space aka spacetime was created in the big bang so what where you trying to correct?I may not be the geniuse that you proclaim to be but I have a better grip than that. By the way why are you so concerned with what Achem thinks or believes? He never seems to push it on any body so what does it hurt? I may be way off base here and if so I am sorry but I wish thier was less negative hostility toward each other on this site. If you want to show off your knowledge of cosmology you could help me with something I do not understand. They say that spacetime is like a sheet and the sun for example distorts this spacetime, like a ball sitting on the sheet. Well when I look at the sheet and see the ball that represent the sun it is not part of the sheet or embedded in the sheeet, it is sitting on top of the sheet. So if the sun exist in spacetime would it not distort the fabric of spacetime differently as it is not sitting on top of spacetime but actually inside it? If this is so can we ever really get an idea of how it distorted spacetime, i.e. what shape in the spacetime continuum did it create. I suppose we could look at photons and see what path they follow, right? 85. John Seals @ hate machine By the way Gravitational time dialation is just a bunch of fancy words that mean. Objects of large mass speed up time in the imediate vaccinity. This is why we say that if we could orbit a black hole for say a year and then return to earth much more time would have elapsed here. I don't claim to be a master of the subject but I am not as ignorant as you want to imply. They also theorize that since energy equals mass times the speed of light sqaured energy could also have this effect. So if we could go fast enough we could do the same thing here on earth. Travel on the imaginary train for a week and get off you are now in the future. Why are you being so condecending? Is it my imagination? I really don't want to make an enemy but I am not used to people challenging me to learn something, as if I am in need of more education or something. I enjoy learning and I will look up the exact phrase Gravitational time dialation to make sure that it is what I think it is. That being said my field is theology and I am sure I can stump you with some fancy jargon or challenge your knowledge of some obscure concept having to do with ancient religions, but I will not. What would be the point. If I have misread this situation I apologize. 86. John Seals @ Hate nachine Actually they run slower when near a massive object not faster. I'm sure your racing to correct me. 87. mj Good doc... thanks Vladko i'll perhaps add some food for thought Can there be something true which cannot be proven but there are signs for the truth of the statement. A bit like Goedel's incompleteness theorem and the absolute need for infinity in maths but infinity cannot be fully grasped except with certain paradoxes... 88. capricious I'm sorry but the argument about whether or not god exists has been dead for some time. Any rational person can understand there is absolutely, positively, no reason to believe in god. I can sumamrize it quite briefly, in fact: The lack of evidence for a god is itself agreeably not evidence that he does not exist - however - it is completely clear evidence that believing this entity does exist is completely irrational and direct evidence that this belief is 100% based on mythological hearsay. That's it folks. The end. 89. capricious And on a side note -- I find it absolutely mind boggling that theists can say, without a shred of doubt "GODS" do not exist... yet you remove ONE letter and it just MAGICALLY changes everything. Give me a GOD damn break. 90. hawkpork i suggest we all calm down.. have a smoke if it helps :). John, you said something which bogles my mind a bit. 'I did not mean that science speculated that a singularity existed before the big bang...as thier was not time or space for it to exist in.' isn't that what they say? before the big bang there was the singularity? ok time and space didn't exist yet. because space is the distance between 2 points and time is,, well umm, part of space and there was only 1 point, therefor no space or time. but the singularity did exist before it expanded to spacetime. am i misunderstanding you? probably, it's a mindbogling concept. and one regular language is not designed for. take for example 'before' the big bang. we all know there was no time and therefor no 'before'. but it's so hard to break the conceptual bonds to the dimensions we know. 91. richie If a father teaches his child all the good things that a child should know but the child goes off and becomes rebellious; is it the fathers fault? The father does not try to stop the child rather the father allows the child to pursue that course in order for that child to learn. Is it fare that the child blames the father for the bad things that the child has experienced in his rebellious course. The father is not the cause of the problems. Like Jehovah he also allows us to pursue our own course and does not cause our problems but we ourselves. 92. mindcheck101 GOD CREATED MAN BECAUSE HE WANTED A FAMILY...YET MAN HAS BEEN AN UNRULY CHILD, ONE FULL OF PERSONAL VANITY. 93. Epicurean_Logic GOD CREATED caps lock so that it could be used in moderation. NOT SO that DUMB comments can somehow have more effect. 94. ilovemyselfmorethani @ capricious "it is completely clear evidence that believing this entity does exist is completely irrational and direct evidence that this belief is 100% based on mythological hearsay." -- I'm sorry, but where is your argument? 95. ilovemyselfmorethani "I find it absolutely mind boggling that theists can say, without a shred of doubt “GODS” do not exist… yet you remove ONE letter and it just MAGICALLY changes everything. Give me a GOD damn break." -- It's not "mind boggling" at all. There have never been any good arguments that a bunch of Gods exist. If the universe was indeed created, then its more plausible that it was created by a single creator. A many Gods hypothesis makes incredibly much less sense, and is a philosophically indefensible position. You can even cite Occams Razor and show that the 'single God' hypothesis is more plausible than the 'many Gods' one. What's so "mind boggling" about that? 96. Shashikiran Srinivasa It raises more questions than answers.... Science does not give quick answers... It is more like evolution... :) 97. John Seals @ Hawkpork Yes, I believe scientist do speculate that thier was singularity that was the source of the big bang. And yes, this does set up a parodox as it had no spacetime to exist in. I wish I could help you make sence of that but, it doesn't make sence to me. Our issue is that we see time as a linear progression of events, all humans do. But when we talk of spacetime, it is the fabric in which all we know exists. These types of paradoxes are what lead many to not believe the big bang theory and choose religion insted. I used to scoff at this but, I'm not so sure that we (athiests) are right anymore. I still do not believe the thiest are right either though, I just do not know. You have these people like Hate machine that are so quick to point out your grammar mistakes and so forth but, they can picture this no better. If we don't say "before" then what do we say? If we look at it as a linear progression of events then the singularity came before the big bang, but time is not a linear progression in physics so AHH!!! Sorry I know this did not help but its the only way I know to explain it. 98. HaTe_MaChInE @ John Seals - "Why are you being so condecending?" I didn't mean to be condescending. You seem to posses good logic and I wanted to broaden the scope of the conversation. If you want to talk about time and space there is a lot of discussion that isn't speculation. If you just want to use your imagination then imagine that I might be a little more passionate about (so called) facts and might come off a little blunt. If I'm not blunt, my posts would be pages long. I dont take the sciences lightly. If someone tried to explain that electricity came from love I would do my best to to see that the are in fact wrong. I will also not give an inch to anyone that criticizes someones belief structure only to post a different beliefs structure that is also not based in any fact. People on this site tend to look down on someone that says a book told them "god" made the world, but in the same breath promote a book that says "consciousness" made the world. To my they are the worst kind of hypocrite because they base their ideas not on the science but on miss quotes from books they have never read. So let me comment on the follow quote, and take what I say with a grain of salt but not anger. " I believe scientist do speculate that thier was singularity that was the source of the big bang. And yes, this does set up a parodox as it had no spacetime to exist in." Since a singularity is of 0 volume why would in need to exist in space. By definition a singularity does not have volume so it does not need space. As for time... think of time as a stopwatch. The big bang pushed the button on the stopwatch and time started ticking off. This is a honorably inaccurate portrayal of time but the simple answers are sometimes the best. So we have a singularity that needs no space... but starts to expand. At the same instant we turn on the clock. We are now in a expanded singularity that has fun things like gravity and time. I see no paradox. Dont try to change the universe to suit your mind change your mind to suit the universe. A note on time dilation. From studying time dilation you of course have realized that the universe doesn't need time to exist. Just as a photon doesn't need mass to exist, or as a electron doesn't exist in one area of space.. it exists in all possible areas of space. 99. hawkpork John and hate machine, i don't personally have a problem with the paradox of the singularities existence outside of timespace. as i said, i understand space to be the distance between points. and time to be the observation of those points, or some elemetary part of space. so that's all good. i think.. but doesn't that still leave use with a "chicken or the egg" scenario? where'd the singularity come from? or is that the wrong way to think about it? did it have to come from somewhere if there was no time or space for it to come from? does science have an understandable theory of what caused the singularity? 100. HaTe_MaChInE @ hawkpork - "does science have an understandable theory of what caused the singularity?" No not at all. Science really has no say as to why there was a singularity. It just says that all evidence points to everything having come from one. Play everything we know about the universe in reverse and you end up with a singularity. But Newton didn't know what gravity was but could observe it. Einstein couldn't put a speck of time on a slide and look at it under a microscope but was able to create experiments to prove his work. Man kind split the atom before we knew what the atom was made of. When all the pieces fall together then we will know. Until then its our job to keep finding the pieces. There is alot of untestable ideas based on some really powerful mathematics that suggest that the singularity is the contact point between two membranes in extra dimensions. This of course is wild speculation from string, m, or brane theories. All of which are amazing elegant models created by the most powerful minds in the world, but are %100 untestable and therefor not actually science. Just some good fun with math. 101. HaTe_MaChInE @ hawkpork - "i understand space to be the distance between points" To find something big (say your Doctor) you need 4 pieces of information. Width (the Ave), Depth (the St), Height (the building floor), and the when (time of the appointment). If you get any of these 4 wrong you will not find what you are looking for. In spacetime all four have equal weight. No one value is more important then the others. Time is no more important then up. Dont try to complicate time with grand gestures of beginning and end, before and after. So an equally plausible chicken and egg question would be. What was first... left or right? If you can explain if right or left came first. Ill be able to explain if first or last came left, or if left or right came up. 102. hawkpork hate machine, lol. thanks for the explanation. but not the implication that i need medication. although it made me laugh :) 103. Achems Razor @ H.M.: What are you talking about? some kind of fairy tale? A singularity that has 0 volume, A singularity that needs no space. Then you are saying that the universe came from nothing, right? That is funny. Isn't that the same thing that I said in my "Null Physics" blog? that you gave me the gears about. And then you say that the universe does not need time to exist, so what does that mean? that time is illusion?? Am waiting for to say also, that it is our consciousness that does it, (LOL) Your a riot! 104. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor - "Then you are saying that the universe came from nothing, right? ...time is illusion... it is our consciousness that does it " I said no such thing. Do not put words in my mouth, I do not want to be associated with your pseudo-science religion about a "consciousness" as a creator. 105. Achems Razor @ H.M.: And why are you even trying to delve into QM, string theory, M theory, parallel universe theory, when all that is apparently everything you abhor. Leave all that to the scientists. Because you do not have a clue. 106. Achems Razor @ H.M.: No? then read your above posts!! 107. Achems Razor @ H.M.: All you are are is a pseudo-scientist trying to look smart!! And rule by force.! 108. John Seals @ Hate machine I'm glad you where not being condescending and I apologize for misreading the situation. That said, I have to question the fact that a singularity has no volume by definition. I have never heard that before and i do not believe it is true. We no that a singularity exists within a black hole and that it has a huge amount of mass, that's what caused the black hole to form. If it has mass then it has volume, even if it is so small it can not be measured. I will research this point because this is actually an interesting assertion and I want to know the truth of it. So i am not saying you are wrong, I am saying I think you are wrong. I'll let you know for sure soon. As far as attacking someones belief system, you are right- we shouldn't. I have been guilty of it in the past and I was wrong for doing it. It's fine to explain your own beliefs or ask someone to help you understand thier beliefs but, we should never attack each other. 109. HaTe_MaChInE Achems Razor - "why are you even trying to delve into QM, string theory, M theory, parallel universe theory," Pretty sure time dilation and spacetime is described by Einstein and the theory of relativity. None of my examples have anything to do with quantum mechanics. You have no clue what you are talking about. Your ignorance of the subject is actually frightening. You obviously have no comprehension of any of the subject matter discuses in previous posts. I would suggest you take your own advice and re-read the post but it obviously is beyond you and would do no good. Even though you still disgust me with your incoherence I think I'm actually starting to pity you. I'm starting to think that you really just cant understand. 110. HaTe_MaChInE @ John Seals Gravitational singularity, a point in spacetime in which gravitational forces cause matter to have an infinite density and zero volume We can argue if the singularity in question is "gravitational". Im very very sure that the reference is in fact a gravitational singularity. 111. HaTe_MaChInE Here is another definition of a black hole which is a gravitational singularity. A black hole singularity is the dimensionless point where all matter pulled into the back hole is concentrated. It has infinite density and therefore does not exist within space-time as it is the point of infinite curvature of space-time. It is a quote by a student but seems to lead in the right direction. 112. ilovemyselfmorethani I've been reading all the previous posts, and Damn it, my head is spinning! I certainly wouldn't think any one of you is stupid, it's just a freaking subject matter that even scientists can't get their head around. So just chill, guys. 113. Achems Razor Time and space had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy. The singularity didn't appear in space, rather, space began inside of the singularity, nothing existed, not space, time, matter, or energy, nothing. 114. John Seals @ Hate machine Well turns out it is not so cut and dry, you are right I am wrong or vice versa. Thier is actually a lot of debate about this very issue in physics right now. Many are still trying to resolve the singularity through newtonian physics and many have stated that only QM will solve the singularity. Neither can say trhat thier equations work well witht the present definition of a singularity. Here are a few definitions from poele whom I think should know. Stephen Hawkins: A point in space-time at which the space-time curvature becomes infinite. Wikipedia: A singularity is a location where the quantities that are used to measure the gravitational field become infinite in a way that does not depend on the coordinate system. These quantities are the scalar invariant curvatures of spacetime, some of which are a measure of the density of matter. Now these definitions say that it does exist within space-time plain as day. But here is a definition that supports your assertion. Dr. Mohsen Kermanshahi: A singularity is the zero size ultra dense point, which according to the Big Bang Theory, is the origin of our universe. So I called a Professor I know and this is what he said. "When a physicist refers to a singularity he or she is generally referring to a quantity which is infinite. Specifically, a quantity which approaches infinity as another parameter goes to zero.It isn't true to say that all laws of physics break down at a singularity. You can imagine the problems though -- how do we interpret an infinite mass or infinite energy or infinite force? Usually we assume that there is some new set of laws or some new way of looking at the problem that makes the apparent singularity go away. Here's an example. You may be familiar with Hooke's law for the force exerted by a spring: F=kx where k is the tension of the spring and x is the distance it is stretched. Now write the equation as k=F/x. Written this way it would seem that if you compare the tension between any two points on the spring, it grows and grows the closer together the two points are. In fact, two points spaced infinitesimally apart seem to have an infinite tension! It's just a manifestation of the 1/x limit above. But of course that's not true. If you really want to know what's happening at small distance scales you can't use the classical physics behind Hooke's law. At some point x drops below the spacing between molecules in the spring's metal. Now Hooke's law no longer applies and you have to use atomic physics to explain the spring's properties. So in the large-scale theory (Hooke's law) there was no fundamental distance scale: x could be as small as you want. But at some point this law breaks down. In the small-scale theory (quantum mechanics and atomic physics) there is a fundamental distance scale: the atomic spacing. We would say that the singularity has been 'resolved.' To which I replied, O.K. Seriousely though this doesn't solve our delima. We still do not really know wether the singularity has shape or volume or if it is sizeless as one Phd above says. I will concede that you where right though, some scientist do support your assertion. Some support mine as well though so, you can't say my staements where incorrect. You can say in your opinion they where incorrect. I'm glad to see that Stephen Hawkins agrees with my side at least, he's pretty smart I've heard. (LOL)Peace 115. John Seals This just in, attention all. I did screw up, it was a gravitational singularity that I looked at. Oh well, win some-lose some. No need to get upset guys. We are all just talking, right? 116. t pain agreed 117. John Seals And by the way, I asked a ligitimate question way earlier in this thread and you guys started argueing and no one answered it. It was about the distortion caused by large bodies in space-time. If any one can explain that to me that would be great. 118. John Seals What's up T pain, welcome to the discussion. 119. Achems Razor @ John Seals: Google..."A non-mathematical proof of gravitational time dilation" Should be all the answers there for you. 120. John Seals @ Achem Thanks I'll check it out. I have done some more research and so far I am finding some definitions that call a singularity a curving of space-time. Some though say it is a shapeless mass with no volume, thierfore able to exist without space-time. Then of course I got the answer from Proffessor Chamblee above that makes no sence to me at all as I am a theologian not a mathematician. So what is right man, is a singularity devoid of volume or is it just very, very,very small. If it has no volume how can it have mass? Is it like dark matter, having mass but no interaction with normal matter or energy? I suppose that i will just have to accept that it existed outside of space-time and thierfore had no definable qualities. That just feels like a cop out though. You know, i can't understand it so I'll call it supernatural. Isn't that the definition of supernatural, to be beyond our comprehension or abilty to measure. If so then I guess I found the one supernatural thing i have to believe may have existed. Or would you even say "existed" since that defines something existing within space-time. Wow, I am confused. 121. John Seals I'm going to a thread about religion and philosophy, where I can feel smart for a while. (LOL) Just kidding... I certainly do better with theology than I do with cosmology though. That's for sure. 122. Achems Razor @ John Sears: Why worry John, at least you where, and are in school, you know more than a lot of people, I myself never went to school, it shows right? (LOL) even the top scientists in the world do not have a clue really about the big bang singularity, All they can really study is black hole singularity, where it is deduced in gravitational black holes that it is a region where spacetime curvature becomes infinite. Quantum gravity probably will feature black holes without singularities. Attention has been drawn by the "fuzzball model" in string-theory. No black holes as we know it, but for observer, does appear just like an ordinary black hole in GR. 123. Achems Razor @ John Sears: You mentioned supernatural, I thought that myself before, until Knew better. There is no magic, I wish that there was, would simplify things, I do not really care what anybody says, but everything has its origin at the Quantum level. It makes sense that everything starts at the smallest level possible, from where else could it start from? the macro, from GR? I do not think so. There might even be smaller levels that go to infinity, who knows? nobody. Just like fractals a math construct that go to infinity. I absolutely will not even go into any QM. on this, had enough hassle on this, especially from you know who. Peace. 124. ilovemyselfmorethani Here you people are, talking about the universe and the fundamental principles behind it. Articulate, eloquent, intelligent, sentient, and able to understand so much about something that has supposedly arrived from nothing important at all. Just the mere thought that creatures with so much capacity arose from all this chaos and seemingly purposeless blobs of whatever, to me cries out for an explanation. It just seems like there is a purpose to it all. If there is none, honestly that would seem very sad. 125. Achems Razor @ John Seals: Well, I should of said, went to school, but very little, to much of a rebel I guess. Have a major library of every subject conceivable, have studied many theories and facts from minds greater than myself, no PC. or internet in those times (LOL). Used to read up to 2 books per day, Had at least 5 or 6 books going at one time. Will never stop learning I suppose. 126. Achems Razor @ I love myself: I agree, should be a purpose, but what? to pay allegiance to some invisible non-entity, that is who knows where? ScrEw him or it! 127. ilovemyselfmorethani @Achems Razor Then I take it you are not against theism, but organized religion in general. When science finds out about everything there is to know about this universe, it will come to a dead end, and the answer will be "well that's it folks, nothing else to see here". I think the most fundamental question is 'why are we here?' And religion, as primitive and dogmatic it may be, at least tries to answer this question, while science will say that the question is meaningless. 128. Achems Razor @ I love myself: Well, you took it wrong, I believe in no religion, "no gods" of any type whatsoever! If I can make it more clearer, am an atheist. Religion tries to answer this question? how? by fairy tales? give me a break! 129. hawkpork hey guys, i find this a very interesting subject. obviously an irrelevant one to my life as a house painter though :) my father introduced me to the subject of black holes, the big bang etc; as a child and the tools i learned to think about it then are the ones i still use today. and they're rusty. so i ask you to bare with my simplistic thought processes on the subject, and not try referring me to my doctor ;) pls feel free to help me evolve my thoughts. it's why i'm here. when all dimensions are compressed to one point volume has no meaning. if it has infinite curvature and density.how can it have volume? if it had volume then it's curvature wouldn't be infinite. cause we could define it's parameters in space-time. the way i see it, when space-time is so wrapped in on itself and there is nothing else, one cannot measure volume because it is the relationship between points in spacetime. which, in a singularity has infinite density so can't really have volume. as John's prof friend said above,"a quantity which approaches infinity (density)as another parameter goes to zero(volume)." hope my interpretation isn't to off the mark. is that quote in relation to black holes and not singularity though? wouldn't the singularity have infinite density and curvature? not just "approaching" and "going to"? Achems, in an infinite universe there is no "smallest level possible" all measurements are arbitrary. 130. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Achems Razor Well, that's new. An atheist who thinks there is a purpose to the universe. Sadly, it is a question to which the answer, if there is one, can always be easily construed as a fairy tale. Even if someone told you the real purpose of existence, you would immediately still say it's a fairy tale, and that's the problem; there is no way out. 131. Achems Razor @ Hawkpork: Yes, I stand corrected, no absolute measurements in infinity. Will digest everything else you have said. Get back to you later. 132. Achems Razor @ I love myself: If there is a way in, there is a way out, but not by religion or any gods. Only by science. 133. zgtrst i really like the series; this must be the six'th time I've seen this episode 134. HaTe_MaChInE "If you really want to know what’s happening at small distance scales you can’t use the classical physics" Agreed I will add the inverse. If you really want to know what is happening at large scale you cant use quantum mechanics. So if all of space time is in a volume of 0... is it large or small? I think the answer is small. But that is just a guess. Physics is based in math. The analogies used are a crude way to describe the equations. DO NOT base your concepts of the universe off the analogies. It is very easy to construct a mathematical model that will generate something with 0 volume. Just like the mathematical model of a photon says it has 0 mass. Volume and Mass are variables in an equation, nothing more. Most models for quantum mechanics A singularity is a mathematical construct that is very well defined. The big bang singularity is a single special instance of a singularity that is in the process of being described. Not just by us but by the real minds. I have no clue how to describe the big bang singularity except to compare it to other definitions of singularities I have run across. All the original singularities were in fact black holes. No one knows how to describe a singularity using general relativity and no one knows how to describe a black hole using quantum mechanics. To combine the understanding of the two is the legendary "Theory of everything" No one has done so yet. The Math does not exist. I guess where I am heading is that the same math that we use to make a cell phone work is the math that tells us that a singularity is 0 volume. It has proven to be some of the most accurate mathematical models ever devised. I just wish I knew more of the math and less of the analogies, but I'm making it a point to learn the math and ignore the analogies. @hawkpork - "in an infinite universe there is no “smallest level possible” all measurements are arbitrary." What about a universe based on a ray. It is in fact infinite, yet could start from an arbitrary size. 135. hawkpork Mr machine, i'm not sure what you mean. are you saying its possible the "ray", is the smallest unit of energy? something like the strings? isn't it a logical deduction that one can always look closer, cut in half. like if x is a ray, then x/2. isn't everything at some level, infinite? 136. Achems Razor @ H.M.: Can't believe am saying this, but yes, I agree with what you are saying, very logical. One point though, what is your take on Hawkpork's infinite ray's, question. 137. HaTe_MaChInE @hawkpork - you can always half somthing. 1 photon / 2 = 1/2 photon The problem is when you try to prove that a half of a photon actually exists. No where in any experiment or in observable nature does a half photon exist. So yes the math works but no it cant be proven. If you want to use half photons to create some kind of new theory of the universe (Half Photon String Branes in Consciousness Null Voids) that is just fine... you can even back it up with lots of pretty equations showing that in fact 1p /2 = 1/2p. This is pseudo-science. Its using tools science us in ways that airnt science. So yes, If I want to create a new universe that starts of as a ray and expands in one direction infinitely, i have created a universe that can be broken down to a single element. 1------2------3------4-----5----> this example might have infinate points between 2 and 1 but 1 is in fact the "smallest" you can get. 1.000000000000000000000000000000001 > 1 and so on. 138. John Seals @ Hawkpork A ray is a line that has a starting point but no end. So, it could be infinte and still have a beginning. A ray however is a theoretical mathemathical construct, i.e. we have never observed one we just theorize that thier existance is possible. Who knows if thier is enough space-time for it to go on forever? I.E. Does the universe have an end, a point at which you reach the edge of the expansion and space-time ceases to be? We just do not know, we peer out as far as we can and then things go murky so to speak at some point. This could mean that the universe has not existed long anough for the light to reach us or, it could be the edge of the expainsion. I am asserting this but, I really do not know if it is right. This is what i have heard others say, not data I have researched. I guess it comes back to that arguement that Chris seems to love so much, absolute infinity- does it exist? If so then a ray must be a viable option. If not then the natural process we understand could not have been the origin of the universe. Why, because every natural cause yet identified needs something to evolve out of (cause and effect), which sets up infinite regression. I personally think that we have just begun to scratch the surface,that we will find the logic to support a natural occurence. But the origin of this belief is not based in fact, I have faith that it was a natural cause. That said, how can I condemn those that have faith in religion. They are doing the same thing as I, following thier gut. I know I have been the first in line to attack religion or belief in the supernatural in the past but, I can no longer do that in good conscience. I still hate organized religion and all that it has caused, but theism in its self is not the enemy. In fact it is not even illogical in a way. All I know is that we all experience the pain and joy of life together. We should be our brothers keeper, regardless of his beliefs. 139. John Seals @ Hate machine I thought that a ray would start at 0 so that thier woud be an infinite number of points between 0 and 1. Why is this wrong? 140. hawkpork H.M why the condescension? all i'm trying to say, is that human intuition (perhaps useless in context) tells me the universe gets infinitesimally smaller and smaller, and bigger and bigger. and that it therefor can't be broken down to a single element. i guess you're telling me the photon is the smallest, or most elementary particle discovered. but it's kinda hard to tell when you're to busy taking thpiss. i thought string theory and the like was theorising on the next level of microness down from "elemetary" particles. i'm not trying to make stuff up. just reconcile my intuition with the prevailing theories of our time. 141. John Seals @ Hawkpork You said: "when all dimensions are compressed to one point volume has no meaning. if it has infinite curvature and density.how can it have volume? if it had volume then it’s curvature wouldn’t be infinite. cause we could define it’s parameters in space-time." If you can logic like this, you are just as smart as anyone here. Looks like your dad did a good job, you got the right "tools". 142. HaTe_MaChInE @John Seals - A ray can start at zero... a ray can start anywhere on a plane. Here is how I picture a finite point ray universe. A ray starts on one plane. As it moves off in a direction it passes through other planes. No matter how many times you cut the distance you can never cut the very first plane in half. | | | | | | 1----2----3---> | | | | | | So this ray starts off in plane 1 and passes through plane 2,3 etc. | | | | | | 0----1----2---> | | | | | | So this ray starts off in plane 0 and passes through plane 1,2 etc. The math is exactly the same even when the place holders change. 143. Achems Razor I might be blowing in the wind, but is there negative "0" Planck's constant is the smallest unit of measurement, might there be negative Planck's constant to negative infinity. Probably in numbers. But in physical?? I don't know, like I said, might be blowing in the wind. 144. HaTe_MaChInE I guess in the terms of like. 5 plancks - 8 blancks = -3 blancks it is no different then asking if there is a negative meter or a negative inch. But in the example of temperature Kelvin you cant have a negative Kelvin. By definition of the measurement it cant be negative. But does that make this equation wrong 5K - 8K = -3K. No. It just means that you are no longer dealing in the realm of nature. 145. Achems Razor @ H.M.: I dig, but was looking into topology, and other things, quite a do about infinity, apparently not set in stone. On kelvin degrees can go to negative, but not by much, when you apply, sorry, again the bad word (Quantum) was just reading this. Was googling all this stuff. 146. HaTe_MaChInE @ Achems Razor - the word quantum isnt bad... the insistence that it is a proper noun is bad. You capitalize Quantum just like someone might capitalize God. If you cant use the word correctly in a sentience how can you be taken seriously when discussing its implications. At least you stopped trying to call it "Quantum Theory". It show that its no impossible for you to learn... just improbable. Since Kelvin is a theoretical value of the coldest thing. The coldest thing you find will always be 0K. 147. HaTe_MaChInE Actually 0 Kelvin inst a theoretical value. Absolute 0 is theoretical. Since Kelvin is a measurement of heat 0K is always absolute 0. 148. Aristotle @Epicurean_Logic Attempted to answer your last question on the bottom of "Life after Life". On this one I would like to see something more in depth from the Surfer Physicist. 149. Achems Razor @ H.M.: Thank you for your input, and pointing out my bad grammar. Ha,Ha, improbable for me to learn?? I suppose then, really should of went to school. But I learn everyday! 150. John Seals I agree with hate machine on this one, infinity can not be negative in a natural real world sence. The negative of infinity would be finite, or at least that's one way of looking at it. I have to say that everyone here has made some good points, this has been a productive discussion. We have managed to seperate mathematical construct from actuall natural phenomenon. I have a better understanding of the singularity and the fact that it is purely speculative. I got to see the infinity trick, about cutting something in half over and over, come to its failing point. Like Hate machine said you can't half a photon. I suppose you can't really half any of the fundemental particles as they break down into thier constituent particles insted. All together a very good discussion, thanks guys. 151. Epicurean_Logic Guys. When you talk about distances they are always positive. and when negatives appear in a distance measurement, it it usually indicating a direction. What kind of direction? It depends on the context of the question. So it's common practice to just drop the minus sign if you are not interested in a direction measurement. 152. HaTe_MaChInE @ Epicurean_Logic - "When you talk about distances they are always positive" So is this not an accurate statement? 8miles - 3miles = 5mile Or do you not consider subtraction in an equation a negative? And how do you get a direction from that equation? "So it’s common practice to just drop the minus sign if you are not interested in a direction measurement." Ahh What? Drop the minus sign? What? How do you figure out your mileage for a expense report. Starting mileage = 23456 Ending mileage = 23500 What is the millage traveled? 23500 - 23456 = x ahh drop the minus because Epicurean_Logic says so. 23500 + 23456 = x Man Im going to come work for you... My travel reimbursement will be awesome. 153. hawkpork howdy all, H:M it's hard to tell just how sarcastic you're being in your appraisel of my logic. but i'll take it at face value cause that suits me :) got 2 questions for yuz re John's last post. 1."infinity can not be negative in a natural real world sence." can anything be naturally negative?.. (perhaps some peoples attitude is proof it can) isn't the concept a human construction? 2. "I suppose you can’t really half any of the fundemental particles as they break down into thier constituent particles instead" how are they fundamental if they break down further? 154. Achems Razor @ hawkpork: I don't think that @ Hate machine was trying to be sarcastic, I came to the conclusion that is just how his personality is, over all the many months we were doing battle on the these doc. Good question on "can anything be naturally negative", the only thing that comes to mind, is anti-matter, 155. Achems Razor @ H.M.: Was going to ask, what is your take on, there is a ceiling on cold, like absolute zero K, but basically no ceiling on hot, even as far as temperatures so hot that everything is converted to the nuclear force, how far can they actually go, do you think there is a limit? Is this a part and parcel of the singularity. The maximum temp. so far is Planck temp. of 1.41679x10^32 K. is there the possibility of still higher temp. The Planck temp. was reached on two occasions, the first, one Planck time 10^43 after the big bang, the second is concerning black holes. What is your take. 156. Epicurean_Logic @TheHaTe_MaChInE. I'm so glad that we have some thing in common with our love of maths and i know that you already know the math answer that i will give to your question. It's just that I work on the Steven Hawkins principle of maths where every equation and number stated loses many viewers so i am reluctant to answer in view of that. Is it better to be feared or loved? It's better to be both, but it is very hard to achieve in one person. I hope that my non-answer answers you in some way. 157. HaTe_MaChInE ”infinity can not be negative in a natural real world sence.” I don't see why infinity couldn't be negative. Since infinity is a concept forcing a concept on real world isn't a good idea. But how about a credit card with no limit. There is no limit to how far my finances can go into the red. But remember that a negative on my side is a positive on the banks side. So maybe the question is can we have a negative infinity without a corresponding positive infinity somewhere. I don't think there are any special rules for using positive of negative infinities. I don't know anything about plank temp. I really don't know much about thermodynamics. Temperature is usually the realm of Big things. As for a ceiling on temp... Im sure at some point the numbers break down. Like in a black hole. Ever since Einstein put a speed limit on the universe, we have been hitting these walls. I was never good thinking about energy and temperature. My noodle does wrap around the many concepts of temperature. Here are some ideas for a ceiling for temp. I dont know how energy from the vacuum might effect things but at some point there is a finite amout of energy in the universe. If you could harness all that energy in one point Im sure that would be the ceiling in a Newtonian point of view. As for kinetic energy, something of mass approaching the speed of light would have the highest temperature. If it could reach c I guess it would be hottest. If someone figured out a Planck temp Im sure it is going to the ceiling... just by the nature of using the Planck constant. 158. HaTe_MaChInE @ Epicurean_Logic - "Is it better to be feared or loved? It’s better to be both" Both is the easy answer. Its the easy way out. This kinda reminds me of game theory. In the case of exclusive disjunction I feel fear would have all the advantages of loved with a few benefits and no drawbacks. But thats just my INTJ personality coming out. 159. Epicurean_Logic @TheHaTing_MaChInE 'I don’t see why infinity couldn’t be negative.' This is what i was trying to say earlier... When we talk about negative distances, the negative sign usually represents a dirction. Just like a cartesian graph where negative represent 'to the left' and positive represents 'to the right'. It is better to be feared than loved.... 160. HaTe_MaChInE @Epicurean_Logic - I see where you are going I just dont like it. I want to say that coordinates on a cartesian graph with a negative just means subtract from... Not go down or left. It just means that you are adding a negative value to your current value and re-plotting. That means that the negative value is very important. Cant just go dropping negatives and hope your plot comes out ok. Let me try to understand your point. If you travel from one point to another, all the movement that occurs between those points is a positive gain. You cant have a negative reading on a odometer because you cant unmove. Am I hitting the nail on the head with this one? 161. Epicurean_Logic @The HaTe_MaChInist When we talk geometrically about grpghs, It's ok to to say that negative represents moving to the left and positive is move to the right! It really does depend on the context. Just dropping the sign is definately not a good a idea in general. Only in the context of directions is it applicable, for the aforemntioned reasons ( i.e. it represents a direction). 162. Epicurean_Logic A negative reading on an odometer would depend on how you defined positive! i.e. if positive represents north then negative represents south. 163. HaTe_MaChInE Whatever... Im just going to let you stew in your nonsense. "I’m so glad that we have some thing in common with our love of maths" For loving it you don't seem very good at it. For the record I dont love math... but you cant explain nature without it so we are all stuck using it. If I could figure how to make a viable fusion reactor work by drinking beer and not by doing math we would all have a cheaper electric bill. 164. Epicurean_Logic lol @'For loving it you don’t seem very good at it.' I have a first class degree in maths and i study masters level analytic number theory as a hobby. I still make a lot of mistakes, but i have no inhibitions about my math ability, or lack thereof. Also my arithmetic sucks. i find it funny though. Did you ever hear about the maths proffessor who got caught arguing about his change in wall-mart only to find out that he was wrong. lol. 165. HaTe_MaChInE @ Epicurean_Logic - "I have a first class degree in maths and i study masters level analytic number theory " I don't believe you. My opinion shouldn't matter to you and you should leave it at that... Im just saying my bullshit meter just went haywire. "A negative reading on an odometer would depend on how you defined positive! i.e. if positive represents north then negative represents south." You should print that out and submit it to your professor. I bet once you get published you will get a Nobel prize in no time. My odometer is measured in natural numbers. 166. Peeroette I always say all the evidence is not in. Then, a quote from a Jackson Browne song. "Let creation reveal its secrets by and by". 167. HaTe_MaChInE @ Peeroette - “Let creation reveal its secrets by and by” I dont think we will ever know everything. But we will know who has been wrong the most. 168. Anon Debates that never end. 169. Epicurean_Logic @ElHaTe_MaChInE if you travel 8 miles north and then 5 miles south you have travelled 3 miles overall from your starting position... If you travel 5 miles north and then 8 miles south you have also travelles 5 miles from your starting poition. Just in a different direction.... # comprenede? 170. Anon What is more fundamental subtraction or a negative number? Is subtraction the addition of a negative number? Is a negative number a subtraction of a positive number? 171. Epicurean_Logic @ anon addition of a negative number or subtraction of of a positive number mean the same thing! Just different was of representing the same thing! 'Is subtraction the addition of a negative number?' No. subtrction is the addition of a negative number... 'Is a negative number a subtraction of a positive number?' yes. 172. Anon It's my opinion that subtraction is more fundamental, that negative numbers are just subtractions. Just saying. 173. Achems Razor @ H.M. Even though infinite temp. might be possible, might be impossible to observe. The thing is, even if an "elementary particle" attains the speed of light, it becomes "infinitely" massive at the limit. But then another paradox, anything that attains the speed of light, would be static, forever frozen in time, because time would stand still. If a particle is accelerated to a certain velocity "near that of light", it gains enough mass to collapse into a black hole. I suppose that is why some people were worried about the Hadron accelerator. 174. Epicurean_Logic @Achems Razor If you drink enough alchohol and then accelerate yourself at a speed close to that of the speed of light you will feel very sick and furthermore the gaining of mass is like getting fat after eating to many hamburgers... So we should all just not worry about that and have a nice time instead... 175. Achems Razor @ Epic_Logic: Well fine. You like math, I like cosmology, And am having a nice time, It seems you must be to, with H.M. (LOL) 176. Epicurean_Logic @Achems Razor Yeah i'm drunk,... who says so... not me....It doesn't mean that H_m or Thabit are wrong... Just that alchohol lets you talk about clit piercings and how to have a nice time...Cosmology is the maths of the heavens and Geometry is the maths of the earth... combine these in a pyramid and you get a pointer to the heavens... It's easy really... 177. Achems Razor @ Epic_Logic: Yes, I understand. Inhibitions run wild with a little booze. Been there, done that. (LOL) 178. Epicurean_Logic @anon it's much more natural to just define addition and multiplication! Thats what is done when defining different algebras. So... it's more natural to define addition of negative numbers... but bear in mind that it is the same as subtracting positive numbers,... 179. hawkpork Hey all, John, sorry if i seemed to be pedantically picking at your choice of speech. this can be a very ambiguos subject when one doesn't understand the underlining maths and koreckt terminology. as i don't. very interesting subject though, just a pity one has to be good at maths to fathom it. don't we all wish we could discover the mysteries of the universe at the bottom of a bottle, or whatever your poison comes in, as H:M suggested. with so many dedicated workers it surely would've all been figured out by now! i missed the step that took you in the direction of "is it better to be loved or feared?" (and now i can't even find the quote) so i may miss the point. but it seems to me its obviously subjective, personally i'd prefer to be loved. but a tyrant would most likely see a greater benefit in fear. at least from the masses. anyway. i'm out of this thread. so dam long now i get lost looking for the relevant bit. 180. eireannach666 @Achems "If a particle is accelerated to a certain velocity “near that of light”, it gains enough mass to collapse into a black hole. I suppose that is why some people were worried about the Hadron accelerator." But do you not think that the work is worth the risk? Pros out-weigh the cons? @Epi_Log Im not as think as you drunk I am. Is there an officer problem? (lol) @HM "I dont think we will ever know everything. But we will know who has been wrong the most." Nice way to put it. And I couldnt agree more. 181. Achems Razor @ eire666: They must have weighed the pros and cons, probably no risk involved. Did you watch the new doc. in this series? The riddle of black holes, is very good. 182. BJ I do love these docs and forums. Great discussions. It would be great if some of you guys lived in the same town and formed a sort of doco club. Come together once a week, watch a doc and then discuss. I bet the talks could go well into the night! 183. eireannach666 @Achems Is it on here? Where did you see it at? I like this series. I think there may be some sort of risk. Actually could be a small chance of great risk and small chance of small risk. But I agree , they have more than likely addressed these probabilities and are well aware of the risks , no matter how small or large. Im just glad to see the research being done. I think QT/M should get all the funding it needs. As , Ive said before . I dont buy in yet but I like the direction its taking us. We will never be done asking questions but we will eventually get the answers to the ones at hand and repeat the process. Does anyone have any thoughts on "negative mass propulsion" and that , there in , may be a use to do further wormhole research to the extent of actually sending something into one,or even someone? (Well Im not going but , yeah.) And please nobody bring up Millis’s space drive stuff. It kind of stinks. Also Achems, I would like to say that I like what you were saying about infinite temp. I will say that , to think infinite anything is impossible , scientifically that is , would be a rather ridiculous statement by anyone that is in any way a science/math fan. (not implying that is what you said , but just in general.) The universe could expand infinity if the trend we know as the expansion is fact. Infinite is not wrong just because we cant see infinite now as a number. We'll just keep adding zeros and decimal points. @Epi_Log Math is math. Addition , subtraction , etc , all of it is just as valuable and essential as the other. Just saying. 184. Achems Razor @ eire666: Yes, new doc. here on TDF. ..."Through The Wormhole-The Riddle Of Black Holes" See you there. 185. josh awesome documentary, really made me think. 186. Serge God may have created human but for sure human have created god !!! 187. la "The latest science is showing that the four forces governing our universe are phenomenally finely tuned. So finely that it had led many to the conclusion that someone, or something, must have calibrated them;" Who? Where? Some brainwahsed children in the childrengarden maybe. Some deluded people lacking any normal education. 188. Skye-hook @Connie- to try to briefly answer a bit of your wonderings- Start at the beginning. In the beginning was the "word", & the word was with "God" & the "word" was "God". Word=sound=vibration makes sound, but only if it has something to affect, even air. Then there was nothing, except a vibration. The Void became aware of itself, causing a vibration in the nothingness. * The hairs on your head could easily be counted by the Soul of the universe, (Consciousness of the Universe), because those hairs, and you, & I & all in creation are part of what that original vibration evolved into, and is still being & experiencing. Everything that IS is a tiny cell in the whole of all that is, in the soul of the universe. Consciousness & energy in it's many forms. And it's possible I'm wrong, BUT consider that God-days are universe days, not earth days or 1000 years of earth days. The soul of the universe took a long time to evolve into all that now is. This physical universe we know about is about 13.7 billion light-years old. (See wikipedia) Divide that by 6+ to see how long "God's day" probably is, as this is still being the 7th day, right? "God" doesn't live only on Earth, right? Unless there's a different "God" for each speck in the sky. I doubt you think that. BTW, "in his image"= soul/mind/emotion. "God" has no body except all that is physical(yeh, giggle), & that's kinda a lot for us to look like. lol:)"God" is consciousness/awareness + all that now exists. All that is physical is energy/light fractals. Some of it has life & consciousness. There is "god" consciousness in all the space between every atom or "thing" that exists. Universal Consciousness is aware of everything because it is BEING everything. I wonder what will happen when the 7th day is over. ?? What do you think? 189. Skye-hook Oops, sorry. I thought Connie came over to this doc. lol@me. 190. Skye-hook A few scattered thoughts- 1. Wait = weight. Time = continuum = sustain, for however long, even 10 to the minus 43. Gravity is an effect of time. No time = no gravity. 2.-There HAD to be SOMETHING before the Big Bang, or NOTHING would have exploded. Literally no thing. I believe there was hydrogen 1st. Enough hydrogen & time/gravity would cause a heck of an explosion! Everything could evolve from hydrogen. Even before an explosion, everything can come from hydrogen. *Let's theorize, for fun. Say there was nothing. The Void. No time. There was no physical matter, no force, no energy, nothing. And then it just exploded, with no cause, as there was nothing. Not even time. Not even consciousness. Nothing just exploded. That just doesn't feel like the correct thing to me. IMHO. lol 3. The girl in the 1st part who used the helmet- she saw 5 beings, not 1. Sounded like it induced a drug-like state to me. She didn't even say it felt or seemed to be like "God". 4. I don't think "god", or a creator, would be just playing, as the experience is much too intense for that. It is just experiencing BEING, with all the possibilities. It hasn't experienced all those possibilities yet. "God", IT, is not some giant controller, It is simply experiencing and being aware of all it experiences. Maybe it gives something a nudge once in awhile. There are possibilities & probabilities, and a LOT of randomness. If "God" were being us too, why don't we know it? Because our brains are new, like a new computer, they must learn & figure things out, & we should all be VERY grateful that we are allowed to make ourselves seperate from "God", (seperate-like a knot in a string or an air pocket on the outside of a balloon, with a twist to keep it seperate)and to not know all the universe consciousness is aware of all the time, as we couldn't function in the physical at all if we were knowing all in creation at any given moment. I don't even want to be aware of 1 other person at all times, and everything they are experiencing & thinking. Time truly is the Universe's way of keeping everything from happening all at once. I don't want to know all about EVERYTHING all the time, do you? :) @Hate_Machine I already know you won't agree. :) That's ok. 191. Skye-hook Sorry for several entries. Didn't read comments 1st. @HM- Consider that there can be a Soul of the Universe, or Universe Consciousness & have it NOT be "Omnipotent". Humans idea of what they'd want that Universe Consciousness to be like does not have to mean it is. lol And really, you say "he would already know the outcome of anything we could possible do. He would know all outcomes of everything." HOW? From previous experience? Is that your fantasy? Exactly HOW would He/It know? And you say "Would it be better to never have created man or to have let hundreds of millions of men die horrible deaths. What kind of monster kills for no reason." Oh, please. He/It IS NOT a giant Sim controller! And death of living things, even painful long suffering, is just 1 of the myriad possibilities. He/It does not control your mind. Would you let it, even if it wanted to? I think you'd fight it to the ninth degree with every bit of intelligence you have. Stop wanting to blame a "God" or SOMEONE for stuff like that. Much is even random. You say "If god loves us why does he kill our children. Either he cant stop the death of our children or he likes the death of our children. I hope god kills my children so I can prove I will never lose my faith in him." 1.- Holy cow! OMG! 2.-He/It doesn't kill your children. He/It lets some things happen to children or any of us for many varied reasons. I don't think he/it can always stop something, really. But He/It experiences what we do, even thought due to all the trillions of incoming experiences to He/It, It probably doesn't experience our happenings as strongly/intensely as we do. I would guess. Anyway, we're all just speculating here except those who are just expressing a thank you. Sorry, but you had that comin from when you got me the other day. lol @Jonas- You said-"If God can create anything he wants"- what makes you think that?? Did "god" tell you that? Don't believe everything you hear from humans. We don't know what other beings are like. We certainly don't know what the Soul of our whole universe is like. You say-"Why does he need worshipers and why does he condemn people who does not believe or happens to sin?" He/It DOESN'T need worshippers. Nor priests, nor preachers. Nor criticizers. Nor "followers". You wanna follow, then do it, but He/It doesn't need you to. He/It is fine just as is. He/It also doesn't condemn humans for errors! Humans made up the word sin. It is error & mistake. He/It may hope you don't do it again, but you learned that about sin from a human. "God", if you insist on following human religious teaching, gave the life & pain of "His" "only begotten son to erase your sin", right? So you can't have it both ways. He/It either did or didn't. Answer me this- imagine for one minute that "God" is experiencing being you too. Now, you do something horrible. If "God" condemned you, wouldn't "He" be condemning himself too? Of course. "He" knows what led up to your doing every single thing you ever do. "He" experienced it too, because you are like a cell in his little finger. Which doesn't mean it's all just great, but it also doesn't mean you are "condemned". If it isn't good for everybody & everything, then in the long run it won't be good for you either. Same as if it's not good for you, it won't be good for everone & everything. That's the nature of violation. Being religious isn't necessarily a bad thing, IF you really think fully about every single thing in it, not just blindly believe everything you hear! I believe in a Universe Soul or Consciousness, a "God", but not the things I've been TOLD OR READ etc. PLEASE, don't even blindly believe ANYTHING, even me, even your own eyes! @BJ- what do you think? Does It need a sex gender? Is there another "God" to multiply with? :) teehe Just yankin your chain. :) 192. Skye-hook @HM- I honestly did enjoy a LOT of what you wrote above!:) 193. NoName we created god.. and god created us.. 194. eireannach666 @Skye-hooker What do you really think was before the big bang? Your saying god? What do you have to support this beside the constant jabbering about god? There is no god. Dang this statement should be a realization by now. Why the stance of superstion for the unknown? 195. eireannach666 *superstition* 196. Skye-hook @eireannach666- I didn't say that. Either go back & read again, or suffice it to say- I said- there HAD to be SOMETHING before the Big Bang, as NOTHING cannot do ANYTHING, much less explode! When I write "god" I usually enclose it in quotes, as that's not what I call it anyway. I call it the Universe Consciousness. I also said maybe what existed in the physical b4 the Big Bang was hydrogen. *BUT while I'm at it..let me just say- If others DO believe in a "God", with all the characteristics they want it to have, that's none of your business! Who are you to go around saying there is no ANYTHING? Ruler of Earth? Dictator of the internet? #1 cheese in the Illuminati? Others have a right to their opinion too, just as you do--IF you respect those of others. If you don't, you forfeit your own. I had a lot of respect for you til you said that. It may be popular or socially acceptable to here to be a bully, but not when there are still people like me around. *Just for the record, I don't believe in a "God" the way people do who go to church. I do believe there is A CONSCIOUSNESS & that we are conscious because we are a part of it. But it's quite different in my mind than a churchy thinks of it. If I wanna express that here, I will. If you don't believe that as I do, that's fine. You have your own opinions. If I give you respect for yours, then be fair & respect others. 197. hawkpork hi all, i've been ruminating for some time now on the nature of the universe, whether it's infinite or finite. in mass/energy or spacetime. both scenarios a paradoxical. either it all came from nothing or we have a chicken and egg scenario ie; "if god made the universe, then who made god?" or "what was before the big bang?" a paradox that's logical conclusion is eternal, infinite spacetime, and maybe mass. if it all came from nothing, which is kinda easier to comprehend, as at least then we can concieve a starting point, then concepts like finite or infinite mass,energy lose meaning i think. so either way. from nothing or something, i reckon the universe is infinite in time, space and energy. we just can't observe beyond our "bubble". 198. otj I disliked this documentary because it was far too heavy on bogus speculation, far too light on empirical science, and contained a few blatant logical errors and omissions of information. 1. The statement that all religions have a God. This is simply untrue as anyone who has studied religion would know. For example, Mahayana Buddhists don't believe in a specific creative God, and don't treat the Buddha as such. Also there's no mention of the fact that Hellenistic and Indian religions have MANY Gods, which begs the question of which God they're talking about in this program. They can't all be right because they differ so drastically. 2. The fine tuning argument. There are so many problems with this argument I don't even know where to begin. People like Steven Weinberg and Lawrence Krauss have said quite a lot on this topic, so look up their counter arguments. I'm surprised they didn't trot out the old "something from nothing" argument as well... which has also been thoroughly debunked as well. 3. Total lack of good debate on the question posed in the title of the show. They didn't speak to many of the top scientists and philosophers out there like Pinker, Weinberg, Greene, Krauss, McGinn, Dennette, and likewise the program didn't speak to eloquent theists like George Coyne. 4. The final segment on the universe being one big computer simulation was laughable. There are many, many problems with this idea, and the guy's notion of "evidence" is ridiculous.... It's not a theory because it's not a collection of facts and observations about the natural world and do explanatory, testable work. If you're going to postulate a hypothesis that everything is a computer simulation, fine, but you had better make sure that your final theory explains EVERYTHING that all other scientific theories explain because that's what it would take. The idea that we're all in a computer doesn't help explain the CMB, inflation, exo-solar system formation, supernovae, Evolution, entropy, death, etc, etc. Anyway, in the end this program was far too fluffy and didn't contain enough hard science. 199. eireannach666 @SH Well , well , well. You say Im bullying but youve done nothing but talk trash since the beginning. Im only responding to the statements made to as well. I dont care what anyone believes but if you discuss it with me than be prepared to here my opinion. Im not going to sit idle and just listen to all the god BS and not speak on what I know, when its clearly directed toward me. And respect? I doubt you did. I may have mis-interpreted you on what you were saying , so my bad for that , why do you think I put question marks and not periods? I have no quarrel with you but be aware that I have been defending myself on here for days now so I am of little restraint. Now as for UC. If you are saying this than you are still implying that there is a "god" of some sort. Yes you are right about there having to be something before the BB but I disagree with the fact that consciousness had anything to do with it or has anything to do with it now, The implication of this is that there is some from of entity out there moving things along. I cant agree on that at all as it is Creationism. 200. Laurie Robillard How does all this knowledge help us? I'm interested in energy vibration for healing. I have experienced first hand Zero Point Energy. The Zero Point Feild contains the blue print for our existence. In Genesis in the Bible the creation is repeated twice one is the blueprint the other the creation into matter. I had painful feet my doctor said it was Ostio arthritis. I had ex-rays done and he delivered the results. I know too well the side effects of prescribed medicine. Just on time my mind was prepared to receive and accept this method of self-healing with Zero Point Energy. I was introduced to the the AMwand that creates an environment for our bodies to heal to bless my life. The power of healing is within our body. Try cutting yourself and see what happens. Now I am pain free. Zero Point Energy reminds our cells of source in Zero Point Field where there is no pain no inflammation no virus germs disease. This is not a philosophy or mind over matter; the proof is in the pudding. Nocoli Tesla about 90 years before his time had lite the Chicago world fair without electricity. He used Zero Point Energy. He invented a tower that all of our machinery could be charged with Zero Point Energy. Free and natural but the government doesn't allow his scientific experiments to go public. Imagine not using oil. We would have a revolution. We live in a world where there is institutional resistance. I believe there are other earths in the galaxies. Why should we think that we are the only ones. 201. HaTe_MaChInE @Laurie Robillard - I got a bottle of snake oil infused with Zero Point Happy Energy. Its cures brain damage caused by using Zero Point Sad Energy (the only energy know to cure feet pains). Thomas Edison used it to power the first light bulb. From your comments it seems you must have used WAY too much Zero Point Sad Energy. If you channel the spirit of Alessandro Volta you will confirm that brain damage is not only a side effect but usually a precursor to using Zero Point Energy to cure feet. The good news is I can sell you bottle for the cheap price of$19.95. I can also sell you a copy of James Watt's chakra diagrams. The diagrams will illustrate where you need to shove the snake oil.

202. Laurie Robillard

@ Hate Machine
Tesla in his time believed in the existence of the aether and that it could be harnessed for free energy that could be the salvation of humankind. The resolution of life's dilemmas seem to arrive in its own mysterious way in its own time line and place.
My common sense tells me to stay away from snake oil. Thank you so kindly.

203. Laurie Robillard

@ Hate Machine
What Are People Saying?

"Being released from long standing back and hip pain in just 20 minutes of using the AMWand has changed my life. Thanks to Amega, its vision and its technology, the world finally has a product that can help drive a Self-Care Revolution" ~Ann Carlisle

204. Epicurus

Laurie, anecdotal evidence is used by these products because they are not allowed to make claims about what the product does themselves or it would be false advertising since there is no studies or real research done.

so what they do is depend on gullible people like you to provide anecdotal evidence like that and they make a whole advertisement consisting of just that and it tricks people into thinking everyone uses the product and it works.

just like the q-ray bracelet.

and about your comment on genesis. those two versions of genesis differ from one another and contradict one another and also contradict known facts.

205. Laurie Robillard

@ Epicurus
When you go to the theater and see a good movie do you tell your friends about it . Isn't that advertising.
If the AM wand was sold at Walmart who would buy it? It looks like a silver pen but sells for $300.00. Who understands ZERO POINT ENERGY? It is something to experience. I don't have complaints anymore about any aches and pain because I have been wearing my AM pendant and using my AM wand. My tomatoe plants are like small trees because I have been watering them with energized water. My old cat is able to jump on my lap again and she hasn't done it in three years.That is my testimony. 206. Achems Razor @Laurie: It is a scam, just as crystal healing etc: If you are so positive, let it go through the million dollar challenge. Contact "The Amazing Randy". You might as well get rich will you are at it, right? hehe 207. Laurie Robillard @Epicurus Who is The Amazing Randy? Tell me how can a scam remove pain? I have experienced it. It removed the itch from a mosquito bite. 208. eireannach666 @Laurie Robillard Do you not believe that your mind releases natural explainable chemicals of "feel good" and "awe" when we want to experience something of such and something that feels good. (i.e.)Like the placibo effect. Just my outlook on "New Age spiritual stuff." And if its "spiritual healing , is it not really your own mind (spirit) doing the healing or whatever it is your trying to achieve, anyways? Why the need for another source when you have it already? Sounds like blowing money to me. @Achems Ha! Yes , I agree. @Laurie , just type @The Amazing Randy and he will appear. (Also if you say it three times in the mirror he jumps out and gives you a whiskey!) 209. eireannach666 @Laurie So does anti-itch lotion and most anti-histamines. 210. Achems Razor @Laurie: Really? removed the itch? Holy cow!... just rub the inside of a banana peel on the bite, itch also disappears and does not cost you 300$. What does a banana cost, 20 cents or so. See am saving you money!

211. Epicurus

darn you vlatko and your moderation ;) *shakes fist*

212. Pikachu

Any one else hear that scientists name on the first part at 6:55 as John Pokemon?

213. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor
I guess you didn't read the whole thing. Removing the itch from a mosquito bite, removing the pain of osteo arthritis in my feet, removing the itch in my eyes from allergies to environment, allowing my cat to be more flexible, growing my tomatoe plants to the size of a small trees 5 feet tall after one month, changing the molecules in lemons and negating the chemicals then the lemons taste like sweet lemons , turning a cheap $10.00 bottle of wine to the taste of an$80.00 bottle of wine.

214. TheQueenOfCheese

Never thought I'd see Morgan Freeman working for the Discovery Institute.
Man he can make physisc sound boring!
Good thing to watch with your friends or recomend to your neighbours if your a closet-atheist in an overly religious area. It will rid them of any suspision towards your religious views and they might even put down the torches.

215. Julian

People will deny God until it is too late. He has given more than enough evidence, and if you reject him, that is the choice he allowed you to make by not forcing belief. You have the option not to believe, and woe to those that take it. God Have Mercy. Read Romans 1:19-21

You have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Okay, lets say that there was no God, so what? How does that change what will happen to me after death. We will both be dead and thats it. But if I am right, your loss for eternity. If you want to take that chance on this short journey on earth, welcome. Life becomes full of sound and fury and signifies nothing.
"A little philosophy leads a man to atheism. Depth in philosophy leads a man to religion" - Francis Bacon

216. Achems Razor

@Julian:

You like to gamble do you? the odds are better at Vegas than to try to pick the right god, the right religion to bet your life on,

And then if you are picking a religion just to hedge your bets, wouldn't your so called omnipotent god see right through that?

Shows how phony most of you religee's are!

217. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor

You talk like you go around like a self-righteous peacock, massaging your own vanity. Your daily life must be spent in weaving against "religee's" like a spiders web.

218. Laurie Robillard

@Julian
Your words are like music to my ears. Atheism rules on this page. They keep asking me give me proof, give me proof. They are indifferent to the realities around them. Miracles does not bring people closer to God. Its almost as though they are the "walking dead". They seek for something to struggle out their dilemma but it eludes them so they choose to ridicule and pretend they are not accountable.

219. Julian

@Achems Razor
Omnipotent God see right through what? My willingness to acknowledge the reality of his existence? My choice not to reject him? I fear and respect the power of God, and the necessity of belief. But I do it out of love for God as any other motive. The person doing it because they want to avoid Hell has imperfect motives, but the end result is much better than yours. And eventually they will come to love God, but atleast its a beginning. But denying his existence leads you nowhere. I am offering a gamble for all those that need proof, saying that you might not get the proof you want until ts too late, and so even through rational analysis yours is a very foolish decision.

When the argument was made (Pascal's Wager), it was in reference to Christianity, and Catholicism in particular. So I guess you can phrase it as it is better to believe in Christianity than to be an atheist. The reason being that if you choose the other religions, according to Catholic doctrine, you will be rewarded for your sincere heart in searching for him and trying to follow him the best way you know how. This does not mean that you are guaranteed salvation, but you have a much higher chance than zero, which is what the atheists have, since they have denied him and he has specifically stated the consequences of that.

And regarding choosing the wrong religion, all religions are not the same and each has to be evaluated individually. But not denying the existence of God is a a start. And here's a clue, rule out right away any religions that have no founder, no historical validity, no logical belief system, no miracles, does not claim exclusivity, and most importantly does not claim to be of divine revelation. These are a few of the ways to analyze religion, and only Christianity withstands ultimate scrutiny. Study all the religions for yourself, thinking philosophically and using logic and reason, and see where it leads you.

Why is atheism so much more prevalent today? Is it because there are any new advances in science that deny God's existence? No actually the opposite. The reason looks more like people want to be their own God so they are free to do what they like. If you look at all the arguments for atheism, there is none that could have not been considered 2000 years ago. People naturally assume that everything progresses through history, but not all fields. Advancements in technology and science are usually the norm, but what was said in philosophy and religion could have been said 2000 years ago. The atheists have said nothing new, and in fact I feel the classical atheists (Nietzsche style) atleast accepted the nihilism inherent in atheism, instead of the delusional fantasies and sophomoric arguments that characterize today's neo-atheists.

And that is my point, all these arguments are going to be worth nothing once your dead, and if your wrong there's consequences, and for me nothing changes :)

220. Julian

@Laurie
Thanks, yea they can argue all day but they have nothing positive to offer. If atheism is true, that is so depressing for anyone who is not clouded in their thinking.
Yes I agree, and if a lie is repeated often enough and loud enough people will come to believe it. I think it is a matter of their lack of humility and open-mindedness to the possibility of the unseen, and their wishful thinking, unanswerable for any of their life. Also, many of them have the wrong way of thinking about religion, analyzing it scientifically when it is mean to be analyzed philosophically. Science is a method that is not conducive to answering the existence of God irrefutably. They are going to be waiting for proof so long that they have wasted their whole lives for which they will be accountable. They have chosen to close their eyes like you said, and have lost the capability of experiencing God all around them. And importantly, the how beautiful and wonderful and joyful life becomes when you believe in God and submit to reality.

“The atheist can’t find God for the same reason that a thief can’t find a police officer”

"To doubt is not sin, but to be contented to remain in doubt when God has provided "many infallible proofs" to cure it, is" ~ Irwin H. Linton

“No man ever repented of being a Christian on his death bed.”

221. Epicurus

if any being told me i must worship them, love them, obey them, and believe in them WITH NO PROOF THAT THEY EXIST and if i dont i will be tortured....I will go with being tortured.

I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them - Galileo Galilei

Myth:
Life for atheists must be depressing and meaningless.

Response:
This is a very common claim heard from religious theists, especially Christians. It is also a very curious claim because it sidesteps the issues which most atheists would regard as central: does God exist? Is theism reasonable? Is atheism reasonable? By ignoring the important questions about the validity of theism and atheism, this claim is an example of the Red Herring fallacy, attacking an ultimately irrelevant issue.

However, it isn't entirely a Red Herring because, even though it may not appear to address something important, it sometimes does. Many theists believe in the existence of a god not simply because they think it is true, but also because they think it is necessary. What this means is that they do not honestly think that important aspects of life, like morality and purpose and meaning, are possible unless a god exists.

This isn't the same as believing in God because they want it to be true. A person can be reasonably convinced that life must have meaning and purpose; so, if such things cannot exist without a god, it is reasonable to conclude that God obviously exists. The question becomes, then, whether or not a god really is necessary for life to have meaning and purpose. Thus while the issue should be a Red Herring, it may not be if one is dealing with theists who are convinced of the existence of god based upon reasons like this.

One problem for atheists and theists communicating over this is a difference in how they understand the concept — a difference which isn't always immediately clear. For theists, it is typically the case that life must have an objective meaning and purpose, something which is imposed externally. Atheists, on the other hand, do not all regard an objective meaning or purpose as necessary — or even as positive.

Objective Meanings

A theist might appear to be correct that, without God, there is no objective, externally imposed meaning or purpose to life. The universe does not seem to establish purpose to our lives, aside from perhaps reproduction, or meaning to our lives, aside from perhaps the sheer act of living itself. Thus it may not be unreasonable to conclude that, without the existence of a creator god, there may not be an objective meaning or purpose to our lives.

If, however, the need for an objective purpose or meaning is dispensed with, the need for a god is also eliminated. Do we need such a purpose or meaning? To be quite honest, I don't think so. It seems perfectly adequate for us to create our own meanings and purposes. Indeed, it is arguable that this is a preferable situation. When someone else imposes upon us a purpose of their own design, aren't we little more than slaves?

Imposed Meaning

Is it even possible for meaning to be imposed on us by another? No one can make a book or a meal "meaningful" for me. Why? Because such meaning must be created by us, based upon our values. No one else can cause a particular book or a particular experience to have value to me — that must come from within. When we value something, it will have meaning, and when we do not value something, it will not have meaning. Values cannot be imposed upon us because they must develop out of our character and our personality; so if meaning is derived from values, then meaning also cannot be imposed.

Even many theists will acknowledge the truth of this in particular circumstances because they will tend to agree that they are not forced by their god to value their god or their relationship with their god. Thus, their god has meaning for them because of their own choices. It is generally only the more extreme faction of Calvinists who argue that God can only enter a person's life because God wants to and that human effort in this area is worthless. If theists accept this principle in some circumstances, then it's up to them to explain why they don't accept it in other circumstances as well. If they cannot, and if this principle does apply broadly, then they cannot argue that value or meaning can be created for us and imposed upon us by any gods. This means that value and meaning must come from with in and can exist in the absence of gods.

No Meaning? So What?

Finally, it must be asked: even if a personal meaning or purpose is impossible and an objective meaning or purpose cannot exist without a god, so what? A theist who finds this unacceptable might be depressed at the prospect, but since when does a rational person adopt beliefs about the state of the world based upon what is least depressing? Is there anyone out there who believes that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, never happened because the idea that they did happen is too depressing? If someone believed that they are rich because facing the reality of poverty is too depressing, do we praise them for their faith or recommend that they seek help from a mental health professional?

Although it might be true that the question of meaning and purpose in life has no bearing on the reasonableness of either theism or atheism, the fact remains that it is an important concern of many theists. If someone brings it up, it is because their belief in a god is, at least in part, predicated upon the idea that their god provides meaning and purpose to their lives. This is not a bad thing — the problem lies in the fact that they cannot imagine that anyone's life can have meaning and purpose unless it happens on the same terms as their life. In their case, at least, the only way they would ever abandon theism will be if they realize that meaning and purpose can come from themselves instead.

222. Julian

No, just because I state an important difference from theism and atheism, does not mean it is because that is the only reason I follow my religion. If religion is not true, it is not worth anything. But my statement was that only religion can provide true meaning and purpose, not the human made nonsense of atheists. But the only reason to chose religion is because you believe it is true. These are one of the in-numerous riches of Catholicism, and other religions as much as how close they are to Catholicism. Truth is the only criteria when choosing your worldview, and not what meaning and purpose they provide, but this comes along with only certain choices.

"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important" - CS Lewis

223. Julian

@Vlatko
I am not trying to convert anyone. I am stating my views regarding the belief in God or not, an important subject in the documentary. I cannot state my views regarding God without reference to my religion. My views would not make any sense because they are one and the same. I am stating my views, just like everyone else. How about the atheists trying to convert people to adhere to their worldview? But I will refrain as far as I can.

224. Laurie Robillard

Vlalko

Part of the title is "Is there a Creator?". I call a creator God. I know conversion cannot be done over the internet. I certainly am not trying to bring or convert anyone to my faith.I have never mentioned my faith. Conversion has to be done through the Spirit (the Holy Ghost). The holy Ghost doesn't hang out where there is contention. No conversion will happen here. I don't know Julia and I am not Catholic as she is. I was raised Catholic but I changed to Mormonism 30 years ago.The question of all ages is Where do we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? That in my opinion is related to the documentary.
I was attempting to explain my worldview on this subject.

225. Achems Razor

@ Julian:

Stating your views is fine. But with out appearing argumentative, yes, you and most religee's try to convert people into their religions, it is almost a prerequisite is it not? And am not just talking about J.W.'s

Non-believers, atheist's etc: present the latest scientific facts, theories, and views as info. only, not trying to convert, convert to what? something that may change overnight with new evidence? I think not.

Religee's ad nauseum: say the same old thing over and over, that I again will say has all the origins in sun gods and in pagan myths!!

226. Achems Razor

@Julian:

Noticed you said you were Mormon, Where I live you hardly cannot even go for a bike ride, without Mormons literally running after you, trying to convert you! I say this as fact!

227. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Sorry I meant you, when was talking about Mormons. Not @Julian:

You said you where trying to explain your world view on this subject? what world view? are you the spokesperson for the world? it is your view entirely!

228. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor
Acknowledgement of truth is a matter of choice. You have no scientific evidence to refute God and His gospel. You just don't like what they say. Go ahead through insults to ease your own ego. Its sad really.

229. Vlatko

@Laurie Robillard, there is no offense there. Achems was just stating what is happening in his neighborhood while having a bike ride.

And he also doesn't have any scientific evidence to refute Cinderella, Zeus, Krishna, Amon Ra, Santa Claus (and their gospels) etc. Therefore they exist.

You also don't have any evidence to refute my God (Snow White). I wrote down everything she said to me, so I have a book now. There is no way you refute that.

On the other hand you have no scientific evidence that your God exists. Nor I have any evidence for the existence of Snow White. Except my testimony and the stuff I wrote about her. In other words you have to believe me. Do you believe me?

The same is with your God.

You say: You can't prove my God doesn't exist, therefore he exists.
I say: You can't prove your God exists, therefore he doesn't exist.

Which statement is valid?

230. Epicurus

@Julian,

you said:

"But my statement was that only religion can provide true meaning and purpose, not the human made nonsense of atheists."

its amazing you dont notice the fallacy in this statement. RELIGION is human made "nonsense" if you will....religion is a construct ENTIRELY of human minds. there is no evidence or proof for it ANY religion or ANY god. there is just faith and culturally held traditions.

also you ASSUME or presuppose that there MUST be meaning and purpose...why? the fact that we dont have meaning or purpose shouldnt make you upset in anyway. in fact it ought to liberate you and make you realize you make your destiny and are completely responsible for all your actions (and in-actions)

@Laurie.

why did you become mormon? do you not know the history of joseph smith and his family? they were all con men and swindlers in their time. the idea that gold was buried in woods somewhere was rampant at that time and joseph smith cashed in on peoples gullibility.

i dont know how an adult with a working brain can fall for any religion LET ALONE mormonism...magic underwear?? black people are cursed descendants of Cain?? men get a planet to rule over when they die? a star named kolob??

mormons are absolutely 100% crazy

why did you convert? did you marry someone who made you?

also one doesnt need scientific anything to show zeus isnt real or shiva or fairies....why would i need evidence to show god isnt real. YOU need evidence to show he IS real or i can dismiss the hypothesis without evidence

here is a rule...if something is presented as true without evidence it can be dismissed with just as much evidence.

231. Julian

@Achems Razor
It is almost completely futile to attempt to convert anyone by argument. People are convinced of what they believe in, and often have too much invested emotionally to objectively look at the facts and evidence and make a wise decision. This goes out to people with all worldviews. Like Bertrand Russell stated on his essay regarding Knowledge and Wisdom, it is important how you arrived at the conclusion regarding your worldviews. I arrived at religion through pure intellectual speculation and logical analysis, not blindly following what are the societal norms or familial views or following any ideologies, such as a common one of atheists, which is scientism through which they analyze the question of God.

Anyway, how can stating my views make people convert? If my argumentation exposes people to new views or ideas, it is up to them to critically analyze them and discard them or contemplate on them as they see fit. I am not hypnotizing, deceiving, or bribing anyone here. Everyone should be free to express their views regarding the topic of the documentary.

How can you force people to convert online? In what way am I forcing people? How come everyone can state their agnostic views but a person cannot state their views on their belief in God which stems from their religion? If that is not on topic, I do not know what is. Trying to convert someone, or reason why you see the world they way you do, or instigate a change in beliefs happens both ways and to say otherwise is pure semantics.

The origin in sun Gods and pagan myths is not true of all religions, and has been refuted by numerous scholars, and pretty much had its heyday in the 18th century from which on it was pretty much considered a fringe theory. Who, Odysseus? Romulus? Doinysus? Zarathustra? Attis of Phyrgia? Krishna? Horus? All these and other pagan similarities have been found to be either a matter of coincidence, either happening in time after so cannot originate from them, or thoroughly debunked in other ways. Just because things seem similar does not mean they are or does not signify common origin. Its actually a matter of the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc in many cases, and happens to have such superficial similarities on closer examination that the argument is pretty much dead in even the most liberal intellectual theological circles.

"Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit arises to the contemplation of truth"

232. Epicurus

actually i would argue the similarities in religious myths stems from the similarities in human desires fears, and ignorance.

thefreelibrary . com/The+evolutionary+psychology+of+religion.-a0151548842

233. Laurie Robillard

vlatko

You also don’t have any evidence to refute my God (Snow White). I wrote down everything she said to me, so I have a book now. There is no way you refute that.

That is your road and I'm not even going to go there but I know you are selling yourself short. I hope it enhances your self worth and self -actuation and invigorating mentally.

Statistical report 2009 from The Church Of Jesus Christ of latter Day Saints
Here is some comody for you vlatko
Total church membership 13,824,854
new children of record 119,722
converts baptized 280,106

Dozen of LDS humanitarian volunteers rotated on and off the United States Naval Ship Comfort on a four-month humanitarian mission August 2009 as part of a government-sponsored mission to provide medical care to countries in the Caribbean and Central and South America.
Church Humanitarian Services further contributed by sending 10 shipping containers of medical equipment and supplies, which were unloaded along the way at each country. All this is paid for by membership tithing.

A new partnership between the Church and the Dikembe Mutombo Foundation promises an additional water source for the Biamba Marie Mutombo Hospital and Research Hospital and Research Center. located in Kinshasa, the capital city of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

"By their fruits you shall know them."

234. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus

i dont know how an adult with a working brain can fall for any religion LET ALONE mormonism

Total church membership 13,824,854

235. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Case in point, No wonder Mormons are everywhere trying to convert people!

They come knocking on peoples doors dressed in white shirts, black tie, black pants, sans black jackets, because it is summer. They look like the movie "Men in black"
I see them in our "Canadian Super Store" pretending they are shopping.
They are in local parks, in their Mormon outfits, chase you down the bloody road even if riding a bike, the odds are yes, they do get converts when they take advantage of gullible people, Worse that the Scientologists!

And they are not giving away their own money it is the contributing peoples money, and yes, they have to spend money to make more money, they pay no taxes, everything is tax free for the Mormon "cult" You say they are helping people, I say it is to get more converts. And to make more money.

236. Epicurus

@Laurie...what does the large number of people have to do with it?

Schizophrenia affects about 24 million people wordwide. are you saying because something is accepted en masse that makes it less crazy?

how many people need to be taken from your number until it doesnt matter?

"Smith and his family participated in the sectarian fervor of their day. Although he may never have joined a church in his youth, Joseph Smith participated in church classes and read the Bible. With his family, he took part in religious folk magic, a common practice but one condemned by many clergymen. Like many people of that era, both his parents and his maternal grandfather had mystical visions or dreams that they believed communicated messages from God. Smith later said that he had his own first vision in 1820, in which God told him his sins were forgiven and that all churches were false.

The Smith family supplemented its meager farm income by treasure-digging, likewise relatively common in contemporary New England. Joseph claimed an ability to use seer stones for locating lost items and buried treasure. To do so, Smith would put a stone in a white stovepipe hat and would then see the required information in reflections given off by the stone. In 1823, while praying for forgiveness from his "gratification of many appetites," Smith said he was visited at night by an angel named Moroni, who revealed the location of a buried book of golden plates as well as other artifacts, including a breastplate and a set of silver spectacles with lenses composed of seer stones, which had been hidden in a hill named Cumorah near his home. Smith said he attempted to remove the plates the next morning but was unsuccessful because the angel prevented him."

......and you believe this guy? WHY? and why do you never answer my questions?

237. Achems Razor

@Julian:

I really do not care what you believe in. It seems you are the one that will not let it rest.
These doc's. are supposed to be primarily scientific not religious.
Anybody would be hard pressed to "not" find the inclusion of religious mumbo-jumbo in almost all of the doc's on TDF, no matter what the topic, could even be a doc. on how to build proper outhouses, if there was such a doc. on TDF. the religee's would find a way for the inclusion of there gods.

I personally am getting bored with the religee's because it is the same old, the same old. Nothing ever changes with them, could refute them almost automatically as all my posts will attest. If they actually presented something new, then I would sit up and take notice, instead of their repetitious circular logic. Ad Nauseum.

Like I have said, believe what you will, it does not matter one iota. We all end up in the same place, wherever that place may be.

238. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor

Anger, hostility, and defensiveness has replaced sincerity and honesty. No feeling of acceptance between us seems to be the problem here. Accepting the fact that we think differently and feel differently. No respect. I have learned from you the absolute futility of using the mind to dominate the heart. There are two languages- the language of logic, the "shoulds" of this earth, and the language of sentiment, how people feel. People behave more on how they feel than how they think. Unless there are good feelings between people, it is almost impossible to reason intelligently. Unless people feel that they are accepted and that they have a right to express their feelings without fear of embarrassment or ridicule, that all they will do is react and rebel and struggle for their identity- fight for their individuality. So you feel judged and evaluated and moralized and preached to. Have to go to work.

239. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Ah Contraire!

I am not angry, just bored with you religee's. you are the one that is angry, hostile, and defensive. I have nothing to defend, except maybe all that science has to offer. You want me to respect the Mormons?? Ha,Ha, so funny.

Of course you have the right to express your feelings, but you are pushing your religion dramatically and incessantly. When are you going to stop? not to many people are interested. I am not.

It is apparent you hardly know anything about your religion. Just cherry picking what is suitable for you.
If you feel you are being judged, and all that jazz, so then stop already.

Ah Revoir!

240. Julian

@Achems Razor
I guess you have to resort to dismissing arguments because you cannot address them. What is the subtitle of this documentary? All you say are statements denigrating belief without any substance or proper argumentation behind your statements.

241. Julian

Achems Razor
What new arguments have you made instead of stating the same nonsense ad nauseam? Same old circular logic.

242. Achems Razor

@Julian:

You figure that I should waste my time and keep arguing with you?
I think not, try someone else.

What are you worried about? I already told you, do not care what you believe. You seem like a kid having temper tantrums.
Not interested!

243. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus
People's concepts of God and and his attributes are largely the projection of their own experiences -happy or bitter with the authority people of their lives.

……and you believe this guy? WHY? and why do you never answer my questions?
What is the greatest and highest law in the gospel? The law of love. Upon this law hang all the other laws. That is the reason WHY Epicurus

244. Laurie Robillard

Stellar dynamics is the branch of astrophysics which describes in a statistical way the collective motions of stars subject to their mutual gravity. The long range of gravity and the slow "relaxation" of stellar systems prevent the use of the methods of statistical physics. The motion of stars in a galaxy or in a globular cluster are principally determined by the average distribution of the other, distant stars, and little influenced by the nearest stars.

The "relaxation" of stars is the process deflecting the individual trajectories of stars from the one they would have if the distribution of matter was perfectly smooth. The "2-body relaxation" is induced by the individual star-star interactions, while the "violent relaxation" is induced by a large collective variation of the stellar system shape.

245. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

You cut and pasted that right from Wikipedia.

246. Epicurus

@Julian...oh goody did you say i mouthful. this out to be fun.

you say:
"I agree many religions are human made, because God has oriented man to seek him, as can be clearly seen from the lack of atheistic cultures throughout history throughout the world."

This is not completely correct however i love how you say it like its so matter of fact. not only do you say there has never been an atheistic culture (there are a few im sure you can look up, i dont want to do the work for you) but you also claim that this is because god has oriented man to seek him. in a conversation discussing the existence of a god you cant presuppose he exists and is directing things like you have here. i can give you a much more logical explanation as to why MOST cultures have a religion and it would be based upon two theories. one is social solidarity theory (look it up) and the other, Hyperactive Agency Detection Device (also look it up).

You say:
"...grouping all religions into one basket and failing to analyze them individually on their own merits shows a lack of critical thinking. It is the lazy man’s answer. Some religions do not claim divine revelation, and so are human made."

I most certainly have studied them individually during my numerous philosophy or religion classes.
exactly how do you know they are human made since they do not claim divine revelation??? that is a non sequitor.

You say:
"Some religions claim divine revelation and are doing so falsely, whether the founder was deluded or attempted to deceive others, one has to study the religion and its founder and discern the truth."

talk about creating a double standard...there is not enough evidence to say the people were not crazy, lying, or mistaken. but there is plenty of logic and reasoning and probability pointing to superstition and other psychological attributes.

"But where we disagree is I believe that my religion is true because it was divinely revealed, and base my decision on a rational faith."

what does rational faith mean? and you believe your religion is divinely revealed just like mormons do and muslims do.

this is interesting:
"Religion has to be analyzed philosophically and not scientifically. You cannot prove or disprove God, and agnostic is an irrational decision because you are sitting on the fence on the most important decision, and there will be consequences for not choosing."

only consequences if certain religions are right.

"Atheism is irrational because you cannot prove that God does not exist, and there could be consequences."

Atheism is the default position just like you are an atheist of unicorns and leprechauns and invisible teapots between here and mars. without proper evidence for something you dont accept it to be true unless you have been tricked into this pascals wager you are trying to pull....which - heads up - im about to destroy.

"That the burden of proof rests on theists is garbage, and a poor escape from important decisions."

If the theist proposes an entities existence, MOST ABSOLUTELY the burden of proof is on them. if i propose the existence of ANYTHING the burden of proof is on me to show its existence not on you to show its non-existence....otherwise, i have an invisible "wiggyboo" under my bed.

actually an important point here. the more CLAIMS that theists make for their god or religion the more it enters the realm of science or at least logic and able to be scrutinized meaning the theist must also back up those claims, and if they are logically inconsistent then they dont stand up.

"One cannot do wrong in choosing Theism. If wrong, so what? The most logical decision is Theism. If you cannot prove beyond all possibility (which is impossible given even the limits of human reason, and the potential for God to even choose to not be known) that God does not exist, it is not logical to be an atheist."

you are BETTING on god for fear of the punishment of being wrong. this isnt belief or faith or love. this is fear or desire for reward. this is pathetic...AND it doesnt account for the millions and millions of gods you ARENT picking that will punish you for choosing wrong. you have the exact same chance as the atheist.

"I did not presuppose that there must be meaning and purpose, but that to have objective meaning and purpose, the only real meaning and purpose, there must be belief in God. Otherwise the two options are either to understand that there is no real purpose (as the classical atheists clearly did), or try to pretend there is meaning and purpose, or make your own, which is really logically incoherent. Meaning and purpose cannot be made, it is either there or not. Everything else is just to make you feel good and cannot withstand logical scrutiny."

your need to assume there is meaning and purpose is just there to make you feel good. there doesnt HAVE to be meaning and purpose. especially if you look at the size of the universe and the length of time it has been around and will be around without us....to think we are some important focus rather than some necessary by-product is logically incoherent.

247. Laurie Robillard

This is my point

Obviously Sennacherib was planning to eventually haul the people of Judah back to Assyria, precisely the way his father , Sargon 11 had hauled off the ten tribes.
This was enough for the delegates from Jerusalem. They rushed back into the city, tore their fine robes as a token of distress, and went to the temple. It was not until he had been reduced to this abject level of complete desperation that he finally thought of sending for Isaiah. It was obvious that the material fortifications on which Hezekiah had been instinctively relying were not enough. If God would not save them, nothing would.

The Lord tests the Faith of Hezekiah
The king's servants dressed themselves in sackcloth and went as a large delegation to see Isaiah. It is amazing that some contact had not been made with this great spiritual leader long before. Isaiah herd their plea, and then bluntly told them : Say ye to your master, Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid of the words which thou hast heard, with which the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me. Behold I will send a blast upon him, and he shall hear a rumour, and shall return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land.

It was a fantastic promise, almost unbelievable in its fullest implications, but there it was. Hezekiah found the strength to rely upon it, and therefore apparently sent the Assyrian delegates away without any satisfaction whatever.

But barely had Hezekiah received what he thought was going to be certain relief from Assyria's monstrous threat when a hole cloud of catastrophe settled down upon him. As far as we can tell, it was right at this juncture that Hezekiah came down with a deadly illness caused by a lethal infection or abscess in his body. He became so ill that he asked Isaiah to visit him and disclose what his expectations might be. Isaiah had bitter news for the king. Said he, "Set thine house in order; for though shalt die, and not live." Even under normal circumstances this would have come as a terrible shock to the king, but in view of the national crisis sweeping down on Judah it seemed completely irrational that the Lord would take him just now.

As soon as Isaiah left the room, Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and sobbed out a special pleading to the Lord. "I beseech thee, O Lord, remember now how I have walked before thee in truth an with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight. And Hezekiah wept sore.

By this time, Isiah as just leaving the middle court of the palace. "suddenly the Spirit stopped him and said : "Turn again an tell Hezekiah the captain of my people, Thus saith the Lord, the God of David thy father (forefather, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears:behold, I will heal thee: on the third day thou thou shalt go up unto the house of the Lord. And I will add thy days fifteen years; and I ill deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the kinf of Assyria; and I will defend this city for mine own sake, and for my servant David's sake.

Isaiah returned to the palace with this magnificent news. However, lest the healing of the king be taken too much for granted, Isaiah determined to require something at the hands of the king's servant. Just as Naaman, the leper, had been required to dip in the Jordan seven times, so now Isaiah required that a poultice of figs be spread over the king's abscess.

But the king Hezakiah heard all that Isaiah had to say, it soon became apparent that he was not taking any part of this message for granted. These prophecies were all so thrilling to contemplate that he did not dare believe them! Perhaps Isaiah was just trying to make him feel good in his last hours. The king therefore begged for some kind of confirmation, saying "What shall be the sign that the Lord will heal me, and that I shallgoup onto the house of the Lor on the third day?

Isaiah could have said , "Be still and wait patiently on the Lord," but the spirit apparently authorized Isaiah to demonstrate to Hezekiah that the power of Go as behind his words. The prophet therefore referred to the famous sun dial hich ha ben built by Ahaz, the father of Hezekiah and asked, 'shall he shadow (on the dial) go forward ten degrees or go back ten degrees?

This as rather a fantastic proposition since the changing of the shadow on the dial would apparently involve some dramatic change in the working relationship between the earthband the sun, and Hezekiah so interpreted it. Said he, "It is a light thing for the shadow to go down 10 degrees (since that would only involve speeding up of existing processes..) but let the shadow return backward ten degrees.The scriptures continue, "and Isaiah the prophet cried unto the Lord:and he brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz." It was a phenomenal miracle and must have impressed the king deeply, not only because of its spectacular implications but also by giving comfort to his tormented mind.

My question is was this done by direct intervention in the mechanics of stellar dynamics or whether it was achieved by the simpler and direct device of manipulating the rays of light and thereby causing the shadow to be shifted backward.

248. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Wow! You must of got that info. from the Mormons.

The OT states that Isaiah assured Hezekiah that the city would be delivered.
The OT states that during the night an "Angel"??? of Yahweh brought death to 185,000 Assyrian troops. The OT states Jerusalem was spared destruction.

The Assyrian account as discovered in the ruins of Nineveh in 1830, and now stored at the Oriental Institute, Chicago, Ill. completely contradicts that in the Tanakh, and as stated in the OT.

Jerusalem was spared by the exchange of a lot of gold/silver.

What!! stopped the world and either reversed or forwarded time, Won't even go there, with that type of fairytale.
I recommend you leave the science to the scientists, you haven't a clue!

249. Laurie Robillard

Achems Razor

The OT states that Isaiah assured Hezekiah that the city would be delivered.
The OT states that during the night an “Angel”??? of Yahweh brought death to 185,000 Assyrian troops. The OT states Jerusalem was spared destruction.

Yes! I am aware that the Assyrians encamped around Jerusalem were smitten and suffered many casualties. The Assyrians who survived broke off the campaign and withdrew to their homeland. There Sennacherib was assassinated as Isaiah had prophesied.
I didn't think that I had to give every single detail to get to the point of the sun dial where day light was extended.

The essence here is -----was it the mechanics of stellar dynamics or was it achieved by the simpler and direct device of manipulating the rays of light and thereby causing the shadow to be shifted backward.
No I'm not a scientist. I was asking you a question.

250. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razo

Following is what I was expecting you to say or something dicussing the sun dial and what happened. So when you are unfamiliar you resort to telling me --you haven’t a clue!

A solar eclipse seems to have happened, making the shadow move in a way that gave the impression that time had been reversed.

251. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

The Assyrians laid siege to the city and withdrew by being paid off with gold/silver.

If a Solar eclipse happened they would not be looking at any dials, only the sun. And would be so stated in their books.

Gave the impression that time had been reversed?? I think not, all the dial would do is to get dark.

You asked a question of stellar dynamics. Stellar dynamics concerns gravity throughout the cosmos, it is a complicated issue, Everything due to gravity is being held together in a sort of equilibrium, Yes, gravity can cause time dilation, but that does not have any applications to what you were referring to. People living in caves looking at sun dials will not cause time travel. Written in antiquated books by antiquated people that did not know any better.

By stating you do not have a clue, was only fact, nothing else.

252. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor

Yes, gravity can cause time dilation,

Is that effected by a motion of the sun?
or
a change of the relative position of the earth?

I'm glad I can make you laugh but this is not what I was thinking concerning the solar eclipse its what I thought you would say to poke fun at me.

Do you think that motion and time is an illusion?

It would be hard to measure speed without time. We would have to change our language. I was there. I am here. I will be there. How do you plan an event?

Is time finite or eternal?
Did it always exist?
Did it have a beginning?
What happened before time?

If a chain of loops is hanging in the air and each link is holding up the one under-- doesn't there have to be an original link to hook it to a nail? There must be an original event that began the chain. There has to be a FIRST CAUSE to all the effects of the universe.
Do we agree on this?
If you have one hundred dominoes a thousand dominoes a million dominoes that you can count at some point you must still get to the FIRST CAUSE. Who? or What? is the cause of all causation. Are you saying that CHANCE is the CAUSE of our universe and all creation.

The universe is cooling meaning that the available amount of energy giving light and heat to the universe is running down. No new energy is being created.
The universe could not have been cooling down for eternity or it would have completely burnt itself out by now. To me it means that time and all creation had a beginning. How can CHANCE be beautiful,structured,and obedient to laws?

253. Achems Razor

@Laurie:
Gravity is affected by mass, only gets affected by motion if it is going up to the speed of light.

Nobody really knows what time is, infinite, had a beginning, has an end, what happened before time.

First cause?? now you are getting into the CA, not interested in that. @Epicurus: is the champion on the cosmological argument, ask him.

The rest you mentioned, my answer is, is that I do not know, nobody does.

254. Achems Razor

@Laurie

Gravity is affected by mass, only gets affected by motion if travelling up to the speed of light.

Nobody really knows what time is, infinite, had a beginning, has an end, what happened before time.

First Cause?? now you are getting into the CA. ask @Epicurus: on that, he is the champion on the cosmological argument.

The rest you mentioned, my answer is, is that I do not know.

255. Laurie Robillard

@achems Razor

Gravity is affected by mass, only gets affected by motion if travelling up to the speed of light.

What travels at the speed of light?

256. Laurie Robillard

@Razor achems

Back to the essence you wanted to talk about

The OT states that Isaiah assured Hezekiah that the city would be delivered.
The OT states that during the night an “Angel”??? of Yahweh brought death to 185,000 Assyrian troops. The OT states Jerusalem was spared destruction.

The Assyrian account as discovered in the ruins of Nineveh in 1830, and now stored at the Oriental Institute, Chicago, Ill. completely contradicts that in the Tanakh, and as stated in the OT.

Archaeology gives us confidence that the places and people mentioned in the Bible are accurate.

Recorded on a clay tablet now in the British Museum
Now when Sennecherib was returning from his Egyptian war to Jerusalem , he found his army under Rabshakeh his general in danger (by a plague) for God had sent a a pestilential distemper upon his army and on the night of the siege a hundred and four score and five thousand, with their captains and their generals were destroyed. Antiquities 10.1.5

Jerusalem was besieged by Sennacherib, with unclear results as sources from both sides claimed victory, the Jews or (Biblical authors) in the Tanakh and Sennacherib in his prism.

The validity of Assyrian records is not reliable due to Assyrian records indicating themselves that the Assyrian army never lost any battles. (well known Taylor Prism)
Archaeology can neither prove nor disprove the Bible's veracity in every instance.

681BC the king was murdered by his sons Isaiah's prophesy fulfilled

257. Achems Razor

@Laurie::

You are still pushing your fairy tales are you?

Well here is the real lowdown of what happened!

Egyptian sources mention of Sennacherib's defeat in the conflict with Judah, but gives the credit for the victory to an "Egyptian God" who sent field mice into the camp of the Assyrians to eat their bowstrings and thus they fled from battle!

So it is very clear that the mice did it!!

That is my story and I'm sticking to it!

258. Laurie Robillard

Achems Razor

Some passages in the Old Testament agree with at least a few of the claims made on the prism. The Bible recounts a successful Assyrian attack on Samaria, as a result of which the population were deported, and later recounts that an attack on Lachish was ended by Hezekiah suing for peace, with Sennacherib demanding 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold, and Hezekiah giving him all the silver from his palace and from the Temple in Jerusalem, and the gold from doors and doorposts of the temple

That is when Hezekiah gave gold and silver to Sennacherib not when Sennacherib's general besieged Jerusalem.

So it is very clear that the mice did it!! That is a story (myth)created from the real account.

259. Epicurus

everything laurie said is straight copy pasted from wikipedia and the actual wikipedia page is full of [needs citation].

either way what are you both arguing...what is the basic points on each side? i think you have both been chasing red herrings for a while now.

260. Achems Razor

@Epicurus:

My point is that no god, gods came down from above, played sides and ordered any defeat on anyone.

261. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor

The story about the mice might appear as fanciful myth. However, it might bear a kernel of truth. Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, also mentions Sennacherib's defeat, explaining that it was caused by a plague. He cites an earlier historian who had written: "Now when Sennacherib was returning from his Egyptian war to Jerusalem, he found his army ... in danger [by a plague], for God had sent a pestilential distemper upon his army; and on the very first night of the siege, a hundred fourscore and five thousand, with their captains and generals, were destroyed" (Antiquities of the Jews, Book X, Chapter I, Section 5).

262. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus

@Laurie from Achems Razor
First Cause?? now you are getting into the CA. ask @Epicurus: on that, he is the champion on the cosmological argument.

263. Laurie Robillard

The Casimir effect has been? known by sailors for centuries. If two ships lay up alongside each other, but not touching, they will slowly draw together, even if they are not moving. If they are big ships it can be quite hard to get them apart again.

264. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

You are talking of gravity between the ships when they are close together. Forming a warp just like in spacetime gravity, but only on water from the water tension.

The Casimir effect in a vacuum is a different thing entirely.

265. Laurie Robillard

Is gravity a property of matter? If all ether-space would be eliminated would the gravity field still be able to exist in absolute nothing? Can gravity be distorted?

Does this make sense that the higher the gravitational field the slower time moves?
As space expands does time expand? I mean does the speed of time in expanded space arrive at the same time as the non-expanded space?.

266. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

As usual, anything the ignorant theists do not understand, they immediately say it "this must be proof of god". This has been the rallying cry of non-thinkers for all history. We should admit, yes, it IS a lot easier than thinking, especially if you have nothing with which to think.

267. Nietzsche's apprentice

@Laurie First thing: there is no such thing as "ether-space." You probably heard that term at the same place you heard about "q-waves" and "bio energy healing" and all of that bull. Secondly, "the gravity field" is called spacetime. Gravity is the warping of spacetime. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity; look it up. If there were no, ahem, "ether-space," there would be nothing to warp, and hence no gravity. Of course, there wouldn't be anything for particles to exist within, so there'd be nothing for gravity to affect either, but I digress. Gravity cannot be distorted. Gravity is, again, the distortion of spacetime. One cannot really distort a distortion; it will still be a distortion. Regarding your second paragraph: if by "higher" you mean stronger, then yes. Gravity warps spacetime; that is, time and space. Time is affected too. If space expands, then time does not necessarily expand. It may, but it may not too. There is no "speed of time." Speed relative to what? Time can only be sped up or slowed down relative to time at another point in space. Time cannot "arrive." You are trying to apply the concept of time to time itself. How would time take time to arrive? That is logically inconsistent.

tl;dr

268. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor
And they are not giving away their own money it is the contributing peoples money, and yes, they have to spend money to make more money, they pay no taxes, everything is tax free for the Mormon “cult” You say they are helping people, I say it is to get more converts. And to make more money.

Laurie to A R
Wall Mart made a big financial and goods contribution during hurricane Catrina. They did it for social responsibility. Some say they had an ulterior motive. I say if it benefits its good. Some say its not genuine or pure. It doesn't matter what the reason they are doing it, at least they are doing it. Some cynical people will always say its window dressing, vaneer, superficial. Do you think that Wall Mart got tax credits for the truck loads of bottled water and blankets they gave away? So what if they did. Do you think they got more customers from all the press coverage? Yes they did benefit from the press coverage. So what?

I say love is an action word. So when the Mormon church helped Haiti during and after the earthquake with sanitary kits, medical supplies, food, pre- built houses etc. It is out of love. The members donate to the church humanitarium program out of love.

269. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

I have only one word for that..."Bull-Shyte"! or maybe that's two words.

270. Laurie Robillard

@Achems Razor

What a sour comment. If it can be considered a comment. Well you show a belief that people are motivated chiefly by base or selfish concerns. You believe the worst of others. The opposite of that would be optimistic.

271. James Smith

when ever people quote the bible, or other "holy" document, they are really admitting they have no argument at all. They're just trying to baffle you with BS. Because they are incapable of recognizing reality or thinking rationally, they think that will work.

First you have to define what is meant by "god". If you are talking about the omnipotent father-figure of the jewish/christian/islamic tradition, there is not one iota of evidence for that. But there is plenty of evidence against it. So theists, get real, get logical and furnish some proof that even a skeptic can verify. Of course, most will not even answer this because they know they cannot. The rest will engage in evasions and offensive comments like "I'll pray for you." So you do that and I'll have a devil worshipper sacrifice a baby or two for you.

272. Leah

There is no god... Unless you want to call the aliens god... we are their experiments. They are the ones that sped up the evolution from monkeys... It would have took longer, but they abducted us, and did their little scientific experaments on us... The government knows all about the aliens, and they even have meeting with them... The government made a deal with them... For the technology that they had, we let them abduct people for their experaments...
So, really there is no god, there is just us, and the aliens that take our eyes, blood, and our private parts...

273. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

Then tell is Leah, exactly what evidence do you have for your totally absurd statements? You are postulating a conspiracy that would involve thousands of people over a period of at least decades. That's totally ridiculous. Keep in mind, "Three people can keep a secret - if two of them re dead."

So either present some independently verifiable evidence or be prepared to be dismissed as the wacko you obviously are.

274. Achems Razor

Ha,Ha, @Leah: is just being facetious, aren't you Leah?

I think he is just trying to troll to stir people up.

275. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

No, I am not a troll. I am very serious. Nothing I saw in Leah's post was beyond the stupidity of conspiracy theorists.

So Leah if you were being factitious, my apologies, if not, everything I posted still stands.

276. Achems Razor

@James Smith Joao Pessoa, Brazil:

You misunderstood, was not calling you a troll, was referring to @Leah:

I agreed with everything you had said.

Must be a language barrier.

277. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

Thanks for the explanation. But I suspect you could be right now that you mention it. Leah may have been jerking the collective chains of some others. If so, it was pretty well don. Over the top, yes. But not so over the top as to be unbelievable.

278. D-K

The fact that Leah's statement could be taken as anything other than a joke is somewhat disheartening.

Although I must say I have had my run-ins with undeniable stupidity.. still, c'mon..

C'mon....

279. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

D-K. I have to agree with you. Yes, it is a sad reflection on human intelligence that it could be a serious comment. But conspiracy buffs, like theists, can accept the most preposterous claims based on the most ridiculous evidence when even mountains of contrary proof exist.

As Albert Einstein has been reported to have said, "The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and human stupidity."

280. Randy

@Laurie who wrote:

"What a sour comment. If it can be considered a comment. Well you show a belief that people are motivated chiefly by base or selfish concerns. You believe the worst of others. The opposite of that would be optimistic..."

All human beings that ever lived on this planet, and who will EVER live on this planet, and every animal and plant that ever evolved or will ever evolve on this planet, are motivated by "base or selfish concerns"...

That includes you, me, your kids, your hubby, every single creature that ever drew a breath on this world.

That is basic biology.

Also, optimism kills. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best. This is the only way I have found to go through life, and I am fairly wealthy.

I expect all strangers to be murderers and thieves. I always meet strangers well armed, with knowledge and with deadly weapons... Of course, sometimes they turn out to be friendly, but...

"Nobody knows anybody, not that well..."

There are monsters inside of us all, and we all have bloody thoughts... I enjoy that! I find it fun!

I play by the rules, until someone else don't, then, there could be pain...

I'm just sayin'...

281. Randy

Oh, and Laurie, let me give you some important advice...

When I am incapacitated by my MS, I prefer fire-arms, just because I am weakened, although I find them vulgar.

But, when I am healthy, I love knives! I have a huge collection and have many hidden sheaths. You should look into keeping some on your person.

Studies show that most gunshot victims live, but with knives you can take your time and make sure the job is done right!

Was that creepy? I can't tell, anymore...

282. Randy

Oh, and one more thing! Ceramic blades are a must! They are deadly sharp and do not set off metal detectors!

You can get them now from info-mercials! I remember when ceramic blades were so rare you had to have connections with either the Massad or the Russian mob to get one!

Now, I have dozens...

Uh oh... I think I just went on some "no-fly" list... Don't worry FBI, Home Security, etc... Randy will NOT be flying anywhere in the near to late future... (Doctor orders that I do not, so... whatever!).

BUT, the ceramic blades are awseome at cutting tomatoes!

Anyways, Laurie, get some ceramic blades and be vigiliant and aggressive towards the animals that surround you!

Was THAT creepy? I don't know...

283. Leah

Anyone that has a mind, has an opinion...

What I said was my opinion, and my beliefes... call me what you want. I don't have to explain myself to you or anyone else for that matter...

284. Randy

Leah, forgive me, I can get cranky about this, because I have seen too many people who were "trusting and think the best in people..." end up in shallow graves...

I warn my nieces and nephews to assume anyone they meet is trying to rape and murder them...

I'd rather scare them then attend their funerals.

But, I was too harsh... I'm sorry.

285. D-K

@Leah

Wait, you were actually serious? Oh wow.

...

wow. I'm interested though, what motivates those beliefs? Were you or someone close to you abducted?

286. Randy

Ooops, I got Leah confused with Laurie... all the whacky-hippies are a blur...

287. Achems Razor

@Leah:

I am interested also, is this first hand experience that you are referring to? Or something you watched or read?

You have piqued peoples interest now, can you please explain all this to us?

288. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

No, Leah, you don't have to explain yourself. Your statements made it plain. But they are so ridiculous that you have to understand why many thought it could be a clever joke instead of a wacko releasing insane thoughts on the world. But as I quoted Einstein, "Human stupidity is infinite." Thank you for confirming that the great man was right again. :)

289. Leah

So, let me get this straight...You all think I am just a crazy person, with crazy notions and beliefes... And yes I was serious about it... But to explain what I believe is impossible for me. I couldn't even know where I am to begin with all this. All I know is that I have seen things, in documentries, in the news. I even heard the spirits of pigs running around in my fathers garage after they were killed for meat.
I saw a home movie once that was takin by a girl in a plane of some kind. It was takin just 5 minutes before the planes hit the WTC... And the object that was seen in this home movie was seen at the top of the WTC... It was a UFO... And it nearly hit the plane that this girl was filming this in.

Like I said before, call me crazy if you want...

290. Randy

@Leah

Ok. You are crazy.

Listen, there are some wonderful anti-psychotics that may alleviate some of your delusions.

But, seriously, as long as you are harmless, and no danger to yourself or others... Rock on, little sister!

291. Leah

I didn't think anyone to believe me when I tryed to tell what I have heard, and believe to be true and what I believe... So why do I even bother... sigh!

292. Leah

And Randy... I would rather die then to take some drugs full of cemicals with side offects that will mess me up... I am perfectly fine the way I am...

293. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

No Leah, we do not call you crazy. We all know how truthful and reliable TV documentaries are. TV news too, is never wrong and never broadcasts anything that is not the absolute, verifiable truth. Naturally, you could not have had an auditory hallucination or been mistaken about some other noise in the garage. So many people have reported pig spirits that how could anyone doubt you?

Interesting how there is not even one other report of this "home movie". Everyone should be willing to accept that any "object" not instantly identifiable to a single observer has to be a UFO. What else could it be? A reflection in the camera lens? A balloon? Or even another hallucination, but visual this time?

No Leah, no one thinks you're crazy. Maybe stupid or a liar. At the least, extremely gullible. But crazy? Why would anyone think that? ROFLMAO!

294. Leah

Sarcasume... what I funny thing to try and hide...

Even in that last little sentence, you failed at hiding it...

295. Randy

@Leah

I have studied UFO's since I was a little kid. I was always fascinated by the idea!

But, eventually, I had to face the fact that the "evidence" is compelling, but certainly not conclusive.

There are no tests that we can perform to prove it out. And only things that can be tested should be considered.

But, I do think more study should be done on the subject, less because of "aliens", more because it probably has a great deal to with our human psyche.

We may find out more about ourselves, through study of the phenomena, than about "visitors" from other worlds...

296. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

Judging from your spelling, and other writing, I suggest you get some education or at least a spell checker.

The depth of your intellect is shown by the fact that you thought I was trying to hide sarcasm. (correct spelling)

If you couldn't detect deliberate and ostentatious sarcasm why should anyone place any credence in your other statements?

297. Leah

I graduated from high school... and no body is perfect!

298. Leah

The reason why no one has ever been about to proove anything with studies done on UNOs or Aliens, if because if you said anything then a couple of men would show up at your house and tell you that if you said anything that you would go to jail or they would kill you... That's the way it works,the government always wants to keep the truth from everyone... So... that's why it is never prooven...

299. Randy

@James

C'mon, to be fair, I have advanced degrees but I still make silly spelling errors on this site.

I type quickly and on the fly... and there is no "edit" feature here, so...

If anyone tries to tell me I am uneducated because I make spelling errors here, I would hit them so hard their mama's will feel it!

300. Leah

Randy... The crazy lady thanks you for standing up for her...

301. Randy

@Leah, who wrote:

"That’s the way it works,the government always wants to keep the truth from everyone… So… that’s why it is never prooven…"

Can't you see the infinite regress and cyclic argument you are making there?

"There is no proof and that proves it..."

This is the crazy argument of conspiracy theorists and UFO people and, yes, religious zealots...

There is madness at the end of that path.

Of course, I have been accused of being "in on the cover-up.." so maybe you should be wary of my advice? Maybe I am one of them!

LOL! Seriously Leah, get a good job, find a nice boy and settle yourself for life.

It's all over before you know it!

302. Leah

You can't scare me with that...

303. Randy

@Leah...

HAHA! I wasn't trying to scare you, sweetheart.

It was just friendly advice, which you are, naturally, free to ignore.

304. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

Leah Ohh, High School. The American school system is so good almost ever high school graduate is a literary maven. You can still use a spell checker.

Leah, you are also a liar. No one shows up at your house for "proving" anything about UNOs or aliens (no caps required). Perhaps that is another one of your delusions? In any case, no one has ever "proven" anything about UFOs or aliens

Note that "prove" has only one "o" as does "proven". I'd think a high school graduate would at least know that much. Also, "nobody" is one word, too.

Randy, I type quickly and on the fly, too. But my spell checker (part of my OS) checks every word I type in any program. I recommend to anyone that does not want to appear to be a lazy, semi-literate m****(like Leah) to use one.

As for hitting me, you are an i****. Hiding behind the Internet to make threats you wouldn't dare speak face to face shows you are an intellectual and physical c*****. You may have "advanced degrees" but you are still uneducated. Are you saying Leah is educated? That says more about you than it does about her.

305. Leah

I'm not going to stop trying to get the word out that Aliens are real and god isn't, and the governments are liers... And I'm not crazy either...

Thank you for your advice... I don't mean to ignore it, but it would go against what I believe...

I didn't understand alot of the video that Morgan Freeman did... Although I did think it was rather neat that they picked him... Considering that he did play the part of god in Bruce and Even Almighty...LOL

306. Randy

The "god isn't real..." part-- I am on board with!

But let me let you in on a little secret:

We are ALL crazy in one way or another!

Me? I am as mad as a March hare!

No one gets out alive, and no one gets through this life unscathed. Mental scars are worse than physical ones...

Don't you agree?

307. Leah

I'm not really sure... I was bullied and called names all of my child-hood... And I'm not sure which one that falls under. And because of the bullying...I couldn't let go and I am facing some depretion and not nice thought about myself. I don't believe that I deserve any of the nice comments that people give me, actully I don't believe that I deserve anything in life... And I want to hide from it all...Like a hermit. So, your guys called me crazy, fits right in with the hermit inside I guess...
So, I can't agree or disagree with you just yet...

308. Epicurus

you claimed earlier that they would and that is why no one speaks...however many people speak yet they are all unreliable like you.

i will say that you need to learn how to think critically and rationally rather than jumping to such insane conclusions.

even carl sagan, didnt believe that aliens visited us.

if you TRULY care about truth rather than just blind belief i would urge you to read this book (which ought to be necessary reading in all grade 9 science classes)

309. Randy

Leah, you are breaking my heart! And I am more ashamed of myself for picking on you.

Listen, it is not about what you deserve. None of us "deserve" anything. It's about what you can build/make!

You get what you work for. No one is going to give it to you!

We all claw our way through the world... as do all animals on the planet. We are no exception, just because we think we are clever because we can drive and build computers... and Las Vegas... etc.

(I just flashed on my last trip to Las Vegas and I looked around at the electrical, gaudy splendor of the place and said, "What clever monkeys, we can be...")

310. Leah

Don't feel ashamed...Everyone picks on me...It's their idea of fun...

Clever monkeys indeed...

311. Randy

@Epicurs

Holy Batman! I haven't read that book in years! Now I will have to run and get my dog-eared copy and add it to my already insane reading list!

You are absolutely right, it should be required reading for everyone!

312. Leah

I would read that book...but I can't really read that great... I can read what you guys are saying to me...But if I want to actully sit down and read a book... I would have to get someone else to read it to me for me to understand what it's about...

313. hawkpork

hi all,
just wanted to add that i think you\re all being a bit hard on leah.
she\s not the first person i\ve heard goin on about aliens.
second most recently added doc is about "ancient aliens". heaps of people are absorbed by the idea.
and can anyone give deffinitive proof that the earth wasn\t seeded by extraterestial life? intelligent or otherwise?
shouldn't you all be a bit more humble? or did i miss some real crazy comments?

314. Leah

Well, Hawkpork...

I won't lie...By the way I sounded, now that I go back and read my own writing...If I didn't believe what I believe now, there are some doozies...

I do kinda look crazy saying it all...but I do strongely believe it all...

315. Leah

And I'm thinking I should do the right thing here...

From what I said earlier... don't let what I say keep you from talking on here... I feel that there are alot of people out there that would probibly put me straight into the loonie bin if they heard what I said...

So, don't let me stop you from talking to people on here... And I'm just the crazy lady remember...

316. hawkpork

leah,
lol. you're not stopping me from talking to people here at all. why would you think that?

well, i had a brief look back through the comments and percieve you to be a pretty gullible person, pardon my honesty.
i found this to be your most, lets say contentious comment.

"call the aliens god… we are their experiments. They are the ones that sped up the evolution from monkeys… It would have took longer, but they abducted us, and did their little scientific experaments on us… The government knows all about the aliens, and they even have meeting with them… The government made a deal with them… For the technology that they had, we let them abduct people for their experaments…
So, really there is no god, there is just us, and the aliens that take our eyes, blood, and our private parts…"

whilst your comment does sound extreme, i've seen a great amount of alien story spinning c!"P on the net, so i'm not suprised by gullible people giving credence to such ideas.
as i said, the 2nd last posted "documentary" here is "ancient aliens".
the net is riddled with "crazy conspiracy theories (G bush)". they compromise the validity of the real ones. coincidence? no.
a deliberate "turd in the punchbowl".

317. Leah

There was a comment that no one was talking because of something that I said... So, that message was put up there for that reason... not just directed at you...

318. Albert Couillard

Sorry if I am repeating something that has already been said. I will state that I am not particularly religious yet neither am I comfortable with a completely scientific approach to the world. Science is suggesting that God is simply the firing of certain neurons in the brain. I imagine the same can be said of love, hate, loyalty, dedication, trust, pride and any other emotion or feelings humans may display. So if the entire human experience is nothing more than chemcial and electrical processes in the brain then any sense of value we place on those feelings and emotions are also nothing more than chemical and electrical processes. They are then akin to flicking a light switch or the binary code of a computer. Who is to say that the chemical processes inside the brain of a scientist are any more valid than those in a serial killer. Who is right? Why? What becomes the goal? Find out how it all works and bottle it? Lacking loyalty? Take this chemical. Want to think you love someone? Take this potion. You are a killer? Take these drugs and then you will think like us "normal" electrical processes. It all becomes a commodity and meaningless.

319. Randy

Indeed, Albert, ultimately it is meaningless.

But evolution and science teach us that we exist to eat, breed, and then die, becoming food for something else. For me, that is all I want from life. How can you ask anymore?

Making a living is "eating" and providing for your tribe, but everything comes down to what you contribute before you finally succumb to the ravages of the Earth.

I find great comfort in keeping it just that simple. As far morality, evolution gives us all of that, as well. We are social mammals. We work together to perpetuate the life of our tribe/troupe/family, what have you.

'Course, I decided NOT to breed, because I have genetic anomolies that would cause my offspring to suffer as I have, so, evolutionarily, I did the right thing.

But, not every organism gets that priviledge-- to pass on its genetic code. They struggle mightily to do just that, but, many can't succeed. Evolution tries to weed out the weak stuff, (of course, we humans have been cheating for some time now, and that will be our species' downfall...)

320. Jacob M

There was a young man, who's mantra was "I need proof." As you can not prove that things such as love are real, he lived somewhat with out them. On the day of his death, he approached God in his spirit body. Staring in awe, all he could repeat was his phrase for life. He breaks down to the floor crying, "I just need proof." God understands that this man has been brainwashed by the human way of life and understanding. Such things as faith and belief can not, and never will be proved scientifically, and movies like this will constantly change the face of God to those who can not see him with their own eyes.

321. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

As most "christian" witnessing, this is an absolute lie.

Jacob M: My mantra for over 50 years has been, "there is no god" Not one person has ever been able to furnish an iota of proof otherwise. Every "christian" I have ever met has been a fool, a liar, or a hypocrite. Usually, all three at once.

As far ethics and morality, every time I have been cheated, abused, taken advantage of, or otherwise mistreated, it has been by a "good christian". Real morality has been left to atheists who do good because it's the right thing to do, not because of fear of punishments or a promise of mythical rewards. That isn't morality at all.

322. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ James Smith Joao Pessoa

Atheists always like to argue that atheism does not devolve into fundamentalism. Thank you for proving them wrong.

323. Epicurus

Atheism has no more no less of a chance on becoming fundamentalism. but that doesnt make atheism wrong or an invalid position. you are not adding anything by saying this.

The problem with this also is that somethings are completely okay to be fundamental about, especially when you are correct. i will express fundamentally that you should NEVER under any circumstances jump out of an airplane without a parachute...why? because im a fundamentalist when it comes to gravity.

being a fundamentalist doesnt make you wrong or bad. it depends on what it is, and whether your position most accurately fits reality.

324. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

ilovemyselfmorethani What atheists like to prove is how ignorant and stupid theists are. Thank you for proving that, once again, we are right.

Your statement is as lacking in facts and logic as your religion.

325. Albert Couillard

Most of the blatant arrogance I see is on the part of the obvious atheists that have commented here. Most of the Christians I know ask for something very simple: that their beliefs be respected. They will answer questions if you ask them but they do not throw their beliefs into every conversation and try to convert everyone to believe exactly as they do. Many atheists, however, that I have either read or met seem to be on a mission not only to disprove religion but to belittle anyone that dares has a belief. What gives them the right to do that? Why is that ok? Someone dares believe something that you don't and that gives you the right to not only pick those beliefs apart but character assassinate the person for daring to have said beliefs. That is what being an atheist means? That is what society should model itself upon? How is this different from radical religious fundamentalists? Oh wait, of course, because atheism is right and everyone else is wrong. Kinda ironic isn't it?

326. Peeroette

Equating man with a cancer seems to be popular these days. Some people want someone to blame humans for everything. We are thrown into this "soup" like every other living thing. Give humanity a break, will ya?

Mankind is capable of wonderful things, as well as terrible things. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I will not apologize for being human. I am no cancer. If you feel you are, that's your problem.

327. Peeroette

While I am not a Christian, I see no reason to bash every Christian or their belief system. Many atheists seem to think they are superior and act arrogant and asinine. Hey guys, you are showing your ignorance acting that way. You don't know 100% what this thing is all about, either.

Let creation reveal its secrets by and by.

328. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

@Albert Couillard If theists want respect there are a few things they should do to get it. Respect is given to truth and logic, not ignorance and rejection of truth and reality. Respect is earned by teaching beliefs with facts and verifiable proofs, not by brainwashing children and forcing beliefs on others through law, fear, intimidation and violence.

What gives atheists the right to belittle these things? The same freedom that fives theists the right to push your sick, twisted theology on everyone else whether they believe it or not.

You may not like these things but they are the TRUTH. I know that truth doesn't matter to you, as all of christianity is founded upon lies. But show me verifiable proof that anything I have posted is not true. Rejecting reality and forcing stupidity like creationism into the classroom will not get any respect. Behaving like decent human beings will. I am not holding my breath waiting for proof or decent behavior from theists.

329. ilovemyselfmorethani

"The problem with this also is that somethings are completely okay to be fundamental about, especially when you are correct."

So you're saying it's O.K to be an atheist fundamentalist because you know it's correct. In other words, you know that theists are delusional? How do you know this? Can you prove this to a reasonable certainty? Go ahead, do it.

@ James Smith

"lovemyselfmorethani What atheists like to prove is how ignorant and stupid theists are. Thank you for proving that, once again, we are right. "

O.K. Go ahead and prove it. If you can't, then you're just talking out of your ass.

Fundamentalism is what's the problem. Don't be a hypocrite now. You are no different from the religious radicals who you so deeply despise.

330. Randy

In my country, (USA, trying not to assume nationality to anyone else here, and speaking only for my own country), christianity is a hugely powerful political force. It imposess its archaic, bronze-age ideas on "morality" to a 21st century world.

It is an assault on both American ideals, as set down by our Founders, (and seldom used in the last 30 years or so...), and on human dignity.

It is evil and must be destroyed.

Why am I so aggressive in my atheism? Because islamo-christianity, and all that support it, are my enemies and the enemies of all human freedom and expression.

That's just me...

331. Albert Couillard

To : James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

Thank you for proving my point. You assumed that because I defended the right for someone to enjoy their beliefs that I then must be religious. I am not. You then accused me of participating in brainwashing, fear mongering, intimidation and violence, even though we have never met. All, this, because I believe in the constitution of our country that gives people the right to religious beliefs. This, by the way, is the "verifiable proof" that anything you have posted is not true. And the proof, for me at least, that many atheists are more insecure and hyper defensive of their beliefs than most of the religious people I have ever met.

332. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ Randy

Only Fundamentalists will try to impose things on you, whether they are Christians or not.

Western Moral Foundations however are largely based on Christian teachings. I'm not making this up; even Daniel Dennett conceded this point. So it isn't an assault on American ideals. In large part, American ideals have been based on it.

When something devolves into fundamentalism, that's when it can be dangerous. Let's be careful because radical atheism can do the same. Atheism is not just a lack of belief; this lack of belief entails many many other things that when followed to their logical end, may not be dangerous to a Dawkins or a Harris figure, but will obviously be VERY dangerous to someone with James Smith Joao Pessoa's level of thinking.

333. Randy

Again. Wrong. You people have no idea of American history or the works of our Founders... you make assumtions based on the biased opinions of men who loved their sainted christian mamas.

Well, I don't like them or their mamas...

Our country was more based on Greco-Roman ideas than any biblical silliness. Most of the signers of the Constitution were anit-christian and tried to release us from the christian oppression Europe was steeped in.

Afterall, only two of the "ten-commandments" are actually law... stealing and murder... and those are open to debate in most courts of law...

334. Achems Razor

@Loveyourselfmore, Etc:

Your Quote "in large part American ideals have been based on it" On what? Christianity??
How come most Americans do not even know the history of their own country? Deism anyone?

335. Albert Couillard

I am starting to feel very sorry for the atheists that feel a need to attack anyone with religious beliefs. I am starting to understand they have all had very tramatic experiences at the hands of evil religious people. I must conclude this because they seem the need to defend themselves as if they had been grabbed by a roving band of religious people and beaten in a dark alley with bibles. Or a law was written in their communtiy by religious people that forced them to go to a church rather than a hospital to be treated for some illness. Or, gasp, they were forced to walk by a church and the very fact of seeing a cross caused eye damage. Something, must have happened that makes them feel so violated by people that dont believe exactly what they do.

336. Albert Couillard

And for those atheists that say religious people are doing nothing but destroy society explain this: The largest non-governmental provider of social services and homeless shelter in Canada is the Salvation Army, a religious based organization.

337. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ Randy

"Our country was more based on Greco-Roman ideas than any biblical silliness. Most of the signers of the Constitution were anit-christian and tried to release us from the christian oppression Europe was steeped in."

Can you cite a "Greco-Roman" moral notion that has arguably influenced a large part of our moral history? Or were you referring to their architecture?

The notion that Life has intrinsic value and that people should be treated as ends in themselves and not as means to an end is a notion that the West has got from Christianity. You won't get anything like this from believing that life has no objective meaning, or we are just blobs of matter that happen to be organized in such a way that would seem interesting.

338. D-K

I'd just like to pop in and say that any notion of spirituality beyond that of an individualist nature is bunk.

I believe people should be free to have a belief if they want to, intellectualism isnt for everyone. Having said that, anything spiritual, or spiritual in nature, should not be a teaching. Ever. You can't teach spirituality, you can't learn belief, people should be encouraged to think for themselves.

No religion-class in schools, no religious parties in government, no indoctrination, nothing spritual beyond the individualistic. No person anywhere should be affected by spiritualism unless it's of their own choosing.

Religion should be done away with, it;s merely an instrument to guide spirituality (with certain motives/goals).

339. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

@Albert Couillard I have proven nothing for you except that you are a self-centered, delusional fo**. Because I made truthful statements about theists, you immediately assume I am speaking directly to you. As far as the Constitution being your "proof" what an i**** you are. The US Constitution guarantees us freedom FROM religion while leaving people free to practice whatever fantasies they please as long as they do not attempt to force them into public law. But that is exactly why Christians have always one. Those are fact. You may not like it, but prove me wrong. You can lie and while but facts do not change to suit your delusional beliefs.

If you want to feel sorry for anyone, pity the theists that are wasting their lives and resources on religion. Did you ever look at a cathedral or even a modest country chapel and wonder how much better humanity would be if those resources had been devoted to health care, education, and genuinely caring for people? No, I am sure such logical and practical thinking never crossed your mind. After all, it's for the "greater glory of god" isn't it? What kind of omnipotent god would need "glorification" from mere humans? Or perhaps those resources were really for the glorification of the lying hypocrites leading the sheep into religion?

340. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

@ilovemyselfmorethani You are obviously another theist liar. Morals have nothing to do with religion but cooperation for survival. "We need religion for morals" has been the great falsehood spread by theists forever. But what morals do they teach? Genocide, intolerance, hate, guilt, fear, and murder.

True morality is not based on a system of rewards and punishments as in religion. It is based upon doing the right thing because it is the right thing. But, as a theist, you cannot accept that. If you accept that, then you surrender the power of religion to common sense and human decency. then bam, there go your "love offerings" cathedrals, and all of the trappings that help religion to subjugate people.

The real danger is that religion persecutes anyone that doesn't believe as they are told, proof, evidence or not. Ignorance and suppression of learning, speech and thinking are how all religions prosper.

Most of the problems of the world are, and always have been, caused by religion. Mankind will never truly be free until the black yoke of religion is lifted by the clear light of truth and rational thinking.

When religion stops allowing children to die because they will "pray them to health" and doesn't attempt to force their sick beliefs on other by force of law, threats and acts of violence, and suppression of human rights, maybe then it will get some respect.

Everyone ask yourselves, when has any atheist attempted to force their views any anyone by violence, threats, or passing laws restricting their freedoms? Most of the American founding fathers were atheists or "free-thinkers" as the term was in those days. Those people guaranteed the theist's right to believe as they wished. The theists are the ones who have abused that right.

341. Epicurus

@ilovemyselfmorethani

my point up there was you are saying the problem with anything is fundamentalism and i said no not at all. i didn't say it was okay to be a fundamentalist atheist. it is okay to be a fundamentalist about evolution or gravity or germs. it is okay to be a fundamentalist that the earth is not 6000 years old and that a magic man didn't make everything out of nothing.

it is not okay to say there is no god and you know it. that is not what i was saying.

dont straw-man my points it wont work. especially since they are there for you to go back and see. My point was FIRST that saying atheism is or can be fundamentalist in nature doesn't mean that the position that there is no god is the WRONG position. it doesn't make it wrong, my second point was that there are many things you can be a fundamentalist in that doesn't make it bad or negative.

@Albert Couillard.

the reason you are seeing an almost aggressive stance by atheists is because of the nature of our society. society is mostly steeped in religion. we have it pushed in our face almost everyday everywhere you go. churches are tax exempt yet influence voting, they try to teach creationism to children as if its a viable theory, they try to ban abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, gay adoption...they aren't just sitting around in churches praying to a personal god. they are pushing their religion on society through politics and people who dont believe in there particular god are sick of it.

we have been taught our whole lives that you have to RESPECT other peoples beliefs. but those beliefs dont respect us. they dont respect us so much that they are taught that we are going to hell to suffer for eternity because we dont believe in the same stone age superstition as they do...so how come the atheists cant speak up for themselves? how come if someone says they have an imaginary friend that will burn you forever if you dont say you believe in it, you cant point and laugh at them? what happened to respect being earned?

and how come the actions of one person is proof for you that all atheists behave that way. remember the things i said Christians do is all doctrine and all ordered from their book (which i know very well and would happily back up my claims with scripture). where as atheism has no doctrine. all atheist means is someone who doesn't believe in any god. it doesn't mean ANYTHING else. someone could believe in fairies and ghosts and leprechauns and tarot cards and psychics and still be atheist. it is impossible to try and group them together with behaviour, and just silly.

back to @ilovemyself, are you completely ignoring the Greco-Roman moralists? and politicians? our whole government system? Cicero? Seneca? Epictetus? Plato? Aristotle?

why assume any of the morality that Christianity claims is exclusive to Christianity?

MANY MANY cultures believed life an intrinsic value. in fact Christianity didn't actually endorse that. what they did endorse was that any CHRISTIAN life had value...anyone who wasn't white and christian sometimes wasn't even human.

here is a question....why Christianity and not Hinduism? what makes Christianity more probable or logical than Hinduism? (directed to any Christian)

342. Albert Couillard

@ilovemyselfmorethani

So,what you are saying is because someone doesn't believe what you believe - you can belittle and ridicule them. And that shows respect towards your fellow human beings?

Also, I don't know what the Hell schools you went to but I went to Catholic schools all my life and we were taught evolution.Yes we talked about creationist theory but it was NEVER taught as something we MUST believe. I am suspecting you heard about one school or a few teachers somewhere that pushed creation and you ASSUME all Catholic schools must do the same thing.

Also I did not say ALL atheists are anything, I said "many". If you are going to accuse people of something,might I suggest you get the facts right.

Also as far as "beliefs don't respect us"I am confused. If you areanon-believer why do you care if a religion says you will go to Hell, a place you reportedly don't believe in? How does it actually affect your life in any way?

Abortion is allowed, stem cell research is allowed, gay marriage is allowed. A quick search on the Net showed me 22 states allow gay adoption. So again I ask how exactly has a religious person impeded your life?

Again,the only pushing of beliefs I see are on the part of people like you arguing the fact that someone else should believe exactly what you do.

343. Randy

Epicurus wrote, expounding on a point I made and then I will further expound on HIS point:

"...back to @ilovemyself, are you completely ignoring the Greco-Roman moralists? and politicians? our whole government system? Cicero? Seneca? Epictetus? Plato? Aristotle?

why assume any of the morality that Christianity claims is exclusive to Christianity?"
------------------------------

In fact, there is an old saying among classical historians and other acedemics of the like, "christianity is just Plato for the masses..."

But, I have argued this point, "islamo-christianity/religion-in-general is evil and muct be destroyed..." over and over, for months and I am getting sick of it...

America will fall as an horrific taliban-like theocracy soon enough, there are no Americans with the cajones left to fight it. I am certanly too old and really don't care as long as I can retire in comfort.

The sad thing is, we will be dragging down other, more deserving Democracies down with us...

The suffering will be epic; and I will smile on my death-bed, hearing the screams outside my windows. My last words: "I told you aas**les! Where is your god now?"

344. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ Albert Couillard

Why are you addressing me with those answers? I'm not sure I've asked you anything in that spectrum. I think you've mistaken me for someone else.

345. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ Epicurus

I said Fundamentalism is the problem, not religion. Which was a response to someone who was implying that religion was the problem and in the process became as radical and fundamentalist as the group of people he tongue lashes.

Then you said it's O.K to be fundamentalist if you know you're correct and then made some analogy about gravity.

So I assumed that you were answering my retort on Atheist Fundamentalism. It wasn't straw-manning anything, it was logical inference.

If you're saying that you didn't mean that it was O.K to be a fundamentalist with respect to atheism, then I think you're being DISINGENUOUS. I'll leave you to it.

346. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ James Smith Dumb whatever

“We need religion for morals” has been the great falsehood spread by theists forever. "

-- Without the divine, our morals are socio-biological spin-offs. That's fine if you want to believe that. But you probably aren't smart enough to realize that what that does it it makes morality subjective. You can still be fine with that. But for theists that makes morality akin to opinion.

So yes "We need religion (or the divine) for morals" to be objective

"True morality is not based on a system of rewards and punishments as in religion. It is based upon doing the right thing because it is the right thing."

-- True religion is not based on a system of rewards and punishment. Christianity is certainly not based on this. So again your ignorance leads you to say things of which you have no clue. Doing the right thing because it's right? How do you know it's the "right" thing if morality is subjective? You seem to be implying that morality is objective when you say "doing right coz it is right". Like I said, You have no clue about what you're talking about. Hundreds of years of philosophers studying ethics and you say we should do the "right thing coz it is right!" Lol.

"The real danger is that religion persecutes anyone that doesn’t believe as they are told, proof, evidence or not. Ignorance and suppression of learning, speech and thinking are how all religions prosper."

-- You're talking about fundamentalist religionists. By the way you blab, it seems you want to do the same thing to Christians. Like I said, Fundamentalism is the problem. You still don't get this?

"When religion stops allowing children to die because they will “pray them to health” and doesn’t attempt to force their sick beliefs on other by force of law, threats and acts of violence, and suppression of human rights, maybe then it will get some respect."

-- More examples of fundamentalism. More examples of people who are LIKE YOU.

347. Charles B.

Ah, Dr. Randy! I prayed for you this morning. Sincerely. The thought occured to me that you perhaps I as a Christian could apologize for Christianity as a whole to you in as much as whatever one or many of us called by that name have done to hurt you. There's power in repentance, and as a true blue believer, I would like to ask for your forgiveness on behalf of those of us (myself included) that sometime act totally contrary to the way we should and proclaim to believe. As you've said before, we can act just as "evil" as anyone else sometimes, and that ought not be. I'm sorry.

On a personal note: I had a great vacation! How are you doing? Vitrolic as usual I see! :-)

I can't post much, but I'll try and check back to see if you read my post for you.

Peace to you.

Charles B.

348. Achems Razor

@Charles B:

Well, your alive! I missed you! we all missed you am sure. Fill us in on how you are doing! How was your holiday? etc:

349. Randy

@Charles B.

Hey! Buddy. How's my favorite nut-job, fundie christ-lover?

I prayed for you to... but, I don't think you would like the gods I prayed to... JUST KIDDING! You know I don't believe in none of them! (Maybe...)

How's your health, these days? Still experiencing that psychotic-break from reality known as christianity, I see... Well, that can pass, as I am a testament to...

Good to hear from you!

350. D-K

I have to half-agree with Ilovemyself... on the fact that non-religious morality and ethics come with inherent nihilism. Without (or with) ultimate consequence, morality and ethics are subjective, as well they should be.

What I think you're forgetting (ilovemyself..) is that religious morality is also subjective, it's just that judgement derives from external input, rather than the self. Religious morality differs in both nature/motivation and execution between the various religions. To say morality/ethics is/are objective is to preach a falsity.

While humans are adapt in collective subordinance, ethics and morality does not derive from actions, it derives from motivation and purpose. The difference between religious and non-theist morality/ethics is, and ONLY is, it's origin of motivation and purpose.

Do you supply your own purpose and motivation, or do you follow established patterns, i.e religion? Just because a pattern is widely shared or collectively endorsed, does not make it objective.

351. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ James Smith Dumb whatever

"You claim I am like fundamentalists but I have not said theists should “shut up” be imprisoned or in any way restricted in what they believe. What I have said many times, but apparently not enough for it to sink into your mentality, is that theists should not attempt to force their views on others by force of law or other means of intimidation."

-- And you also say this :

"Of course not, you’re a theist so ignorance and denial of obvious facts are your life." And this "another theist liar". And this "If theists want respect there are a few things they should do to get it. Respect is given to truth and logic, not ignorance and rejection of truth and reality." And many other things of that sort. You want to sugar coat your stupid fundamentalism by now saying that all you want is for them to stop imposing their beliefs on you? Are you really this disingenuous?

Read what you say. Do you really think you are NOT a fundamentalist? Well, maybe you will still think you aren't, but that's coz you're a half-wit.

"Christianity is not based on a system of rewards and punishments? Are you expecting anyone to believe that? They entire principle of heaven and hell is reward and punishment."

-- Yes it isn't. You try to argue against something you know so little of. Then you bandy about your crayon understanding of Christianity and expect real Christians to take you seriously.

"I repeat, true morality is based upon doing what is right because it is truly right for yourself and others."

-- O.K. Let me indulge this little child for a moment. Why do you think it is "right" to value someones life?

("You do what is right because it is right" -- Geez.. You seriously don't know what's wrong with this galactically stupid statement of yours?)

352. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ D-K

"What I think you’re forgetting (ilovemyself..) is that religious morality is also subjective, it’s just that judgement derives from external input, rather than the self. Religious morality differs in both nature/motivation and execution between the various religions. To say morality/ethics is/are objective is to preach a falsity."

-- We can debate this all year and still won't be breaking new ground. But what I can say about this is that in the Christian Worldview, we DO know what is right and what is wrong, because God gave us that divine spark (or whatever the metaphor is).

So Theists, at least Christian theists, believe that morality IS derived from the self.

We don't look at the bible or the commandments and derive our morality from there. The Good Samaritan was a story of a gentile, who knew not of any Jewish Tradition, moral codes, and practiced no Mosaic Law, but knew what the right thing to do for his neighbor was. Theists believe that the recognition of Morality is a God-given characteristic.

It's not that religion is needed for people to be moral. atheists can just be as moral as theists, because no matter what the belief, they have been given that divine spark.

353. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

ilovemyselfmorethani You have yet to demonstrate that a single word of what I have posted is not true. What you have shown is your own ignorance and determination to never learn anything.

It's obvious to me, as it must be to most, that I know far more about the bible and your religion than you. You might ask yourself, when have I said you were a fundamentalist? You are the one that uses that word consistently.

You think it is not right to value someone's (apostrophe needed) life? That's typical Christian morality and illogical thinking. Doing what is right because is right is "galactically stupid"? Sure, you only do what is right because of fear and force. Truly good people (unlike you) do what is right because it is the honest, good thing. Apparently without the threat of hell, you are so morally bankrupt that you would run amok, committing any manner of atrocities. Again, a typical theist. t makes me even more proud to be an atheist. Thank you for that.

I have no more time to waste on you, So I invite you to obey the biblical imperative to "Go forth ans multiply thyself."

354. WTC7

@ Charles B.

Welcome back! Good to see you :-)!

355. Albert Couillard

To: ilovemyselfmorethani

My apologies I meant to direct those comment to Epicurus.

I mistakenly copy and pasted the wrong name. Again my apologies for the confusion

356. z103

Did our Universe just come into being by random chance, or was it created by a God?

If universe was created by god then who created him self , was he come into being by random chance? Then the God should be the random. If he are the random, What did the random come to?
When you stop search him you will find him.

357. Albert Couillard

To Epicurus,

There are many things I am tempted to say in response to your last entry but I have realized it would all be for naught.I feel all you really want to hear is that you are right and everyone else is wrong.So,since it will I must assume,help you sleep better at night here it is: yes Epicurus, you are right and I am wrong. How foolish of me and others not to see the world exactly as you do. The world would be so much better if you were dictator. There,have a good sleep now.

358. Epicurus

good, more straw-man from the child who cant have an intelligent discussion with differing views without being a knob about it.

but thanks anyways. i often am.

359. Achems Razor

Ha,Ha, another one bites the dust!

360. D-K

Albert, you do yourself a disservice. Intelligent discussion, positive conflict, clear listed (counter)arguments and respecting eachother's opinion goes a long way.

@Ilovemyself:

Well. I think we could be discussing this metaphorical "spark" all year, mostly because that is just vague. God bestowed humans with the spark of morality, thus enabling them to see right from wrong?

2 words; feral child.

Without frame of reference/paradigm, no system of judgement, no right and wrong. Right and wrong are not programmed, morality derives from the frame of reference (culture/upbringing/environment) and imposed standards, both implemented after birth. Both also absent if never implemented.

361. Randy

Ultimately, I will repeat an axiom of mine that I have often used all over this site: If it isn't testable, verifyable, measurable, it isn't worth worrying about.

Philosophical debate is fun, but meaningless, pointless, and a waste of time. Much like watching "Bridezillas" or "The Jersey Shore".

Learning science and math and things that effect the real world, can put money in your bank account.

And that, my brothers and sisters, is the only thing that matters in this life.

You believe in god/gods? Great. Can it make money for you to support your family? Yes? Then you are selling dreams for profit and that makes you a con-artist, (a profession I HAVE been successful at, but I realized it was ethically WRONG). Does it make you NO money? Well, then move on to something else...

Ever notice you don't see a lot of "christian fish" on the backs of Mercedes or BMW's. But you see them all over junked up station wagons and bombers with duct-taped plastic over a broken side window...

My sister-in-law is nuts in love with the lord and has been a member of some christian cult based in Florida for decades...

She basically lives in her car, sleeping at her daughters' house in a spare room cuz she can't even afford a place of her own at 50 years old...

But, she tithes ten percent of her part-time salary to the church every month.

Where is HER god, now? How is this helping her?

362. Albert Couillard

To D-K

I appreciate what you are saying but here is the problem I have with this supposed discussion.

My interpretation of many of the comments by many of the apparent atheists here are the following:

1) Everything all religious people believe is wrong

2) They are foolish to believe it

3) Even if we allow you to believe it - you should never, ever express any tenets of your belief in public in any shape way or form because the very act of doing so violates my atheists rights

4) Ok,let's discuss

What is there left to discuss? Given these conditions anything any religious person, or supporter of their right to believe, says will be shut down as irrelevant and based on falsehood.

In my view what is not sought is a discussion but the chance to attempt conversion and/or simply the chance to say "Well I'm right becasue I'm right and your wrong because you are wrong". It becomes tiresome to "discuss" in such an atmosphere.

On a final personal note all I will add is I find many of the "crimes" such as hypocrisy and greed being leveled against, seemingly, all believers is unjust. Examples of such actions, and more, could easily be found everyday in the secular world. But again I feel any defence offered by any believer, or supporter of their right to believe, will simply be ignored or belittled.

Again, such "discussion" seems pointless and quickly become tiresome and I have chosen upon the conclusion of this posting to no longer participate.

363. Laurie Robillard

She basically lives in her car, sleeping at her daughters' house in a spare room cuz she can't even afford a place of her own at 50 years old...

from Laurie
I think that is what families should do help one another out. If a family member asked me to borrow three hundred dollars for a car repair and I had it in my bank account as savings I wouldn't lend it I would give it because if a family member is struggling to pay for a car repair of $300.00 they will struggle to pay it back or won't pay it back and it would create bad feelings between family members. We are stuck with family members for a long time so so if you can help to make them good relationships everyone will be happier. 364. Laurie Robillard She basically lives in her car from Laurie Maybe that person has a mental illness like maybe she is disfunctional maybe she has anxiety, depression and can't keep a job . It doesn't mean it's her religion that is to blame for it. We live in an imperfect world where there is illness. Sometimes ill people are put in our path to teach us a lesson if we are teachable 365. Achems Razor @Randy: Bumper stickers, fishes, money? Right, the only bumper sticker that made sense to me and was funny was one of my general managers one that was on the back of his Mercedes sport convertible, that said..."F*ck The Poor" 366. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil Albert Couillard: Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it is not true. Religious people ARE foolish for believing in something that is patently untrue and no one can produce even a tiny bit of evidence that it is true. Instead, they demand everyone "have faith" and reject all contrary proofs and attempt to forbid reasonable questions. In addition, theists consistently attempt to enact their foolish beliefs into laws so as to impose them upon everyone. You may not like the above but they are facts. If you think they are no, prove it. Yes, hypocrisy and arrogance are "crimes" common to all believers. I have never me even one religious person that really practiced what they professed to believe. If that is not hypocritical, perhaps you have another definition? Believers are universally arrogant in their insistence that only they are right and have access to the "truth". Arrogance when one preaches to be humble and respectful is another example of hypocrisy. No one on here that I have seen has ever said anyone should not express their beliefs in public. Just don't try to force them on others by laws or threats or actual violence. Suppression of beliefs is a strictly theist approach because they know their views cannot withstand free and open discussion. Tell me, when have you ever known an atheist to threaten believers with violence, imprisonment, or eternal damnation? Those are all theist methods. So anyone can believe what they want and make every attempt to persuade others as long as they stick to logic and facts. When they attempt to enact their beliefs into law, threaten others, forbid questions, or use violence such as murder and bombing, they are to be stopped. If theists were bombing churches and mosques, shooting evangelists, and passing laws making it illegal to practice a religion, they would be as guilty as theists. But none of that has happened, has it? Are you not participating because you have contributed nothing worthwhile or because you cannot successfully respond? 367. Laurie Robillard @ilovemyselfmorethani It’s not that religion is needed for people to be moral. atheists can just be as moral as theists, because no matter what the belief, they have been given that divine spark. from Laurie I call that spark the light of Christ. Every human born on this planet has the light of Christ. The light of Christ some people call it conscience the knowledge to know the difference between good and evil. Knowledge doesn't save because people also have free agency the right to choose between good and evil. 368. Laurie Robillard @z103 Did our Universe just come into being by random chance, or was it created by a God? If universe was created by god then who created him self , was he come into being by random chance? Then the God should be the random. If he are the random, What did the random come to? When you stop search him you will find him. That is a very good comment. God is the CAUSE. Some people need to be taught how to search. The door to the heart has only a doorknob on the inside. There is no force used to open the door. If there is force it isn't of Christ. He died for free agency. Some well intended person may use force but it doesn't make it right. That means that they don't have a full understanding or they have issues. Believing in Christ doesn't make a person perfect. We have our whole life and the next to perfect ourselves. One step at a time. God does not expect a person to run when they can't crawl.Grow where you stand. 369. Laurie Robillard Epicurus NEVER under any circumstances jump out of an airplane without a parachute…why? because im a fundamentalist when it comes to gravity. from Laurie A little laughter is needed here. Laughter is good medicine. Epi If I gave you a million dollars you wouldn't jump out of an airplane unless you have a parachute? You just lost a million dollars the airplane was on the ground. 370. ilovemyselfmorethani @ D-K "Well. I think we could be discussing this metaphorical “spark” all year, mostly because that is just vague. God bestowed humans with the spark of morality, thus enabling them to see right from wrong?" -- In the Christian WorldView, that's the belief. Yes. "Without frame of reference/paradigm, no system of judgement, no right and wrong. Right and wrong are not programmed, morality derives from the frame of reference (culture/upbringing/environment) and imposed standards, both implemented after birth. Both also absent if never implemented." -- You go against evolutionary psychology if you believed this. Ofcourse, cultural evolution has a big effect; Say, we can be desensitized to horrible things if we are exposed to them enough. But there's no conclusive evidence that our perception of the moral realm is wholly dependent on our current frame of reference. To the contrary, some findings indicate that we seem to have built-in moral notions. 371. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy This pretty much summarizes your idea of what life should be about: "Learning science and math and things that effect the real world, can put money in your bank account. And that, my brothers and sisters, is the only thing that matters in this life." And you rant that the world is such a garbage dump because of religion? Imagine everyone adopted your worldview, as expressed rather eloquently above. Doesn't seem like such a nice place to me. 372. ilovemyselfmorethani @ James Smith Dumb whatever You stupidly say: "Doing what is right because is right is “galactically stupid”? --Why do I even bother with the likes of you.. Read the statement "We should do what is right because it is right". Read it a million times if you want to. Consider that you believe morality to be subjective (an opinion). And then try to discover the galactic stupidity of it all. Come on now slugger, you can do it. 373. D-K @Laurie: Family means nothing if it's members aren't a positive influence on your life. There is nothing altruistic or heroic about dragging along a ball and chain, just because you share genes. It is by all means, irrational. @Albert: "1) Everything all religious people believe is wrong 2) They are foolish to believe it 3) Even if we allow you to believe it – you should never, ever express any tenets of your belief in public in any shape way or form because the very act of doing so violates my atheists rights" 1) Well, you can't really be an atheist wtihout thinking all theists are wrong. Not everyone who doesn't believe is an atheist though. Be mindful of generalizations. 2) That's a personal opinion, and neither right nor wrong. You may think that non-believers are closed-minded or deliberately obtuse, this is your right. You also have a right to voice that concern, albeit a bit of a shin-kicker. I have certain opinions about theism and atheism as well, it is natural for humans to judge opposing assessments. For instance, I find the act of believing to be unscientific. That goes for both Atheism and theism, both require belief. 3) I've said something to this effect, but I think you misenterpretet. Your beliefs mean NOTHING to anyone else, unless they share those exact beliefs, or see logic to adapt or change their beliefs to suit your vision. Belief is inherently individualistic, there is no actual need to vocalize unless you wish to start a discussion. The problem most atheists/non-believers have is that religious parties influence governments, and so influence decisions of national importance. For instance, I have been battling with my own government for a while, trying to ban christian religious teachings from middle schools set programs. A school is a house of knowledge, factual knowledge, christianity isn't that and as such as no place in a school's set program. At the very least it should be optional, although I feel banning it all together to be much more logical. As I said before, you cannot teach beliefs. 4) I think you mistake intent, instead of focussing on emotional charge in comments, you should check them for merit and valid points and discard information you deem useless. Stick to the points of discussion and pay no mind to what you consider to be ad hominems. It's as simple as that. 374. ilovemyselfmorethani @ James Smith Dumb Whatever You say: "You think it is not right to value someone’s (apostrophe needed) life? That’s typical Christian morality and illogical thinking." I made no such statements. So not only are you an imbecile, you're also a liar. 375. D-K @Ilovemyself: " You go against evolutionary psychology if you believed this. Ofcourse, cultural evolution has a big effect; Say, we can be desensitized to horrible things if we are exposed to them enough. But there’s no conclusive evidence that our perception of the moral realm is wholly dependent on our current frame of reference. To the contrary, some findings indicate that we seem to have built-in moral notions." Actually, "feral childs" are the cornerstone of my thesis, perhaps you should look up some research and docs concerning the matter. These humans act purely instinctively, with patience and dedication they can be "domesticated" but that's besides the point. Feral childs teach us that instinctive behaviour is natural (the default) and that morality is purely a cultural trait. There is no divinity in that which is taught. Morality is intrinsic to modern day society, not to human nature. 376. Epicurus @Ilovemyself, i am studying evolutionary psychology at the University of Toronto and I didnt understand the point you were trying to make there. You claimed morality exists in humans and was given like a spark by god....if that were the case why can we have feral kids. why, if people are not raised in a society, are they extremely animalistic? IN FACT, you claiming morals are given to us by god goes against evolutionary psychology. The development of modern morality is a process closely tied to the Sociocultural evolution of different peoples of humanity. Some evolutionary biologists, particularly sociobiologists, believe that morality is a product of evolutionary forces acting at an individual level and also at the group level through group selection (though to what degree this actually occurs is a controversial topic in evolutionary theory). Some sociobiologists contend that the set of behaviors that constitute morality evolved largely because they provided possible survival and/or reproductive benefits (i.e. increased evolutionary success). Humans consequently evolved "pro-social" emotions, such as feelings of empathy or guilt, in response to these moral behaviors. In this respect, morality is not absolute, but relative and constitutes any set of behaviors that encourage human cooperation based on their ideology to get ideologic unity. Biologists contend that all social animals, from ants to elephants, have modified their behaviors, by restraining selfishness in order to make group living worthwhile. Human morality, though sophisticated and complex relative to other animals, is essentially a natural phenomenon that evolved to restrict excessive individualism and foster human cooperation. Shermer, Michael. "Transcendent Morality". The Science of Good and Evil. ISBN 0805075208. Marc Bekoff and Jessica Pierce (2009) have argued that morality is a suite of behavioral capacities likely shared by all mammals living in complex social groups (e.g., wolves, coyotes, elephants, dolphins, rats, chimpanzees). They define morality as "a suite of interrelated other-regarding behaviors that cultivate and regulate complex interactions within social groups." This suite of behaviors includes empathy, reciprocity, altruism, cooperation, and a sense of fairness. In related work, it has been convincingly demonstrated that chimpanzees show empathy for each other in a wide variety of contexts. They also possess the ability to engage in deception, and a level of social 'politics' prototypical of our own tendencies for gossip and reputation management. Bekoff, Marc and Jessica Pierce Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press 2009) O’Connell, Sanjida (July 1995). "Empathy in chimpanzees: Evidence for theory of mind?". Primates 36 (3): 397–410. doi:10.1007/BF02382862. ISSN 0032-8332. Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals 377. ilovemyselfmorethani @D-K O.K. If that was your thesis, then I'm sure you have some very persuasive arguments up your sleeve. But again, your thesis seems to be at odds with current notions of evolutionary psychology. 378. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus I'll answer you tomorrow.. I'm at Hong Kong right now, so it's 1am. 379. Laurie Robillard Throughout the centuries men have had to struggle to be free. They have had to contend with usurpers. They have had to fight dictators. This is what lovers of freedom are doing today.(David O.McKay) It is not to the State that we owe the multitudinous useful inventions from the spade to the telephone. all these are the results of he spontaneous activities of citizens,separate or grouped. Human liberty is the mainspring of human progress. The one great revolution in the world is the revolution for human liberty. This was the paramount issue in the great council in heaven before this earth life. It has been the issue throughout the ages. It is the issue today. A Personal Responsibility May I call to your attention to the fact that at no given time was it designed that any individual should think it is his business to control or dominate the lives of others. "It is the nature and disposition of almost all men as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, that they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion--hence, many are called, but few are chosen" Indeed, it is our right as the poet declared, "to call, persuade, direct aright, in nameless ways be good and kind. But never force the human mind" It is man failure to understand that basic truth which underlies much that has afflicted mankind from the beginning. (Harold B. Lee) DENOUNCE COERCION Free agency is a divine gift more precious than peace, more to be desired even than life. Any nation, any organized group of individuals that would deprive man of this heritage should be denounced by all liberty-loving persons. Associated with this fundamental principle is the right of individual initiative, the right to worship how, where, or what one pleases including Snow White for some, without having to skulk out a culprit at the risk of being shot and killed. To all truth seekers: Besides the preaching of the Gospel, we have another mission, namely, the perpetuation of the free agency of man and the maintenance of liberty, freedom and the rights of men. This is the test to distinguish the true from the counterfeit. 380. Randy ilovemyself... wrote at me: "And you rant that the world is such a garbage dump because of religion? Imagine everyone adopted your worldview, as expressed rather eloquently above. Doesn’t seem like such a nice place to me." Well, since poverty is the number ONE cause of premature death and suffering the the ENTIRE world: yes, I think less poverty would be a wonderful thing. Listen, this is Evolutionary Nature talking to you: "You were put here to EAT-- so you could live long enough to--- BREED--- and then you EAT--- so you can live long enough to--- raise your offspring and provide for your primate troupe--- and then you must die and become food for something else which must--- EAT--- and on it goes..." For human primates, the EATING is MONEY. Making a living so that you can provide for your family and for the welfare of your troupe/tribe/community... that is morality, my friend. @Laurie who spoke of how sad people who are dpressed or anxious need coddling, I say, well, sure, for awhile... but if they can't get over it by 50, (and especially if they can't get over it by the time they have kids?), then they need a kick in the pants, and they need to snap out of it. Listen, I was horribly abused as a child, and my life has been a constant struggle and wracked with pain... I said, "Life-- bring me your worst, you nasty B*TCH!" and I achieved anyway. I believe in support and compassion, but too much is just too much. Besides all of that, my sister-in-law thinks she is doing just fine. She won't except our help because... I don't know... the lord has a plan for her silly-ass, I suppose... 381. Epicurus @ilovemyselfmorethani you also believe morality to be subjective. subjective to god's will. Does God command the good because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by God? 382. Achems Razor @Laurie: When you cut and paste stuff as you put on in your previous blog. you should tell all the sources. 383. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus "you also believe morality to be subjective. subjective to god’s will. Does God command the good because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by God?" -- Christian Worldview: God wants us to be Holy and Moral, because these attributes are a part of His nature. You can google 'Divine Command Theory'. This will explain what I just said in more detail. I'll probably be butchering this notion if I attempt to explain it myself. 384. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus "You claimed morality exists in humans and was given like a spark by god….if that were the case why can we have feral kids. why, if people are not raised in a society, are they extremely animalistic?" -- Obviously, we don't expect kids that have raised themselves in the jungle to be like us. They've had to live through certain things. When I said the "spark" thing, I was in no way de-valuating the significance of cultural evolution, and other societal pressures that can influence our moral senses. But these 'Feral Kids' are still vastly different from animals, I think you'll agree. "IN FACT, you claiming morals are given to us by god goes against evolutionary psychology." -- Not so much if you are a Theistic Evolutionist. Though Man is created in the image of God, he is still a creature, and shares many attributes with the rest of the created order. Made of the dust of the earth, he is a biological system and has certain needs that are similar to those of other organisms. But I believe that the most fundamental characteristics of people, the Law of Human Nature as C.S. Lewis terms it, is this inherent ability not only to perceive right and wrong, but to choose to do either the right or wrong. 385. D-K @Ilovemyself: "But I believe that the most fundamental characteristics of people, the Law of Human Nature as C.S. Lewis terms it, is this inherent ability not only to perceive right and wrong, but to choose to do either the right or wrong" Really? Decision-making in context of cause-effect is not inherently a human trait. Social structures within the primate branch allow for choices based on what is socially accepted within that group. These rules are however, not absolute. Wiggle-room is left, indicating ethical implications to be considered within that group, which constitutes one of the many responsibilities of the patriarch. Primates across the board are succeptible to moral influences when making decisions, although I will admit that studies have shown they are heavily impacted by hormonal flow as well. A particular touching scene comes to mind, in which a banned mother with a bastard child stumbles upon another group of apes. Recognizing her vulnerable state, a female, after having recieved permission from the patriarch, inches closer the mother and infant. She then shares the "tools" used for extracting termites from a nest that's also being used by the apes from the group. While not being accepted within the group, she finds herself being allowed passage, where it just as easily could have been a game over for her and her child. She returns her borrowed tools after having fed her child and she dissapears into the distance. Unless god bestowed his spark on apes as well, which somehow went unmentioned, divine command theory is propostorous and only seems to be the pointless elevation of humans above other species. Humans aren't special, just further along on the evolutionary ladder. 386. z103 If belivers trust in Jesus and not in them selfes, then those peopels are denying the gods powerfull force which created them. If they think Jesus was better than they self, then they are telling to to GOD that he did wrong programing with them, their God is then not perfect... If belivers trust in church, and call it gods house, what did they call the nature wich is the real gods house... If you belivers want to send a package from A to Z , will you first send package to G and then further to Z ? Then know why your prayers never came frame to god, because you sent them to jesus first, and u can never be sure jesus send them back to god because hes dead... Only alive human can comunicate with god. Dont belive in DEAD, trust in LIFE. 387. D-K @Ilovemyself: “But I believe that the most fundamental characteristics of people, the Law of Human Nature as C.S. Lewis terms it, is this inherent ability not only to perceive right and wrong, but to choose to do either the right or wrong” Really? Decision-making in context of cause-effect is not inherently a human trait. Social structures within the primate branch allow for choices based on what is socially accepted within that group. These rules are however, not absolute. Wiggle-room is left, indicating ethical implications to be considered within that group, which constitutes one of the many responsibilities of the patriarch. Primates across the board are succeptible to moral influences when making decisions, although I will admit that studies have shown they are heavily impacted by hormonal flow as well. A particular touching scene comes to mind, in which a banned mother with a b*stard child stumbles upon another group of apes. Recognizing her vulnerable state, a female, after having recieved permission from the patriarch, inches closer the mother and infant. She then shares the “tools” used for extracting termites from a nest that’s also being used by the apes from the group. While not being accepted within the group, she finds herself being allowed passage, where it just as easily could have been a game over for her and her child. She returns her borrowed tools after having fed her child and she dissapears into the distance. Unless god bestowed his spark on apes as well, which somehow went unmentioned, divine command theory is propostorous and only seems to be the pointless elevation of humans above other species. Humans aren’t special, just further along on the evolutionary ladder. (c/p'd 'n reposted, censored) (also, b*stard is not a word that's inherently offensive, weird auto-censor, might wanna check on that Vlatko) 388. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus Take the "Second Horn" of Euthyphro's dilemma. That's it. But it's not arbitrary, because Holiness and Morality IS HIS NATURE. It's not that God *chooses* to be Moral, He IS moral. So that pretty much shows how, from the theists perspective, morality isn't fundamentally arbitrary. you say: "and no i wont agree that feral children are vastly different from animals. they may have a higher cognitive ability and be able to learn better than animals but that has come with many years of social evolution, and even then after a certain age of living feral the child is not able to learn basic “human” functions." -- Then don't agree. I don't think children raised as monkeys will be like monkeys. Sure they'll turn out weird, but they'll still be vastly different. You agreed with this by saying "they may have a higher cognitive ability and be able to learn better than animals", and obviously that's all the materialist will agree with. He's not in any way going to say "Oh yeah I agree they have the divine spark", so Go figure. 389. ilovemyselfmorethani @ D-K So your saying animals have the ability to be moral? They have the ability to perceive right and wrong? Really? 390. D-K Did my comment confuse you? 391. D-K I'd also like to interject in your conversation with Epicurus, since I brought up the "feral child" matter. A feral child isn't "raised", also a human is not a monkey (or an ape, which I'll just assume you were going for). Noone here equated a feral child to a monkey. Also this; -"You agreed with this by saying “they may have a higher cognitive ability and be able to learn better than animals”, and obviously that’s all the materialist will agree with. He’s not in any way going to say “Oh yeah I agree they have the divine spark”, so Go figure"- is not an argument. Excuse my butting in, Epi. 392. ilovemyselfmorethani @ D-K No your comment did not confuse me. Did my question confuse you? I'm asking if you believed that animals (at least some animals) are able to distinguish between right and wrong; do they percieve the moral realm; does a chimp, say, know he's being immoral when he kills another chimp? You say: "I’d also like to interject in your conversation with Epicurus, since I brought up the “feral child” matter. A feral child isn’t “raised”, also a human is not a monkey (or an ape, which I’ll just assume you were going for). -- Which is why I said they've "raised themselves" in specific environments. And my exact words were this: " I don’t think children raised as monkeys will be *like* monkeys. " you say: "Noone here equated a feral child to a monkey." -- Just as noone here accused anyone of doing such. you say: "Also this; -”You agreed with this by saying “they may have a higher cognitive ability and be able to learn better than animals”, and obviously that’s all the materialist will agree with. He’s not in any way going to say “Oh yeah I agree they have the divine spark”, so Go figure”- is not an argument." -- It wasn't meant to be one. Read it again. 393. ilovemyselfmorethani @ D-K You seem to be slightly overstating the mental situation of feral children. Epicurus argues they are "extremely animalistic". In reality, feral children simply lack the *basic social skills* which are normally learned in the process of enculturation. I don't think this makes them extremely "animalistic", and incapable of fundamental notions of morality. 394. Charles B. Wow! This is quite the topic. I'll have to watch the doc and get back to it. Thanks for the welcome back. Yes, Dr. Randy! Still believing in that which is most believable! In fact I'm the preacher this Sunday, so no time this weekend to read this thread. Also, I'm interviewing for a professor position at a Christian college Saturday. Secretly. I'll have to go get my masters degree most likely while/before I can be full faculty I bet, but I want to do that anyway. In Theology of course. :-) I have a good feeling about it. I think they'll bring me on. My wife might get hired on too. She's already got the masters degree she needs. I bet we both get hired together. The director is coming in by train to meet us in person and said he's thinking about asking my wife to teach also. I had a wonderful vacation! My Mom's still living and so is my Dad. Can't be better than that at this point in time. Personal highlight: 3 LB 20" Rainbow out of Diamond Lake! Yea! I wonder why we can find so much joy in killin' da "big one" just to take pictures with it? My cousin's nighbor smoked it, so I didn't get a bite . . . . but I sure love my pictures with it! LOL These are happy days. Peace to you all. Vlatko still rocks with docs! :-) 395. Laurie Robillard z103 Dont belive in DEAD, trust in LIFE. Jesus isn't dead. He is a resurrected being. His body and his spirit was reunited on the first Sunday we call Easter. But you're right prayers should be addressed to Heavenly Father. 396. Laurie Robillard @D-K So your saying animals have the ability to be moral? They have the ability to perceive right and wrong? Really? Animals have a God given instinct to survive and have joy in their sphere. 397. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil Laurie, jesus is not dead because he never existed. If you look up Horus, Attis, and Mithra, you will see where the entire myth was stolen from far earlier myths. You might also consider that there is not one contemporary account of jesus. The first account is the gospel of Mark, written at least 4 decades after his supposed death. Do you think it strange that the Romans, who kept such good records on everything else wound never mention someone who was supposed to perform miracles , cause political and civil unrest, then executed in a very public manner? What you choose to believe is your own business but when christians demand respect and try to enforce their beliefs by passing them into laws and forcing them to be taught in public-supported schools, then it become my business. Then there is the free ride religions get on taxes, flouting the law, and restricting freedom of speech that moves religion from the realm of private beliefs into a disruption of freedoms. As long as I have to bear part of the tax burden that should be aid by religions, I have the right to say what I please and tell them what they may and may not do. Start paying your own way and stay out of the public sector and you can practice anything you like in your personal lives. 398. Laurie Robillard @ilovemyselfmorethani Our world is in turmoil. It is aging toward senility. It is very ill. Long ago it was born with brilliant prospects. It was baptized by water, (The Great Flood) and its sins were washed away. It was never baptized by fire, for that is still to come. It has had shorted periods of good health, but longer ones of ailing. Most of the time there have been pains and aches in some parts of its anatomy, but now that it is growing old, complications have set in, and all the ailments seem to be everywhere. The world has been "cliniced," and the complex diseases have been catalogued. The physicians have had summit consultations, and temporary salve has been rubbed on afflicted parts, but it has only postponed the fatal day and never cured it. It seems that while remedies have been applied, staph infection has set in, and the patient's suffering intensified. His mind is wandering. It cannot remember its previous illness not the cure that was applied. The political physicians through the ages have rejected suggested remedies as unprofessional since they came from lowly prophets. Man being what he is with tendencies such as he has, results can be prognosticated with some degree of accuracy.... Today is another day, but history repeats itself. We read headlines. The great powers warn and threaten. Bombs are detonated. Terror is substituted for reason. Defense stockpiles increase. Nuclear races get swifter. The radios whine. The newspapers carry glaring headlines, politician wrangle, students and authorities harangue. Everybody expresses opinions, but few approach the real cause or the real cure. What is the real illness? Its symptoms are manifested in every corner of the globe. They are found among men in high places, in hut and mansion. Its symptoms are carelessness, casualness, covetousness, slothfulness, selfishness, dishonesty, disobedience, immorality, uncleanness, unfaithfulness, ungodliness. compiled by Jerreld L. Newquist 399. Achems Razor I see that the religee's are still and always, pushing the misconception of there gods. Well they are paying allegiance to the wrong type of god of course. There god plain and simple is anthropomorphized from the Sun as god giving light to the world, a saviour of mankind. etc: etc: The name easter has its roots in ancient polytheistic religions (paganism) A pagan celebration of the spring solstice. Even though the death/resurrection story in pagan rituals actually occurs from Dec. 22nd to 25th the Roman Catholics who own the copyright thought it would be cool to celebrate the birth on Dec 25th and the resurrection at the time when the days grew longer. Christmas...a pagan celebration of the winter solstice. It has existed for well over 3500 years as the festival of Horus, long before Jesus came along and bought the copyright. For more on this google...Christianity on trial; final hearing<<the world according to Xenocrates 400. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Laurie While I admire your persistence, and respect what you believe, you won't get far with atheists if that's how you frame your comments. 401. Greywall “What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? … Up to now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is to ask the question why?” - Stephen Hawking 402. D-K "I don’t think children raised as monkeys will be like monkeys. Sure they’ll turn out weird, but they’ll still be vastly different" By this statement you implied Epicurus or myself stated that feral childs are like monkeys. The term "raising" is especially contradictory to the concept of a feral child. I really think we shouldn't get hung up on semantics though (again, lol). "No your comment did not confuse me. Did my question confuse you? I’m asking if you believed that animals (at least some animals) are able to distinguish between right and wrong; do they percieve the moral realm; does a chimp, say, know he’s being immoral when he kills another chimp?" I think my example provided a very clear example of counter-instinctive behaviour. I also believe it to be clear enough to understand it's context and implications, I see no reason to "validate" my example with a "yes, I believe this" when it is quite clear that I do. Chimps have a lot of documentaries, watch some and see how group-dynamic and group morality comes into play. I believe Epicurus provided a nice link to "group morality" in the "million dollar mind reader" doc page, it's a good read, have a look. Perhaps I have overlooked something though, in my "tool-sharing" example, I simply attribute the behaviour described to be influenced by morality. Perhaps you can tell me what influences behaviour to a degree where it overpowers self-preservation instincts. The example sketches a picture of compassion and empathy, traits belonging to the moral perspective, which I found to be convincing. 403. ilovemyselfmorethani @ D-K Yes we shouldn't get tangled up on semantics. I could have sworn I said "raised themselves" somewhere up there, but not on the particular comment you quoted. Also, I apologize if my semantics can be confusing -- english is not my first language, and I don't speak it on a daily basis. I have to say that what you said didn't seem clear to me, since you added the part about hormones doing much of the influencing. But I do think that that was where you were leaning towards. I have to say I don't agree animals can perceive right from wrong. They can show behaviors we once thought were uniquely human, but the ability to perceive right from wrong, and to choose to do right-- despite every evolutionarily built in disposition to do the opposite -- is unique to humans. And this is what I was referring to as the 'divine spark'. I have no problems with evolutionary psychology and it's seemingly reductionist approach in explaining away human behaviors though. "what influences behaviour to a degree where it overpowers self-preservation instincts." -- Many people commit suicide, so I guess a lot. But the better question is what makes humans able to go against fundamental evolutionarily built-in behaviours. I don't know of any naturalistic answer for that. 404. D-K "but the ability to perceive right from wrong, and to choose to do right– despite every evolutionarily built in disposition to do the opposite — is unique to humans" This is the exact argument I was trying to refute with my tool-sharing example. Sharing tools isn't in any way beneficial to the one lending them out. In fact, she deprives herself of the means to gather food (albeit temporarily). Why? Also, what is your reason for believing that in the first place? I don't know of any mention of a divine spark in the bible or scripture, and wasn't able to find anything on google either. 405. Steve Wooten The thing to always keep in mind is no matter how rationally you approach the question, it is not possible to answer the question unless you are a deity yourself as all other speculation is just that. Only a being with access to supernatural powers could know his or her answer is correct and not another form of self deception or delusion. The definition of a "God" precludes humans from ever knowing if a God exist. This would indicate Atheist are the ones who must be wrong,the agnostics and believers can only say what they believe not what they know. 406. Laurie Robillard @Achems Razor Most of us know that Jesus wasn't born on Dec 25 and yes it is a pagan traditional festival. Jesus was born on April 6 in the spring. However we celebrate it on Nov 25 and it is a great celebration. 407. Laurie Robillard @James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil As long as I have to bear part of the tax burden that should be aid by religions, I have the right to say what I please and tell them what they may and may not do. from Laurie There is a wide difference between academic freedom and academic license. The public teacher has perfect academic freedom to believe that opium is a food and good for humans. He can talk about it, he can write about it, but he must not teach that to my children. 408. D-K "so in actuality EVERYONE is agnostic, but do they live as an atheist or a theist" I giggled a little at the oxymoron in there. :D Indeed there is a lot of back and forth of the actual definition of an atheist. I, like Epicurus, adhere to the greek definition considering the word itself is greek. However, it does bring to mind the question of whether it means to "live without god" (individualist) or "life without god" (general).. Funny how a single letter can make a world of difference, as only one of those explanations holds up logically. 409. Laurie Robillard lovemyselfmorethani08/20/2010 at 17:10 @ Laurie While I admire your persistence, and respect what you believe, you won’t get far with atheists if that’s how you frame your comments. from laurie It requires great courage to stand up for my peculiar standards and doctrine including the more weighty principles such as the principle of freedom. Reason and experience forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles. 410. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus "the problem with taking the second horn of the dilemma is that it is STILL subjective to gods whim." -- No, because 'whim' is not 'nature'. I'm sure you can appreciate the distinctions. "but then you will have to argue that it was moral to keep slaves, moral to sell your daughters to their rapists....." -- Sir, I was afraid it would get to this. As much as I love these kinds of informal discussions, I do not want to get into a debate about scripture, biblical inerrancy and the likes. What I assert, and I believe this answers your initial question about Christian morality, is that it isn't subjective when you take the second horn of the dilemma. Nature is not akin to whim. God is described as being all-powerful, but one thing he cannot do is go against His own Nature. "D-K has cited an example and i can show you a video of an animal acting moral. i would also say there are many many examples in nature where social animals will behave in a way we call moral." -- Certainly we can see many examples in nature. But the fundamental question is: "are they able to perceive right from wrong?" When an animal acts in a way that we would consider moral, do they know they are doing such? Will they be able to go against evolutionarily built in pre-dispositions to *choose* to do the moral thing? @ D-K and Epicurus I'm not convinced by the 'tool-sharing' example. I would be more convinced if the chimp knows of the risks of sharing the tools. Say, if it knew that there was significant risk in sharing the tools because there was a big chance the other chimp would run away with it etc. They do things that would seem moral, but morality is dependent on knowledge of what is RIGHT and WRONG, and choosing to do the RIGHT, without expecting any consolation --I do NOT think animals are capable of this, and your examples would seem a bit thin in the face of this. 411. ilovemyselfmorethani @D-K This is the exact argument I was trying to refute with my tool-sharing example. Sharing tools isn’t in any way beneficial to the one lending them out. In fact, she deprives herself of the means to gather food (albeit temporarily). -- See my response above Also, what is your reason for believing that in the first place? I don’t know of any mention of a divine spark in the bible or scripture, and wasn’t able to find anything on google either. -- Did you use the words 'divine spark'? Because that's a metaphor I frequently use, but I don't think it's the most common one. My reason for believing this is simple. I've been fortunate enough to have experienced God in so many ways. So I've embarked on a journey to know him better, which entails reading about the man Jesus, and studying theology as much as I can. 412. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil @Laurie Laurie, you do NOT bear the tax burden that belongs to religion. I bear it too. So I have more right to criticize this than you. You think it is fine to inflict the burden of religion on people, I say it is not. You think it is fine to brainwash children, I say it is evil. You think it is a good thing to instill fear and guilt into people. I say it is not. Those are a few differences between theists and rational people. Does academic freedom include the right to teach something as patently absurd as creationism and parade it as "science"? That is a greater obscenity than all of the porn on the internet. When direct questions about proof are asked about religion is it OK to evade the issue and try to deflect the thoughts by deception and outright lies? Such as you ignored my questions about Horus, Attis, and Mithra? Many would look at those myths and see that christianity, like other religions, is founded upon lies. But if you have no answers, perhaps it's easier to pretend the question was never asked?= 413. Randy Oh, holy, BATMAN! This "Divine Spark" nonsense makes me want to have a stroke... Epicurus, D-K, and many other athiests, and I, have a powerful, robust, scientific method behind what we talk about. Everything we know to be truth is verified, quantified, and shows real results in the real world. You have, what mama told you, what daddy told you, and what you saw on some Afterschool Special... a bunch of lies, and hot air. We have science and engineering, which builds everything you live in... everything you eat... everything you wear... everything you appreciate as a convenience, (cell phones, computers, lights, building materials and a long history of civilization...) as well as everything you ever enjoyed in your life... And you have... opinion, "your heart", silly aphorisms and bumper stickers, and some idea given to you by some book written by insane, middle eastern, cultists who thought there was a "Divine Spark"... As evolution is a fact that we know is true... when in our development as a species did this "Divine Spark" inculcate into us? When we were bacterium? When we were sponges? Flatworms? When we evolved into vertibrate, mammalian form? Your argument is nothing. It is opinion and can not be measured, therefore it is meaningless. Hot air. Airy breath. By the way, there is no conclusive evidence that this "jesus" ever existed. I am a PhD in World History... it is just a mytholgocial character that goes back some 20,000 years... There weren't even any JEWS then, let alone a bible or anything resembling a "Divine Spark"... The idea of a god-man that gives his life to save the world is as old as primates. Get over yourself and move on... it's a silly myth. 414. Randy And, I do not care if it, (this silly notion of god), gives you "comfort"... life was not meant to be "comfortable". It is brutal and savage-- short and bloody, you must struggle to survive in this world, that is what Nature teaches us, and that is what every civilization before the "comfy" Western World in which we live, knew very well. This life we lead is not sustainable, history proves that. I am a Doctor, I know. 415. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy And your argument is, what exactly? Apart from telling people how learned you are. You said so yourself, money is all that matters in life. Yet you decry religious con-artists, because what they do is unethical? Religious con-artists do their best to get what YOU admitted is all that matters in life --MONEY. Contradictory much? When you have an actual argument, then maybe I can waste some of my time addressing them. 416. Randy Well, I have a computer, actually 12 compuuters... that was all done with science... that is a large part of my argument... but then I have evolution, medicine, architecture, biology, paleantolgy, archeology, geology, HISTORY, documentation, verifyable and testable results... etc. And you have what? Exactly? A strong feeling? Really? OK. 417. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the worldview of theistic evolutionists. And none of those branches of science deals with the divine, so I don't think bandying about scientific terms lends your...uh.. argument any credence. So saying you're a Doctor and you have a PHD, and you are an oh so smart man, doesn't seem like an argument to me. And no one said I base my beliefs on a "strong feeling". I'll leave you to keep talking out of your ass. 418. Randy You and I spoke before, on the "Why Does Everybody Laugh at Creationists" documentary forum. I tried to be nice to you there, but no more... I know the history of the world and you play video games... you are young and inexperienced, even if you are biologically middle aged.... still someone else pays your way... am I right? No... you would never adnit that... you are too proud and full of christ-y indignation... but--- I see you... Randy sees all... 419. Achems Razor @Laurie and @Ilovemyself, If you religee's so stridently believe in all this gooblydok that you are spouting why are you even wasting your time here on this earthly plane? Why wait for your so called rapture, you always have the option to go and see your Jesux, et al: or maybe it is Horus, Attis, or Mithra? Or are you doing all this religious mumbo-jumbo because you are scared sh*tless of death! of dying? 420. Charles B. My sermon's ready (mostly), so I have time to "play" a bit before bed. Dr. Rany: "This life we lead is not sustainable, history proves that. I am a Doctor, I know." Now that was funny! I hope I (and you) live long enough for me to get my Ph.D. in something or at least a D.D. so I can say something like that to someone someday and I would be delighted if it were you! Hang on for 5 more years, won't ya? I just wanted to let you know I'm earnestly seeking to instill my faith and wisdom to hundreds and perhaps thousands of young minds and souls. With all my heart, when I breath my last, many other "believers" shall I leave behind me, God willing! Now doesn't that just bring "comfort" to your cranky old heart!?! I thought it would. ;-) Wish me luck! Mr. Razor: Please don't say "Jesux" as that's horrendously offensive to me and I like most of your comments even though I diasagree with them 99% of the time. That other jerk said that all the time; just let him monopolize the blasphemy on that one if you can. ;-) Please. "Jesus" is more precious to me than life itself. also, when I thought I could be dying with heart trouble (speaking as a religee to the max), I had no fear, only regrett that I would make my children "fatherless" at such young ages, and sadness that I might not do "more" for His service before I went. Turned out my son just hurt me jumping on my chest and may have just cracked my sturnum. Yea! Gonna live a while more, I suspect. Happy day! To all: Good news bad news with my job interview . . . Bad news: I can't be a professor without advanced degrees. Doh! Go figure! Good news: The pastor/school director who interviewed me seems to really like me and if things work out, I can be a high school principal, or even a college president (administrative level), or even a head pastor (he pastors 3 currently), or at least a high school teacher while I study for my advanced degrees, . . . . barring the Rapture, of course. Smirk smirk. :-) That was your Razor! IlovemyselfmorethanI: We're on the same side, but, Dr. Randy worked hard for those degrees. He desirves the respect he's earned. I was saddened today to learn that half the faculty of a "Christian college" were non-Christians because so few of us hold the credentials and walk the talk. Let's both try to load our "guns" with some good education and the letters behind our name to garner the respect our wise words hold. Peace to all. Charles B. 421. Laurie Robillard @Author: Charles B When moral obligations cease to exert an influence, and virtue hides its face, and the unblushing effrontery of sin and foul corruption takes it place, then may the nation consider there is danger. "When the wicket rule the people mourn" "Men will either be governed by God, or ruled by tyrants" (William Penn) Why to you flatter the vanity and presumption of Dr Rany PhD? The wealth of the world cannot heal a broken heart, and the wisdom of all our universities cannot turn into paths of righteousness a wayward soul. Men can be born again only through religion. (David O. McKay) Religion is the creator and the conservator of our social ideals. Men are in need of a safe pilot to serve as a guide over the troubled and turbulent waters through which we are now sailing. When the mariner has been tossed for many days in thick weather, and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails himself of the first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his latitude, and ascertain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. Let us imitate this prudence, and, before we float farther on the waves of debate, refer to the point from which we departed, that we may at least be able to conjecture where we now are." (Daniel Webster 1830) we do not need more material development, we need more spiritual development. We do not need more intellectual power, we need more moral power. We do not need more knowledge, we need more character. We do not need more government, we need more culture. We do not need more laws, we need more religion. We do not need more of the things that are seen , we need more of the things that are unseen. It is on that side of life that it is desirable to put the emphasis at the present time. If that side is strengthened, the other side will take care of itself. It is the side which is the foundation of all else. If the foundation is firm, the superstructure will stand." (Calvin Coolidge, The price of Freedom) 422. Laurie Robillard # @Randy Well, I have a computer, actually 12 compuuters… that was all done with science… that is a large part of my argument… but then I have evolution, medicine, architecture, biology, paleantolgy, archeology, geology, HISTORY, documentation, verifyable and testable results… etc. And you have what? Exactly? A strong feeling? Really? OK. from Laurie I know something you don't have. H U M I L I T Y 423. Randy @Laurie Whose, statement, I suppose is in moderation as I recieved it in my mailbox, but do not see it here... She wrote: "Why to you flatter the vanity and presumption of Dr Rany PhD?" Because, I flatter Charles B., who, even though he is christian whacko, I think is a GOOD man, with a beautiful family, and I like him! As much as I hate chiristianity, I know the good guys from the bad guys... Charles is one of the good guys... And he will come around someday... I think! 424. Laurie Robillard @James Smith João Pessoa, BrazilSo I have more right to criticize this than you. It is high sounding to deny divinity and to say that man must make for himself whatever he has or may ever have. A civilization and its culture may go on after a fashion after it has lost faith in the power from which it rose, carried on its acquired momentum. But unless it is nourished at the roots, it will ultimately exhaust the surplus on which it draws. You can no more go on drawing indefinitely on moral reserves without replenishment, than you can go on drawing from a bank without keeping the account current by new deposits. Maybe you have never seen or met a person who lives virtue but only met people who preach virtue. Myself if I had to choose between talent and integrity , I would choose virtue and integrity, for without them we are lost. Don't say that I'm discounting brain and know-how. I stand in awe in the presence of a great mind with superior intelligence devoted to human welfare. 425. Laurie Robillard @Randy And he will come around someday… I think! from Laurie concerning Charles B Why would you wish the narrowing of Charles B's horizon of spiritual things? No worse evil could befall him in his course on earth than to loose sight of heaven. What shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 426. Laurie Robillard @ James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil Does academic freedom include the right to teach something as patently absurd as creationism and parade it as “science”? That is a greater obscenity than all of the porn on the internet. from Laurie Every nation which has dropped out of sight can trace its downfall to the breakdown of its moral structure. There are no walls or forts which can protect a nation or a people from invasion but the wall of righteousness. France built the series of impregnable forts along its borders, but the Germans paid no attention to the Maginot line of forts, for there was an easier way in-- through the flimsy veil of the country's bad morals. China could never be safe behind the GREAT WALL or even one ten times as high and long and thick so long as corruptible officials have the keys to the doors through it... Our complacency and feeling of security toward honour and integrity in our teachings starts our children on their way to dishonesty and corruption. In an uncorrupted world it would be sufficient to point out that certain speeds were dangerous to ourselves and to our neighbours whom we are commanded to love and we would obey the rules without officers and sirens and tickets. When an individual in his thinking and actions unhitches himself from integrity, he lets himself go so to speak. He is anchored to nothing more stable than whimsy, momentary impulses, mere whiffs of fickle opinion. He is adrift and without compass. 427. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil for Laurie How arrogant you christians are. You think you have the only way and all others, deists and atheists alike are completely wrong. According to you, everything good comes from religion. What a crock that is! Most of the problems of the world are, and always have been, caused by religion. Religion when it was the most powerful prevented science, reasoning, and learning. It was called "The Dark ages" Is it any wonder that religion, with it's patently absurd idea, unprovable assertions, and suppression of freedom of thought and speech is regarded with disdain and contempt by rational people? Religion demands "respect" while doing absolutely nothing to show it deserves any. Furnish some verifiable proof that even one of the tenets of the "faith" are true. For christianity, even the basis of jeeezus is a lie. It is simply a myth stolen from those of Horus, Attis, and Mithra. Can anyone believe it is all a coincidence that they all bear an uncanny resemblance? You expect everyone to accept that but refuse to believe evolution could "just happen". Theists always want to have the most ridiculous parts of their stories accepted with no evidence at all, yet refuse to accept obvious facts with an infinity of supporting evidence. Every time I hear about religion is the "basis for morality" I want to throw up. The basis for morality is genocide, murdering babies, brainwashing children and promoting lies? Religion is the black yoke of humanity and people will never be truly free until t is lifted by the clear light of truth and rational thinking. You may not like what I have said, but prove one word is not the truth. While you are at that, prove one thing about religion is true. 428. Randy Hmmm... I smell the telltale aroma of burning hippie... does anybody else smell that...? Laurie... listen, as I have told Charlse B. many times, over the many posts that we have shared... I too was like him. A brain dead, intellectually suicidal whacko... I went from christianty to Satanism, to, Wiccanism, to any kind of "ism" you can name, until I realized that it was all CR@P! Science and maths and engineering liberated me a thousand times more than any religion could ever HOPE to. I have been all over the map, and I come to you to say, quietly, and with humility... walk away from the monster and step into the light. Math and science and engineering... if we don't do it, the Great Indian Peoples will... (and your children will be left behind...) 429. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy "I know the history of the world and you play video games…" "Randy sees all…" --Oh, you know the history of the world, and you're also a "Doctor" and have a PHD right? Somehow I have to doubt that you are actually as learned as you purport yourself to be after your ridiculous attempts in arguing from authority --while invoking yourself as the authority. Or, maybe the old-age is getting to you. Oh, and your little playground insults just shows you to be the intellectually insecure douche that you really are. No wonder you always have to remind people of how smart you are. Hilarious. 430. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Achems Razor "If you religee’s so stridently believe in all this gooblydok that you are spouting why are you even wasting your time here on this earthly plane?....Or are you doing all this religious mumbo-jumbo because you are scared sh*tless of death! of dying?" -- Doesn't really seem like you know anything about the religion you keep bashing. Typical. 431. ilovemyselfmorethani @ James Smith Whatever "How arrogant you christians are. You think you have the only way and all others, deists and atheists alike are completely wrong." -- Gotta love the irony here. 432. Randy blah... blah... blah... etc. But finally, what I have is--- everything you live for and with, and what you have is... opinion... *Randy gets the scales" Hmm... still, what you have is weak and unprovable... but I can build a satellite that can keep you in-touch with your illicit love affair, or your SILLY-ASS Facebook/Myspace.youface, page! You Children. So Sad. Study maths, science, engineering--- constantly, or stand in line while the Great Indian Peoples take us over. Your choice. I am dead. I do not care. 433. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Charles B "We’re on the same side, but, Dr. Randy worked hard for those degrees. He desirves the respect he’s earned." -- Yeah I know, that's what he keeps saying. He must've worked oh so hard for them. Let's not forget though that respect begets respect. 434. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy "but I can build a satellite that can keep you in-touch with your illicit love affair" -- Yes Randy, we know how awesome you are. You don't have to keep telling us about it. 435. Randy @James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil You and I seem to be speaking the same language! Merci! 436. Randy @Charles B. who wrote: “We’re on the same side, but, Dr. Randy worked hard for those degrees. He desirves the respect he’s earned.” Thank you, Charles! I am touched and moved by your defense of me, a dirty athiest! I like you, too! 437. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil @ Randy What is amusing to me is that deists will protest what you say and denigrate it and you personally, but when you ask them to disprove anything you say r to prove anything they say, those questions are ignored. Any direct questions such as, "What proof do you have for the existence of any god? They pretend the question was never asked and instead attempt to deflect attention from it by going off on another senseless rant. Is it any wonder I accuse them of being liars as well as moral and intellectual cowards? 438. Randy @ilovemyselfmorethani I would take a bullet for Charles B, or anyone in his family. But, I wouldn't p*ss on you if you were on fire... What does that mean? He is as christ-y as they come? Hmmm... let's think about it... 439. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy "I would take a bullet for Charles B, or anyone in his family. But, I wouldn’t p*ss on you if you were on fire…" -- I wouldn't want you to piss on me if I were on fire. And as for taking a bullet for Charles B or anyone in his family, I seriously don't think you would. 440. Randy Yes, of course... Well, Charles knows, I think, that if I was in South Korea, and some radical religious crazy was gunning for him, I would jump in front of the bullet to protect him. He is smart, and he has beautiful children, I have no children, therefore, evolutionarily, he is more important than I... I just wish he would teach his childre maths, and sciences, and engineering, instead of worrying about a horror novel written by arabs a few hundred years ago... but... I can't help it.... I like him! 441. Achems Razor @ilovemyself: Don't know about religion? I know about more about "all" religions, probably more than you will ever know! there kid. Well I shouldn't say all, taking into account there are approx. 28,000,000 gods in recorded history. @Laurie: Do you have a semblance of any thoughts of your own, instead of always copy/paste? @Charles B: Just for you, and because you asked, I will no longer call Jesus, Jesux! ever. You are the only religee that I like. Burning hippies, Ha,Ha, I smell burning snake oil. 442. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Achems Razor "Don’t know about religion? I know about more about “all” religions, probably more than you will ever know! there kid. Well I shouldn’t say all, taking into account there are approx. 28,000,000 gods in recorded history." -- O.K. Allow me to re-phrase what I said; You seem to know little about Christianity. Because if you did, you wouldn't be expecting true Christians to want to off themselves. 443. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy "maths, and sciences, and engineering," isn't the antithesis of religion. You're a doctor. Then you must know that 70 % of doctors are theists. (I might be mistaken by the percentages, but I'm quite sure it's a significant majority.) Only fundamentalists are not functionally atheist. But many theists are. Theists won't attempt to pray themselves off a continent, they'll ride planes. Like I said, it's fundamentalism that's the problem. And there seems to be lots of them here, on both sides. 444. Randy I will only allow for a documentary on this site, (I am plugging for Vlatko... "Religulous"), which states that 93% of acedemics are atheist/agnostic... but I think the truth is somehwere in the middle--- let's say 89%, still, advantage me and science... I certainly have never met a PhD who believes in the christian god... so I got that goin' on... It doesn't matter whether you are a fundamentalist or not, you support a HORROR CULT, filled with the destruction of the human, primate, species. Congratz! 445. Randy Vlatko is AMONG US! *Randy bows low* There is much admiration from me, sir... it is embarrassing to you, but you provide a great service to our species.... so... Just suck it up! (LOL, much reverence for your work... etc.) 446. Randy @Charles B. who wrote: "Now that was funny! I hope I (and you) live long enough for me to get my Ph.D. in something or at least a D.D. so I can say something like that to someone someday and I would be delighted if it were you! Hang on for 5 more years, won’t ya? I just wanted to let you know I’m earnestly seeking to instill my faith and wisdom to hundreds and perhaps thousands of young minds and souls...." ---------------------------- I gotta tell ya Charles, that idea scares the cr@p out of me! But, you are my favorite whacko-christ-lover! And I pray to my dark gods that you get your PhD! (I'm kidding... I certainly do not worship dark gods... as far as you know...) I'm kidding! I kid you because I love! Seriously, good luck, Bona Fortuna, to YOU! 447. Vlatko Thank you very much @Randy... and @Charles B. welcome back. 448. Achems Razor Ditto about all, from me also! 449. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani Christianity is kind of funny...in a weird way. If anyone tries to find God and doesn't find then they need to believe in god more just because god might give a sign. If you doubt God then Satan will get you. Even science might be made up. Gravity, evolution and quantum psychics are made up by Satan so we stop believing in God. They are Gods way of testing us. Seriously Christianity is paradox by itself and is a paranoid religion like most others. I mean, you can stop listening to everybody because religion makes people close minded (not everyone). In science there are close minded people also yet if they have a theory and a firm proof to support it. Scientists will change their views to certain degree. Religious people on the other hand are impossible, IMPOSSIBLE. Unless they start to ask questions them selfs. I mean how can someone argue against someone that believes in something that no one else can hear, touch or see? The sad thing is when schizophrenic people are mistaken for having demons inside them. Talk about pouring salt on a wound. Worst of all...people that have "heard" voice and said it was God telling them to kill someone. Like that one case about a woman killing her kids because she heard gods voice saying it to her. That can't be God right? How do we know if it was gods voice or not? God can't be that cruel can he? Read through Bible and God isn't "as nice" anymore. It's just madness...to submit people to such mental torture as Christianity and Islam. I've recently started to read Qu ran. I've always thought it was a bit fishy, some Islamic people are nice and others say they need to use force to make things better. And as far as I've read...it's not a peaceful religion at all. I've been religious, back then I tried to find answer in every religion and I was broken down. When I found my answer in Science...I felt so wonderful but I was still afraid of Satan and such mumbojumbo. I don't know about anyone else but just reading or watching about evolution and how everything is connected, is just wonderful. Human and a flower, even if it's a small percentage it's still amazing. The complexity, the huge amount of evidence and a rich theory...I'm speechless. I've researched a lot of religions (mostly the larger religions at the time...except Buddhism. And a few older) this is the conclusion I've come to. It's nice to actually see from both sides perspective. I had a hard time getting out of religion and but now I feel at home. Everyone should learn to see from each others perspectives and learn about one and another. I love discussions and I love arguments. You learn, you defend your knowledge and you learn to see from new views. 450. Laurie Robillard Hmm! I smell the lex regia concept of the Roman system. In one place the le gislative , the executive, and the judicial powers. 451. Randy @Epicurus and all others... Pigs and cows are extremely sensitive and intelligent. BUT, I love beef and bacon... Hey, for now, anyway, I am at the top of the food chain. There is an ancient Zen dialogue. One of which I have written before... The student says to the Master, "Eating flesh is wrong. Animals are our brothers. I will not eat my brothers." The Master responds, "Why should we not eat our brothers?" Think about that. We are all animals on this planet... it is horrible to eat pigs and cows but they are delicious. Also, because pigs and cows are so prized by homo-sapiens, we domesticate them and protect them and "husband" them, Maybe it's not too bad of a life for them? Evolutionarily speaking... Think about all of the plants that we love to eat, and that we protect and serve for our food source... I think the plants totally love that... Evolutionarily, they hit the jackpot. We serve them and protect them and refine their genetic lines. 452. Charles B. Laurie Robillard: God knows my heart an my motive; to know my name is written in Heaven in the Book of Life is beyond all wealth or glory or accolades or degrees this world could ever bestow. Both my kids are probably genius I.Q. If I want them to not abandon their childhood "faith" I need to keep it real and sharp intellectually as well as genuine spiritually, so they know science and faith are indeed compatible, and not at all at odds. I want them to be able to say, "Both my mom and dad are Ph.D.'s and they're solid as a rock in their faith, so I can be as well!" The Apostle Paul was brilliant and a scholar's scholar; highly educated for his day. He stood before kings and the Roman Emperor as well as the peasants in the marketplace. He said, "I become all things for all people that I might gain some." Sometimes you need credentials to turn the ear of the same. Ronald Reagan talked at length with Gorbachev about faith in God -- who else could do that except another president and get away with it? Very few. Yes, I agree with you that we need to increase correct religious faith, but a brilliant Christian scientist is more likely to influence another brilliant atheistic scientist than Billy Graham for Christ. We have far too few highly educated among us. If I can, let me be one that reaches out to ones like Dr. Randy. If a few letters behind my name help, then I'll do it! If I can. My ambition has always out-weighed my abilities, but I still want to try if I can. Dr. Randy: There is a real possibility of me getting at least a B.S. in archeology or even the masters degree from U.P. (University of the Philippines) in the near future. I want a PH.D. but my wife says "Get a masters first." Why not? I can study for my M.Th. also from a Christian seminary, but why not get an advanced degree in something I find exciting as well? I looked up the program tonight on line. Both my wife and I want another degree from U.P. If I could, I'd like to get my Ph.D. in archeology as well. All it takes is time and money and effort! Even if it takes a while, why not? I could study Biblical archeology nonetheless (perhaps for my thesis). I'd be as happy as a kid in a candy shop I think! A little paleontology would be very interesting too if that's an elected course I can take. Well, I'm hoping. My boy looooooooves dinos! Dr. Randy, you've never met a Ph.D. that was Christian? That's sad. I have. My Christian professors in history, and anthropology and Greek and Hebrew and communications and English lit. were all Ph.D. I think. It IS possible. Ya know, that was nice of you to say; I think I'd take a bullet for you too! my motive would be different, but the outcome would be the same: I'd go to Heaven; not so confident 'about your odds at the moment, but as long as there is breath in your lungs, there's hope of repentance. It would give you one more chance to change and to repent at least. Mr. Razor: Thanks! the big "J." is my all-time hero and friend, as well as my Lord. Nothing about him "sucks" even if you don't agree with the rest of the story and disagree with everything else. I appreciate it! Someone mentioned the "voice" of God thing. I have an answer to that. The Bible tells us to "judge" every spirit to see if they are from God or not, that means some are not, and they DO come our way, Christian or not! "Kill your kids" is NOT the voice of God, I'm sorry. There's no if's and's or but's about that! God's voice is gentle, but ironically not very often. It's very purposeful. Our own voice is the most common (as we think to ourselves), "I want a sandwich for lunch." But, there ARE voices that are demonic in nature and often use the "first person" when they speak, such as "I'm going crazy!" Or "I'll never be truly loved by anyone, so why even try?" etc. Unless you keep close to God's heart, you can sometimes confuse the three. If you suspect a mental suggestion is "demonic" in nature, you can say (even as a non-Christian): "I forbid you in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth to use the first person!" and when it switches to "You're going crazy!" You say, "Oh, no I'm not! You're outta here!" Demons can temp/taunt/distract/hinder/torment/persecute a Christian (especially if we don't stop it cold), but they can't stay permanently when we "evict" them purposely from our lives/minds/families. It does take effort, sometimes, however. Special note: A true Christian has an advantage as the Word of God says that we hear God's voice and will not follow another. When we have that "suspicion" in our heart a thought or feeling or suggestion is not of God, we can check it with prayer. Note: If any one want to know more about that, let me know and we can e-mail personally. Charles B. 453. Charles B. P.S. Bacon is yummy, you're right! Korea loves their pork; so hard to eat well here sometimes. 454. Laurie Robillard To all Humans are to act and everything else in our world is to be acted upon. Rocks are to be gathered to build fences and houses etc. Animals for our food clothing etc. However it does not mean that we can abuse the animals and cause suffering. We should take care of them. The animals are also here to teach us. Once there was a trapper and when he checked on his trap he found a male bear trapped and the female by his side with a tear down her eye. He quit being a trapper. A scientist was sent to the north for three months to study wolves. A female wolf got injured and found an abandoned cabin for shelter against the cold , wind. This scientist watched a male wolf for three months bring a fresh kill every day for the female as she wasn't able to hunt. When the scientist got picked up after three months he informed the project management about this injured wolf and help was sent to help the wolf. Yes animals are capable of compassion in some instances. However a female dog will mate with several dogs and have a litter of different breeds. Is that moral as we know it? Morals are taught by parents culture community school church government. However the light of Christ which is given to all as a free gift allows us to recognize truth. Is murder bad or good? Is stealing bad or good? Until greed gets in the way and blinds and desensitizes. 455. ilovemyselfmorethani @Randy "It doesn’t matter whether you are a fundamentalist or not, you support a HORROR CULT, filled with the destruction of the human, primate, species." -- Really?? Soup Kitchens can do that to "human, primate, species"? Doctor, you need to get yourself checked. Seriously. 456. D-K @Ilovemyself:Couple of things; "Yes “god is confined in a certain way”, in the sense that He cannot go against His nature" Wouldn't that make him not-omnipotent? Isn't the whole christian system of belief based on the notion that God is omnipotent? "Then cite them, and illustrate how they are moral acts, and I’ll try to show you why I’m not convinced" This statement illustrates bias, perhaps you should re-phrase. "but none that would seem to show an animal’s ability to perceive right from wrong" Please enlighten me, how would you be able to distinguish an animal percieving right and wrong? Do you expect them to tilt their head, cartoonishly scratch it, excuse themselves for a moment of ethical contemplation? Lastly, you claim morality to be objective, but that would imply there would be no such thing as a moral or ethical dilemma, everything would be clear-cut. Are you suggesting that? Also, if morality was objective and controller by god, he'd need to have a way of answering any moral pseudo-dillema at him, or it'd have to be written in the bible. How do you solve moral psuedo-dilemma's that aren't specified in the bible and without having direct acdces to god's answer? 457. D-K wow.. typo-palooza up there, forgive my quickness of hand. 458. ilovemyselfmorethani @ D-K "Wouldn’t that make him not-omnipotent? Isn’t the whole christian system of belief based on the notion that God is omnipotent?" -- Just the same way that, in the Christian Worldview, God cannot create a square-circle, or married-bachelor. Those things are illogical, and a perfect being cannot devolve into imperfection. A perfect being cannot be immoral, that would make him imperfect. "This statement illustrates bias, perhaps you should re-phrase." -- Which is why I said "try". If I couldn't then I will concede. When I conceded our previous debate, that doesn't mean I will now doubt the historicity of Jesus. I don't think anyone here is not biased. No one will be changing anyone else's worldview here. But I will concede defeat when I have to. You know this, I've conceded defeat to you once. "Please enlighten me, how would you be able to distinguish an animal percieving right and wrong? Do you expect them to tilt their head, cartoonishly scratch it, excuse themselves for a moment of ethical contemplation?" -- I have no idea. An act that would clearly seem to go against evolutionary pressures would be a start. Iv'e explained why I'm not convinced by the tool-sharing example. "Lastly, you claim morality to be objective, but that would imply there would be no such thing as a moral or ethical dilemma, everything would be clear-cut." -- No, it wouldn't mean that. Math is objective, but everything isn't so clear-cut. We would have to be infinitely smart for it to be that way. "Also, if morality was objective and controller by god, he’d need to have a way of answering any moral pseudo-dillema at him, or it’d have to be written in the bible. How do you solve moral psuedo-dilemma’s that aren’t specified in the bible and without having direct acdces to god’s answer?" -- I don't answer moral dilemmas by looking at the bible, but I know fundamentalists do. I think it's O.K to look for guidance from the bible, but not answers. If we had access to all the answers somewhere, we wouldn't bother trying to understand anything. So no, I don't agree with the premise of your question. 459. Randy @ilovemyself.... Charity? Every evil organization that ever existed on this planet, always gave richly to charity. That's how you fool the sheep, by pretending to be "charitable"... c'mon, you know this... The Nationalist Socialist Party had some of the best soup kitchens! There is NOTHING good about chrisianity. Nothing. 460. kalampok I have one question to those how believe in creator : how do you know that the creator exists? 461. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil kalampok: That's a great question. I have asked it many times and usually the question is ignored or the answers given are something meaningless like "The Bible says it is the word of god, so god must exist." Theists usually evade direct questions that require a direct answer or anything resembling verifiable facts. Perhaps because they have none of those? They claim to be honest and moral, but when questioned fairly and honestly, they show themselves to be deceitful, evasive, and cowards morally, intellectually, and physically. 462. ilovemyselfmorethani @ James Whoever says he believes God exists because "The Bible says it is the word of god, so god must exist.", is a nutjob. 463. Vlatko @ilovemyselfmorethani, Do not direct your comments personally and stop calling people nutjobs. I had to edit your last comment. And you've been asked a question: How do you know your creator exists? 464. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil ilovemyselfmorethani I am not a nutjob, but you certainly are. Unlike you, I am not a liar and a moral and ethical coward. You, like all other internet cowards, hide behind your keyboard to say things you would never dare say to a person's face. But then, most theists are liars, hypocrites, and fools. Usually, all three at once. 465. Prix @Charles B. That someone who mentioned voiced in head was me. You still stand firm on demons being inside some people and doing harm to others and themselves. So tell me what is the gods voice? What if when you think Gods voice is gentle AND it doesn't make sense for God to say "kill your kids"? If God has higher purpose then you or me have no clue of it. Maybe it was a test for the mother to show how much she really loves God? Simply put neither you or me or anyone else can tell right from wrong when it's voices coming and telling you. It's illogical and wrong. Even in the Bible there are several references which no not make sense and only leave "It's for higher purpose". There is no way anyone can know ANYTHING about God. Also if we look at psychology, we sometimes can't even trust our minds. Our minds can be tricked easily...btw I'm a magician and if anyone wants to ask I have this to tell. Talking with dead\future telling\mind reading and so forth are just simple tricked covered with dramatic acting. Everyone can be fooled but people have sooooo much faith in stuff that they tend to brush away the facts and the criticism. NOW! Why am I writing this? Well, fooling yourself is quite easy. Anyone can be tricked, religions are both old age and modern age tricks. Having faith in something and then just to find out faith is only based of...nothing and to find that faith is a lie\trick...That feeling just crushes ones perception of reality and for most of the people they can't even imagine it. To think that talking with an invisible friend and that might give you the truth is just....hmm I can't think of any good word here. Also, If there are people around the world thinking they have a special invisible person for them and it tells them the truth, there is conflict. What if Hinduism\Buddhism\Judaism\Islam\Sikhism\Ancient Greek religion\Jainism\Norse religion or any of them are right instead of Christianity? Yes, we call Ancient Greek religion now a mythology...what if all of the religions are mythologies? Or what if all of those religions are true? When you ask questions about religion (any religion) you will always find yourself going in circles and thinking "I'm going forward". Wait, what if you weren't a Christian? You would obviously tell your kids to go after the religion YOU THINK IS TRUE. PS: Christianity and Islam didn't get to be such huge religions without nothing right? Must've done good to the world and spread out through peace right? I think you know the answer to that. War, forcing people to convert, making them afraid of the devil, total control of people and making everyone paranoid about everything around them. 466. Prix Sorry for the double post but I can't edit, I forgot to mention one last thing. Sorry about this Vlatko. I forgot to mention that instead of trying to figure out if there are demons talking or God talking. Just get help from psychologists instead. I'm quite sure none can tell the voice of a demon from voice of God. Let's take this as an example. Let us say demons exist, demons can behave nice but are doing selfish things to cause someone else great deal of misery. Or they can do like in exorcism the movie. Gods voice can tell you to do something that might go against society standards because no one knows what Gods purpose might be. We can complicate things even more. It's a spiral of confusion and paranoia. We also know God can make good people poor and have hellish life just to test them. Or God can make a true believer rich and wealthy with happiness and love. Satan can do all of these things as well. Hellish life just because they would turn away from God. Make them rich and wealthy with happiness and even love. Don't tell me "It depends on if you believe enough and if you do your work in a way to benefit humanity and build your relationship with God" You can invert that as well. There is no way out of this madness...You can try to answer it but it's so simple to reverse it. Paranoia is the easiest way to make people do the wrong things even if they might seem correct at that time. Humans always have thought themselfs to have big meaning in their life and long to hear "You are great! You are higher than other. You follow the truth and you're so kind and friendly. You will have a special place in (insert any religions good place)" No one in the whole world cares what you do and don't do. Humans think universe revolves around them yet universe doesn't care about humans at all. Universe isn't just here for us to look and think "wow, someone made all of this for ME!". @ilovemyselfmorethani Did I get an reply by the way? Can't seem to find any. Anyway I'm going to move into this discussion. "– Just the same way that, in the Christian Worldview, God cannot create a square-circle, or married-bachelor. Those things are illogical, and a perfect being cannot devolve into imperfection. A perfect being cannot be immoral, that would make him imperfect." So from what I've gotten you believe in God but not Christian God(too many posts to read from so I apologize if i'm incorrect). If there is a God what came before it? If God is so perfect why this pain and suffering? If God exists why not directly put up a sign saying "Alright everyone here I am". If God exists why so many religions? Why can't their be many Gods? If God is so perfect why even apply him\her\it to our logic? That's waste of time because there is nothing that can be absolutely perfect. If God does exist why even create us? It's like he\she\it is just watching people suffer\let unjustice go on\starvation and so forth. If people have to trust themselves (Which can be very harmful for everyone) to find the true answer how do we know it's the right answer? Also, if we take God from the Bible. That god is not perfect. There are several instances where God is disappointed. Let's take Adam and Eve, a perfect God would've KNOWN that they would eat the apple. God must've control over time? God must see everything in the future and in the past? One last question that might sound silly. Can God create a huge rock that not even he\she\it can lift? The answer is paradox. Now if you say our logic can't be applied to Gods ways...well we are all doomed. The knownledge we have gained is quite useless. Even trying to understand gods ways are useless, to think WHY god does something is useless. God is not logical because the word we use for logic is different than Gods or there might not even be logic in God. Even saying "No, there is logic in God"...no there isn't. Logic doesn't apply to God. There is no such thing as perfect then because something being perfect needs to be explained in logic. No...logic...at...all "– Then cite them, and illustrate how they are moral acts, and I’ll try to show you why I’m not convinced. Saying “many many experiments we have done showing…” doesn’t really amount to anything at this point." Is it that hard to see? Most of the animals have standards and know right from wrong. Even apes and monkeys know what friends are and who the enemies are. They can see the difference between good and bad. There are documentaries on this site telling how animals can co-operate and do good for one and another. Look at bees, they work and if someone isn't working the right way they throw that person out because it doesn't HELP everyone. Sharks can eat fish easily but there are fish that clean them up and the sharks don't attack them because they benefit. Morals are everywhere, co-operation is the key for it. But yes, there are several experiments done that show animals knowing right from wrong. Just search the web and you'll find those experiments. At the moment it's quite late and I've been writing for a long time. Sleepy time. 467. Randy @Prix Yes. Yes, indeed. You spelled it out very well. I would also add, to your excellent essay, that this "god" as he is supposed to be perfect, is an unattainable goal for human animals. It is an alien monster. Satan, on the other hand, (Hades, or Dis, the gods below...), is a very HUMAN creature, full of lust and vengance, anger and imperfection. A very understandable god! Who among us has not felt these very human emotions? IF these gods actually existed... (and I do NOT believe that they do...) Satan would be the guy that I would hang with. This weirdo-god-dude is silly and a little too homo-phobic for me. 468. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy "Charity? Every evil organization that ever existed on this planet, always gave richly to charity. That’s how you fool the sheep, by pretending to be “charitable”… c’mon, you know this…" -- So you're saying they cynically use soup kitchens to be able to rule the world? Geez, Mr. Doctor with a Phd who knows all about History and can build satellites to spy on my illicit love-affair, that's not such a bright comment there. 469. ilovemyselfmorethani @Vlatko "Do not direct your comments personally and stop calling people nutjobs. I had to edit your last comment." -- Really? I shouldn't direct my comments personally? This rule for theists only? No "nutjobs"? What about 'dillweeds'? "And you’ve been asked a question: How do you know your creator exists?" -- Which I will get right to. Cmon, so many questions, so little time. 470. Randy This is Vlatko's house. We obey his rules. You need to step off, son. 471. ilovemyselfmorethani @ James Smith whatever "I am not a nutjob, but you certainly are." --Oh yes you are! "Unlike you, I am not a liar and a moral and ethical coward. You, like all other internet cowards, hide behind your keyboard to say things you would never dare say to a person’s face." -- O.K. Mr. Fortune-teller man! "But then, most theists are liars, hypocrites, and fools. Usually, all three at once." -- ...imbecilic, unintelligent, nonsensical... You are all 6 at once! 472. ilovemyselfmorethani @kalampok "I have one question to those how believe in creator : how do you know that the creator exists?" -- You usually will be born thinking a creator exists. If you sincerely want to have a relationship with God, and you call out to Him, He'll make you know He exists. Obviously this will all seem subjective to the next person -- as it should be. But there are arguments for the existence of God. You can find them out for yourself. 473. Achems Razor @ilovemyself: You should listen to yourself kid, all a-ranting and a-raving, I tell you there is a god, and so on. You are sounding like a child having a temper tantrum, and you are dissing Vlatko and other people on top of that. You have basically just scr*wed yourself!! 474. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "Did I get an reply by the way? Can’t seem to find any. Anyway I’m going to move into this discussion." -- I'm sorry, I didn't see your question. I will try to answer some of your questions, but will skip the ones I think will be easy to find out for yourself. "So from what I’ve gotten you believe in God but not Christian God" -- No. I believe in the Christian God. "If there is a God what came before it? " -- Nothing. "If God is so perfect why this pain and suffering?" -- More opportunity for people to choose to be moral. Pain and suffering makes better people. Pain is also relative; for a child, that flu-shot may be the worst pain it has ever felt, but her mother knows better. She knows that the pain is inconsequential and needed for her child's own good. We also experience pain and suffering when we do not get what we want. But if we got whatever we wanted, how would that make moral people? You also cannot limit pain and suffering. Imagine it being limited, then we would experience pain and suffering from every trip of the foot -- that would be the worst pain ever. You will see people asking God "why God why!? My foot hurt, why!?" "if God exists why not directly put up a sign saying “Alright everyone here I am”" -- Divine coercion. If there was a sign in the sky saying "I'm real! --God" People will all act differently. God wants people to be holy and moral our of their own free-will. "Also, if we take God from the Bible. That god is not perfect. There are several instances where God is disappointed. Let’s take Adam and Eve, a perfect God would’ve KNOWN that they would eat the apple. God must’ve control over time? God must see everything in the future and in the past?" -- There are many answers to this that will be incredibly lengthy to explain. One is "Molinism". Maybe you can start with that, and then learn about the different kinds or branches of it. "One last question that might sound silly. Can God create a huge rock that not even he\she\it can lift? The answer is paradox." -- Not silly at all! To do so would be an illogical feat. God cannot be illogical, because being illogical is an act done by imperfect beings. This is just like asking if God can be immoral. No He can't. Because an immoral being is an imperfect one. You'll say, then He isn't all-powerful since there is something He cannot do. What God cannot do serve to define who He is (albeit limitedly). He isn't illogical, and imperfect. "Is it that hard to see? Most of the animals have standards and know right from wrong. Even apes and monkeys know what friends are and who the enemies are. They can see the difference between good and bad. There are documentaries on this site telling how animals can co-operate and do good for one and another. Look at bees, ......" -- I don't see anything here that shows animals being able to perceive morality. Again, all of these things/examples you just mentioned can be explained away as actions influenced by evolutionarily built in pressures. 475. Randy @Achems How are you, my friend? 476. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Achems Razor "You are sounding like a child having a temper tantrum" -- You don't see the temper tantrums of your fellow atheist friends? Selective aren't ya. "dissing Vlatko and other people on top of that." -- Huh? How? 477. Randy I can't resist this... ilovemyself wrote: "– I don’t see anything here that shows animals being able to perceive morality. Again, all of these things/examples you just mentioned can be explained away as actions influenced by evolutionarily built in pressures..." And just WHAT do we respond to, exactly? Evolutionary pressures, I would imagine. I mean, we have science to back that up... Hmmmm... still you seem to be clinging to that "Divine Spark" comcept that is entirely silly. You need to step off of THAT, son. 478. Achems Razor @Randy: I am fine, have been building up my glutemus maximus, (LOL) I kid you not, am working on my home gym trying to get ripped again, your fault (LOL) 479. Epicurus @ilovemyself i did give you a couple links and the rest is up to you. if you refuse to look up whether scientists think animals behave morally or not that is not my problem. you are the one insisting on staying ignorant. if you want something to show animals know right from wrong yet you wont take the studies done as examples would you please create an experiment where we could find out if animals have the ability to discern right from wrong. you keep saying you dont think they can...why dont you think that? what would convince you? the rest of your response to me sounds like it came form a child and doesnt deserve me picking it apart but i will restate somethings you brushed over. how do you explain people of other religions claiming to have experiences like you have had but witnessing other gods or coming to the conclusion of a different religion? how are you so sure your experiences are real and not just your imagination or a misinterpretation based on your bias? im not saying your experiences ARENT real so dont try brushing it off by asking me that ridiculous question....i want to know how you can be sure your experiences are real and that of a hindus for example are not real or are misinterpretations? you said "Just the same way that, in the Christian Worldview, God cannot create a square-circle, or married-bachelor. Those things are illogical, and a perfect being cannot devolve into imperfection. A perfect being cannot be immoral, that would make him imperfect." those are problems of semantics. if god couldnt deviate from perfection he wouldnt have been able to create anything with a flaw (humans) anything from god would have to be perfect based on your argument. however you will just say that this rule ONLY applies with the morality issue and nothing else. and that will be easy for you to say because everything you have said thus far has been off the top of your head out of your imagination like a child with a comic book character. its amusing. you said "you usually will be born thinking a creator exists. If you sincerely want to have a relationship with God, and you call out to Him, He’ll make you know He exists. Obviously this will all seem subjective to the next person — as it should be. But there are arguments for the existence of God. You can find them out for yourself." prove it...prove you are usually born thinking a creator exists and then explain why there are so many cultures that dont believe in a creator. the arguments for the existence of god are junk and easily refuted. actually i did a whole paper in philosophy of religion debunking every single one of them. my point is this....provide evidence for ANYTHING you are saying. provide evidence that animals dont know right from wrong. we have given you examples and links where people who study this for a living recognize that animals are recognizing right from wrong but you just cant seem to get it. you and your...sorry how many years of education in zoology? give it up, you look silly and have not brought anything forward other than sad apologetics to deflect attention away from everything asked to you. even when you answer, you give an answer (claim) and dont back it up with any evidence or logical reasoning as to why you would take that claim. like many have said, you come off as a child. 480. Randy @Achems Listen, I have an excersise (sp?) that is great for the gluts... LOL! I call it, "F*cking the Dumbell" I am sorry, Vlatko... You take a free-weight, like 20 pounds or so... maybe 40, depending on your fitness level, and you assume a position on the floor like you would a sit-up, with your legs folded up and your heels a few feet from your butt. With the weight, (or dumbell) on your hips, you crunch upwards like you were... well... maybe you get the idea... You can really feel the burn in your lumbar back and gluts... I'm just sayin' HAHAHA! If you were serious. But, you and I both know... chicks love the butt... LOL! 481. Randy I apologize for the use of the term "chicks"... I love women and, generally, I only use that word when I am given permission by them to do so. My wife doean't mind it, so I use it sometimes, but I understand that it is offensive to some women. I bow to you women, and give you great thanks... you are the keepers of the magic poonami, that I love so well... Please forgive me for using that word... 482. Prix @Randy Thank you, I can understand how ilovemyselfmorethani is not very understanding and tries in every way to provoke instead of trying to listen and understand what people have written to him before. He got a lot of responses and still didn't bother to look at them or at least not respond to them. Also, he's acting childish which I find kind of..ehhh.. Btw Randy I like to read your, Achems and I think last one is hate machine? Charles B. is memorable as well. So, thank you for the entertaining comments! Keep it up! @ ilovemyselfmorethani "When science finds out about everything there is to know about this universe, it will come to a dead end, and the answer will be “well that’s it folks, nothing else to see here”. I think the most fundamental question is ‘why are we here?’ And religion, as primitive and dogmatic it may be, at least tries to answer this question, while science will say that the question is meaningless." I stole this little comment while reading through your comments. So, forgive me I'm a little too late to reply to this. No, you don't know. No one can for see the future or what science will say about us. Also, you're saying you would STILL believe in what HUMANS wrote in the old ages just because science doesn't give you an answer to that? Even if all of them turn out to be lies? Based on nothing more than faith itself? Btw, have you seen Banned from the bible? It's right here on this site. I'm presuming you know by now that humans wrote with the help of "divine" power. I know by experience that people will lie thinking it might be good for someone. Even if it's a small lie. Now so many books that didn't make it into the new testament. That's just mind boggling! Humans wrote something that didn't make into new bible? What gives? Humans had a gathering and patched a book together for followers to read. And took out things that they thought didn't fit the holy book image. Dude, Nothing came before God? Isn't that an impossible feat by itself? Illogical? I don't know why but you answered some of the questions where I kinda know the answers you would provide. I mostly write what's on my mind directly. So you kind of picked the easy ones. Except the last two. If God has a sign saying I'm here was one of the easier ones. I knew the answer to that and your answer is exactly what I guessed you would write. In other words faith, if you were born into another religion you wouldn't believe in the Christian God. But what if you're completely wrong? What if other religions are right? I can tell you this, Zeus exists and the only way to see him is if you believe in him enough. The greek "mythology" is rich with religious stories about moral and Gods. What existed before the Zeus and the titans and all that? Nothing (same answer can be applied here). "– There are many answers to this that will be incredibly lengthy to explain. One is “Molinism”. Maybe you can start with that, and then learn about the different kinds or branches of it." Molinism, yep I've read through it shortly. See what I'm trying to say is, logic doesn't apply for God. You can just speculate without verifying. Yes, I did read about Molinism and the reference to Bible. You said it yourself didn't you? When people try to find answers to their questions in the Bible it's just silly? You wrote this yourself "I think it’s O.K to look for guidance from the bible, but not answers". It doesn't matter how you look at it, you can even take the bible and see the future with bible codes if you pick sentences out. Dude, the animals and morality...you just wrote the answer yourself. "influenced by evolutionarily built in pressures" That's what we humans do also. It's not like Animals follow humans with those smaller morals. We take their basic knowing of right and wrong and make it advanced. Hmm, i'll try to find some documentaries about this. But I think Epicurus gave you some links. "– Not silly at all! To do so would be an illogical feat. God cannot be illogical, because being illogical is an act done by imperfect beings. This is just like asking if God can be immoral. No He can’t. Because an immoral being is an imperfect one. You’ll say, then He isn’t all-powerful since there is something He cannot do. What God cannot do serve to define who He is (albeit limitedly). He isn’t illogical, and imperfect." Very nice answer. But what I was trying to get across was "there is no such thing as perfect". Even in mathematics you can NEVER be 100% sure about something. Even in math, so being perfect doesn't exist. There is no such thing as perfect, nothing will ever be perfect. You can get close it, of course, but never perfect. If God can be perfect and non-perfect in the same way and in the same place (monolism quote right? Wikipedia woohoo). Still there is no perfection in ANY of them. (now this will get confusing) If God was perfect at the same time he was perfect, he wasn't perfect. When God isn't perfect then...well he can't be perfect. You gave a good example, if I was perfect and if I died. I was not perfect. If I was perfect and immortal then i couldn't die. Still not perfect. Nothing is or ever will be perfect. Someone might want to start on a new theory instead of molinism and use the 11 dimensions. Really, I would be interested in that. Only problem is, it'll still be just speculation without any experiment, without any evidence, without anything. You seemed to take things in the wrong way, Vlatko isn't making rules only on religious people. That's ridiculous, the kind of paranoia I was talking about in my post which i wrote to Charles B. If you have some time to spend, just read that post of mine. Btw, that "why so much suffering" Well I meant religious people that waged wars in earlier history. I'm guessing that one is too easy to pick on as well right? It's because humans and their free will. hehe, it's like going around in circles. People fight thinking it's gods will and god doesn't give an answer so people die, get raped and looted. Yet, we blame it on humans. In reality religion was created by man and wage war so their religion can take over. Hope you reply! Have a nice day! 483. Randy @Prix I stopped responding to ilovemyself... he is a silly person. But you are quite interesting. Your writing seems to indicate that English is your second language... from what nation do you hail, my friend? Please do not take offense if I assume incorrectly... I totally "get" everything you write... and I struggle with languages other than English and I have GREAT respect for the rest of the world that is multi-lingual! However, if it is just that you type too fast, like me, and I am making an ass of myself please feel free to tell me so! 484. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus "you keep saying you dont think they can…why dont you think that? what would convince you?" -- See. This is what I've been saying. READ my response. Actually read it, and don't be glancing it over for things you can easily STRAWMAN. You would've seen that I HAVE given something that could convince me. When an animal does something that we consider moral, and does it seemingly in contradiction of evolutionary pressures. I have explained why I think the tool-sharing example and your other examples, STILL can easily be explained as being influenced by fundamental evolutionary pressures. Thats the response you give when you don't READ your opponents answers and just glance them over looking for things that you can easily strawman. "im not saying your experiences ARENT real so dont try brushing it off by asking me that ridiculous question…" -- That "ridiculous question" was trying to brush off, your ridiculous response, where you immediately accused me of pomp, feeling superior, feeling special -- just because I had an experience you believe to be false. So don't try making me look like an ass, when it was YOU who was the ass, and therefore deserved that "ass" response. "if god couldnt deviate from perfection he wouldnt have been able to create anything with a flaw (humans) anything from god would have to be perfect based on your argument." --NO. God wants to create Holy and Moral people. These attributes are dependent on free-will. No human can be holy and moral upon creation, they have to choose to be out of their own free-will. There is a reason why we don't call a tree, that provides us with it's fruit, generous. It's not like it can withold it's fruit. For the created, generosity and other moral attributes are dependent on free-will. As free-willed agents, we have the ability to choose to be immoral. "prove it…prove you are usually born thinking a creator exists and then explain why there are so many cultures that dont believe in a creator." -- An article in TIME magazine I once read saying that we are hardwired for believing in God. I'll try to remember the title and author. The cultures though that don't believe in a creator, interestingly believe in some sort of transcendent reality. "like many have said, you come off as a child." -- You only see me coming off as a child. But you don't see yourself or your friends when they clearly do it. That's because you're biased. I will leave your other questions. Wow, I've been having debates all around the internet. And if the atheists at sophisticated websites like Pharyngula were as... how should I say... smart as you guys (with the exception of one guy), there would be a significant reduction in the number of conversions to atheism. If you want a real debate, you should lose the adhominems and I'll be happy to seriously engage you. The problem is, you atheists start with adhominems, then hypocritically cry-afoul once it's shoved right back at you. "Oh he's acting like a child!". Oh please. 485. Randy I'm Sorry, Prix... I was going over your posts and I see that you have a strong grasp of English and even the vernacular... I think I spoke completely out of turn there... Please forgive me... 486. Epicurus @ilovemyself, you didnt respond to my question still about other peoples experiences about god that are different than yours. how you know yours are geniuine and theirs arent. and yes by saying you have had experience of a god is a pompous position. if people have to believe in a god but some like you get chosen for revelation that is either a bulls*** deal or you being delusional. your entire posts are made up of ad hominems. you don't respond to anything put towards you but try to show why you don't need to answer. if you claim the responses on those animals are "evolutionary pressures" maybe you could list them. for the hippo saving the impala from the crocodile, the apes sharing tools, or the puma looking after the baby monkey after eating its mother....could you give me the "evolutionary pressures". and realize that morality (from the view point of evolutionary psychology) is evolved. so you are committing a genetic fallacy. yes i do realize when my posts and others on here come off harsh and childish. it happens. and your last post before this one was like reading a child. in response to god wanting to create holy and moral people...prove it. there are many humans and things in nature that are flawed, how can you say something cant deviate from perfection yet make imperfect objects...remember god made adam and eve and expected them to behave yet they disobeyed (shouldnt he has known that) he also flooded the earth saying it was bad...he messed up twice. how can he know everything taht is going to happen yet claim people have free will...can you prove people have free will? you are making a claim for free will without providing evidence that free will is real. what about determinism? have you solved that puzzle and just withheld it from the rest of the world? better yet, why does he have to create humans and put them through this? what is the point? why did he decide to do this? when did he decide to do this? if he exists outside of time how is there moments of creation and decision for him? should i go through your posts and copy paste every ad hominem? dont accuse others of it. Point, Proof, Comment....try it out. 487. Randy Vlatko, let me axe you this... The descriptions of the documentaries that you post, are they all written by you? Because, I gotta say... a big WOW. Lots of admiration for your writing. I have been looking around the site and reading just the intros for your docs and I have been hugely impressed! You are a powerful smart man! I do NOT mean that in a gay way... although, I wouldn't kick you out of bed for eating crackers... I'm just sayin'... 488. Randy You know who I think is really cool? Batman. I believe that Batman created the Universe. He is cool and has a great cape and stuff... I totally think he rules the Earth. There is no argument. You can not dissuade me from this opinion. Batman is GOD! And there is MUCH more documentary evidence of his existance than there is of this christ person... (another superhero...) Hmmm... what were we talking about? So, I have THAT goin' on... 489. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil @ilovemyselfmorethani I repeat. What proof do you have of any god at all? You claim so many questions, so little time. Then answer just that one. Like other theists, you will evade that question like any other where you have no answer. I maintain, you are a moral, intellectual and ethical coward. You are a liar, a fool and a hypocrite. Prove you are not by answering a direct question. With id**** like you representing theism, is it any wonder it is regarded with derision and contempt by those capable of rational thinking? Either answer the first question or slink away like the cowardly hypocrite you are. 490. Laurie Robillard @Charles B. Sometimes you need credentials to turn the ear of the same. from Laurie I was not judging and rejecting you. I don't know enough about you to formulate such a judgement. I was asking a question to make sense of what was being said. I know God knows your heart and your motives and you sure don't owe me anything. I am grateful that you took the time to send me a note. I am very impressed that you stand up for the correct spelling of the name Jesus and that you let the world know that He is dear to you and if they have respect for a likable person such as you they will co-operate. I like your style because you connect. You teach in response to the statement that I seem to perceive from Randy and Mr. razor "I don't care how much you know until I know how much you care." You see you are already teaching and connecting without a PhD I am not against education. I have two children with university degrees myself. One in international business and he speaks Spanish,English, French and another who just finished teachers college and she landed a job in Alberta Aug 2010 teaching French immersion. I've encouraged my children to higher education and they have seen me study and improve myself taking courses all their lives. However I have four children and only two walk in my footsteps and keep the faith. The reason the other two are rebels without a cause is they feel values are restrictions and somehow they don't seem to have self worth the other two have. Smoking allows them to feel they are part of a group, smoking weed makes them feel accepted by their peers, drinking alcohol allows them to have a good time. God is not finished with them yet. Life is their teacher now. My atheist son who doesn't have higher education sends his two kids with me to church every Sunday. Why? His life is not as blessed as my other two faithful children. He goes from job to job and periods of not working same as his girlfriend. Education is not a priority for him. Now they are apart and the kids are introduced to various partners. My heart aches for my grandchildren who are very sweet and sensitive and know what is right and love God. Kids are not born with a set of instructions. Even Adam and Eve had wayward children and they themselves were instructed by angels and they walked and talked with God. You can only do the best you can. I understand social and economic systems. One may be grumpy and disagreeable with the elevator man or simply ignore him because he seems unimportant; but when the president of the corporation hops aboard, one's disposition and gentlemanly manner suddenly change. Material and social values become terribly important because they represent or symbolize or confer individual value. Does it mean that Ronald Ragan has more individual value? His position of influence and prestige allowed him to talk to Gorbachev. God is all powerful He chooses who, the place, the time to teach someone. If it wasn't Ronald Ragan it would have been someone else maybe a 19 year passenger on a plane. Knowledge does not save or convert it is the spirit. Almost from kindergarden, students are compared against each other. If graded on a curve, one gets a B because another got a D and vice-versa. Yet the B student may be a goof-off, a cramming artist with a lot of ability to find a takes shortcuts, whereas the d student may be really producing in terms of perhaps fewer talents. What is a grade? It becomes more than an indicator of performance. It carries social value. The family and society reward and punish based on these grades. The purpose of learning getting more education is to keep intellectually alive, to renew ourselves, to learn how to learn, how to adapt, how to change, what not to change. I think you are asking yourself "How can I best serve God and man?"going the second mile. That is great but you are already serving . Put value on where you are now because you are communicating value to all of us. You are a great Gospel salesman. You don't need a new coat to give the right impression. You have an attitude of love and regard for the human soul. People sense your whole soul integrity. 491. Charles B. Prix: Unless you believe there is a true God to listen to, then all arguments for hearing it correctly is a bit mute. The Word of God says that His sheep know His voice and will not follow another. The key word is HIS sheep. In Israel, many shepherds could mix their flocks and when it was time to shelter them for the night, each shepherd would call their own sheep individually by name, and as they passed between their legs into the fold, they would check their health. If I called out: "Big Ram! Come!" Then "Big Ram" would come, and I'd check him and let him pass into the fold. Then, "Mama Ewe! Come!" and she would come with her lamb and pass into the fold. Apparently they had names for hundreds, and the sheep would wait for their name to be called by their own shepherd. They wouldn't go to another shepherd even if someone called out: "Hey, you, Ram! Big Ram, come here!" Why? Because "Big Ram" knew the voice of his shepherd. He would come only to his shepherd's well-known voice. I know the voice of God, and if you don't then perhaps that is because you belong to another, hum? Sometimes God is indeed "silent" for many times when I would like an answer to a problem or situation, but other times His voice is more than clear. Occasionally, I've even had a long conversation with Him where I hear the mental "answer" to each question immediately for a whole conversation, but that's not very often and always for a purpose and usually for the purpose of prayer for someone or something. I suspect nothing I could say will mostly change your mind, but I just wanted you to know I had an answer, and a good one. 492. Charles B. Kalampok: How do I know that there is a "Creator?" God values "faith" in His followers. It has been proved that even those that had no doubt there was a God didn't always prove "faithful." Seeing may be "believing" but it does not mean "accepting"! Even if God was sitting visibly on a throne in Jerusalem (a future event that I believe will literally come to pass some day), there would be people like you and Dr. Randy that would hate Him all the more! Dr. Randy plans to flip Him off as he's being sent to Hell, and I'm hoping Dr. R. changes his mind before that time comes so the good Dr. doesn't have to go. To expound on this further, Jesus did miracle after miracle and was hated to the bone by the wicked-to-the-core Pharisees and Seduces, etc. The real question is not if I can prove to you there is a creator using whatever measure YOU choose, but even if I did, the real question is "Would you yield and trust Him if you knew for sure He was real?" I think not. A pillar of fire by night and a cloud of smoke by day leading the hard-hearted children of Israel couldn't keep them from rebellion and "doubt" in God's love and care in the wilderness. The rebellious have hopelessly "faithless" hearts it seems. I think we all have that nagging feeling in our hearts that God is real, and even a true "atheist" can't fully get rid himself of that gnawing feeling that he might be "wrong" after all. Can you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that God does NOT exist? 493. Charles B. IlovemyselfmorethanI: Wow! Chill, buddy! You're embarrassing me as a fellow "Christian". Very little we say as believers will be accepted here, but you have to do it calmly and respectfully. Vlatko's website is very generous, but I've seen him kick off hot-heads before (always Christians, sadly). I would change my pen name from something not so weird sounding, and then cool my jets and come back with a more level head. Don't be rude to the host. Trust me. You're being "counterproductive". Peace to you. 494. Charles B. Laurie: That was an awesome letter. Thanks! We were posting at the same time. I have it saved in my e-mail and will re-read it again later. I had such a bad day at work (really quite depressing). Do you mind saying a prayer for me if you feel lead to do so this evening? Then next few months are key in making major career choices. I had the thought cross my mind: "Ask Laurie to pray for you." even before I read your letter. :-) If your willing, I'd appreciate it. 495. Randy @Charles I am sorry you had a bad day... do you want ME to pray for you? There will be blood involved... And James! Wow! You blasted my man Charles really hard! I agreed with everything you said but, holy Batman! The poor guy has had a hard day! 496. Randy @James... I shouldn't say anything, I have been just as hard on Charles in the past... Hmmm... that sounded gay... Sorry Charles and James... 497. Abrahams Son Again, their is no way to prove or disprove the existence or absence of any type of "God" as we are all individuals with our on experiences. The only important question becomes how we respond to the each other's personal belief. For Atheist your "belief system" is your interpretation of the world which you are able to experience. Make no mistake, this is a belief system in the same way all religions are based on a belief system. We only have access to what information our senses provide us and our minds allow us to interpret. We would all be better off accepting this as our "fate" and go from there but thats just my "life experience opinion". 498. Charles B. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil: You made me laugh! Talking to myself? If I were the one talking to myself, looks like I'd do a better job of it when I really wanted to hear an answer! I've found that only the devil is a "babble on" and God choose His words precisely and very timely, and hardly ever on OUR timetable. And what about "failure of prayer"? Well, if you're willing to allow "answered prayer" as proof of God existence, then great! I've seen a lot of that in my lifetime! I've seen God heal of cancer, heart disease, and other doctor-verified illnesses. Those are just the "physical" answers to prayers that I've seen. The ones such as, "Lord, guide Julie tonight as she makes a hard decision about her family's financial situation" is a little harder to verify. But, to be specific, my nephew was planning to commit suicide, and God woke his sister up and she prayed all night for him! He later said he had the gun to his head, but changed his mind. Now isn't it just a lovely coincidence that his sister was so "wacky" as to have prayed all night for him on the same night he was planning to "do it"! My pastor in Arkansas felt lead to pray for one of his congregation in Iraq. Sincerely. Earnestly. Desperately. He later asked that young man when he came home "What happened on this day at this time?" The young man said that he had just entered a house with people in it, and was about to leave when he noticed a closet that he check and it was filled with weapons! They fired on him when he found the closet, but he escaped unharmed in the firefight. Now isn't that a coincidence that the very day that he needed God's protection the most, his pastor in Arkansas was praying for him? James, I've even met people (personally) that have talked with angels and I've talked with a man who's mother-in-law was raised from the dead after prayer and had a specific message from God for a sinning leader in the church. I even have a personal friend that died and met Jesus (twice). But, surely none of that would serve as "proof" to someone that has already made up his mind that there is no God. Or would it? When I hear God's voice, rarely is He telling me what I really want to do. If asks me to fast and pray, I really hate that! That's not fun. Prayer for someone is hard work and sometimes exhaustingly long. "Blind faith" in anything, say like a "rock," is fruitless and worthless, but enlightened and genuine faith in the One true God is never wasted. It yields righteousness now, and eternal life in the life to come. Good night. I had a rough day. Not in such a good mood. Brazil, eah? I hear God is relaly moving big time down there! Just go to church, man. Get healed, get saved, loose that "faithless" heart of yours! Peace to you. Charles B. 499. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil @Randy Maybe he has had a bad day. I wonder why god has not protected such a "good christian" from all of that? I'd also be interested in how the "prayer worked for him. Considering that the "success" rate for prayers is somewhere around 0.01%, far less than even random chance would dictate. Yes, I know the excuse is "sometime god says "no". But doesn't the bible say, "With faith, nothing is impossible"? And what about the "Faith as small as a mustard seed" bit? I suspect many theists, deep down, don't really have much faith. Otherwise, why would they need to evade direct questions and make up weak excuses for their religion. Yes, "god does work in mysterious ways". Those ways are often inconsistent and contradictory, too. No wonder so many evasions and excuses are used to deflect attention from direct challenges. "Do not tempt the lord, thy god" How can one tempt an omnipotent, omniscient deity? When one asks the most simple, logical questions, the entire fragile construction of religion collapses like a toothpick house. You will notice how few even attempt to answer my questions. Well, when you have no facts or logic to bolster your position, it's better to pretend the question was never asked. LMAO! 500. Charles B. Dr. Randy: You made me laugh too! I'll pass on any prayers that involve "blood". Thanks, but no thanks! 501. Randy @Abrahams Son: Well, the thing is, our personal experiences mean nothing. They are a grain of salt in the vast ocean of human experience. You must study as much of the history of the world as you can and read every piece of information that humans ever wrote... Because there is SO much more in this world than you could ever hope to see and live in your tiny life-time. You and I are insignificent motes of dust; we barely exist. I find great comfort in that... 502. Randy And Charles! Dude, you are killing me with your talk about angels and god moving around and such... I have a hard time defending you when you talk all crazy-insane like that! Listen, you and I have talked about this before, I do not respect the bible as any authority in this world. It is a novel, like "Lord of the Rings" or any Batman comic... Actually, 66 novels all bundled together and written by hundreds of cranky men with sand in their shorts. 503. Charles B. James: We can't expect "Heaven" on Earth now, or Heaven would hold nothing to look forward too. Bad days come to us all; I just have something better to look forewad too eventually. Prayer worse odds than "chance"? Well, if you're praying for something that easily obtained by "chance" then why pray? But if you're saying that the "miraculous" happens 0.01% of the time when Chrstians pray, then great! That's good news! I think I'll do some tonight before I hit ths sack. For you and Dr. R. 504. Charles B. Well, I've yet to personally meet an angel or Jesus Face to face yet, but I'm willing. Would sound a bit wacky if I didn't believe it myself I suppose. Dr. R. I sure wish you were on our side. :-) Ok. Truly. Good night. 505. Randy @Charles B. I will pray for you, too! I just need to find a black goat... hmmm... 506. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil @Charles B. You'll "pray for me" You don't care about offending people do you? Your "praters are as offensive to me as my direct questions that are unanswerable are to you. Tell you what, if I knew a couple of devil worshipers would it be OK to ask them to sacrifice a baby or two for you? What arrogant people you theists are. "God is big in Brazil"? Obviously, you know nothing about Brazil. I know hundreds of people here. Maybe 1% take religion seriously. Church attendance of all kinds is down so much that That there are two that have closed just in my neighborhood. Even of the people I know that do attend services, I suspect some are doing so for social, political, or business reasons. So learn something about what you're talking about before you post more silly statements. But then truth and reality are not conducive to faith are they? Sorry that I won't be able to respond to any more silliness here, but I am going to Canada for a while. Packing, farewell stuff and so on are taking my time. Maybe you can spend some of yours educating yourself and learning to think rationally about religion? 507. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil @ Everyone Sorry that I won’t be able to respond to any more silliness here, but I am going to Canada for a while. Packing, farewell stuff and so on are taking my time. Maybe you theists can spend some of your time educating yourself and learning to think rationally about religion? 508. Achems Razor @Charles B: As you said to @Kalampok: You believe that your God will be sitting on a throne in Jerusalem some day? Well he, or she, or it, better get his rear in gear, and do that as soon as possible, at least before the Yellowstone national park that is actually a giant volcano decides to erupt again, sending the world into a global catastrophic event, (a mass extinction event) as it did 700,000 years ago. There are signs it might become highly active again. Or maybe the one that might precede that, is one that is happening as we speak, the loosing of the earths magnetic shield and the reversal of the magnetic poles. not counting the Earths 5 mass extinction events that already happened, how many times is your so called God going to keep doing that? He ain't a very good builder! Charles. 509. Randy Yes, Achems, the Super Volcanos! Very cool stuff! Mass extinctions are just "par for the course" in the Earth's history. She just shrugs it off... life goes on. And, the reversal of the magnetic poles? That is some serious sh*t... I mean, it's happened already a couple of times in the geological history of the planet, and seems to be creeping back to another shift soon... But! Can you imagine how devastating it would be to us, now? I mean, no electronics would work, electricity, as we use it, would simply... STOP! And Epicurus, I apologize for earlier when you wrote this poignant essay about morality and I came back with, "Pigs and cows are delicious!" What a drooling i***t I seemed to be there, and I completely missed your point like a total whanker... 510. D-K Honey, I'm ho- oh holy hell.. You people sure are prolific. Seems the discussion is over now though.. Too bad. 511. Randy @D-K Well if you going to sleep like a normal human then you are going to miss out on some drama! LOL! 512. GOD You are all wrong, but keep the guesses coming. Know what u need to know close your mind..know, then ask yourself why you know what u know and then and only then u will truly know. Sincerely, GOD 513. Randy @GOD U R 14... do some homework! 514. Prix @Randy Haha, no need to apologize to me. You're married so I'm guessing you're older than me. So, no need for apologies sir. Yes, English is my second language. I was born in India and moved to Sweden. So I know Hindi, Urdu, punjabi, Swedish and English. I can speak and understand a few other languages but not as good as the ones I wrote before. I know I don't use advanced words, it's mostly because I'm not used to writing in English. Also, I like it simple so everyone can read and understand. @ilovemyselfmorethani "If you want a real debate, you should lose the adhominems and I’ll be happy to seriously engage you. The problem is, you atheists start with adhominems, then hypocritically cry-afoul once it’s shoved right back at you. “Oh he’s acting like a child!”. Oh please." I've read your comments before and you were really acting like a child. No one is being bias when writing you acted that way. Because they can obviously read what you have written. Also the "hypocritically cry-afoul", not everyone does that. Even you acted that way! It's like you're not even examining yourself and labeling others for such things. That's another thing that is quite childish. Sorry if that might seem a little to "bias" to write that, but if you were someone else and looked at your replies you would understand. @ Charles B. I'm sorry, I don't consider that as a good answer. You took a psychical example and threw it in a direction that cannot be explained. We can examine why the sheep listen to the Shepard, we can examine even how come the sheep react that way and know where to find their master. Take that example and put it into God now. It doesn't work, everyone can hear voices if they really want to. Even I hear voices, no one can comprehend Gods motives so to presume "oh that's the answer" just because something happens by chance is just not going to work with logic. Even animals mix voices, for example horses. Even if you make a noise that is not close to what a predator might make, they react. Their insticts say "listen carefully! It might be something, try analyzing it. How does a lion sound like?" That might not resemble our minds but they think in very simple ways. So if we think "oh what was that? Was that God? Analyze it, ignore the chances and then believe in it. I know it's god because I've been brought up believing in God so there is a God" I've always found it intriguing when humans take examples they cannot understand(not saying you don't) as an example for higher power. Humans have done that through out ages. I've got loads of them but they can never fit in with God. I mean think about it, even science doesn't always rely on math. They need psychical evidence and experiments to make sure it's correct. If I don't know the voice of God? Well no one knows the voice of God. What if you're just fooling yourself with it? Quite interesting what people can do with their minds right? Fooling themselves into thinking they have a "Shepard" when they actually don't? There is no way of truly confirm that the voice you're hearing is God. Logically speaking, it's you who believe in God so much that you hear voices. Come on, if I started to worship Zeus and there is a "good" voice telling me what good deeds to perform, does that mean Zeus exists? Let me guess, you get answers sometimes that you go "Wow! Is that really how?" Everyone gets surprised when they think they have come up with a good explanation. Like for example Einstein, he must've felt that way when he wrote theory of relativity. It's nothing new, everyone gets surprised whenever they discover something in a different way. There is always a good feeling when you reaffirm your belief. To think all of what you've dedicated your life to is just a lie, no human-being can endure that easily. Think about it, each and every "voice" you've heard must be a good voice. Even if it might sound harmful one way or another you will feel good because you're just reassuring yourself into believing "Yes, God is there for me". Everyone likes to be special, kids always love to see themselves as center of the world. Religion is childish in that way. To think "I'm special! I'm the one hearing this!". It's common among us humans to think we are special. Also, no one wants to be evil. To think "I'm doing good for the world" must be a great feeling. Well, what if you're actually doing harm? As far as I've seen religions go, it can do a little good and A LOT OF HARM. And you have so much strength in your faith that all of what I write will go to no good use. You'll just think "You can't understand because you don't truly believe", that kind of thought only goes around circles. Look at the circle here. If you don't believe in God then you can't hear his voice. If you do believe in god but can't hear his voice then you need to have more faith. There is no way out of this circle, religion always goes around circle. Never ending spiral. 515. Randy @Prix Well, I have much, much respect for your knowledge of world languages! I humbly bow to you... It is something I always aspired to! 516. Laurie Robillard @ Charles B. I have an idea that you need to watch the movie A Man for All Seasons. I think it is an excellent movie. I saw it in two great personalities who demonstrate this first principle of private victories preceding public victories. Sir Thomas More was the man who opposed King Henry V111 in his desire to divorce his wife and marry Anne Boleyn. For some reason it violated his conscience, and he would not take a particular oath of succession to the king. Because he was a man of such honesty and integrity, his influence, even in silence, assisted in disrupting things in the British Empire.. Eventually he was condemned to die, and right there at the guillotine he looked right at the anxious, hesitating executioner and said, "Do not begrudge your office. You only send me to God." Then Archbishop of Canterbury spoke up, "Oh are you so sure of that, Sir Thomas?" Sir Thomas answered , "God would not refuse one so blind." In other words, his total commitment and faith resided in the unseen God. That was the oath he had made in the various private battles of his life. The other fascinating character in then movie was Richard Rich. His life became totally buffeted as compared to More who led a life anchored and true and powerful, and very very influential. 517. D-K @Pissed: several reasons. Great qualitym even when streaming, quick buffer speeds, very versatile player and loads on any browser that has flash. The 72/54 minute problem can be circumvented for those who are familiar with google. 518. Charles B. James Smith: You need to shut your faithless mouth! How dare you call me a liar! That was unbelievably rude. I know every one of those people I mentioned, PERSONALLY. None of my stories are second hand, unless I mention I saw it on say like Sid Roth or something. If I didn't have common sense and respect for Vlatko, I'd' post a testimony or two or three from them that I have saved from e-mails, in their own words, nonetheless. My dear mother alone has been doctor verified healed from both glaucoma and life-threatening asthma. My spiritual mother, Fayrene, whom I just spent the summer with too was healed after prayer of cancer. If you are praying to God and the healing comes, then you should give God the glory for it. I need to record the testimony of the man whose mother was raised from the dead, and I regret not having thought of that while I was in the U.S. last. You said: "You’ve met people that have “talked to angels”? What are their names? When was this? Where is evidence other than your word? Sadly, you seem to be no different than most of the other theists I’ve know. Lies and dissembling are OK when 'witnessing for Christ'”. You evil little snake! I won't let you get away with that! My adopted grandmother, now in Heaven, was only one of several people I've known that have been helped by/talked to angels. She broke down in a tunnel and prayed "Oh, God! We're going to get hit by another car! I wish we had some flares!" At that very moment, God sent an angel with a box of flares and set them up around the car and when they turned to thank him, he had vanished into thin air. Now, whom am I to believe, my beloved honest grandmother or your wicked little faithless hash? That's just one example. I could cite others. You may ask why I meet so people that have extraordinary experiences. One reason is I run in those circles. I talk to missionaries, and pastors and evangelist and intercessors! I ask them, "What stories do you have to tell? What has God done in your life that was miraculous?" I'm never surprised when they say, "God healed me of cancer and the doctor was just a cussing and cursing the next day because he couldn't find the tumor!" (Estelle Greene) or "God sent an angel, who called me by name, lead me by the hand, and kept me from being raped when I was a teenage girl that disappeared when I was safe." (Pat Maynard) Before you call a man a liar, make sure he's a liar, rather than revealing your own faithless, unbelieving wicked heart. 519. Charles B. Prix: Jesus Himself used the example I gave about hearing God's voice. It IS a good one. You don't believe me because you don't believe in God. If God is real, when why would it be so difficult for Him to speak to whomever He wants in whatever way He wants. And then why couldn't these to whom He speaks to, know it when He does? Are you strictly atheistic and do not believe in angels and demons as well? The Indian Christian man that I met knew there was a God because he served the demonic gods of Hinduism for years and encountered them in various ways. He then found Jesus. Let me know about your story if you don't mind. 520. Charles B. Mr. Razor: I'm still thinking about ancient Earth time lines. I too think the Earth is very old, but I don't think that humans were created at the time the Earth was. In the Book of Revelation, the whole earth is toast in one form or another. Natural disasters and supernatural calamities decimate the population to just a fraction of the population it is now. I'm personally hoping all the mega-disasters wait until that time (which I believe will be after the Rapture), but if not, then I'm ready to go. Are you? Laurie: I'll try and find the movie. If I get the "ax" any time soon, let's hope it is for the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ, and my sincere convictions, and not just my loud-mouthed opinions over the Internet! OK, funny true story: I was afraid of Achems Razor when I first logged on here last year, and didn't want to "offend" him just in case he was a radical Muslim that would find out my I.P. address, hop a plane, and take the time to hunt me down and use that "razor" on my Christian loud mouth! It took me a few weeks to learn the name was based on some philosophical argument about trimming down an argument to it's basic elements and therefore the most logical truth. Phew! Now I can insult him without fear . . . should I want to! Honestly. Ha! :-) 521. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Charles B "James Smith: You need to shut your faithless mouth!" "You evil little snake!" -- Charles B, please don't embarrass a fellow Christian with your rudeness! (Now you know why I had to resort to these kinds of words.) 522. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil Charles B. Yes, unless you are willing to show proof of your statements, I am going to say you are a liar. I have challenged you and instead of responding like a truthful person you reply with insults and name calling. While I am making simple statements of observed facts, respond with more lies. But I am not at all surprised. Every christian I have ever met in my life has been a liar, a fool, and a hypocrite; often all three at the same time. So, prove your statements or slink away like the cowardly, lying dog you are. No, that's an insult to dogs. They are far more honest than you. Who do you think you are to tell me to shut up? Oh, I forgot, you're a christian, so freedom of speech and thought is not part of your world view. So I say to you, you're another liar and a fool as well as a hypocrite. I see from your comments that, when faced with a direct challenge to prove your lies, you become very defensive and resort to insults like "shut your faithless mouth" and "You evil little snake". If you want respect, you would either respond in a civil manner with the facts requested or be a real ethical person and admit the stories were "anecdotal" (lies). But nope, like all christians, you have no real ethics and morality is whatever is convenient for you. Disgusting! Ilovemyself... You are even worse. What a disgrace you are to all religions. Not just religion but to the human race. You're both hateful, intolerant, arrogant and s!@#$%. Then you're also moth moral and intellectual cowards. You evade questions and spout nonsense in reply to honest inquiries. Is it any surprise you are treated with contempt and derision? If you even once, responded with facts and verifiable evidence instead of lies that are insulting in that they show that you expect people to be so stupid they will believe anything you say, no matter how ridiculous.

Lucky for both of you there is no heaven, no hell. Your totally typical, but "unchristian" behavior would put you both on the express train to the "fiery pit".

523. Charles B.

IlovemyselfmorethanI: Touche! Good quip there. Well said. Ah, I'm not even half as upset as I may sound. Rarely do I call people a vile evil snake, but ya know, if the scales fit! I just don't like being called a liar and accused of evading questions that I answered fully and quite well in fact. I really got him fumin' didn't I? ;-)

Peace to you.

James Smith: I thought you were off to Canada and would bother us no more with your mocking faithless Christian-hating mislogic of yours . . . . . liar! Sorry I called you a "snake," but you ARE "faithless" and that's actually even worse.

Good night to all!

524. Abrahams Son

James, thanks for your persuasive argument for the proof of God which you must be. For only a God could know that ALL Christians are liars, hypocrites and have no ethics or morality. You could have your opinion based those you have actually had contact with but thats as far as you can go with it. Why do Atheist have such a hard time dealing with the fact they will never be able to disprove the existence of some type of God? The very meaning of faith in a God tells you this because it is a statement of belief in something which is not proven by empirical evidence and thus it cannot be disproven by empirical evidence. The only important questions is why believe in something you cannot know to be true. The answer to this nmay be unsatisfactory to you and all Atheist but its all anyone can know that is not a being with supernatural powers which I assume you would agree humans are not Gods. My own opinion is that all humanity are agnostics at times whether we admit it or not.(believers and non-believers) I will not be responding to any comments other than rational argument since name calling and personal anger is a waste of time. Thanks

525. Achems Razor

@Charles B:

Wow! Charles, you are getting all vitriolic now aren't you? Good for you!! I say fight fire with fire! no p*ssy footing around there man.
Enough of this goody, goody two shoes, Ha,Ha,

@James is no evil little snake in my books Charles, he is just asking questions per se: all you have to do is answer him, without resorting to hysterics.
The rapture?? Au Contraire! no such thing a-happening, Ever!!! You have to get real on that complete fairytale.

It is actually very scary stuff that you are spouting. No benefit to mankind at all, puts everything right back to the dark ages! If only you put your resources into science as you do your religion, then you probably would be a great benefit to humankind!

You are an American first and foremost, you should not loose sight on that Charles.

One of your founding fathers "Thomas Paine" a Diest, said it succinctly, and I quote..."The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the the "Sun", in which they put a man called "Christ" in the place of the "Sun", and pay him the adoration originally payed to the "Sun"

THOMAS PAINE
1737-1808

My conclusion is as always Charles, you are praying to the "Sun" that is "GODS SON" period!

526. Achems Razor

@Vlatko:

Can you get me out of moderation heaven please! per my last post.

527. James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil

Charles B. You ARE a liar. You think telling lies for the "faith" is a good thing. You are the snake and a disgusting example of humanity. Testimonies from "friends" is not proof except to diseased minds like yours. When rational people (unlike you) speak of proof we mean independently verifiable facts. Not common fables people tell each other to make themselves feel good. Only delusional morons, such as yourself, would believe those.

As always, you evade all questions and are continuing to prove what a horror of a human being you have chosen to be.

Abraham's son. If you could read with something approaching grade school comprehension, you would realize I said I have never known a christian that was not a fool, liar, and hypocrite. You would also recall that I have said that, every time I have been cheated, abused, taken advantage of, or otherwise mistreated, it has always been by a "good christian". SO I have a pretty good handle on what they are like. Certainly not all, but, as a group, they are not to be trusted. The replies on here amply demonstrate that. All the evasions, dissembling, and straightforward lies do not speak well of theists as a group.

Yes, I leave for Canada in a few hours. SO I will be happy to not have to deal with a bunch of arrogant, hypocrites that lie with every word. You will notice folks, that none of these hypocrites have even tried to prove that anything I have posted is not true. As soon as they are sure I am gone, they will be congratulating themselves on their "victory" and posting more absurd "proofs" of their self-righteous stupidity.

But they should be careful, I may be back and call them out again. Moral and intellectual cowards can never resist being shown up again. That's what makes them so amusing.

528. ilovemyselfmorethani

@ James Smith

"You are even worse. What a disgrace you are to all religions. Not just religion but to the human race. "

-- Hmmm.. That's a bit saying too much isn't it? I'm a disgrace to the human race? Come on now.

"You’re both hateful, intolerant, arrogant and s!@#$%. Then you’re also moth moral and intellectual cowards." -- The irony burns.. "You evade questions and spout nonsense in reply to honest inquiries. Is it any surprise you are treated with contempt and derision? " -- And "honest" being the operative word, right? I challenge you to quote me on any insult I've made against someone who did not do it to me first. I've been treated with contempt and derision because of my Christian views. And If you read up, that's a lot of questions for lil ol me to respond to. I am more than willing to respond to anything, as long as it's asked properly and in the spirit of interesting debate. Unfortunately, seems like there are none. 529. Prix @Randy I've posted a comment further up and given you some links to some websites and very interesting answers about the whole "We are born to believe in God" that statement is completely false. No such thing, most people don't even know what they are talking about when stating that. Also, another thing that religious people take as proof for their "there is a God". That's what ilikemyselfmorethani did when he recalled an article in Times saying "we are born to believe in god". Hope you get the link, have a good day sir! @James Smith I know what you mean but please don't resort to offending. Charles doesn't mean anything bad towards you. But I can understand how it's offensive towards you, when he tells you to have faith instead of rational thinking and logic. @Charles B. When you answered him like that, I kinda lost a little respect for you too. Back to the answer you gave me. You wrote this to me: "Jesus Himself used the example I gave about hearing God’s voice. It IS a good one. You don’t believe me because you don’t believe in God. If God is real, when why would it be so difficult for Him to speak to whomever He wants in whatever way He wants. And then why couldn’t these to whom He speaks to, know it when He does? Are you strictly atheistic and do not believe in angels and demons as well? The Indian Christian man that I met knew there was a God because he served the demonic gods of Hinduism for years and encountered them in various ways. He then found Jesus. Let me know about your story if you don’t mind." Exactly Charles, that's what I meant by spiral. You will never move from that one point. Have faith, faith is a spiral that is never ending. It's just to fool yourself. There are plenty of articles saying how we humans are really good at fooling ourselves. Most of us are delusional, and to say "have more faith" is just like saying "put more gasoline in the fire it's not bright enough" When there is no fire there at all. No logic at all. You won't see from my point of view because you need to believe without evidence. Like the Shepard example you gave, I gave you a rational answer back yet you insist without any true motive "You just don't believe enough". Just because Jesus "said" it doesn't mean it has to be true. The Indian Christian met Hindu Demons? Dude, Humans have the ability to fool themselves SO HARD it's impossible to comprehend! My mother have had stories about super natural and I believed in them when I was a Kid. I can now examine them in logic and explain them. My mother insists I'm wrong, but she can't argue HOW I'm wrong. She just says "you're wrong". I have great deal of respect for my mother. Also, if this Christian Indian found Jesus. But he actually saw these Hindu demons, why even bother with Christianity? Why not believe in Hinduism? Praying doesn't do anything. Praying has 0 percent of chance of even happening. Sheer luck is better than a prayer. You'll never even think on the other side. It's impossible for you, it really is. A person is paralyzed in left arm, that person says "That hand is my fathers hand". Doctor tells him "Alright with your right hand and touch your left shoulder". The man does so, the doctor then tells the patient "With your left arm touch your shoulder". The patient lifts up his arm with the right hand and puts it on his right shoulder. If our minds have made up a decision then it's hard to get the facts right. You are exactly like this, you simply don't think with facts. I can give you a link showing this in several videos. Also you're going in circles again, you just wrote "it IS a good example" Yes Charles that is a very good answer. No it's not you didn't question my answer at all and just wrote "NO! my answer is correct". See what I meant by the whole you just have to believe? You simply don't want to see it from my perspective. You just insist it is a good example. You have no good argument there at all, you just insist without anything backing up your point. I'm not going to tell you in details what happened that let me to be believe in God and not believe in God. There are just too many thoughts and way too long to write. I've had hell for a life and tried to pray. To any religion, to any God. The thing is, finding the "right" religion is impossible. You can never state what true religion is. It's just what you believe in. It's not a speculation it's a FACT. Also the testimonials you're talking about. You just see them as proof, you don't speculate at all. Everything can be explained with logic. Now I know that we might not know everything about our brains. We at least know that our brains are easy to food and misdirect. Misleading information is so easy, even the smartest people in the world can be tricked. They can trick their own mind into believing things. Our eyes get tricked by optical illusion. If you showed optical illusion to 1000 year ago humans they would've said "We don't understand, it's demonic" or "It's a God that made this image". When we don't understand our confusion leads us to say "I'll give up and believe in a simple explanation, God!". Our brains are made to understand everything around us. We can't walk away from something that is impossible. We are so intrigued by the impossible. It's quite easy to understand this, I'm a magician and I've seen Christian people asking me "Is that real magic?". So, even if you give proof. You'll mix it up with something that your own mind has created. Even the people that witnessed this in first hand aren't reliable. Take another example, A woman sees a guy killing another guy. She sees him just a few seconds and tries to remember. Her mind will actually lose the image quite quickly but she will insist "I remember perfectly!". And at the police station with a few people lined up she will point to one that committed this crime. In actuality the murderer isn't even there. That's why the justice system doesn't always rely on testimony without any physical evidence. All our senses are weak and pathetic compared to what the animals have. We only have our brains that give us the advantage above all other animals. Without our minds we are useless. Even if I tell the people that the things they saw can be explained they would never listen just like you. They have made their mind up and there is no going back. Like i wrote before, to have something you believed in for so long to be crushed is not so easy to get over. Dude, don't rely on this "faith" too much. You even tell other people to try to fall into this circle of infinity. You don't realize it but that is a dangerous circle. Killing all other possibilities and logic without even looking at them. When you say wrote that to James. I find it kind of rude, people actually take offense to that. For them it's like saying "stop being smart and become dumb, remove your rational thinking and logic. Believe in faeries". And I know you don't mean it in that way. I know that because I can think from both perspectives. Both religiously and scientifically. In this case I can fully understand you and them. That's why James offended you because you offended him as well. I'm not trying to say you did something wrong or that he did this first. Just try to understand from both point of views. 530. Randy Wow, the room got really ugly while I was away! Listen, youse guys, this is nothing that a little gunfire won't solve... On three, everyone rack up your weapons and open fire! You'll all feel lots better... READY? One... two... 531. D-K Allow me to condense Prix' giant post into something a little easier on the eye. You might also noticed I made this point before; spirituality is an individualist property. Can't be taught, shared or learned. You cannot debate faith, you can debate logic however. Debating faith is essentially an ad-hominem and isn't constructive in nature. Other than that, have a ball, kids. 532. Epicurus i dont think you are a liar charles but i think you are extremely gullible if you believe all these peoples accounts of angels and miracles without putting them to logical scrutiny. what do you say charles to anyone that claims they have witnessed Shiva (hindu god) or witnessed Mohammad and Allah? do you believe that people of other religions are seeing the deities they believe in? or are you skeptical? would you say there is some other explanation? you might claim that what they are seeing is your god and they are interpreting it wrong but im sure they would say the same thing about the people you know who make these types of claims. you have created a double standard of evidence allowing your bias a free pass when it comes to accepting extraordinary claims. and both of you have no excuse for behaving the way your religion condemns. you ought to know better. you are reacting in an emotional way because you have no real evidence to support your claims. 533. Randy Also, I would submit this, as well, although it is an unpopular idea: "Spirituality" is not just an individual property, it is a myth. And to me, anyway, it seems a waste of time to concern yourself with... There are so many more important things to do... People need to make peace with the fact that we are all just walking bags of meat and bone... there is nothing wrong with that, in fact I find it much more interesting than any silly myth about a "soul" or a "spirit"... You do the best you can with what you have and then you lay down and go to sleep forever... simple... easy and clean. 534. ilovemyselfmorethani @Prix If you're going to quote someone, please quote him accurately. "[people] usually will be born thinking a creator exists" is what I said. Which is Ginormously different from saying “We are born to believe in God” --which you said I said. You cannot refute what I said, if you quoted it accurately, because it is true. This seems to be the problem with you. You seem to only remember the last argument your opponent makes, while somewhat disregarding of the previous ones. No offense, really. But it seems you're unable to follow multiple trains of thought. 535. Randy Very well put, Epicurus, but you must understand that Charles would argue that anyone else who saw Shiva or Kali, or Allah, etc... were being fooled by the Devil! See how the argument feeds itself? I mean it is a frightening trap for the mind. Horrible... I was there, man, I am SOOO happy I was able to free myself from it... 536. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Epicurus I checked out all your links re: animal morality. And, well, I concede your point. For now. I got quite interested in the topic, and so I'll be studying it as much as I can. There must be some salient difference there somewhere. 537. Randy Ah, a glimmer of hope for ilovemyself... Indeed, as we have been saying, Nature is very moral, religion is very IMMORAL... Who taught you it was the other way around? Religious people... see? Religious people have only been around for a few thousand years... NATURE has been here for 14 BILLION years... Nature wins... 538. D-K Ilovemyself: Going in expecting to find alternate explanations or debunking it on a whim isn't the way to go about it. Again, eliminate the bias. I also think you need to explain this further: "“[people] usually will be born thinking a creator exists” because people don't yet "think" when they are born. 539. Epicurus lol in all honesty that comment made my day ilovemyself. im at work and you just made it better! if i can suggest some reading, pick up The Moral Animal: Why we are the way we are by Robert Wright. 540. Epicurus ya i also have to disagree with the claim that “[people] usually will be born thinking a creator exists” what happened to tabula rasa? i dont see any reason to assume a new born is able to hold a thought on a creator. my family has never been religious and growing up i always thought of the christian stories as i do christmas stories (rudolph or frosty) or the way i saw fairy tales. it wasnt until i got on the internet and found people ACTUALLY believed the bible was true or the stories in it happened or there was a god-man thing named jesus who rose from the dead....it was a huge shock. 541. ilovemyselfmorethani "I also think you need to explain this further: ““[people] usually will be born thinking a creator exists” because people don’t yet “think” when they are born." -- Hmm.. Are you sure new-born babies don't "think"? Are you suggesting an infants mind is a tabula rasa? A newborn comes into the world not as a passive receiver, but as a participant, ready and eager to interact with the environment. Babies' intellects are working, and working very well, long before they can talk. They perceive a great deal, and they have decided preferences as well. 542. Randy Yes, actually the only thing a baby wants is a breast! For him or her that is the only god that exists... Hmmm... that's kind of ME, too... Sorry, wandered off there... 543. Randy @ilovemyself... Of course, human infants are born with intsinctual "hardwiring" that comes from the r-complex or brain stem, and to a lesser degree some mid-brain... But the high-mind, the frontal lobes, those are not fully developed until the age of 19-25 depending on the individual. That means if you are younger than that, your brain isn't done cooking, yet! 544. ilovemyselfmorethani @Randy O.K, but they do think, I think. 545. D-K An infant is in no position to reflect on his/her position in the universe. Children cannot even understand spirituality up to an age where they learn to think critically and develop natural skepticism. I personally, will do everything in my power to raise my child intellectually/philosophically objective. I think it's morally wrong to teach children about intellectual subjects such as religion or m-theory. Their frame of reference is not fully developed so rather than seeing logic in the matter, they see the matter as logical. Indoctrination isn't righteous. Not ever. You try explaining the "divine spark" or "the self" to a child, much less an infant and see if he understands it contextually as well as conceptually. There is simply no way. The only way to make religious beliefs even remotely understandable to a child is to use the heaven/hell concept. Good is rewarded and bad is punished, and you hardly need religion to teach right from wrong. A human brain starts in debug mode, and isn't even "done" up until a good few years into puberty 546. D-K Infants "think" like pets. They equate certain physical actions to certain responses, and exercise those functions to interact with the world. At this point, the child is a semi-autonomous learning machine, linking behaviour to effect and setting up neuronreceptors/connections. It has no notion of anything other than what's practical to him/her, certainly no notions of spirituality. 547. Randy Yes, D-K, indeed. Here is an interesting thing to think about: when was your first consious (sorry about the spelling there) memory? Studies show that for most people it is anywhere from 4 to 7 years old... for me it was 7, just in time to experience some horrible abuse and molestation! Sorry... that was off-topic... let me start again... This seems to indicate that there certainly is no concsious thought before that age... I mean, no one remembers the experience of being born, for example... and thank Batman for that! Can you imagine what a horror-trauma that would be? 548. ilovemyselfmorethani @D-K But infants do "think". You seem to have implied that they don't. 549. Randy I don't know if they can think, but they sure are tasty! MMmmmMMM... human infant sammiches.... *drools like Homer Simpson* Was that inappropriate, I can't tell anymore... 550. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani08 You wrote: @Prix If you’re going to quote someone, please quote him accurately. “[people] usually will be born thinking a creator exists” is what I said. Which is Ginormously different from saying “We are born to believe in God” –which you said I said. You cannot refute what I said, if you quoted it accurately, because it is true. This seems to be the problem with you. You seem to only remember the last argument your opponent makes, while somewhat disregarding of the previous ones. No offense, really. But it seems you’re unable to follow multiple trains of thought." It's not true, here I'll write to you. Go to Youtube type in "VS ramachandran beyond belief 2006". There is part 1 and 2. Now lay out what proof you have. Btw VS Ramachandran quotes the thing Times wrote as false. Publisher taking a quote and blowing it out of proportion. I'm sorry for not directly quoting you by your own words. But why do you even try to correct it when the whole argument is false? Also, don't start picking on this small thing about "but you wrote something I didn't write!". I've said sorry and let's move on. @Randy Sir, That VS Ramachandran speech is the one I tried to give to you. If you don't mind please have a look. Also there is another one, go to youtube and search for "The God of the Gaps Neil DeGrasse Tyson" or just "The God of the Gaps". Really interesting speech. My other post where I gave the links doesn't show up. It reads "Your comment is awaiting moderation". Have a good day 551. Randy @Prix Yes I will check those out as soon as I can! Thank you. I did see "The God of the Gaps" but I could refresh my memory if it, certainly. Namaste! 552. Joe_nyc @prix (u kno dat sounds like p r i c k s) Just checked out V S Ramachandran on youtube. I thoroughly enjoyed it. thanks 553. Prix @Joe_nyc hahaha, yes I know. As long as it bring a laugh for you then I don't mind. You should check out more of his stuff. Check out Neil DeGrasse Tyson speech as well. Go to Video Google and search for VS Ramachandran and set the filter on more than 20 minutes. His speeches are easy to understand and at the same time it explain the complicated details. As far as we know, press only wrote "it is the religious sensor! So everyone is born in believing in higher power". That's not true, we can't explain it completely because completely yet but it's just not religious. If we were in ancient Greece and did this experiment they would respond the same way to images of Zeus. Meaning it's not true, religious people do something else that needs an explanation. There is a lecture with VS Ramachandran about art. Search for it in Video google. "VS Ramachandran art" He gives results on theory they had about Art and human mind. He explains what Art does to the brain and how the brain processes that information. Thank you for the feedback. 554. Randy @Prix Yes, James Joyce spoke of that too with his work on "The Epiphanies" An Irish fella... 555. Prix @Randy Thanks! I'll check it out right away. Haha, btw Namaste is bye in Hindu saying bye to another Hindu. India has so many languages. Most of the Muslims say Al Vida and Christians...I can't remember. But yes, I don't remember a common word used for good bye. Just letting you know sir. hehe, I do feel nice when you wrote Namaste don't take me wrong. I'll write back when I've found "The Epiphanies" online. I see there are couple of links but I'll see if I can find the whole book. Have a good day sir! Oh, I see I made a few mistakes while writing in an earlier post. Pardon me for that. 556. Randy @Prix No need for patdon, on my account. I certainly make about a hundred spelling and grammatical errors a day on this site... WEll, I don't know if you will find any James Joyce online... I am old and only trust books... I mean this site, is great but... really, for me, if it ain't in a book, I don't trust it much... You may be able to find "The Power of Myth" either on this site, or on YouTube... and Joseph Cambell speaks about James Joyce a bit... 557. Randy As I try and fix computers, I have one of my favorite movies on the movie screen... "The Departed"... Irish mob, very cool... Here is some James Joyce, "Non Servium..." Or, the Scottish version, "It is far better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven..." "I don't want to be a product of my environment, I want my environment to be a product, of ME!" Also, "...no one is going to give it to you, you have to take it..." Etc... just a snack of thought for the room... 558. Prix @Randy Ah now I see where people get the "It is far better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven" from. I'll search the smaller stuff so I get to understand at least a little bit about him. I usually don't read books, I watch documentaries and read articles. My attention span isn't all that long. But while I'm watching something, I usually ask myself questions and the film itself questions. It's a habit that has grown. I need to read books if I want to learn how to write properly and increase overall intellectuality. Have you seen the movie "The Man From Earth"? Written by Jerome Bixby and it's about a man that "confesses" to his friends that he is a 30 000 year old man. His friends have majors in all kinds of fields, history, physics and religion. So they start asking him questions about what happened in the past and whom he met. The whole film is in a room, no flashbacks or nothing. The whole conversation is so intense and incredibly interesting! Have a nice day sir. 559. Prix Sorry about that, I checked on IMDB and this is what it reads about "The man from earth" IMDB- "An impromptu goodbye party for Professor John Oldman becomes a mysterious interrogation after the retiring scholar reveals to his colleagues he is an immortal who has walked the earth for 14,000 years" 560. eireannach666 @ Randy and Prix It was Stephen Hero in which Joyce spoke of this the best I say. 561. Prix @eireannach666 Ah! I found the book! I'll see about this tomorrow, I need to go to sleep now. To you and Randy, Good night to you and I'll check back tomorrow. Maybe I'll get some responses from Charles B and ilikemyselfmorethani. Good night and take care! 562. Charles B. Prix: There seems to be a ring of truth to your posts, especially for those that hold your view already. In fact, we all have a form of "faith." You believe there is no God, ergo, I suppose you believe in evolution, etc. Those things take a great deal of "faith" as well, and much more than I have! Nonetheless, my previous thought is a valid one; if God exists, and I believe He does, then what does He value most in the universe? Material objects would hold enjoyment in their beauty, just as it does for us, as we are made in His image and have a concept of awe and beauty when we see it, therefore I'm sure He does too. That's true I'm sure. But, to the heart of the matter, what pleases God most is trust, obedience, and love. Trust is another word for "faith" here. It's the first of process. I'll be exceptionally open with you, so that you might know my heart as well as my mind. Your arguments exclude God and you work your words around your active "disbelief." I was praying on the work today, "Lord, I wish you would make yourself more plainly known." (visible/easily verifiable), but before I even finished the words, I received an answer, "But it IS about Faith!" I remembered the fact that very real manifestations of God didn't bring faith and trust to the evil-hearted (like I said before) and those healed by Jesus was often attributed to their "faith." Then the verse came to mind: "Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God." I had never thought of that verse in the present tense before, but always in the future tense. I realized that the pure in heart will know and see God even before they see God Face to face, because of their ability to have "faith." Visible sight of God does not bring repentance, as will be seen in the future (should you live to see that day), nor does the way God chooses to speak to us and show Himself to us now exclude those that have a pure heart from finding Him. The Bible often tells us not to "harden our hearts" or "burn our conscience' so that we can no longer tell right from wrong for a reason. When I'm apart from God's will (prolonged involvement in sin that I know is sin), I can hardly hear God's voice except to say "Turn around. Don't do that!" But when my heart is calm, pure, and focused, and at God's discretion only, I do hear His voice. When you were a child, you might think your mom was calling you sometimes, and then realize she wasn't, but when you do hear her calling you, there's no doubt it's your mother's voice you hear. You just know. Jesus said the souls of men had 4 kinds of people (soils): the heart-hearted where Satan can easily steal the truth away, the shallow-hearted where they have no depth of character, the crowded-hearted that has no room for God even as they know in the back of their mind that He is real, and then, lastly, the pure and receptive-hearted that accept and believe and nurture what has been given them and return it with service and love and devotion. To what extent each man has dominion over what type of heart he has, I don't know for sure. I just know for sure that my heart has belonged to Jesus since the age of 7 when I choose to follow Him, knowing full well what I was doing. I've had my struggles to overcome, but God's voice has always called me back, and I've always been wise enough to listen to it's gentle soft whisper. But, someday our faith will be sight and this argument will be moot. At that point it will shift to allegiance or not, but not based on whether God is real or not, but on a matter of the soil of a person's heart. Choose to be "pure hearted" Prix. We've all had trauma and injustice in some way. You said you were willing to call out to any God that would help. Don't turn your back on the only one that can, even if you don't think He has done so in the way you wanted him to. Dr. Randy: You are quite right. Any encounter or answer to prayer by Hindus or the such are of a demonic nature, most likely. Yet, God answers prayer. I've prayed for non-believers before for God to spare their life and for healing, etc. Who are we to say that God is not answering a believers prayer even for the unsaved. And at last, can He not do a sovereign work and meet a person's need before they come to faith while they are still in darkness and ignorance? Perhaps. I've prayed for you on numerous occasions; for your health and for your heart and soul. Isn't there even a "spark" of the desire to return to what you have given up from your younger days? Just curious. Peace to you. Charles B. P.S. Prix if you've lost respect for me for my response to James Smith, then why? Even Jesus chose His responses and didn't mince words with those He knew to be spouting the most unfounded accusations against Him. I just didn't feel like masking my real opinion of the man (assumed). I'll consider that, however, as is usually the case, those that are 563. Charles B. Continued: called by the name "Christian" are held to a higher standard whether we want to be or not. Also, I meant "hard-hearted" not "heart-hearted" in the story of the soils. Sorry. I'm rushing. 564. eireannach666 @Epicurus Thanks for replying first to that. Saved me a lot of typing. Bravo. 565. Laurie Robillard @Vlatko: Can you get me out of moderation. I want my email removed. Meaningless chatter, gossip, and sarcastic humor replace genuinely rich interpersonal communication in this house. It seems religion is a weapon to judge and condemn others in order to feel superior and exclusive. People are threatened and defensive and there is no learning, no growth, no progression, no development. This house is a thief of time. My last words. "Yea, he that repenteth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing--unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance." (Alma 26:22) Book of Mormon 566. Randy @My Gaelic brother! How are you? It is good to see you again! 567. Randy @Prix Really? "Namaste" just means "bye", in Hindi? I had a beautiful Indian woman tell me it meant "I see the god in you..." I respect your word, of course, as you live it, and I am a struggling i****t with world languages... Do you think she was lying to me? 568. Randy @Laurie Yes, of course, you are right... However--- I will repenteth when your god repenteth. Otherwise I will fight the creature with every last fiber of my being. It is far better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven... The Chruch says kneel, stand, kneel... if you pay attention to that then I don't know what to do for you... Non-Servium... 569. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "Now lay out what proof you have. Btw VS Ramachandran quotes the thing Times wrote as false. Publisher taking a quote and blowing it out of proportion." -- I admire Mr. Ramachandran. I believe we've evolved, if you will, to believe in a God. Most of the people who've ever lived do exactly that. See, I never argued that this is proof that God exists. And you try all your best to make it seem like I did. That's why I said you seem unable to follow multiple trains of thought. Many evolutionary Psychologists will argue that there was selection pressure for belief in Deities, and I'm fine with that. I'll remind you that I'm a theistic evolutionist. "I’m sorry for not directly quoting you by your own words." -- You should be. You've completely, COMPLETELY, altered what I said when you did "Also, don’t start picking on this small thing about “but you wrote something I didn’t write!”. I’ve said sorry and let’s move on." -- You've said sorry. And, O.K, I can accept your apology. But here you go again, being much to generous to yourself. You apologize, and yet assert that it's a "small thing" as if I'm groundlessly pulling your leg about this. It's not a small thing, as I've said above. If you apologize, then be sincere about it. You're apology is slightly irritating because you simultaneously try to justify what you did and make pre-emptive judgements on how you think I will respond. It's like you can't help but go off on weird tangents whenever you try to follow a train of thought. 570. Randy Here is another piece of Melville from the top of my head, and I should get my copy of "Moby Dick" to check this, but I will just shoot it out here, you guys will forgive em... "From hell's heart I spit at thee, from the depths of hell I stab at thee..." Etc... 571. Randy OH Batman, YES, I'm sorry Vlatko, another author/book I wrote about with a name that gets into moderation... Let me ammend... Here is another piece of Melville from the top of my head, and I should get my copy of “Moby D*ck” to check this, but I will just shoot it out here, you guys will forgive me… “From hell’s heart I spit at thee, from the depths of hell I stab at thee…” Etc… 572. Charles B. Epicurus: That was very well written. If you are right and I am wrong, or I am right and you are wrong, both of us will find out soon enough. Similarity between spiecies may not mean commonality of decent, but a common creator as well. You have said the new spiecies are being formed. I read the Talk Origin list of the "new spiecies" and it's very miniscule at best and all within a kind. To explain the vastness of spiecies would require more change than what has ever been observed, even in the very limited time we have been trying to. God has creted DNA, etc. to do as it does, and there is flexability built into the structure for the survival of animal/plant created. It's not surprising if divergence to some degree happens, but what is surprising is the uniformity of all creatures great and samll for untold generations. What I would give you is the layer mystery for me. I would like to discover why fossils come in layers that are not better mixed. Sincerely Yours, Charles B. 573. Randy @Charles Listen, god did it, or the Devil did it, is just too easy... Do you not like to think? Is that hard or painful for you? I mean, I am really trying to understand, here... what is it about thinking that you and your ilk do not enjoy? I would rather be a depressed genius than a happy i***t... Do you like someone else taking care of you? I do not get that, either... I like taking care of others, but if they try to take care of me, I reject them utterly... I would much rather be dead than helpless... don't you see that? Or... what, then... give me some help that is NOT in the bible horror-novel. I read that already... talk to me about real things... 574. Epicurus @Charles B. i cant believe you came back at me after what i put up there, with....Kent Hovind and Ray Comfort style excuses.... "Similarity between spiecies may not mean commonality of decent, but a common creator as well." there was MUCH MUCH more there than just similarity of species...MUCH more...and by grasping at a straw saying that is could be sign of the same creator is just sad. if you read the list in went in order where each progressive point proved upon the one before it....it answered what you just claimed there. you also said "I read the Talk Origin list of the “new spiecies” and it’s very miniscule at best and all within a kind." or as creationists OFTEN word this: "Species may undergo minor changes, but the range of variation is limited to variation within kinds." Response: 1. What is a "kind"? Creationists have identified kinds with everything from species to entire kingdoms. By the narrower definitions, variation to new kinds has occurred. By the broader definitions, we would not expect to see it in historical time. 2. Helacyton gartleri shows one example of change that would be hard to call anything other than a change in kind. It is an amoeba-like life form that came from a human (Van Valen and Maoirana 1991; evolved from a carcinoma, it spreads by taking over other laboratory cell cultures). 3. Creationists have never hinted at, much less shown, any mechanism that would limit variation. Without such a mechanism, we would expect to see kinds vary over time, becoming more and more different from what they were at a given time in the past. as for your question: "What I would give you is the layer mystery for me. I would like to discover why fossils come in layers that are not better mixed." what do you mean? the strata is lain down with fossils just the way evolution would predict. what do you mean better mixed? why do you think they would be mixed? 575. Charles B. Epicurus and Dr. Randy: It's insulting to say that I'm unthinking. In fact, I'm one of the deepest thinkers I know at the moment. Just for your information, Epic's long post was very good, but there's always two sides to every story. Just out of curiosity, and because I have free time between classes where I litterally have nothing else to do, I looked up the Institute of Creation Research site, and found the very first articles all had to do with a lot of what Epic was spouting: There was an article about the marsupials and retroposons DNA, took marking on bones from "Lucy's Era" and even about soft tissue structures found in "80 million year old fossils." There was even an article about the transformation of the sticklebacks to cold water as being a result of pre-programmed adaptability. Like I said before, God programmed things to survive and the variants that are most adaptable to the current environment quickly kick in that programming in their DNA that is needed. One of my kids is chubby, the other stick thin. Whatever environment comes in the future, one or the other will have an advantage. It's not evolution, it's pre-programmed contingency from God. Lastly, I was interested to find an article (this was all on page one by the way) of the complexity of sponges that have 80% of the human equivelent genes. The best I understood it, they were concluding that the concept of a "simple sponge" is a misnomer, and they never were "simple" but are as they are now, incredibly complex and they share commonality of genes not because of ancestory, but because of the same Creator. I was very happy to find poeple with more letters behind their name than I have, and that have put in the time to study it in depth to have similar ideas to myself. Imagine that! It was quite coincidental that nearly every thing that Epicurus had mentioned did in fact have two sides the argument. Ok. Got to run. Charles B. 576. Randy @Epicurus Obviously, as a smart guy, you do not understand that the Devil has totally twisted your mind... As it says in Poopoplus 20: 13: "For the wisdom of the wise will be pooped upon by the lord of hosts and the king of kings..." You see? I mean, totally get over yourself, because you are being lead astray by evil spirits... I'm getting my chicken bones out to pray for your Canadian ass... I'm just sayin' 577. Randy Charles, Listen, there is really NOT two sides of every story. There is just what we see in front of our eyes. What we measure and test. These men that you listen to are biased and just as frightened as you... Evidence judged by unbiased, detached humans is the real measure of reality. In fact, the only measure of reality that we have. Epi-genomic research clearly shows that all life on this planet shares a common ancestor and no god is needed to explain it. The only reason you hide your eyes from this idea is that you are frightened by it. Be a man, Charles. You can walk away from this vaporous idea. I promise it will not hurt you to do that. 578. Epicurus Charles, dont you question why the institute of creation research or answers in genesis people have to make their own "peer reviewed" journal or dont allow outsiders to examine it? do you know the importance of peer review in science? 579. Randy I just re-read Laurie's post... she with the magic Zero Point energy wand and stuff... Holy Batman! I didn't realize she was a mormon. That is some delusional christianity, right there. I have a book of mormon around here, some place, and I have read it... and I have read the biographies of Joseph Smith... Wow. But, as science fiction as that religion is, they do take care of each other, and they are very rich and powerful... I mean, you can go anywhere in the world, basically, and say, "Where is the Mormon Welcome Center" and you can get a job, a place to live, etc... all you have to do is serve the church. Whatever... Again, though, people, "taking care" of you... that makes me queasy... But, what are you gonna do, they own Utah and most of the midwest of America... they have HUGE banks and can buy and sell politicians at will. Much like the mob, with which I am familiar... Organized Crime and Cults, very much the same. 580. Randy I'M sorry, allow me to revise THAT statement... Organized Crime provides a very real service whereas, cults provide pipe-dreams and afterlives that are wispy and insubstantial... So... But, don't get me wrong! I am a law abiding American citizen! I serve jury duty when asked, vote in every election, pay my taxes like a religion... I love my country... I'm just sayin' "When I was a kid they said you can either be a cop or a criminal... but when you're facing a loaded gun...? What's the diffrence..." 581. Randy @Prix Yes, I have seen the movie "The Man From Earth"... I was transfixed by it. The writing was very, very transcendant. There has been a great deal of speculation about how Bhuddists' traditions, (very Far Eastern) might have metriculated into the Middle East with the myth of jesus... However, this jesus character was a lot more insane. According to the horror novel the dude cursed a fig tree because it had no fruit for him to eat! What kind of bi-polar wierdo is that???? A tree? Really? Leave the trees alone, you crazy man! Also, as it is all just a silly myth... what-have-you... and people are inserting ideas into fact not in evidence, there is no reason to concern yourself with it. I'm a PhD in world history, I know these things... (Also, as I have said many times in other posts, even the Bhuddist religion is very cruel, and so is the Hindu... I'm sorry, Prix... I'm just sayin'...) 582. Charles B. Epicurus: The heart of the matter is that I still have just enough doubt in Evolution as you've laid it out, and just enough faith that God is real, that I can both intellectually and spiritually maintain my philosophical position. Besides, what have I to gain from changing my mind? Dr. Randy thinks we are just bones and meat walking around without a soul. Now that's a lovely thought. I'd be giving up all that is dear to me to be "walking meat". You also mentioned that you were sick and tired of me "proselytizing" and wouldn't hold back your insults in the future. We're both trying to convince the others on this topic. Aren't you trying to persuade me? That's a double standard as you're "proselytizing" for atheism as much as I am for my beliefs. As far as people whom have never heard of the Gospel or who lived before modern day Christianity, I don't know for sure, but I leave that in God's hands, whom I trust intrinsically. However, for those of us who have heard, we will be judged according to how respond to the truth we've been shown now. s far as the "pure in heart" issue is concerned, let me ask you this, "Do you consider yourself 'pure in heart'?" Yes or no? I generally think people know when they are "pure in heart" and when they aren't, but if for some reason they are totally clueless, then what is the standard God has set for purity? If you meet that standard, then you fit the bill; if you don't, you don't. The fossil record doesn't show gradual changes. Fossils come in batches fully formed and in mass numbers. Then they disappear just as suddenly "Evolution" is a term that holds connotations of changing from one distinct form to another separate form of a different kind. Adaptation is possible, and changes within the possibilities of a species, but kinds stay within kinds. I agree. Sponges are "simple" as you describe them, but they aren't predecessors of higher forms of life. Evolutionists use that term almost interchangeably with life they expect to be predecessors to life we have now. I'm unfamiliar with the "peer review" process in science related material, inside or outside of the institute in question, but the articles seem to be based on the work of scientists that AREN'T involved with the Creation Institute. However, my gut feeling is that Evolutionists are so biased and one-sided in their understanding of things that they would drum out of their profession anyone that disagreed with them and ignore important information and discoveries that they didn't like, such as the tool marks on bones found on "Lucy Era" bones. They'd never publish what they didn't want the world to hear contrary to their own model now, and that's the truth. In fact, your dissing them right now! The likes of you wouldn't even publish God should he wright an article on how he form a thing. Had it not been for this web sight, I'd have very little to ponder other than your one-sided conclusions. It was just by chance so much of what you mentioned in your post was also mentioned on the first page of their website. Anyway, I've got to go. It was a good discussion. I just wish I had the vast amounts of time to research it all and to get the degrees needed to back up my opinions more solidly. But, I've read stories about existing researchers that made conclusions contrary to the evolutionary model, and then were drummed out of their own profession mercilessly. You guys are not "tolerant" people of dissenters even in the slightest, with or without proof. It sounds like you got the website I used already, but it's icr. org I do believe. It would be interesting to hear a response to the "soft tissue" issue, however. Dr Randy: I like your heart, if not your conclusions! Peace to you! :-) 583. Charles B. Dr. Randy: The fig tree was cursed, I think, for the purpose of the parable on faith. We have a fig tree in our school. It produces fruit before it puts out leaves. If it has leaves, then it should have some fruit, no matter the season. I've been told this tree was "barren" and there it was not fulfilling it's purpose for being. The way I understand it, it's not a condemnation of say, unbelievers such as yourself, but rather a warning for people like me who are called "Christian" that we should also be fruit-barring, and not just professing Christians. But, to counter act this seemingly heartless act against the tree, Jesus also gave the parable of the land owner that wanted to chop is barren fig tree down, but the grounds keeper said, "Wait! Let me tend it and fertilize it, and if it doesn't produce again in due season, then we can chop it down." Mercy is given when mercy is needed for god is merciful and patient, but judgment is given when judgment is undeniably deserved as God is also just. I believe. Good night. Logging off now! Seriously. I think. :-) I want to actually watch a documentary sometimes rather than just comment on this one! LOL 584. Randy Charles, sweetheart... That was a very thoughtful, well written, and cogent defense against Epicurus. I must say, very good! However, you wrote: "I don’t know for sure, but I leave that in God’s hands, whom I trust intrinsically..." WHO is this guy? Where is he? Why would you trust all of your poker chips to some amorphous creature you read about in a book, or saw on the Sistine [sic] Chapel? It would be irresponsible of you to trust your children's lives on this painting by Michealangelo, or some horror novel you read, or something your mama told you was true. In Louisianna they have a saying, "Who do you know who your father is? Because your mama told you so!" But, who's your mama? Why the hell can you trust her? I'm just sayin' Also, I am going to answer my friend, Prix, in a minute... but I have some other stuff to do... 585. Charles B. Dr. Randy: Ain't gonna listen! Ain't gonna listen! Watching docs only tonight! 586. Randy @Prix Apparently, you have a comment in moderation, but it showed up in my mailbox. I enjoyed it though,, so I would like to answer you... if Vlatko doesn't mind. The Dumbell excersise is very taxing, and, yes, my wife exhausts me with her needs. Whatever, woman, I got stuff TO DO! Is what I say to her.. (and then, she beats me...) That was a joke...! (she would beat me if she read that...) And yes, sir, I was a born-again a**hole for awhile in high-school. It is a great shame to me... Much more of a shame than when I was a Wiccan Priest, or a Satanic priest, or a Freemason, or any of the other many cults I looked through for some Truth... Only science, maths, and engineering liberated me-- Illuminated me. Like you, I read everything, which is why I know religion, science, mythology, biology, etc... I just wish I had learned more world languages! I love language... you have a vast advantage on me there... 587. Abrahams Son Non-believers, my point is simply you by your own definition of your existence, can never know more than what you can see with your eyes or process in a human brain. This does not allow you to prove or disprove anyone elses belief system. No matter how illogical or ridiculous faith may seem to anyone it's validity can never be proven or disproven by the logical arguments as these arguments are always the product of what our brains which have evolved to allow us to comprehend. If the evolution of the brain is simply driven by the desire to "survive" it can never be completely trusted in the quest for truth. For non-believers the entire purpose of human evolution is to find a way to survive on this rock hurdling through the infinite cosmos. ENJOY!!! 588. Charles B. Ah, ok. Hum. Welcome, comrad fellow believer! I think. 589. Joe_nyc @Randy If you don't mind I would like to ask you a personal question. How did you come to understand that we are just flesh and bones? 590. Randy @Joe Well, that is a rich and complex question... But, I would guess I might say it was in medical school when I was performing autopsies on human bodies. When you hold the human organs, the brain and the liver, the heart, in your hands--- the mystery of life tends to fade away from you. Plus, the bowel ducts are some foulness that you never want to smell and think we are "holy"... Plus, it was all the reading and the knowledge, and stuff... 591. Randy Oh and Joe, of course there were comparative anatomy classes in which I discected cats, dogs, frogs, etc... and saw that we were all the same on the inside... 592. Epicurus @Charles. first off i have laid out all the evidence for evolution. the only reason you refuse to believe it is because you already have a belief system that doesnt allow it. if you were honest though you would go with the evidence. i am sick and tired of you proselytizing. the definition means to convert to your religion. i dont have a religion therefore im am not proselytizing. you however are. i am showing you evidence you are depending on faith. you say you dont know how god will respond to others who dont know of him however you dont KNOW that. its just more faith. you are arguing faith using faith. its just silly. its childish. if you cant see how illogical this is i feel extremely sorry for you. i dont believe there is a position that is "pure of heart" however if you mean being true to yourself i dont see why you would get an experience from god and we wouldnt. but then again you just have faith that is all. the fossil absolutely shows gradual change from simple to complex and not JUST the fossil record but also the genome record and the retrovirus record. as well as the geologic strata. it all matches exactly how evolution would predict. you say no, i say yes....yes has more letters...i win. no but seriously you can close your ears and go lalalalala all you want but it wont change the evidence and reality. sponges themselves are the predecessors. but organisms like them that were pressured through natural selection have changed and we see this in the fossil and genome record. why do you think scientists would drive out people that show them they are wrong?! science is about being wrong and finding the right solution. the peer review is in place for ANYONE to go over the work and show how or why it is wrong. are you saying there is a collective conspiracy of independant scientists all over the world (who have no way of organizing) to fake results that show evolution takes place? why would they do that? why wouldnt they be more concerned with the truth? Evolution is being put to practical use in industry and widely used on a daily basis by researchers in medicine, biochemistry, molecular biology, and genetics to both formulate hypotheses about biological systems for the purposes of experimental design, as well as to rationalise observed data and prepare applications. James McCarter of Divergence Incorporated states that the work of 2001 Nobel Prize winner Leland Hartwell which has substantial implications for combating cancer relied heavily on the use of evolutionary knowledge and predictions. McCarter points out that 47 of the last 50 Nobel Prizes in medicine or physiology also depended on the use of evolutionary theory. you do not have a clear enough understanding of science OR evolution so if you REALLY REALLY wanted to be honest you would just admit that with the information you have and understand that YOU DONT KNOW. you should not be taking a position either way with your ignorance. finding tool marks on bones that 2.6 million years old doesnt necessarily mean the bones arent that age....when you use at least 10 different dating methods and they all line up, then that number is correct. if you find something like tool marks on bones when you think humans didnt have tools the FIRST thing you do is question if maybe humans had tools (even simple stones to cut) earlier than we suspected....that doesnt disprove evolution. lol i actually got a good laugh about that though. so did my girlfriend. that is some funny reasoning you got there. ICR is not a science based website it is a church based scam that you are falling for. out of 100,000+ scientists only 300+ disagree with evolution...think about that. 593. Epicurus King James Version, Second Kings 2:23-24 23: And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up that way, there came forth little children of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; Go up, thou bald head. 24: And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood and tare forty and two children of them. what does this mean? what is the "parable" here in the story where God sends or allows the she bears to rip apart the children? oh also read Numbers 25:4-13 and tell me what god what thinking there. 594. Abrahams Son It would of course require the mind of God to fully understand everything God is thinking. 595. Epicurus that would be a good excuse if you had already shown god to be true. the more reasonable explanation is that there is no god. that would be the default position until shown the evidence. 596. Randy Abrahams Son, who wrote: "It would of course require the mind of God to fully understand everything God is thinking..." That is such a lame and tired and raggedy-a@@ argument, it really wasn't even worth you pausing in the kissing of your boyfriend to type it! But here is an old and tired answer that you delicious children have never been able to counter: Why would I care about the mind of this alien monster? IF it does not choose to reveal it to me, then I can go about my business... why should I care about some cowardly creature that hides in the sky and wants to be my king? I didn't vote for him... he can eat me... 597. D-K ... grow by dying, and live by growing. It's a doozy alright.. I don't know why sponges would lead me to ...., but there you go. I forget what ... is, those big living rocks along the coast of Australia, supposedly some sort of evolutionary marker. Damnit, this is going to drive me nuts. Anyone know what I'm talking about? I think Carl Sagan spoke of them in Cosmos.. 598. Achems Razor @Randy:: That was hilarious HA,Ha, you made me laugh out loud. (LMAO) 599. WTC7 That was a really good on Randy :-) 600. WTC7 ... good onE... :-) 601. Randy @D-K I don't think I am familiar with these "living rocks" of which you speak... But sea sponges... I have an entire shelf of very solid work on these creatures... one of the first "Super-Colonial" organisms to arrive on this planet and from which we are very closely related. Interestingly, or maybe not to anyone else but me, did you know that mushrooms and fungi are more closely related to animal protien than to plants? More specifically, that they are very closely related to US, (we primates, orangs, chimps, gorillas, etc...). It's true. 602. Randy Oh, but I do loves me some sauteed mushrooms in butter, with garlic and onions... 603. Prix @Randy Haha, No sir. I don't think she lied to you. I think most of the Indian people have different answer about what Namaste means. It can be used with Hindu people as Hello and Bye. I'll try reading James Joyces book soon. I'll just get these comments that i need to answer out of the way. @Epicurus Thanks for covering. I appreciate that. You've written many things that I can't cover because my response would be too long and you also written many things I forgot about and just learned new things. Thank you! @ilovemyselfmorethani You still insist "I believe we’ve evolved, if you will, to believe in a God". That is totally false, we don't exactly know of it. To say that without completely analyzing and the final answer you cannot state that as a fact. If you believe on the other hand (which you wrote). Well then you're just believing without and final and solid proof. Btw, can you stop about me not getting a direct quote? I've already apologized. Stop repeating. And if you can read, you've actually written more about the mistake than response itself. @ Charles B. You know, some of the evolutionists just collect all the bones and fit them together and take a look at how they've evolved in each and every stage. In other words, proof that anyone can touch and analyze. If someone thinks it's just believing and faith...well you can touch the bone, even a blind person would know that it's a bone. If the blind person goes and feels even they can tell it's real and evolution did happen. There is no faith about it, and i only took the bones as a small example. You can go into more complicated things to make sure they are out ancestors. I mean take a look at Neanderthals. We know why they fit in. We aren't the ONLY so-called humans. Science doesn't rely on faith...EVER. Still you go on to faith, your whole sentences can be shorten down to "I have faith, I believe in this and that". That's not a valid argument or good way to verify your point of view. We all can have faith, faith in ridiculous things. Even if it might sound ridiculous and illogical even for you. As long as someone has faith no one can question it. Even if someone tries to put it into logic the person will never move from their faith. Even if you show the person that it's false they will still retain their faith, specially if they've been brought up with that faith. Faith doesn't lead anyone anywhere, it'll still go in circles. Exactly faith and obedience without any evidence. You still insist that the circle of infinity is the way to go when in reality there is no way out of once you fall into it. No questioning, only faith and that's all. In other words chance. People go to head their twisted ankle, how much do you think they will be cured? We all know that it's a big chance their bodies can cure it by themselves. The cancer and such, I cannot point out because like we've said we don't know EVERYTHING about our body. To straightly point out "It was God" is just that kind of mistake everyone in the history has made. Newton, when he didn't understand the relationship between how planets gravity affect one and another he wrote "only the divine knows about this". In the whole book there was no word of god and when he hits this wall he says "It's divine power that i don't know of". Einstein came along and stepped up newtons theory even higher. Where Newton wrote "It's divine power", in other words where newton gave up that's where Einstein picked up. So just because science might get stuck we cannot simply say "We don't understand and never will, it's God" That will never get us any further. This faith, look up Derren Brown voodoo doll on Youtube. Faith can do a lot of weird things, just believing in something can make the brain respond in different way. Having faith doesn't mean it's the truth. Like I told you before, our senses are weak, our mind is weak. It can be fooled into believing things. I'll give you another example. Look at that Derren brown video about voodoo doll. This woman believes that the voodoo doll is real, she believes already in that kind of stuff. What Derren brown does is, he takes advantage of that. She believes in it so much that she follows his instructions all the way through. Even she says she bases her beliefs in FACTS. Everyone in the whole world can fool themselves, it's just not only her. Even I can be fooled but as long as I have rational thinking and don't jump on "It's divine power" answer straight away, then it is possible for me to list out. Btw, I know how Derren Brown did that. No, I don't BELIEVE how he did that. I know for fact, exactly how he did it. Most of your post is only "I believe because God says so and I need to believe! Otherwise God wouldn't talk to me" Still, it's all about belief and no evidence sir. The Bible will put you in that circle without you questioning it at all. It's like Bible made a cage for you and you can't look outside of that cage. Exactly, you made my point about Satan. There is no going out of this cage\circle of irrational thinking. It's just another way of putting you in a box and locking you inside. So you're afraid to go outside and think. If someone wanted to take over the world, first thing they would do is to make sure no one questions them. NO QUESTIONING AT ALL. The trauma you're talking about, you still don't see what I was pointing at. I've gotten over my trauma without God and listening to voices in my head. If I had done that, I would've ended in a very bad path. I don't want to talk about that path at all. You're still insisting that I fall into the circle where you are at this moment. No Charles, that's not the way to go sir. At the moment, I don't see any chances of there being a God. I would love to believe so! But no, no proof unless you take faith as proof. And faith can be demonstrated to be misleading. Now i've lost even more respect for you. Hindu and such "demonic" nature. Christianity is basically like any other religion. To say we are better than them is proving me right all this time. Most religious people do consider themselves as higher than everyone else. Closer to something that "no one" can get because they believe in the "right" thing. That's exactly what's in mind of most of the religious people. I was once like that, but that just made me feel bad inside. Now I see every human as human. I'm part of humanity and they are part of me. Even animals know to be kind to each other. Nothing new there. Humans have always wanted special place for themselves...you're just proving me even more right. Because I thought you were at least over the kids phase of religious thinking. "My religion is the right one and everyone else is just believing in demons". I actually regret starting this discussion with you because you're basically simple minded as any other religious person. It's really hard for me to say such harsh thing. Bible...written by humans and people believing it comes from God. Humans writing rules how to think without questioning is the best mistake human kind has ever made. Hinduism written by humans and people having faith that it's the truth. Judaism, Islam, Mormon, Sikhism, Jehovahs witnesses, Scientology...written by humans. Each person considering themselves higher than other and then resolving to conflict and people getting murdered because they didn't believe in the right God. It's just sad to realize this, what humans have done to themselves. If you go to a Scientology they will tell you they know for certain that they are the truth and fall into circle of ignorance. Charles B, I wasn't trying to convert you into anything. I was just questioning your belief. But now I actually see you're basically a human trapped in a cage and you don't let anyone touch you. Believing they might be from the bad side. Haha, look at this. I came with kind hearted thoughts and Bible can basically rip that apart by saying. "Oh the Satan works in mysterious ways. Even if it's a nice person, he is controlled by Satan to divert you". Simple word...Paranoia. Infinite circle of paranoia and false faith. Christians are held by higher standard. Charles that's just ridiculous that's what most of the other religious people think about their own religion. You're making no other point than "Christianity is the best! I know it because I have faith". It's childish and harmful. Harmful to yourself and towards others. I look at others humans as good and as bad as me. Humans as humans. Simple as that. One last thing. You wrote "I’m one of the deepest thinkers I know at the moment." That should tell something about yourself. Think the opposite of it sir. That's actually you in reality. Science doesn't stop on the answer "god did it" but you do. Is that really how deep thinkers do? Don't tell me you don't because that's another thing to waste our time on. Like I wrote before, people are really good at fooling themselves. I have scientific proof to demonstrate that. When you consider yourself deep thinker that's just fooling yourself into it Charles. I'm not writing this out of anger or jealousy. No one can see their true self. I question myself all the time, even if I think I did the right thing. I never sit down on any of the decisions about myself. Let's just end it here. You're never going to question yourself so for me to question you is a waste of your and my time. Thank you for your time and good luck with your life. Hopefully you'll realize one day what you've been trapped in. But i'm pretty sure that's never going to happen. And you'll probably tell me to fall into circle of never ending Faith. Sorry Charles, I can't do that again. I've already tried and didn't realize it was never ending and had no real proof to support and it also made me have an idiotic logic toward science and rational thinking. @Laurie Robillard I'm sorry you think that way. Mormons...I'm not even going to touch that. It's the same religious like every other religion. But you will obviously think your faith is the true one, just like Charles. 604. Randy D-K Are you talking about the Great Barrier Reef? A very important living creature that is vital to the planet and yet we are destroying at an alarming rate? That living rock? 605. Prix OH NOOO! I wrote another comment and it's sitting in (as you say) moderation heaven. Please Vlatko help! I wrote the word Idi**ic about myself and that comment goes to moderation control. Yay! Charles, my answer is coming up sooner or later. If you would like I can copy it and paste it with the word censored. 606. Vlatko No worries. Your comment is there @Prix. 607. Prix @Abrahams Son I've been reading your comments. You know, when you say non-believers well i'm one of them. You don't know how I'm thinking you can't possibly know. Even if I tried to explain to you what I think of when I see the nature and every human. You wouldn't understand me or feel the way I feel. To categorize the believers and the non-believers is just not smart. Everyone has different views for you to try to summit all up with "For non-believers the entire purpose of human evolution is to find a way to survive on this rock hurdling through the infinite cosmos" That's a no go. I see the future in different way than this. The beauty of everything from a rock to the ends of the universe is stunning. Trying to figure the beauty out is the most ambitions thing humans will ever achieve. I love to read about Black holes. What's in there? What happens once you do survive it? We have so much to learn. It seems like all of human science is just touching a small grain of sand when there is a beach to explore and examine. When you wrote "If the evolution of the brain is simply driven by the desire to “survive” it can never be completely trusted in the quest for truth" Well that's correct, the only problem is. We don't always have to see things. Like for example atom, we know through mathematics how it works and scientists did experiments to try to understand it. We can't see but the proof is there with experiments and mathematics. We can't trust our brains as much as we should. Rational thinking and logic make the chances of understanding something a lot higher. In other words PROOF, solid proof. Experiments that can be done to try to understand. Mathematics to make it logical. Science never stays at one place and sits there, it keeps on moving. God on the other hand is just belief. The circle of...never mind I've written that like 30 times now. Good day to you too sir. 608. D-K @Randy: I don't mean the great barrier reef, these are actual individual living rocks, among the oldest living organisms in the world. I swear, this is driving me up a wall, I just cannot figure it out. A name akin to Trilobites 609. Randy OH, I know what you might mean... wait... no I don't! OK, now you are driving ME nuts! Because it is on the tip of my tongue; hanging from my frontal lobe... I will get my books and you do your thing and the first one with answer wins! 610. D-K Got it! Stromatolites! By the good graces of Thor, I can let it rest now. I suddenly realized I should just check google for Cyanobacteria, and there it was. Huzzah. 611. Prix @Randy haha, D-K wins I guess. Sir, you've got huge amounts of knowledge I wish I had. Haha, I guess we just have to live with our current states. But I still have time to catch up with you MOHAHA!! 612. Randy @D-K YES!!!! Excellent! I just pulled out a book as your e-mail went through! Thank you! @Prix Yes indeed! As you are younger you have plenty of time! Use it wisely my friend! 613. Abraham's Son Yeah, that was great Randy! Dont you know God just put all those fossil bones here just to mess with your mind like I am dong now? 614. Randy @Abrahams Son LOL! I don't know if you were being friendly there or not, (and I would agree that I would deserve your scron for my remarks, although I stand by them!) But, back in the day, I heard some preacher say... "You see, the Dinosaur bones were put there by the Devil to fool the Satan-kissing scientists!" Oh, Batman.... that always makes me laugh... 615. Randy *that word above should be SCORN, sorry... 616. Randy And, you know? I have kissed Satan... it wasn't that great. He's gotta little bacteria problem, you know, he needs to use more of the antiseptic to strengthen his gums, like that Listerene.... there was some odor... I'm just sayin' 617. ilovemyselfmorethani @Prix You still insist “I believe we’ve evolved, if you will, to believe in a God”. That is totally false, we don’t exactly know of it. --We cannot "exactly" know of anything that's not reducible to a mathematical equation. Butthere is evidence that would suggest it. We can dispute whether it's strong or weak evidence. But saying that "That is totally false" is not an argument. I can say that everything you said is "totally false". "Well then you’re just believing without and final and solid proof." -- See, here you go again. We can only have "proof" for things of which we can have mathematical certainty. You don't have "proof" for much of anything you believed in. And again, saying "you have no "final and solid proof" is not an argument. Well it is, but it's a very flimsy one. "Btw, can you stop about me not getting a direct quote? I’ve already apologized." -- I KNOW you did. But you did so while simultaneously justifying it, and making preemptive judgements. So it's not quite a sincere apology don't you think? Be that as it may, I already accepted you're insincere apology. "Stop repeating. And if you can read, you’ve actually written more about the mistake than response itself." --Lol! So what? I've written more about the mistake than the response itself, so what? Amusingly, here you go again, you're so caught up with having the last word, instead of trying to have your last word make sense. Concentrate on what's being said, understand it, and don't rush your responses just so you have a response. Your logic seems a bit dodgy. 618. Charles B. Oh, boy. Way to much to cover should I actually have the ambition to cover it today. This is my busy day. Epicurus: The she-bear story is interesting, isn't it? I've known some "kids" that were evil to the core, and obviously they were old enough to know good from evil and evil is what they were dishing out and God allowed Elijah to make that "judgement" call then and there. God is love, but God is also just. That's the two sides to the Divine Being I love and serve. But, no worries; if you're not an evil little moster, no she bears will be sent your way by me or any other man of God any time soon. Peace to you. 619. Randy Here is an interesting thing, speaking of bears: Remember that hippie what they made the documentary about called "Grizzly Man"? You know why he deserved getting eaten by that poor starving bear? Because he was a very silly, hippie person. All apologies to his family, certainly, it was horrible, but I actually felt more sorry for the bear... My LOVE of Nature, or my positive thinking, or what ever faith you worship, will never, never preclude me, or you from getting eaten alive by a shark, or stung by a snake, or utterly destroyed by bacteria, or bitten by a brown recluse spider, or torn apart by a Camel Spider... etc... Only science can protect you from these things. We build the houses that keep you out of the rain. If you think that faith will make you safe? Or protected by some Natural, Universal, Dietific, imaginary friend... Then, you should listen to the dying screams and death agonies of that hippie surfer new-age dude... And then, you should buckle down and get to work on math, science and engineering so you can stave off the supertitions that will get you eaten. 100,000 years ago we had NO choice. Now, it's the 21st century. We can do better... Or not, dudes, it's your choice... I will be in the house. With a weapon. 620. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani Dude, what are you on? Can someone help me with this guy? He is dodging questions and not making any sense what-so-ever. What I BELIEVE IN? When did I ever write I believe in something. Mathematic, what? I'm so lost. It seems like you answered someone else and not me. My whole argument was "No one proved we were born believing in higher power". Simple as that...You base your this argument over what you BELIEVE. You wrote that twice in your sentence. Please look up a word I wrote where I wrote that? How about you apologize for me now instead? Who believes and who states with evidence? Me or you? Alright, if you think i'm only writing that to have the last laugh go ahead. I'm through with it. No more mentioning of that instance. My logic seems a bit dodgy? You wrote about this "– You usually will be born thinking a creator exists." No solid proof backing that claim up. And then you've been dodging this whole thing with other mindless answers without any proof. Am I being dodgy? You're just avoiding your actual claim without giving up. You know, I didn't consider what others were writing about you before but now I can fully understand them. If you try to avoid these questions once more I'm never going to reply. You were talking about "I won't answer unless someone has a good argument" Dude, I'm not going to look up that sentence, this is getting way to long of a page to search through again. Well, you do exactly the same thing you claim others of doing. 621. Prix @Randy I saw that documentary too. I don't know if should feel bad, no not about the guy who got eaten but about myself. I thought the guy was self centered, paranoid and crazy. I can understand why the bears didn't challenge the guy when bears had enough food, but why would he still stay? Why did all of those people cry for him? I mean I would've felt sad if i was his friend but I would've said "btw, that guy was nuts. It wasn't a surprise at all when i heard this news" Am I a weird person for not feel sorry or any sympathy at all? Just want to see if I'm alone on this one. 622. Randy @Prix Exactly. The human had a choice. He could have stayed at home, got an education and made money enough to build a house to protect him from the bear. The bear, on the other hand, has no choice; they have to eat whatever is around to eat. And in Alaska, the salmon runs are going extinct, so the bear have little food. A human hanging around his environment, is a tasty snack. Grizzlies are one of the largest, most ferocious land mammals on the planet... we all need to stay away from them, even as we admire them... 623. eireannach666 Like when that dude got killed by that tigar or that chick who got her face ripped off by the chimp. Then they want to ask why as if the animal wasn't just doing what it does. Funny note, that lady had been giving the chimp xanax and didn't have any that day. Ha! 624. eireannach666 Or "crikey" Steve Erwin who got impaled by a "gentle" beast. 625. Randy Hello, my gaelic brother! Excellent point. Just leave the poor creatures alone, am I right? Otherwise... you know... animals gotta eat... and the food of life is LIFE! 626. eireannach666 I guess I'm in moderation for some reason. I keep those guys busy. So anyways,How goes it Randy? Long time no see! Glad to see the champ come out of retirement! I'm just talking , Richard Dawkins. @ILMMTI So what exactly are you saying? That you are on the fence of our coming to be? So which side are you on? What is your theory on how we came to be us as a species? What makes you think that us and everything that exists is more than just star stuff? 627. Randy And by the way... you did not answer me earlier. How are you? IF you don't anser me I might have to drive over to California and kick your a@@ with karate! And then, of course, we would stumble, bleeding to the nearest pub and knock back a few "jars"! LOL! 628. eireannach666 I'm doing ok. Things are normal again. Can finally do some relaxing and doc hunting. What about you? Oh and I must add that they want to put those animal down for being animals and that erks me. But then I think of all the humans that kill. I think a lot of them should be put down and it seems a little hypocritical at first, but as you said " they had a choice.". So our free will and ability to make decisions on a personal level, makes us human but our ability to disregard all rationality and logic for pure emotion seperates us even more so from other animals.More so than our thought process. Animals don't do emotion. Only instinct and memory. We , with what we have done to eachother and al inhabitants on this rock, make us the beasts. But hey, we are what we are because we grew into a most greedy being since we were able to gain so much from our evolved brain of ours that we forgot what got us there. Instinct,rational and logic. Not religion and not aliens. Just the evolution of the mutant species called the apes. Then,our predecessors would ' perhaps , taken a bite out of ole Seigfreid and roy themselves. Let's here it for the Apes! Three cheers. Hip hip hooray. 629. Charles B. Prix: You're brilliant in a way, but to say that "faith" is childish or any ting less than noble is world-play. Human language cannot convey every concept that is held in one word at this present time. Faith is active and strong; it's a choice after a well-researched look at the other possibilities. You said: "You’re making no other point than “Christianity is the best! I know it because I have faith”. It’s childish and harmful. Harmful to yourself and towards others." You don't think it's harmful or hurtful to me when you tell me I'm being hurtful and childish? You can say that about my faith in God, and when I disagree with you, I'm being "childish"? Prix, you're missing a huge concept here. Just because there are counterfeits doesn't mean there is not an ultimate "reality" or ultimate truth. I may not understand Christianity fully as it's deeper and more wonderful the more I learn and study and as it unfolds in my life year by year, but that doesn't mean that I know know truth when I've found it. We can agree to disagree, but science and your attempt to explain away all that is Divine will eventually prove shallow for you. What if YOU'RE the one that's incorrect? What then? Much of what you put forth as "proof" for evolution, etc. is assumption, arguments complied from previous assumptions. For example, even Epic mentioned that we mirror the stages of evolution during our embryonic progression in the womb. That has now been totally proved to be false as a fetus when it looks like it has gills does not actually have them, and that part turns into the pituitary glad, part of the jaw, etc. Yet, for years, that was shoved down my throat by well-meaning teachers in biology class as "proof" of evolution along with all the little pictures! Assumptions and presumptions built upon other assumptions and presumptions. The whale embryo example that Epic gave, with it having legs that it reabsorbs before birth is interesting, but as usual, atheists view that as yet another "proof" of evolution. It's yet another assumption that may or may not be fully accurate. Even the Bible says that snakes used to have limbs, which seems to be the case as they have little ones where they used to be. Do the limbs have a purpose in the embryo that is not needed later on for the rest of their life in the ocean? Birds with claws loose them after they fledged. It's not an evolutionary indicator, but has a very valid reason at that point in life for the birds. Nonetheless, I'm ready to move on. Your arguments are logical in a odd sort of way, but they don't ring "true" with my mind and soul and spirit. But, if I'm not correct, and you are, I've lost nothing at all. I've had a full and fulfilled life; when I close my eyes in death if that's all there is, then I won't even know my error. However, if I'm correct, then the best is yet to come for those that do have faith, and the worst is yet to come for those that don't. Let me ask you this in conclusion: Is there anything that could change your mind? Dr. Randy: What are all your degrees in? I'd love to cut up dead people. I think I would have been very good at it, except that I'm colorblind. I would have loved to have been a pathologist or a post-mortum examiner. Maybe. I do feel compassion quite strongly sometimes and it might be difficult at times to be objective. Peace to you! You're still my favorite grumpy old disbeliever! You and Razor. 630. Achems Razor @eire666: Hi, from me also man, thought you had disappeared. 631. Charles B. P.S. Dr. Randy: Why do men have nipples and why do I have three?!? Just curious. :-) I know, I know! TMI! 632. Epicurus LOL @ CHARLES B....im laughing at you if you think kids teasing someone JUSTIFIES bears killing them...actually i just thought about that and stopped laughing. you are sick! there is nothing just about killing kids. they were NOT of age where they would know the full scope of their actions.. a MUCH better response form you would have been. "OH! that story must be made up....i wonder what else in there is made up....?" here try this one, Numbers 31:1-54 Under God's direction, Moses' army defeats the Midianites. They kill all the adult males, but take the women and children captive. When Moses learns that they left some live, he angrily says: "Have you saved all the women alive? Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." So they went back and did as Moses (and presumably God) instructed, killing everyone except for the virgins. In this way they got 32,000 virgins 633. heWinked Great Doc!! I especially liked the reference at the end to being on the other side of the glass....I had an experience very close to this...I was at the zoo, sitting and watching the gorillas. I wondered what the gorillas who were born in captivity thought of us on the other side of the glass. Plenty of possibilities entered my thoughts. When I thought of God being on another side of the glass looking at me looking at the gorillas, except, that glass isn't transparent. 634. Achems Razor @Charles B: So you like blood do you? (LOL) then you should of been a paramedic like I was, lots of fun picking up blood and guts and body parts at times. (LOL) I won't go into the more gory details or anything though. 635. Epicurus Also Charles, the pictures of embryos with gills was shown to be wrong yes. go take a look at the embryo in different stages of all different types of animals. you will be amazed. this isnt proof however it is evidence and the exact type that the theory of evolution predicts. theories make predictions and when those predictions are shown true it strengthens the theory. you can SPECULATE with your lack of information that whales may have a use for legs as an embryo but anyone who actually studies whales or snakes will tell you not only that the legs are not developed on the fetus for a long while but they are also of no use (vestigial, look it up its an important word to know for biology) AND they will also show you a progression of fossils of the animal that became the whale. Cetacean evolution has been extensively studied as a matter of fact....actually if you look at all mammals in the water not only do they share the skeleton of their land relatives, but they breath oxygen and when they swim, unlike fish who move side to side, cetaceans move up and down like the spine of a four legged land mammal. The amount of work done on this particular subject is staggering and to see someone who isnt trained in it argue it based on what they feel in their heart (what they have been indoctrinated to believe without evidence) is either hilarious or an insult to all the people who actually went to school for this. I dont know how you can take the positions you do and still claim to be intellectually honest. and you sort of end with Pascals Wager?!?!?! have you never honestly thought about this? "But, if I’m not correct, and you are, I’ve lost nothing at all. I’ve had a full and fulfilled life; when I close my eyes in death if that’s all there is, then I won’t even know my error. However, if I’m correct, then the best is yet to come for those that do have faith, and the worst is yet to come for those that don’t." actually you and I have JUST as much chance of being wrong about hinduism or islam or religions we havent discovered or many number of things that if you dont believe in they will send you to a hell type place like christianity has. you have just as much riding on the bet as we do. also if god will punish good people just because they dont believe in him then i would willingly never worship that kind of being. if that being also made me knowing i wouldnt believe (omnipresent) and knowing what it would take for me to believe in it yet still not do that...then i absolutely find this being repulsive. 636. Randy @Charles You have nipples because you started out in the womb as a female. All vertabrate mammals do. You mutated into a male but your nipples are vestigial, like your tail bone, or your appendix, etc... A third nipple, has a medical name, and I cannot bring it to mind right now... but there are one of two reasons for it... The most common is that you absorbed a twin in the womb and the third nipple is his... Yes. That's how gross nature is... The second reason is not going to be mentioned here. Apparently, this condition seems to be more common in Asia... there is no explanation for that, except that my theory is statistical. Asia, (Including India and Pakistan, Taiwan and the rest of the sub-continent, of course...) make up the majority of the people in the world. Therefore... it stands to reason- mathmatically- that more third nipples would have been recorded there. My Advanced degrees are in useless subjects, as far as money-making goes, World History and Classical Literature, but I washed out of medical school and law school.... and I am writing a dissertation to get a masters in Evolutionary Biology, although I will probably not make it before I die. 637. Randy @Achems Yes, sir. When you are knee deep in entrails, and the stink almost makes you pass out- it is very difficult to think of crystally-- angelic-- spirits and how "divine" we are... However, you can see that we are just the same as every other organism on the planet... the veil is lifted away and reality becomes clear and simple... 638. Charles B. Dr. Randy: Yeah! That's great news, my brother says that I'm just a "freak"! Fortunately neither one of my kids had a third nipple or breast. I checked. :-) That's why weren're not supposed to marry our sisters so that all those add little things are less likely to keep going, eah? Peace to you. I hope you live long and prosper, actually. Sincerely. 639. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "Dude, what are you on? Can someone help me with this guy? He is dodging questions and not making any sense what-so-ever." --Are you kidding me with this? What question am I dodging? YOU'RE THE ONE WHO ISN'T MAKING ANY SENSE. "What I BELIEVE IN? When did I ever write I believe in something." --What? You don't believe in anything?? Don't you believe that the Christian God doesn't exist? Don't you believe that you're a human being, or that your mom loves you? Are you saying you don't believe in anything?! I said, YOU CANNOT prove anything that cannot be reduced to a mathematical certainty. So you cannot prove most of anything you believed in. So don't go asking me for "solid" "exact" "proof", because that would be impossible for selection pressures. "Mathematic, what? I’m so lost. It seems like you answered someone else and not me. " -- No, I answered you. You just cannot follow a train of thought. That's why you're lost. "My whole argument was “No one proved we were born believing in higher power”. Simple as that…You base your this argument over what you BELIEVE." -- Well we probably aren't "born" with it. But we collectively evolved to have such a behaviour. We aren't born immediately wanting to have sex, but we will eventually, because this behaviour has been instilled in us through evolution. That's just the case with anything pertaining to evolution, we cannot have proof, but we can have evidence. And I don't simply believe this. Not only can you NOT follow a train of thought, you are also a LIAR. "You wrote that twice in your sentence. Please look up a word I wrote where I wrote that? How about you apologize for me now instead?" -- Oh Boy, You are so lost now aren't you? All this twisting and turnings. Why don't you read my responses again. "Who believes and who states with evidence? Me or you?" -- What's you're evidence? Statements like "that's totally false!" ? Lol. "Alright, if you think i’m only writing that to have the last laugh go ahead. I’m through with it. No more mentioning of that instance." -- See there you go again. I never said you're "writing to have the last laugh". What I said was you always want to have the last word, without bothering for your last word to make sense. So you just, ONCE MORE, accused me of something that is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. OHHH GEEZZ.. "My logic seems a bit dodgy? You wrote about this “– You usually will be born thinking a creator exists.” No solid proof backing that claim up. " -- There can be NO "solid proof" for anything that cannot be reduced to a mathematical certainty. You really OUGHT to get this by now. The evidence is that MOST people who've ever lived believe in God. That's not to say that God exists, but it could possibly be because of selection pressure --cultures who believed in a God survived better -- who knows. "And then you’ve been dodging this whole thing with other mindless answers without any proof. Am I being dodgy? You’re just avoiding your actual claim without giving up." -- Hahaha When I said your logic is dodgy, I didn't mean you were dodging anything. Again with the proof thing.. This is getting OLD. "You know, I didn’t consider what others were writing about you before but now I can fully understand them." --Oh No. YOU fully empathized with them before you even started talking to me. Which was hilarious, coz you would go talking to them and saying mean stuff about me-- as if I couldn't read what you were saying-- and then below you're comment you would ask me something in your politest. You really seem like an odd person to me. "If you try to avoid these questions once more I’m never going to reply. You were talking about" --Oh NO! Please reply!! please!!! Duh.. " “I won’t answer unless someone has a good argument” Dude, I’m not going to look up that sentence," -- And is that wrong? If people choose not to reply to nonsensical retorts. How is that wrong? "this is getting way to long of a page to search through again. Well, you do exactly the same thing you claim others of doing." -- That's right. You understood ZERO of what I said. But you think, your'e the one making sense. Hilarious. 640. ilovemyselfmorethani @eireannach666 "So what exactly are you saying? That you are on the fence of our coming to be? So which side are you on? What is your theory on how we came to be us as a species? What makes you think that us and everything that exists is more than just star stuff?" -- Was this for me? Well I'm a theistic evolutionist, so I really don't have any problem with evolution. If that's what you mean. 641. Randy @ilovemyself... A theistic evolutionist... oh brother... I see you coming from a mile away... What are you, a catholic? I have an Irish uncle who is a catholic priest, he was happily married to a 12 year old boy in Thailand. (that's a line from "The Departed" but it applies very well, I, too had an uncle Jackie that ended up in a landfill and a catholic priest uncle... it just happens that way... art imitating life, I guess...) 642. Randy It is about AGE not gender, you get that right? I do not care what any two consenting adults do, but no children should be involved... ever, but christians seem to really like the youngin's... 643. Charles B. Epic: Ok, ok! Let's not get personal about my Funk and Wagnals and how they met their end! It was probably just a yard sale anyway. Should I die and the only groovy thing happening two minutes after I take my last breath is that my hair and fingernails are still growing, then you will be the first person offered my apologies in my eternal non-existent state! If you want, then just give me one thing most worthy of my time to study. Razor: Ain't sure why I have such a "morbid curiosity." Literally. Perhaps because death seems like such an "unnatural" thing, as we have eternity planted in our hears and want to keep living, even after life has passed. Maybe I should study to be a mortician, but actually I think being a pastor would be more worldly and Heavenly good for more people. IlovemyselfmorethanI: An evolutionary theist, eah? Hum. What does that mean anyway? Sounds compromising, Perhaps I could call myself "a pre-Adomite life agnostic", meaning, I'm not entirely sure what life was like before God reformed the world and created Adam and Eve to fill it with people. Earth itself could be quite old, but modern man is not. Ok. Joke time! Dr. Randy talked about his "Irish Uncle" so as I Christian I'm the only one that can make fun of us without being utterly rude. Just for a joke. 3 backslidden unrepentant former preachers went to Hell: The Catholic priest, the Southern Baptist, and the Pentecostal (of which I most closely relate to). In utter surprise, the Catholic priest said, "Oh my! I firmly believed the worst I'd get was Purgatory! This is dreadful!" The Baptist pastor said, "Oh my! I didn't believe I could ever walk away from salvation! This is dreadful!" However, the Pentecostal preacher, true to his nature was up-beat and cheerful! He kept a positive attitude and just kept saying: "I'm not here and it's not hot! I'm not here and it's not hot!" :-) 644. Randy @Charles Actually, sir, the hair/beard and nails do NOT continue to grow after death. That is a myth, perpetuated by dark ages medical knowledge, and they also believed in Vampires... We know now that it is the skin shrinking from dehydration, pulling away from the teeth, and bones/nails, and hair protien fibers, that give the APPEARNCE that they continue to grow after death. There is no cellular structure growth or re-organization after the brain dies. Except the batcerium and microbial organisms that eat you, of course. 645. Randy Oh and Charles, that WAS a funny joke! 646. Charles B. Dr. Randy: You're got to be kidding! I'm crushed! I saw that on a CSI episode, so it's gotta be true! What is the world coming to when you can't even trust TV to give you the real truth anymore? I'm rather depressed now. THANK YOU, Dr. Randy for yet another disconcerting comment to my little world. Don't you feel guilty? Where there no soul, I'd be a little more upset about this revelation! :-) Epic: Ok! Let's try this again. If I die and all that's really cool going on is my digesting decomposition and the shrinking of my over-indulged skin on my well-nourished frame, then you will have my well deserved apologies for intending to inspire you to something more than just thinking we're all bacterial all-you-can-eat buffet! 647. Charles B. P.S. Thanks! I do so hope the Vlatko doesn't get overly upset with all the chatter on his website. It's masking my frustration at all you "faithless" ones that still have rather irritatingly hard to deal with snide remarks. But, I still believe, that in the end, the good guy (yeah that me) wins the day! :-) 648. Randy Actually, Charles, I DO feel guilty. It is hard to take candy away from a child and it cries, but you have to if they are intolerant to sugar, for example. It'll break a good man's heart, but, you know-- you gotta do what you gotta do... And the SMART guy usually wins... sometimes that is the good guy, sometimes it is the bad guy. There have been many evil geniuses in world history that have saved the world. But, those distinctions are purely human and really have no place in the natural world. Nature has a morality that can be seen in say... the ocean... which is the womb of the planet. The creatures there are some of the oldest and most adaptable and most resiliant. There is a drama in the interplay of life there that will teach you everything you need to know. 649. Randy Study the Arca-Toothus Vampirus Infernalis, literally "The Vampire Squid from Hell" and it's environment and how it makes a living. Or as I meantioned earlier, the camel spider that our soldiers have to contend with in Iraq... they have much to teach us about evolution and where we fit into the scheme of things. I could go on and on and on, these are just a few examples... 650. Charles B. I was joking about feeling guilty Dr. Randy! CSI probably got it right, and I just misunderstood when I saw the hair growing (ya know how they do those zoom shots). But I'm sure you know that. And I'm sure you were talking about something deeper than that as well. I feel peaceful tonight. My lovely wife and my precious little ones are already sleeping. Whenever I feel peaceful like this, it's a prelude to a deeper understanding from God and I come out on the other end trusting Him even more, if not always understanding all I'm going through. On the day I was born, my mother prayed, "What should we name him? God replied: "Name him Charles Matthew," and later she found out that meant "A man who is a gift from God" when you put the two names together. At the age of seven, I made the conscience decision to follow Him, and I can honestly say I've never turned back. I may have made moral mistakes along the way, but my heart was, is, and always will belong to the Way, the Truth, and the Life; the Lord Jesus Christ. I've never consciously rebelled, even in troubled times, even when miserable, even when down-trodden. It still amazes me when I find people such as yourself whom once believed, if only for a moment, but no longer do. The concept truly is unimaginably "faithless" to me. I cannot place my soul in the hands of men who say there is no God as long as there is still a spark of truth in what I know and as long as there is a shadow of a doubt in what others say might to be the origin and source of all life apart from God. This documentary says that God might only be in the mind and you can trigger a reaction (a presence) with a magnet in the right place. What it failed to postulate is that perhaps that is how God makes Himself known when he chooses to do so. Perhaps that is the place where God makes himself know when He chooses to do so. The eye is not the source of what it sees; it is the means by which we see. The brain may contain the means by which we have "faith" and experience God, but not be the only source of that faith. It would be a great fallacy to confuse the means and the source as certainly being 100% the same. I very disappointing documentary. Dr. Randy, should you tomorrow, or even on your last day and with your last stuggling breath, change your mind, He won't hold your stubborn past against you. He'll meet you where you are and I'll meet you someday in Heaven. As almost always, I leave you with a purposeful blessing; peace to you! And I will pray for you again tonight. Charles B. 651. Charles B. Vlatko: Sorry I'm getting all mushy and "religie" here lately. I do appreciate the docs and your hospitality. It's just part of who I am. Epic: Try not to blast me out of the water if you can help it; if you can't afford to allow me to express a little faith, then please allow me to have a little "grace"! Thanks. 652. Achems Razor @Charles B: When you go to bed, make sure you don't have any electrical appliances on or near your bed, like clock radios etc: it is called "electrosmog" If you hear voices like your god or whatever talking to you in the middle of the night, could be just the interference of the ambient electrical waves/current coming from such devices interfering with your brain synapses, or if you sleep on steel box springs type of mattress, could be generated by magnetic field also, I actually just throw my multi-breaker off in bedroom for the night, don't want to hear any voices or any body talking to me, don't need no crazy's (LOL) 653. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Randy A theistic evolutionist… oh brother… I see you coming from a mile away… -- Come on now, you know you prefer us over creationists. "What are you, a catholic?" --I used to be. But I just consider myself a Christian. "I have an Irish uncle who is a catholic priest, he was happily married to a 12 year old boy in Thailand." --Ah.. getting the nit-wits to represent the whole. A common tactic. But there's a fallacy lurking in there somewhere, won't you agree? Randy, may I ask how old (or young) you are? You seem like a really fun kind of grandfather. I bet your grandkids love you. (No sarcasm involved) 654. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Charles B "IlovemyselfmorethanI: An evolutionary theist, eah? Hum. What does that mean anyway? " -- It's theistic evolutionist (this is more commonly used). It means I don't take the Genesis Account of creation literally. I'm fine with evolution. 655. Randy HAHAHA, yes, sir! I am 57 years old and cranky and my little mieces and nephews love me even though I call them "sammiches" and chase them with electric carving knives! And you are right, I did, grudgingly, respect the church for the Vatican II conference (1964) when they accepted evolution as indisputible, but they then said, "but god did it..." And I love the ritual... but... you know it's a show, like a movie... there are real things to think about... 656. D-K Evolution doesn't explain the emergence of life, it only explains increasing complexity in biochemical organisms. At some point, theorethical science will have to tackle the abiotic to organic matter question. Or circumvent it with panspermia, I guess, which explains life on earth but still leaves the question of organic matter to be answered. Carbon dazzles me 657. Randy Actually, the emergence of life CAN be explained by Cosmology and Biochemistry. I mean, I have conducted the experiment in which simple proto-plasm can be created with all of the elements present at the "Young Earth" (4 billion years ago, apporx.), as Carl Sagan showed in the series "Cosmos"... And THEN there is evolution of forms... Was that your point, D-K, or am I way off... 658. Randy Carbon doesn't dazzle me as much, it is very common throughout the Universe... Buckminsterfulerine, or "The Bucky-Ball" as engineers nickname it... now THAT dazzles me. You know, because of the geo-desic dome that R. Buckminsterfuller invented... and I know I ain't spelling any of that correctly but... if you are well educated you get what I am sayin'. 659. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani “What I BELIEVE IN? When did I ever write I believe in something.” –What? You don’t believe in anything?? Don’t you believe that the Christian God doesn’t exist? Don’t you believe that you’re a human being, or that your mom loves you? Are you saying you don’t believe in anything?! I said, YOU CANNOT prove anything that cannot be reduced to a mathematical certainty. So you cannot prove most of anything you believed in. So don’t go asking me for “solid” “exact” “proof”, because that would be impossible for selection pressures. Believe if Christian God doesn't exist? I can believe the hindu,ancient greek, egyptian, batman any of the gods can exist. But the evidence for it is low and having faith doesn't mean it can be proven. There are so many Gods out there so with the mathematic certainty it's very low that CHRISTIAN GOD exists. There you go, another good reason not to "believe". There ie evolution to try to explain things instead of believing in something that has been repeated through out seveal cultures. So the whole "If i believe christian god exists" is going out of the window. It's that i'm certain of it. No believing there. If i believe i'm a human being? It's just a name for us, we can examine WHY we are human beings. So yes I KNOW i fall into the catogory of human being. With mathematic principle you talked about, every animal can be divided by their abilities. We have a good enough brain so we are humans. No believing there. If my mother loves me? You don't have any reason to go there at all. I know with my own ways and the "mathematic" certainty that she loves me. I know her and she knows me, what me and her have gone through is none of your buisness. You still avoided the real question WHERE DID I WRITE I BELIEVE IN SOMETHING? Also, I couldn't follow you was because you jumped into another catogory and I was having a headache and it was late. Excuse me for that but now i'm back on topic. Now you're just getting rude, I can be that too. Do I want to? No not really. Liar? Really? Who's the one lying? You stated that arguement as a fact and when i show you the evidence you call me a liar? You simply don't BELIEVE. Yes, you believe in that NOW. All of a sudden you change and state something without anything to back it up with? Even animals have these insticts of sex. You can't simply say we "evolve" into believing so. Animals don't have a religion? Or do they? Let's explore idea as well. What you can't do is simply realise that your argument is left in dust and resort to "omg lol! that's funny HA!" now isn't that childish? I can resort to that kind of behaviour as well but it's not going to get anywhere. I actually talked about something being "perfect" which is never possible. Even in mathematics something is never absolute perfect. Al thought you can take the probability on which side it falls on the most. If you really can reduce something to mathematics please do so about our discussion? Cultures who believed in God? You mean dietes? Several thousands of them by now. There hasn't always been the notion of one God. Believed in God survived better? No, actual proof to support that argument even IF it was true. Again with PROOF? Is it getting old? Oh sorry, I thought science was all about proof and evidence? You have surely not provided any evidence except avoiding direct answers. Yes you DO that. Here take a look, at your own writing. "–What? You don’t believe in anything?? Don’t you believe that the Christian God doesn’t exist? Don’t you believe that you’re a human being, or that your mom loves you?" Avoiding without reading what i wrote. I specifically wrote QUOTE ME WHEN I WROTE I BELIEVE IN SOMETHING. "YOU CANNOT prove anything that cannot be reduced to a mathematical certainty" Still dodging by using mathematics, that's not going to work here. You had no solid proof, you also say "Oh we shouldn't look for answers in Bible" and that takes Bible out of the picture for answers of proof for God. "Well we probably aren’t “born” with it. But we collectively evolved to have such a behaviour." You stated something else before and changed it now so it still KIND OF supports you. No, it doesn't. Like Ramachandran said, it's only in religious people that this is available, only the ones that BELIEVE a lot. It can have several purposes that has nothing to do with God. "– What’s you’re evidence? Statements like “that’s totally false!” ? Lol." Where is your evidence might I ask? Because you specifically wrote about us being born believing in God. It's a completely false claim. You stated it as if it was 99% the truth. No, it's not. Not even close. As i previously wrote "There can be many possibileties". To state that is completely false. If you take a Hindu and did the same experinment and he believes in many gods. Does that prove that there is a proof for many gods? No, it means there is something totally different going on. It might not even have something to do with GOD AT ALL. Who knows. I accused you? I'm not even going to touch that. Well, I wrote those things about you because that's the way you were writing. I wanted to get my own impression of you. I did support them by first reading what you wrote. Plus I asked if they could stop because it won't get anywhere. You're still behaving like a child with "OHH GEEZZ!" Anyone can do that. I think most of the people learned to do that in Kindergarden. But i assumed most would grow out of it...guess you didn't. "–Oh NO! Please reply!! please!!! Duh.." See what I mean? "– That’s right. You understood ZERO of what I said. But you think, your’e the one making sense. Hilarious." Maybe you should read instead of acting like a 5 year old? When you took mathematics into the discussion I got lost because I didn't think anyone would just into that as a self diffence once they were cornered. Cornered how? What you claimed before was incorrect and now it's mathematics without at least argument. Yes, you can take mathematics into anything. You didn't even take a claim I made into mathematics and prove it to have less chance of being true. YOU are the one making no sense. "– And is that wrong? If people choose not to reply to nonsensical retorts. How is that wrong?" So I should stop writing to you? Hey that's good advice! Thanks. 660. Achems Razor @Prix,... with respect , BUT you guys are going around in circles about "belief" that has been done before on other docs. ad naseum, you guys can be talking about beliefs till the cows come home and go back out again in the morning, round and round, where she stops nobody knows! 661. Prix @Achems Razor That's true, but I would like to try out my luck with this discussion. I mean it doesn't hurt anyone, I hope. Also learning new things! I love it. ALSOOOOO. Sorry about the earlier post having spelling errors, I didn't have the time to go through it once more. Get some popcorn for this long read. @Charles B. By the way, I forgot to write one thing before. When you wrote "Even Jesus chose his words wicely" or something. I consider myself and everyone else as being just Humans. Making mistakes and not always making the right choices. Now back to the post. Hmm, Charles there is only one way I can prove faith is something that can fool anyone. It all depends on if you're willing to challenge your belief or not. Like Derren Brown did his trick and the things we have learned about our brain so far. Most of us are deluded when it comes to how we think about our selves and what we BELIEVE to be the truth. I'm assuming you're going to go with the route of "Derren brown was a trick. Has nothing to do with the TRUE faith. And most of the experiments are done and science doesn't know what true faith is". Tell me if i'm wrong. Think about it, to believe everyone else are worshiping demons and you are the truth. Isn't that somewhat...deluded? I still have respect for you but I couldn't use any other word. There was an psychological experiment done with a Child. The parents told him he had a red ball he loved to play with when he was a child. They started to tell him that around the age of 8...I think. And after about 3 years they asked him about the red ball and he replied "Oh! I used to play with it there and there" He even managed to make images of how it was and how it looked like. He believed in it SO MUCH! He refused to believe his parents once they told him their was no red ball. Even for a child, if they start to believe in something, It cannot be disproved. It's must be a horrible feeling to tell the child that it was some experiment. And for the child to have done so much just to have their favorite thing being a lie. When I wrote childish, it was correct. Children always believe in things and they will stand firm without letting it go even with proof. Like the experiment I wrote before. Children amongst children always think they are have everything right. That they know everything around them. Even if they do something selfish they will say it's the right thing to do. Even if they state something it's right. Faith is the same thing. Tell me if this reminds you of something. If you have a hindu child and a muslim child. I'll write H for Hindu and M for muslim. H: Oh it stopped raining. I prayed to shiva. M: You mean God. There is only one god, my parents told so and it's the truth. H: You're a liar, my parents told me there are several Gods. M: My god is the true one. You are lying! H: My gods can beat your gods. M: My god created everything, even your God. So he can kill them too! H: No! My gods created your God. (Now their thoughts) H: His one God is nothing compared to our God. His parents are just lying. My Gods will show him that he was wrong! One puny God! hahaha! M: Hmpf! He thinks his Gods are better. My god is true one. Elephant God? That's stupid. It's demons! God will strike him down for believing in such ridiculous and st*pid gods. When he dies and goes down to hell he will know our religion is better. So Charles sir, does that remind you of anything? All of the things you've written that Hindu believe in demons. Christianity is held by higher status. Isn't that by faith...childish? I'm not saying this out of any anger. I hope you take this argument seriously because I do say it with good enough proof. Why? Because I was once like that when I was a kid. It wasn't just me but a lot of other kids thinking their religion is the best. Everyone is still one way or another child at heart. Nearly all of the human history has been wars about religion. To think that it might not happen again and that "We aren't like them" is just as childish. Humans can still be fooled. I can't remember the name of the film, but a teacher does an experiment to show his students that the tricks hitler used can still be used. Humans, you, me and everyone in this whole world can fool ourselves better than anyone else trying to convince us to foor ourselves. Charles...I've written before how humans trick themselves into thinking things and imagining things. I actually like this question. I answer it a lot. I'll give myself as an example and others I know that don't believe in God. I treat other people just as I would treat myself. If they do me harm I let them, they are just loosing a good friendship. I knew a guy who had a bad back. He had a back like that cartoon film "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" I thought to myself. If i was like that and everyone teased me in school. Would I really want some help? I swore in front of him that I will protect him and do my best. Not because I wanted to get into heaven just because if i was in that state I would want help. I stood up and fought people twice as larger than me. I learned how to scare people without getting into fights. He even tried to be with a gang and teased me. But I waited for him knowing they are just making fun of him. And he returned with better knowledge about humans and I kept on pushing. I didn't care if girls found him disgusting, he was and is my friend. I remember there being a huge crowd and everyone watching. A little kid was talking about his mother and everyone were laughing, my friend couldn't defend himself. I went straight in and told the kid "I talked about your mother, what are you going to do?" And took my friend out of there. NEVER ONCE did he say thanks for protecting me. I didn't care one bit. After some years, he asked me a favor and gave me the money before I finished the task. I asked him "Maybe you should give me money after i'm done" He told me "After what you have done for me, I trust you". That is thanks enough for me. If your God is really that cruel then send me to hell. I don't care, I care about people around me and that they are happy. Religion makes people afraid, I know people that worship God and are selfish. Just because they think they are better than me. I don't care, I treat them still kindly. Yes, they have read the bible and follow it completely. Science for them is just a myth. They say "why make it harder than it is? Believe in God and forget about science". I still discuss with them while smiling. They learn, I learn and everyone benefits. Now they are realizing more of what i'm talking about and understand that not everything can be based on simply FAITH. Why divide ourselves? Science doesn't teach us how to behave. We already know how to behave. Being selfish doesn't lead anywhere, being cruel doesn't lead anywhere, lying doesn't lead anywhere. Even a child can understand difference between all of them. Just ask them "what if someone was selfish\lying\cruel towards you? Would you like it?" If i'm incorrect well then I am, for the time being there is not much logic and evidence to support God in many ways. Humans can ask more questions and go forward. Even if I end up burning in hell, I don't care. As long as I know my mother, father, friends, girlfriend and her parents enjoyed being with me. But what if i'm correct? All these wars, all these humans dying and churches being built where poor people live. All the false faiths that have been there, all the science we would miss. All the beauty we cannot explain. The beauty of our evolution, how simple things can do so much. Arguments that have no evidence and just rely on something that anyone can do...trick our brains into believing something that is not there. All the new planets to explore, all the money catholic church keeps and all the molestation that haunt children. With science we could grow better crops and have food for everyone in the world. All the politicians using religion to trick their people into BELIEVING they have chosen wisely. All the money people have earned by tricking others that they can read minds(having faith is still there)or talk with the dead or they can heal others. Sir, after all this. Please don't tell me "Don't throw your faith away, satan can trick anyone" Well dear sir, if everyone stood on solid proof and no faith, this won't happen all that much. I can't remember where i got this quote but it was from Richard Dawkins (I do agree with him but he does some things that I think are not the right way to go) If there was no religion, Good people would be Good and the Bad people Bad. Right now people who are religious THINK they are doing the right thing when in reality they are doing harm. Yes sir, I know it is false that "we mirror the stages of evolution during our embryonic ect". Science never stands on one solid ground. Also the fish out of water is totally false. The stages not exactly look like the same in the same time period. As in, if you take a picture of dolphins womb and a human females womb picture at 5th month. They don't look all that alike. I'm sorry that your teachers shoved down that in your throat. What if the faith that has been shoved down your throat is false? You seem quite annoyed at your teachers doing so but can you imagine the shock of religion being false? (Shoving comment, please don't take it offensively I didn't mean it like that. I just used your words sir. If you do take them as an offense, I apologize in advance) There are many claims that have been proven false in science. It's nothing new, the only thing is science disproves itself. It's not like religious people all over the world get together and try to disprove this. I'm going to be completely honest to you about this. I haven't studied in that specific direction all that much. Evolution has it correct, birds do need their claws at that point. It's for survival. (I'm just assuming that at the moment) Just like T-rex had its arms. No point of them being there but science doesn't precisely know what they were for. If we can reverse the evolution and hopefully have a T-Rex we might know. Most of the stuff is based on what good use they can have in their life time. For example peacocks and their feathers, we know now that it's for attracting females. Healthier the better, every animal does this. Btw, when bible says Snakes had limbs. Can you give me the chapter and the precise placement for the line? Sir, they will never ring "true" in your mind, soul and spirit. Something that crushes the whole perception of reality and death, truth and lie, good and evil...is never going to do that. You lose nothing if nothing happens after death? I really wish there was a heaven and hell to be honest. So I can see what God would tell me. No one on this earth can tell me that. Or if Hindus were correct, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, ancient greek were correct. But you do lose a lot. Science looses a lot. Humanity loses a lot. Everyone on this earth is special. To have faith and dispute others faith, wage wars and all the other things i've mentioned before. You do lose. Science looses a great mind that could be used to push science even further. Disprove theories, build new theories. Discover things that no one knows of. Humanity loses the perception of right and wrong...if we still followed the bible word by word. We would see a lot of war, blood and deaths. Humanity loses a kind person trying that closed his eyes about humans(brain can be tricked). More good people thinking they are doing the right thing even though it might be wrong. No sir. There is nothing that can change my mind. Unless God comes to earth physically and answers everyones questions. He doesn't need to answer mine, I've got both mindsets. But to everyone in the whole world. Tell his children "oh you humans actually did that to yourself. I actually let Satan be there, also i created all these religions to show Satan you humans can be tricked. Btw I haven't written any religion yet, you people did this all by yourself. I never talked with anyone! Btw, the wars you created were fun to watch. I supported the winning side, Get it?" Sorry Charles, there is enough proof and evidence for me to stay put on where i'm standing. Like I already wrote, humans are really good at fooling themselves. To think "I lost nothing if i believe in God and follow a religion" is the same as saying "We won right? Horay!" After a war between humans. When the reality is completely different. 662. eireannach666 @Achems Infrasound Achems? In reference to the clock/radio post. (I spelled that right , right?) But yea, a lot of "ghost" and "para-normal" mumbo jumbo , hocus-pocus has been linked to the infrasound off of things such as fans , electric boxes , etc. Haven't really thought about that in a long time. 663. Achems Razor @eire666: Yes,ambient electric current can have pervasive fluctuation on the nerve synapsis of the brains functioning, Even if everything is shut off, if it is not shut off at the source like a multi-breaker, the electrical energy leading into the wiring and receptacles will still give ambient current in the atmosphere, almost like standing under high tension wires. Came apon this info. by accident, do electronic work as hobby It came up on a website....google "electrosmog" it is actually prevelant in our society, cell phones etc: etc: Maybe that is why so many religee's (LOL) 664. Prix @Achems Razor "Electrosmog" Thanks! I'll look it up as well. Didn't know about this. But do you think this can have huge affect on people or is it something small? Is there a way to detect this, as in a device you can buy to measure the electrical energy? I hope you don't tell me to put multimeter into the air hahaha xD. My girlfriend might think I've gone completely nuts. 665. eireannach666 @Achems Ha! I wonder if anyone has even ran an extensive test of any kind on infrasound and cells.. Computers for sure do.If they did I'd like to see the results. Might be a little disturbing depending on how much we actually intake. I knoe they tested the whole cell phone to cancer stuff but infrasound has been proven to do some strange things. I actually can be contributed to some physical reactions and bodily responses people associate with ghosts ,angles ,etc. In fact , I saw a good doc on this topic. I can't recall if it was here on tdf oe not. Hmm... Vlatko , do you have such a doc here? I forget the name , though. 666. Prix @eireannach666 I tried to search I've found a couple of names. Maybe it's one of these. 5th Dimension Ghost Also I read this, "I watched a show this evening on the Discovery Channel called "Tigers Attack. It was about how scientists are learning that many animals use infrasound (low frequency sounds beyond our ability to hear) to send messages to each other and sometimes evoke reactions in prey. Unexpectedly, the show went from talking about animals to talking about haunted places, and how the reactions that some people have to "haunted" places are actually caused by infrasound present in that particular area. Infrasound can make you feel panic, fear, nausea, wanting to run away...stuff like that. I've seen shows on hauntings where a medium in a room with a lot of activity describes going through those feelings." Was it this show maybe? If not i'm off to sleep now. Have fun and take care. 667. Laurie Robillard @ Randy, Achems, Epi “what do you mean by evolution”, or “are you refering to evolution as espoused by Darwin, or molecular evolution as taught by current biologists”, or “should I consider Darwinian evolution” or “do you mean survival of the fittest” or even “do you mean the process of natural selection”. 668. Randy @Laurie You were very mad at me before... but I will answer you if you don't mind. Evolution is a fact and we see it happening all the time, in nature, in laboratories, it can be studied and measured. And has been studied and measured for about 2000 years now. Darwin, had a "theory" about how it worked, or what engine "ran" it, that was called Natural Selection. It does have some holes, and I do not agree with everything he wrote in "The Origin of Species" but that does not mean that EVOLUTION can be refuted. Evolution tests out. It saves lives. It makes money. It's the best bet. More people have been actually saved from disease by medical science (updated by genomic facts), than by going to shamanic witch-doctors, for example. It's the law of large numbers, as opposed to insignificant digits... etc... Statistics, math, you know what that stuff is, right? 669. Laurie Robillard Randy Holy Batman! I didn’t realize she was a mormon. That is some delusional christianity, right there. Laurie answers What do you know about Mormons? The following should tell you that Mormons are interested in science. A 1940 study established that Utah led all other states in the number of scientific men born there in proportion to the population (Thorndike, pp. 138-39). A thorough analysis of state-by-state contributions to science from 1920 to 1960 found that Utah led all other states by a wide margin in the proportion of its university graduates who eventually received doctoral degrees in science (Hardy, p. 499). 670. Laurie Robillard @ Randy Why can't a person believe in science and religion? Henry Eyring (1901–1981) is undoubtedly the most celebrated scientist produced within the Mormon faith to date. He published over six hundred scientific papers and about a dozen books, and he received almost every prize science has to offer. His theories form the core of modern chemistry. One of his colleagues said, “The contributions of Dr. Henry Eyring touch practically every field of chemical science and technology in a very fundamental manner” (xx). Not only was he a brilliant scientist, he was also a man with deep faith in God and in the restoration of the gospel in modern times. 671. Epicurus no one is saying that delusional people cant be right and intelligent in certain areas of life. look at John Nash who suffered from paranoid schizophrenia but won the nobel prize and created Game Theory. Hitler became ruler of an entire country...you can be delusional and still intelligent in CERTAIN respects. 672. Achems Razor @Prix: Yes, electrosmog does have huge effect, it 's been on the news lately, where classrooms of kids getting sick by lots of wireless computers. I once working in a place of about 180 computers, felt like (you know the word, starts with "c") all day long. They do have meters that can check for ambient current, an experiment, stand under hi-tension towers with a fluorescent tube, it should start to glow. 673. Randy Hey, there were a lot of great Mormons, Orson Scott Card for example wrote some amazing books. And I did spell out the good things about Mormonism. But you know why Utah has been showed to be the "Most Depressed State" in America? Because you people reject therapy and doctors, (and booze!) And you can't have science and religion, according to Paul. All of the Cosmos and Nature have lived without god, or the bible, or Paul or Satan, for about 14 Billion years... (you really have to factor out human existence as it is so insignificant...) It doing fine. You can live without it TOO! 674. Laurie Robillard Here is another man interested in science. You might say it's a lie he never existed. Why can't you believe that people can have religion and be interested in science. ====James Talmage Elder Talmage graduated from Lehigh University and studied at Johns Hopkins Univeristy. He received his Ph.D. following correspondence work at Illinois Weslan University. As a geologist he undertook several pioneering studies of the Great Salt Lake area before receiving his call as an apostle in 1911. 675. Randy Sorry, room, that message above was posted at Laurie but there seems to be some confusion in the order of posts, probably due to moderation and stuff. Or my systems. Or the wonky e-mail on this (one of my redundant) network... Or nutty intertubes traffic at this hour... 676. Laurie Robillard @ Epi from 1940 ancient times updated to 1972 another Mormon scientist James Fletcher Had a doctorate in physics from University of Utah and was head of NASA under Nixon in 1972 and then again to deal with the Challenger aftermath in 1986. 677. Laurie Robillard @Randy Because you people reject therapy and doctors, (and booze!) Randy Randy ! You are right we reject booze. You win the prize this time. 678. Epicurus no one is saying mormons cant hold a PhD in something...does the fact that so many Muslims have doctorates mean that they are not wrong about their religion? i dont understand what you are trying to show here Laurie. 679. Randy @Laurie that is fine... Here is something that alarms me: Ready? Just recently, two gay men were walking hand in hand in front of Brigham Young University. The "Mormon-Police", these guys that dress in suits and walk around looking for a fight... but have no real gubment authority... beat them mercilessly and it was recorded on a surveilance camera. These thugs were never even approched, let alone arrested for their crime. That should never happen in America. Land of the free? Not with religious people in charge, it ain't. Science doesn't care what two concenting adults do to each other sexually. That's for the frightened superstitious... 680. Laurie Robillard @Epicurus no one is saying that delusional people cant be right and intelligent in certain areas of life. Are you saying that Mormon scientist are delusional? How about these characteristic: a fertile imagination, unbounded curiosity, a warm and outgoing personality, a high degree of intellectual talent, the ability to work hard, and a determination to succeed Wouldn't it take those qualities to succeed in science and church. 681. Epicurus Joseph Smith, Jr. was born on December 23, 1805, in Sharon, Vermont, to Joseph and Lucy Mack Smith, a working class couple. Stricken with a crippling bone infection at age eight, he hobbled on crutches as a child. In 1816–17, the Smith family moved west to the village of Palmyra in western New York. By July 1820, the family obtained a mortgage for a 100-acre (40 ha) farm in the nearby town of Manchester, an area that had been the scene of repeated religious revivals during this time known as the Second Great Awakening. Smith and his family participated in the religious enthusiasm of the period. Although he may never have joined a church in his youth, Joseph Smith participated in church classes and read the Bible. With his family, he took part in religious folk magic, a common practice but one condemned by many clergymen. Like many people of that era, both his parents and his maternal grandfather had mystical visions or dreams that they believed communicated messages from God. Smith later said that he had his own first vision in 1820, in which God told him his sins were forgiven and that all churches were false. he Smith family supplemented its meager farm income by treasure-digging, likewise relatively common in contemporary New England. Joseph claimed an ability to use seer stones for locating lost items and buried treasure. To do so, Smith would put a stone in a white stovepipe hat and would then see the required information in reflections given off by the stone. In 1823, while praying for forgiveness from his "gratification of many appetites," Smith said he was visited at night by an angel named Moroni, who revealed the location of a buried book of golden plates as well as other artifacts, including a breastplate and a set of silver spectacles with lenses composed of seer stones, which had been hidden in a hill named Cumorah near his home. Smith said he attempted to remove the plates the next morning but was unsuccessful because the angel prevented him. During the next four years, Smith made annual visits to Cumorah, only to return without the plates because he claimed that he had not brought with him the right person required by the angel. Meanwhile, Smith continued to travel western New York and Pennsylvania, being paid to search for precious metals; in 1826, he was tried in Chenango County, New York, for the crime of pretending to find lost treasure. During one of these treasure quests, he met Emma Hale and, on January 18, 1827, eloped with her because her parents disapproved of the match. Claiming his stone told him that Emma was the key to obtaining the plates, Smith went with her to the hill on September 22, 1827. This time, he said, he retrieved the plates and placed them in a locked chest. He said the angel commanded him not to show the plates to anyone else but to publish their translation, reputed to be the religious record of indigenous Americans. Although by then Smith had left his treasure hunting company, his former associates believed he had double-crossed them by taking for himself what they considered joint property. They ransacked places where a competing treasure-seer said the plates were hidden, and Smith soon realized that he could not accomplish the translation in Palmyra. Quinn, D. Michael (1998), Early Mormonism and the Magic World View (2nd ed.), Salt Lake City: Signature Books, ISBN 1-56085-089-2 . it continues if you want more...lol but how can you believe a known con man who walked around the forest with "seer stones"? when did you start believing in this stuff? WHY do you believe it??!!? what about the story is believable without very compelling evidence....? 682. Epicurus laurie yes those scientists are absolutely delusional if they believe in the mormon religion or any religion. Delusion - Psychiatry - a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact and i have a comment in moderation that is just the story of Joseph Smith's early years...so funny. mormonism is as kooky as scientology if you actually learn about them...magic underwear? native indians are lost jews? garden of eden in missouri? a planet when you die to rule over? hahahaha ohhhh what would we do without religious people eh? 683. Laurie Robillard @Randy Do you think that only Mormons live in Utah? I have never been there. Do you think that all Mormons are perfect? No one is perfect. To believe your brutality story I would need more information. There are coo-coo people in all walks of life. Don't blame the religion. How do you know the offenders are Mormons? I live in Canada. 684. Randy Epicurus HAHAHA! What would we do without religious people? We'd probably be exporing the nearest stars by now! (In actual manned space-crafts, I mean. You get that?) 685. Randy Laurie You can look it up, I guess on the YouTube you kids enjoy, of course. And you know that Utah is like the Holy Roman Catholic Church of Mormonism, right? It is the center of your religion. I would think you'd get that connection immediately. Did you not study your religion at all? 686. Randy Dr. Robert Anton Wilson once commented about a clinical phsychiatrist who, in turn, wrote a famous paper about one of his schizoid/delusional patients. You can look that up, I'm not going to do all the hard work for you! The delusiac was convinced that a giant turtle held up the world in space. Of course, she was terrified that she would fall into the mouth of this turtle and it drove her poor brain to distraction. Her mother had drilled this idea into her head since she was a small child, you see. The doctor asked, "What holds up the turtle that holds up the world?" She responded, "Another turtle, obviously..." "I see, and THAT turtle?" Agitated she angrily responded, "IT'S ALL TURTLES, MAN! TURTLES-TURTLES-TURTLES all the WAY!" Infinite regress. Dr. Wilson added in his book: "We're afraid! BECAUSE, we're afraid... because we're afraid..." And so on... If you don't think that applies to any religious ideology? I don't know what to do for ya... 687. Laurie Robillard Epicurus laurie yes those scientists are absolutely delusional if they believe in the mormon religion or any religion. from Laurie At a time when some other Christian faith were still smarting from the Copernican revolution Joseph Smith's revelations as recorded in LDS scriptures include frequent reference to God's vast creations "worlds without numbers". In another departure from traditional Christian orthodoxy, Joseph taught that God works in accordance with natural laws rather than by transcending natural laws. True science is the discovery of the secret, immutable and eternal laws by which the universe is governed. Joseph specifically denied creation ex nihilo, teaching instead that matter is eternal. Other early leaders of the church expressed similar progressive views. Orson Pratt, who authored a number of scientific and mathematical works, advocate the Platonic view that scientific truths are known to God and that humans merely rediscover them as they progress in knowledge. Revelation does not only come through the prophet of God nor only directly from heavenly visions or dreams. Revelation may come in the laboratory, or of the test tube out of the thinking mind and the inquiring soul, out of search and research and prayer and inspiration Why does the universe appear to be governed by profound and elegant laws? It is my conviction that to the degree the theory of evolution asserts that man is the product of an evolutionary process the offspring of animals----it is false and Charles B agrees with that right Charles. Plants and animals are not ruled out of being the product of an evolutionary process nor an old earth. There are many unanswered questions about how the earth was created but these will be answered in the Lord's due time 688. Randy Laurie In fact the universe does NOT respond to elegant and profoud laws. The laws are brutal, chaotic, and random. Science sees this now. We are lucky to have survived this long. It's like a pinball machine out there! If it weren't for the moon we would have been destroyed eons ago by come asteroidal collision. Plato was a bit of a whacko, too, in fact, because HE denied the scientific method. This doesn't frighten me. Does it frighten you? 689. eireannach666 Laurie So let's talk about joe smith. Why don't you explain to those that don't know how he came to be a "prophet" and how he convienced his peers that he indeed spoke to a divine being. But don't skip the good parts like when he said that nobody could read through these seer stones but him. Or how when Martin Harris and his wife "lossed" the first script but joe couldn't even redictate the script,instead he came with some lame excuse about how god said he needed some new stones to read from the tablets etc. Etc. But try to with a straight face. I can't. 690. eireannach666 @Laurie Also please do tell me your true feelings on polygamy and having sex with kids. Or maybe how you feel about forcing a 14yr old girl to have sex with and marry her own older adult 1st cousin? 691. Randy TO be fair, eireannach666, that is a seperate even MORE cultish branch of LDS. They did finally have to change that part in order to assimilate into "proper" society, however there are still the hold-outs that cling to the original whacka-doodle-ideas... Why not throw it all away? 692. Randy ...is my whole point... 693. ilovemyselfmorethani @Prix I really don't have time to read your kilometric diatribe that doesn't even really deal with what we were previously discussing. You go off at weird tangents too much. You cannot stay in topic. You now talk about completely different things, and ascribe to me completely different ideas. It's just a waste of time. I respect you, a bit. But you cannot follow multiple trains of thought, as evidenced by your posts. Bye now. 694. ilovemyselfmorethani @prix let me give you an example. Here you say: "You still avoided the real question WHERE DID I WRITE I BELIEVE IN SOMETHING?" -- See, I didn't say that you said you "believed in something". I was saying that we cannot have "solid", "exact" proof of anything of which we cannot have mathematical certainty. Therefore, we cannot have "solid" "exact" proof for most of what we believe. I've explained this 3 TIMES now. And you still don't get it. You'll ask me again to show where you said you "believed in something" --AARARARAGHHG!!! You don't get this. You cannot follow where the conversation is going. You still accuse me of putting words in your mouth, when that's NOT what I'm doing. That's why this is getting tedious. 695. Charles B. Shazam! You guys have been busy! Dr. Randy: Did you find my post for you from last night? Mr. Razor: I do have an electrical socket above where I sleep, and unfortunately I have the entire building's electrical wires right above our apartment as we're near the top or our high rise, but I don't hear voices when I sleep nor feel any "presence" most of the time while here. I usually hear God's voice when I pray and then only occasionally and it doesn't matter where: at work, while walking, or at church. It's not predictable location wise, and it's always very purposeful. Just a thought: Electrical infrasound can cause panic, nausea, a feeling of an evil presence, correct? Well, have you ever considered that infrasound could be used by the demonic as well? Alligators, elephants, and even hippos use it now just as natural animals. As science advances, we can learn more about the spiritual realm as well. Perhaps a real angelic and/or demonic encounter creates an electromagnetic field as well. It's not beyond the realm of possibility. eireannach666: I watched a doc like that here on topdocs. Not sure which one, but it talked about the electrical fields. 696. Charles B. Prix: I read your whole post. The passage about the snake having legs is in Genesis, but you have to "read between the lines" actually. When God cursed it to crawl on its belly and eat the dust of the earth (meaning always be in the dust), you have to assume it was different before the curse. But if you don't believe in the Bible as God's word, it's just a story anyway Yes, I understand the story about the red ball, and I have to assume you were inferring that as I was taught Christian things as a child, I believe it now as an adult fervently. Well, yes, that may have a lot to do with my faith. I'm trying to instill that concept of love of God in my kids every day. It really pleases me when I hear them singing "Jesus loves me" even to themselves. I need to be more consistent now that they are young so they have a good example to follow. As far as Jesus (God) coming to Earth in a bodily form, that will happen someday, but only after what most Christians call the Great Tribulation. It's a future even. In order to actually see it with your own eyes, you'd have to survive the worst disasters of human history and there's no guarantee you'll be one of the lucky ones. Even then that doesn't mean you'll accept Christ even then. A hear heart now, means a heart heart then as well (most likely). But, whole books have been written on that subject. 697. Charles B. Ok! Joke time! This one's for Laurie. My best friend in high school was/is Mormon. Do you know Lady Weston Elliott, the author? She's my friend. Anyway, she told me this joke and I had to admit it was pretty funny! Here it goes . . . A bishop in the Catholic Church runs up to the Pope and says, "Your Holiness! I have good news and bad news!" "Yes, go ahead. What's the good news?" The good news is that I have Jesus Christ on the phone! He's returned!" The Pope replied, "Oh, that is good news!" The bishop then said: "But the bad news is that He's calling from Salt Lake City, Utah." 698. Charles B. Sorry, I was trying to say "hard heart" in Prix's post. good grif! :-) I'm a bit tired. 699. Laurie Robillard @Charles B There are many unanswered questions about how the earth was created but these will be answered in the Lord’s due time. What do you think Charles? What city do you live in or what country? I don't know your friend the author. What kind of books does she write? I hope your friend was a good example to you. I heard that joke before. It's funny. God is not only in Salt Lake. You do know that. 700. Laurie Robillard @ eireannach666 What are your degrees Mr. know it all? Also please do tell me your true feelings on polygamy and having sex with kids. Or maybe how you feel about forcing a 14yr old girl to have sex with and marry her own older adult 1st cousin? From Laurie Before you start talking like that get your facts straight. It will look better on you and you won't scare yourself so much. Look at the credentials this man has below. That is a quality person and I would listen to what he has to say before I listen to the garbage that comes out of your mouth. Untrue, wild accusation. You belong on that T.V show where accusation of all sexual scandals where stupid stupid people can't mange their lives. He cheated on me with my best friend etc. Dallin H. Oaks Philippines area president. Sustained to Quorum of the Twelve April 7, 1984, and ordained apostle on May 3, 1984, at age 51. Graduate of BYU in accounting; received juris doctorate cum laude from University of Chicago; was law clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, practiced law in Chicago, and was professor of law at University of Chicago for 10 years, and was executive director of the American Bar Foundation for a year. Served nine years as president of BYU, and three years as Utah Supreme Court justice. Former regional representative and counselor in stake presidency. Born Aug. 12, 1932, in Provo, Utah, a son of Dr. Lloyd E. and Stella Harris Oaks. Wife June Dixon Oaks, parents of six children. 701. Achems Razor @Laurie: If you belong to the "cult" of Mormonism, they do take care of their own, they have a lot of "moola" from all their tithings, business assets, land holdings, etc: They are a godment of their own, they use their religion as a base, they have their own police force, their own universities and colleges, and I might add, the mormon tabernacle choir, which I witnessed first hand when was in Uta at their major shrine to their gods. they perpetuate their own form of godment. It is all there for the almighty dollar, nothing else, plain and simple, end of story! 702. Epicurus please please please never mention how you are brain washing your poor children who are too young to decide somethilng like this for themselves. what you are doing i believe is akin to child abuse. mental child abuse. i really really really hate hearing or seeing people teach CHILDREN about religion. it is disgusting. your child is not old enough to make a logical decision about which political party to follow so what makes you think they are old enough to pick a religion...oh and look they dont even GET TO choose for themselves. they have you there to indoctrinate them with these fairy tales...ugh. makes me sick. especially THAT song...jesus loves me...perfect chant to get children into it...but the lyrics?!? talking about washing in blood and being sinful and going to hell?!?! you actually let your children sing that and dont think that you are damaging them?? Vlatko, when you let my post out of moderation do you think you could move it to the bottom of the list so that it doesnt get missed...laurie really really needs to learn about the early years of joseph smith and his con-men family. 703. Epicurus Laurie you keep showing us mormons who have succeeded....no one has said they cant....WHY DO YOU KEEP DOING IT? should i list off all the atheists who have become scientists or done something in the world? do you really think there will be more mormons? 704. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani I am staying on topic, I know what you mean by mathematics. I do respect you as well but when you're answering me like the previous posts, it doesn't lead anyone anywhere. Not everything can be taken into mathematical certainty. We just haven't reached that yet. I don't see math in evolution just yet. At least not fully implemented math that explains evolution. I also know what you mean by taking mathematics certainty taking into account for our beliefs. But if there is enough evidence that supports it, it doesn't have to be related to math. I can write everything of what I know to be without mathematical certainty because there is enough evidence supporting it without it. If someone shows me and explains to me exactly what i "believe in" in mathematical terms and breaks them down. Well I'll welcome it. You're taking mathematic certainty as a huge role. I wouldn't agree with that, many things can be proven with mathematics, others cannot just yet. That's why we go with other kind of evidence to have "solid" and "exact" proof. If i'm still incorrect, explain it to me in details. You can't simply push me off just because you think I don't understand you. It's as if someone was debating and the other person went "you don't understand bye" without giving an explanation in details of what they mean. Give me an example and let's see if I haven't already answered you or not. You wrote what I believe in, even if it was an example I layed out what evidence there is to support that I don't simply believe. So no i'm not putting words into your mouth. You have written it and I gave an explanation. 705. Laurie Robillard @Epicurus Vlatko, when you let my post out of moderation do you think you could move it to the bottom of the list so that it doesnt get missed…laurie really really needs to learn about the early years of joseph smith and his con-men family.Who is Joseph Smith? from Laurie Joseph Smith, Jr. organized the so-called "Mormon church," which is correctly called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on April 6, 1830. Smith reported having been visited by God and Jesus Christ in answer to a prayer in 1820 about which church he should join. He said he was told to join none of the churches around him because important gospel truths had been lost since the time of Christ. Smith was subsequently directed to restore them in the LDS church. He also is credited with translating the Book of Mormon. 706. Charles B. Epicurus: Well, If I was a negligent father, I wouldn't care about my babies, nor their eternal souls. But, I would view myself an utter failure if I have all the degrees in the world, or money, and my kids turn their back on God later in life. Statistically, men are very important to instill faith in their kids. I read that if the mother alone is a Christian, they have a 40% chance of following in the faith. If the father alone is a Christian, it's close to 70%. If both parents, then it's still about 70% or a little better, so I take my role as a father and Christian example very seriously. It's not child abuse, it the most loving eternally significant thing I could ever do in life. I love my kids more than I love my own life. I'm quite sure when you have kids, you'll start at age one with the evolution pollution solution, and that is your right as a perent. Don't worry. Your kids statistically will most likely be faithless their whole lives and follow your example step by step. But, as for my kids, they are happy kids. They have a wonderful life now, and the prospect of a wonderful life as adults and hopefully will follow in their perent's wise footsteps. I had a wise man of God once tell me, "Charles, your first ministry will always be your family." I took that to heart. I write some of my own songs too, including 3 new verses to Jesus Loves Me. Would you like to read them? :-) BTW There's no blood mentioned in that particular song. I think what you're thinking of is "What can wash away my sins? . . . nothing but the blood of Jesus!" Hum. Good call. That's one I haven't taught them yet. Thanks! 707. Charles B. Laurie: Yes, my friend was the perfect Mormon in every way all ways all through high school. She never wavered in any way. I even sang in her church's musicals, went to the picnics, etc. but never converted to Mormonism. Ironically, our churches were litterally only about 20 feet apart on the same street. She went on her mission to Utah, and I told her that was like a priest being sent to the Vatican to evangelize! She still lives there now. Try googling the name "Wendy Weston Elliott" and see if you can find her blog. She's got some good stuff out and wants to write fiction like Lord of the Rings, etc. 708. Laurie Robillard @Randy It is far better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven… from Laurie Randy you don't know enough to go to hell. Don't worry you're not going there and if you want to be a ruler you need to look elsewhere. Do Mormons Think Everyone Else Is Going to Hell? Mormons reject traditional notions of heaven and hell, believing that almost all humankind will inherit a heaven of sorts. They interpret Jesus' teachings that "in my Father’s house are many mansions" (John 14:2), as well as other Biblical and modern LDS teachings, to mean that there are various "degrees of glory" within the broad umbrella of eternity. 709. Laurie Robillard @Epicurus What do I see on my e-mail but don't see in this house Epi do you believe everything you read and why are you sending me literature to my e-mail? from Laurie Many reports which have been put in circulation by evil-disposed and designing persons, in relation to the rise and progress of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, all of which have been designed by the authors thereof to militate against its character as a Church and its progress in the world. The church started with 6 people and growing strong. There is no stopping the growth. 710. Laurie Robillard @ Randy You mentioned something about depression and Mormons because we don't believe in doctors and therapy and alcohol. I have several friends who are doctors and a brother-in -law. About liquor from Laurie Why Can't Mormons Drink Coffee or Alcohol? In 1833, the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith reported receiving a revelation from the Lord which is known today in the LDS church as the Word of Wisdom. The revelation is recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 89, and includes prohibitions on using tobacco and using alcohol and "hot drinks" (which are interpreted by LDS prophets to mean coffee and tea.) 711. ilovemyselfmorethani @Prix I just dedicated a lot of posts illustrating how you are unable to stay on topic. I didn't just assert it, I showed you exactly how you do it. But here you go again: I never said anything that is remotely akin to a “you don’t understand bye”. You keep accusing me of things I've never done, never said, never implied. I've exerted a lot of effort in showing you why I cannot debate you at these lengths if you keep going off at weird tangents. It is tedious. I suspect your reply to this will be another unfounded, weird accusation that will once more seems to have been pulled out of the air. 712. Joe_nyc @Charles "I love my kids more than I love my own life" If what you say is true then give your kids the choices that you never had. For me it is the most difficult and challenging part of being a parent. 713. Epicurus @Laurie, im not sending ANYTHING to your email. you have the box checked off in here that says "notify me of followup comments via e-mail"....i do not know your email address. so you say that the claims that joseph smith was a con man and someone who wandered the forest with seer stones looking for treasures are untrue? but what about the DOCUMENTED papers of joseph smith being arrested and wanted in particular states? those are not made up. you follow a con man just like scientologists. charles if you loved your kids you wouldnt indoctrinate them into this belief system JUST because you believe it. you would admit that its just a belief or faith and you would allow your children the freedom to discover their own spirituality or lack thereof. 714. ilovemyselfmorethani @ epicurus "charles if you loved your kids you wouldnt indoctrinate them into this belief system JUST because you believe it." -- I never really got this point. Why not? Just because I believe homosexuals are normal, doesn't mean I shouldn't teach this to my child? Just because I believe Racism is evil, I shouldn't teach this to my child? I should let him learn these things for himself? I think we should teach children what we believe is right. If we are wrong in what we believe, and in the process are harming them, then that's when society should step in. That's when society ought to step in. Ah, but you'll say, religion does harm them. Then it's not really about letting children have "freedom to discover" things for themselves, but about eradicating religion. 715. Epicurus teaching your child that people are equal (homosexuals are normal) or that hating people because of their skin is wrong is something that we as a society have collectively agreed on to be a moral way to live. teaching your child mythology as truth is not a very nice thing to do to children who are willing to believe almost anything their parents tell them. my point is a child is no more capable of deciding which religion to follow intelligently then they are able to decide which political party to follow. now does religion HARM the child?? hmm well there are certainly many people seeing psychiatrists right now because of their fear of hell. they are unable to live normal lives because they honestly feel that some things will doom them to an eternity of torment after they die....do you want your child thinking there is a chance they might suffer in hell? or possibly one of their loved one? even if they just start to doubt and question their parents religion....that is a very damaging thing to do to a child. 716. ilovemyselfmorethani @epicurus "my point is a child is no more capable of deciding which religion to follow intelligently then they are able to decide which political party to follow." -- False analogy. Political parties change and are expected to. Yesterdays liberals are todays conservatives, and etc. Than it really is about getting rid of religion, because for some people it's harmful. Why then all the masquerade about giving children "freedom" to choose and all of that bull plop. 717. Epicurus and religions also change...constantly. it is about giving the child the freedom to choose and if the child chooses religion you love it the same. you dont influence him/her either way. 718. ilovemyselfmorethani Religions don't change. If you look at the core principles/doctrines of Christianity. They've been the same for thousands of years. Sure, some things have changed, but those are the peripheral aspects of Christianity. Then by the same token, we should also give the child freedom to choose whether judging people by their skin color is right or wrong. 719. Abrahams Son So, Epicurus you are saying that whatever current society dictates is morally acceptable is the standard for moral behavior. Therefore the individual has no role in this as they had nothing to say in the past when religious groups have persecuted individuals for their own beliefs. Just because society has condoned certain behavior we as parents always have the choice of what to teach our children about racism, bigotry or any other subject. This is why these things persist even when society has condemened them. Were the people who accepted Homosexuals a hundred years ago and rejected societies morality wrong for teaching their children to accept them? The point is what you teach your children is always the choice of the individual in the same way what the individual believes about the existence God will always be an indiviual choice.Even if you are the last person on earth to believe it. 720. Randy Religions change constantly as do the rules for society. Game rules. In Egypt it ths the law that the leader marry his sister. In America it would be considered insane if our President wanted to marry his sister. MLK was a law breaker and should have been put in jail, so was Ghandi-gi... etc etc etc... Enlightened thinkers shake their heads and say, "This is madness... let us use a method that proves and tests results that are palpable over many predicable variations and iterations." 721. Epicurus yes ilovemyself you should give children the freedom to learn that on their own. however like i said racism is something that directly effects others and is shown to have a negative effect on society. so it shouldnt be used in a comparison here. and yes religion has changed...look at how the catholic church views the earths position in the solar system, or its stance on evolution. the religions rules change all the time. the religious issues of today are different from that of your grandparents. the religions political focuses always change. you do have the choice to teach your kids your religion. and i will see it as mental abuse since you are keeping your child from having a critical open mind. you are indoctrinating them into your belief system. one that has safeguards in place to make people not question it when they are adults. and here is some arguments from some other people Critics such as Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins use the term "child abuse" to describe the harm that some religious upbringings inflict on children. They claim that children are especially vulnerable to mental harms related to religion, including: * Terrorized by threats of punishment, such as eternal damnation in a fiery hell * Extreme guilt about normal, healthy sexual functions * Trained to disrespect science and reason * Indoctrinated into a particular religious faith, thus depriving the child of the opportunity to make their own free inquiry later, when they are mature Dawkins is angered by the term "Muslim child" or a "Catholic child". He asks how a young child can possibly be considered intellectually mature enough to have such independent views on the cosmos and humanity’s place within it. By contrast, Dawkins points out, no reasonable person would speak of a "Marxist child" or a "Tory child." Philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer spoke of the subject in 19th century: And as the capacity for believing is strongest in childhood, special care is taken to make sure of this tender age. This has much more to do with the doctrines of belief taking root than threats and reports of miracles. If, in early childhood, certain fundamental views and doctrines are paraded with unusual solemnity, and an air of the greatest earnestness never before visible in anything else; if, at the same time, the possibility of a doubt about them be completely passed over, or touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the first step to eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be so deep that, as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one's own existence. —Arthur Schopenhauer, On Religion: A Dialogue 722. Randy OF course we now know that MLK and Ghandi and these people were wise and the rules were actually wrong... etc. etc... don't get me wrong! 723. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani You haven't given me any precise evidence, just slipped on to something whole different. When you said I didn't understand, I asked for an example. You didn't give any of it and just kept replying I can't follow. Why not explain in more details? I've asked you several times. You even wrote "ah not with the proof part again". I didn't pull out anything from the air. Except when I misquoted you. When you even wrote "Don't you believe in this this and this" I gave you answers back and you didn't even reply to those in details. You're running away and hiding, changing the subject and accusing me without backing your arguments up. Like being born and believing in God you had it wrong and then turned the subject just a little bit. Even thought that even come in handy for you. You even wrote to me in childish manners. The last response you gave me was nothing more than "Let's see how you'll take this out of context" I don't do that. You simply can't follow me either and don't understand me one single bit without changing and accepting you had something wrong. Keep doing that, I'm done with you. Whatever you're going to write is just going to be nonsensical I'm presuming. After the claim you made from the beginning was disputed you have tried to change things into something whole different. I'll listen to your advice and stop responding to you and your comments that take things into argument without you giving any example or proof to back them up with. Take care, it was nice writing with you from the start and It's too bad it ended in this way. 724. Prix @Charles B. This is going to be a long post again. I apologize for that sir. That's exactly what most of the people do with everything. Even if I write a simple story, If people love it enough they will find it deeper than it already is. Every deep answer is different. I see where you're going with your kids singing and being happy. Everyone wants best for their children. Humans tend to always lay their own beliefs on to others(usually without evidence). Just because "If I feel good, you'll feel good". It's nothing uncommon, al thought that does remove thinking outside of the box. You have such a wonderful feeling about God and you want same for your kids. Just like I would like my kids to feel happy. But I will actually tell them to think on their own and if they need words to explain things, I will be always there for them. Charles, you're doing everything to not question you. When kids are young they don't know where to look for answers. To give them only one side of the argument is like telling them there is a Red ball they need to believe in. Hell is a true trauma for them, it's like the red ball. If you ask someone that is around 30 years old now about hell. They can still be scared because of this trauma. I would never scare my kids into believing things. Also, religious people thinking that there is a dooms day coming. Most of us think it's going to happen in our life time. If we follow religious people we should let all the chaos that goes around in the world to happen. If we had technology to stop volcanoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, meteorites, religious people should stop science from using these kinds of tools. It's the natural law and we shouldn't disturb it. Think of it this way, in the future natural disasters can be avoided. Your kids who think it's the dooms day are happy that the day has finally come. Would you really be happy about it? Even thought your kids are going to die and other people leave this earth for another planet? To be honest, even I would try to save your kids from thinking "oh it's the dooms day let's stay here" and taken them into the ship. The people that fight because they are doing God justice...dark ages, witch hunt or other such superstitions that belief has brought. The plague could be avoided if everyone had focused on science and medicine. So many peoples lives would be saved. There are a lot of books written about dooms day, yes. But for people to explain WHY things are happening is like speculating for something we have no clue about. Like every religious person says "God has a divine plan"...I highly doubt that even when reading the Bible. I'm so hard hearted is because what religion has done to humanity and how it tries to push us backwards. And that's even IF- ANY of the religions are correct. But what if we were just waiting for doom to come to us? I want my children to survive, find their own way of thinking. Also, I've seen many religious people being racist in this age. For us to say "oh that's just not kind people". All of them are kind and nice, they do a lot of good things. Actually most of them are Christians. Now to say "they aren't true christians" is incorrect. I've found not one standard definition for a true christian. Even they have heard the so called Gods voice. You cannot disprove it to them because it's their belief and what God has told them. If we take everyone in the world (All christians) and ask them to pray to God and hopefully someone can give an answer. Everyone would PROBABLY give different answers. If racist people have the BELIEF that they are correct, why should we question them? There is no way for us dispute that belief is it? Yes there is, if everyone asks questions and tries to find answers for themselves. Have a Good day and take care sir 725. Ashangel As soon as I saw the helmet, I was instantly reminded of H.A.A.R.P. and project bluebeam. 726. Charles B. Epic: It would be morally wrong not to try and instill what you believe to be the utmost importance in life to your kids. Even you will try and teach them some "morals" won't you? I've thousands of kids in church an none of which seemed "abused" by learning about God. If someone has a preoccupation or "fear" of Hell, and that fear actually does help him or her escape damnation in Hell, isn't that unspeakably better than a person who has nothing but scorn for believers and is never told about repentance and Hell and finds themselves damned forever? Epic, if you don't give your kids "boundaries" and "morals" then that will be a parenting failure on your part, and I'm sure you'll try in your own way. My way includes direction for their immortal soul's protection. Yet, when they reach 18, they can make their own decision. Prix did. I did. I chose to follow after my parent's religion (Christianity), but many do not. I just want to give them the best I can give as a man of God and as a parent. 727. Achems Razor Charles, Charles. What are we going to do with you? Can't believe you are putting the fear of death and hell into little children, to be little is to enjoy life and not have any worries, especially of going to hell when you die. They should not be thinking of death and hell Charles, "whats a matta" with you. Leave them kids alone! 728. Laurie Robillard @ Randy When the Heaven deporting bus with the Hell bound fallen angels with one third of Heavens population departed with much chatter and gnashing of teeth you were on your favorite plush cloud dreaming of literature and history. The Heaven police didn't bother looking for you because your name wasn't on the voted out list. You were not a threat to Heavens population, you were just a fence- sitter. A dreamer dreaming of taking shortcuts. You were very intelligent and you brought that intelligence with you but you lack commitment to real truth wherever it may be found but you have justice . Justice and commitment are rulers qualities. Commitment like a muscle needs to be exercised or it becomes soft. Get your priorities in order and shape-up and decide which Kingdom you want to live in for eternities. In some matters you don't get to vote. You were born to serve. You can go yelling and kicking if you want. The choices for habitation in the future are Terrestial Kingdom Telestial Kingdom and Celestial Kingdom one like unto the stars one like unto the moon one like unto the sun Hell is not a choice. It is for the fallen angels (who have never taken a body) and those who have had their calling election made sure and then sinned against the Holy Ghost. So very few belonging to the Adamic culture (us) are going to Hell. So Randy you don't know enough to go to hell. @ Epi Way too much emphasis is put on the fear of Hell. Epi you don't know enough to go to hell. @Acham You don't know enough to go to hell. 729. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix Just as I presumed. You again accuse me of things I never did or implied. That's why you are tedious to talk to. I've exerted much effort in showing you examples of where you go off at tangents, misunderstand, and get lost. Don't tell me I'm "running away" from you. Oh Please. You've misquoted me, accused me of saying things ("the last laugh" thing is an example that completely eluded your logic yet again!) Go discuss last arguments in complete disregard of previous ones, cannot follow trains of thought, and accuse me of "running away" from you? Lol. Let me give you an example once more, that I know WILL AGAIN COMPLETELY ELUDE YOU'RE MIND FOR WHATEVER INSANE REASON: You say in your last post : "When you said I didn’t understand, I asked for an example. You didn’t give any of it and just kept replying I can’t follow. " --Ohh geez. At my last post this is the example I gave of you being Insanely illogical: "I never said anything that is remotely akin to a “you don’t understand bye”. You keep accusing me of things I’ve never done, never said... " I never told you you simply don't understand so "bye"! I explained to you, SHOWED you HOW you are NOT following the conversation, and how you are unable to avoid going off at weird tangents. I illustrated to you how, gave you examples. So I didn't JUST assert it. Then you accuse me again of merely saying "bye" once more? And at your latest post, accuse me of not giving you examples of where you "don't understand"? Are YOU REALLY THIS DENSE?! geez.. You say: "The last response you gave me was nothing more than “Let’s see how you’ll take this out of context”" -- See! The last post completely erases any thoughts of the previous ones for you. And look at what I just wrote, which was part of my last post, I showed you an example of you accusing me of something that wasn't true. "Whatever you’re going to write is just going to be nonsensical I’m presuming." -- Lol! You are so odd! Really you are. Anyone can read what we've been discussing --if they cared to --and see how you are unable to stay on topic, avoid tangents, and avoid accusing people, misquoting them and all that jazz. You should be thankful that some people here you *try* to debate, even take you seriously. I find you difficult and tedious because of the above. I'm avoiding debating you for the reasons I just stated. I love these informal discussions. And you cannot accuse me of being difficult, I've already conceded 2 debates here. I concede if I have to. But, for the reasons I stated, I cannot go on at lengths with you. Until you get your logic straight. 730. Epicurus @charles, if you KNEW your religion was true i would agree with you. but you do not. you believe it to be true based on faith. you are not honest with yourself enough to realize that you have no evidence you only believe, so you feel you have the right to instill that same type of illogical belief in your kids. that is fine you have the right to. I just hope the education system will be able to reverse any illogical thinking you may instill. Laurie, i dont know enough about heaven to go there either then. why do i have to know about hell to go there? i would REALLY REALLY love to watch a mormon argue with a christian about which one is right. Laurie...again why do you follow a KNOWN CON MAN?!?! 731. Achems Razor @Laurie: You make me roar with laughter!! Are you sure you are not a comedian? Again, another big, big, load of doggy pooop that you write! I don't know enough to go to hell? why do you say that? is their a hell college or something? Actually, maybe you are right, heaven and hell g*rb*ge doesn't concern or bother me, I spend no time at all in contemplating or dwelling on the religee's heaven or hell, I have more important things to do, like living. Are you sure that you are a Canadian? if you are, you are giving us a bad name! You religee's are almost child like! 732. Achems Razor Actually, with respect @ Epic, I disagree, no one should have the right to brainwash little children at such a young age, when they do not know any better. It should be against the law. Period! 733. Charles B. Epicurus And Razor: You wouldn't like me to instill my faith in my kids but want me to let them choose their own destiny (paraphrased). I assume this is because you are so opposed to my worldview as a Christian. Let me ask you a question to test your consistency. Let's assume you will have kids too. You're young, and you might settle down some day with a spouse of your choice, and then as usually happens a child or two comes along through any number of methods (naturally, adoption or foster care). Now, at age 7 your son, Billy is invited to Vacation Bible School at the Baptist Church by his schoolmate, Sally. Billy comes home and says, "Dad! Dad! I really want to go to Vacation Bible School this summer with Sally Jones! Please! Please! Please!" I'm assuming he'd ask. Would you let him go? Yes or no and why? At age 14 Billy has grown a bit and this time hears about Jesus Camp on Topdoc films. He finds it on the Internet and learns it's in his home state. He says, "Wow! That sounds great!" Unbeknown to you, he plans to go and tells you it's a trip with his friends to the lake. What would you do when you found out? At age 17, William's high school gets a college recruiter from Church of the Lord Christian College, and he fills out an info card. He thinks he might want to go there. What would you do when the information comes in the mail and "Billy's not there" at the moment? He's still only 17, and still a minor and still under your roof. There, what might you do in situations such as these? Would you even offer your opinion has his parent, or just "let him choose his own destiny" and at what age might you make that decision? P.S. Razor: We've all been "brainwashed" in some way by something or some one. I've just chosen the One I've want to wash my brain! I think the theory of evolution should be taught in college (as an elective) not in pre-school as a requirement. Now that's involuntary brainwashing! Peace to you. P.S. Epic: I plan to home school or put my children in a private Christian school, for the very purpose that I don't want teachers such as yourself undoing whatever good I might have instilled in them behind my back, as you're they do with my kids. Peace as well to you. My sister home schooled and her very intelligent kids test 2 or 3 grades above the rest at regular school. Why subject my little ones to evolution, homosexual diversity training, and sex education (with free condoms nonetheless) with mediocre education to boot?!? My wife and I can do twice as good in all subjects (math, reading, and science) and enormously more capable in making important moral decisions. I'm sure that brings joy and happiness to your heart, now, doesn't it? 734. Charles B. Razor: P.S. I haven't talked with my kids about Hell at all. I don't really plan to. Now, I am sure they are not old enough to make a moral choice. But, when the time comes, I will focus on "loving God and doing what is right." Love is a motivator for a much longer time than fear is a motivator. I hope I'm the one that gets to lead my babies in their first prayer for "salvation". My sister was the one that prayed with me when I was seven, and I was the one that prayed with my younger brother when he was like 10. It's a special moment. My kids are quite bright, so I'm not sure when that will be, but I was seven when I made that decision and it wasn't out of fear of Hell even in the slightest. It was a knowledge that it was the right thing to do at the right time. Laurie would say age 8, wouldn't you? 735. Charles B. Prix: Good questions. Maybe Monday. Or, if I have a chance later tongiht. 736. Epicurus @Charles, i would allow my children to do whatever it wishes in each of those instances EXCEPT the jesus camp one because that place was the epitome of child abuse. that was terrible and that women should be in jail. the parents of the young girl should also be charged for neglect because that little girl has mental issues. we watched that movie for my psychology of cults class and my philosophy of religion class. it is appalling. I actually have an 8 year old son. and yes i would have no problems with any of those other scenarios. now would i voice my opinion on the issue of theism??....not to a child. when he was around 16, maybe 14 if he were advanced. but im not going to talk to my child about that stuff unless he asks me what my personal opinion is. which is that it is all make believe...actually charles you know how you view hinduism...thats exactly what i think of christianity and all other religions. you and I disbelieve in almost the exact same amount of gods....you just cant give up the one you were indoctrinated to believe because it makes you feel so good im sure. let me ask YOU a question...what if when your children grow up, depsite all your brainwashing, what if they become atheist? now instead of atheist what if they become homosexual??? now your views on science are so terrible that there is no way you should be allowed to teach it. you have one of the worst understandings of science out of any adult i have come across (granted i live in canada and have a good education system). how can you be against people teaching that homosexuals ought to be treated as equal human beings? no one is teaching kids to be gay. how could you be against giving out condoms....kids are having sex. that is a reality. kids will have sex no matter what you do that is a reality. and christians wonder why teen pregnancy is highest with their group????? because they are too simple in the head to realize that contraception is a GREAT thing. not just from pregnancy but STDs (on a side not are you aware of the horrors christians are responsible for in Africa by preaching AGAINST condom use.....absolutely disgusting) of course you are going to home school your children because like a cult you want to shelter them away from reality. you want to keep them tucked away while they are young and you can indoctrinate them then they will be too uncritical to think for themselves on this subject in the future when you have to let them out...that is typical of ultra religious people such as yourself. 737. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani "– Lol! You are so odd! Really you are. Anyone can read what we’ve been discussing –if they cared to –and see how you are unable to stay on topic, avoid tangents, and avoid accusing people, misquoting them and all that jazz. You should be thankful that some people here you *try* to debate, even take you seriously. I find you difficult and tedious because of the above." avoid tangents? Avoid accusing people? Why hasn't Charles said the same thing? Why haven't I misquoted him? Or anyone else? I've already seen what i misquoted on you and i understand what I did. You keep dragging it like I still don't understand of it. You on the other hand don't understand about that subject and tried to change it a bit. It didn't work, you couldn't defend it either. You're just in your own world without understand my point either. Anyone reading our argument can tell you are just avoiding. You've conceded 2 debates here already? Well the last debate I saw you "concede" from was when you just out right busted and gave a nonsensical reply. ALSO administrator had to warn you. You can ask anyone you like to read our comments and post who is wrong. Go ahead do so. I've had enough with your childish way of bringing up stuff for which I've already said I was sorry. (misquoting, not being able to follow) No one else has accused me of this. Also what you accused me of, I was just saying "something in the lines of". Even if i misquoted you, the point you made and the "evidence" you presented was and still is zero. I'm not stooping down to your level. Whatever you write, I don't have any more replies for you. Good luck with your life and do take care. 738. Prix @Charles B. I'll be waiting for your answer Sir. 739. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "I’ve already seen what i misquoted on you and i understand what I did." -- Do you understand why "having the last laugh" is different from "having the last word" ? Do you understand why I did NOT have to quote you on what you believed, since I was speaking about belief in general? And what about my other illustrations showing you to be missing the obvious? Did you say sorry for those? You foolishly think that's all you've done. Like I said, I've gone through great lengths to show you how you are straying away from the topic and following up on weird tangential arguments that have no bearing on what's being discussed. Were you able to clarify why you were doing such? Didn't think so. Go read my previous replies. Heck read them a million times. My oh my, I have time to show you another example, I've been showing you examples of your 'duh' moments at every post, but magically, they somehow elude you. But here's another one: you say: "You’ve conceded 2 debates here already? Well the last debate I saw you “concede” from was when you just out right busted and gave a nonsensical reply." -- You didn't see it did you? I've conceded to Epicurus that morality is not exclusively understood by humans. He gave me examples which I didn't have time to go through. But after having seen them, I said I conceded his point on animal morality. He said I just made his day. So how was my reply non-sensical? It may seem non-sensical to you, because you have No logical sense. "I’ve had enough with your childish way of bringing up stuff for which I’ve already said I was sorry." -- Seems you didn't get me on this either. What's new? You said you were sorry, and then justified what you did, and then made preemptive judgements on what YOU think my response would be. Oh you didn't see me say that? That's because you cannot follow anything. "I’m not stooping down to your level. " -- You're the one who seems to be lost. You don't have to try to go to my level, because you don't seem to have the logic for it. 740. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix And as for your request for evidence. You keep saying I haven't given you any "solid" exact""proof". I guess I will have to repeat myself again, as I have done so probably 10 times now. I cannot give you "exact" "solid" "proofS" because selection pressures are not reducible to mathematical certainties. But if you want evidence, it's all around you. Many people believe in some kind of God, or transcendent reality. Evolutionary psychology is somewhat predicated on the notion that all (or maybe not all) of our behavious are a result of selection pressures. From our desire for sex, to our cravings for sugar. The evidence is that most of the people who've ever lived believe is some sort of God or a similar reality. Therefore, many evolutionary psychologists have argued that cultures who had these behaviours survived better. This was basically me reply, to which your response was an amusing: "Huh what? Mathematics? You answered someone else's question!" Lol! You're hilarious. 741. Prix @Ilovemyselfmorethani Why do you still insist? You're going off on a lot of different things and avoid the points i've already made. "– You didn’t see it did you? I’ve conceded to Epicurus that morality is not exclusively understood by humans. He gave me examples which I didn’t have time to go through. But after having seen them, I said I conceded his point on animal morality. He said I just made his day. So how was my reply nonsensical? It may seem nonsensical to you, because you have No logical sense." See right there? No mentioning about Admin which i pointed out. You follow what you think sounds logical without looking at my logic or explaining your own. Why even bother to pursue something which you think I don't understand and something I don't think you understand. I simply don't think we can agree on this. Saying that I have no logical sense is just not very bright. I never said that about you. Even a child has logical sense. For you to say something like this is just showing more of how much you're backing your sentences up. So if we can't get to an agreement and you replying in manners that most kindergarten children would reply. Why even bother? As far as logic goes, I'm not saying my logic is great. I've never stated that nor would I state that for any human being. Logic makes sense depending on each person. Trying to argue that logic is great way of getting information but to tell someone they have no logical sense is just absurd. I wouldn't state that for any human being. Not even you, even if I get irritated and angry. You're still displaying childish manners with your sentences. There is no point in arguing or discussing. 742. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "See right there? No mentioning about Admin which i pointed out." --And what does mentioning the admin which you "pointed out" do in anyway to my point? You do know what you were trying to say right? You were trying to say that my concession to Epicurus was non-sensical. I showed you it wasn't. What does mentioning the admin have anything to do with any of that? Just wow. "Why even bother to pursue something which you think I don’t understand and something I don’t think you understand." -- You know what? O.K. What do you think I don't understand? Tell me. "Saying that I have no logical sense is just not very bright. I never said that about you." -- Just wow. Like I said, you can't follow the conversation. Now it seems you're having difficulty following even your own words. You feel so demonized because I accuse you of having no logical sense, yet you are just kosher with accusing me of being childish, being in my "own world", "running away" from you, and stooped at a "low level". Lol! Proved my point once again: You only seem to grasp the last arguments that were made, completely disregarding previous ones -- apparently also your own previous arguments magically elude your logic. "I wouldn’t state that for any human being. Not even you, even if I get irritated and angry." -- Oh what an angel you are. Read up, where I quoted you saying much more infantile things. "You’re still displaying childish manners with your sentences. There is no point in arguing or discussing." -- Right. Keep telling yourself how good you are at debating. 743. Prix @Ilovemyselfmorethani "# ilovemyselfmorethani08/28/2010 at 11:04 @ Prix And as for your request for evidence. You keep saying I haven’t given you any “solid” exact”"proof”. I guess I will have to repeat myself again, as I have done so probably 10 times now. I cannot give you “exact” “solid” “proofS” because selection pressures are not reducible to mathematical certainties. But if you want evidence, it’s all around you. Many people believe in some kind of God, or transcendent reality. Evolutionary psychology is somewhat predicated on the notion that all (or maybe not all) of our behavious are a result of selection pressures. From our desire for sex, to our cravings for sugar. The evidence is that most of the people who’ve ever lived believe is some sort of God or a similar reality. Therefore, many evolutionary psychologists have argued that cultures who had these behaviours survived better. This was basically me reply, to which your response was an amusing: “Huh what? Mathematics? You answered someone else’s question!” Lol! You’re hilarious." That's a better answer yet you still behave like a child when replying. I've already explained why I wrote that sentences, I had a headache and it was late in the night. Keep picking on stuff I've already explained. That's not childish is it? Finally you explain what you meant. Thank you for doing so. Al thought this might sound logical for you but as we already know humans have the capability of asking WHAT IF questions. As you wrote there is proof for it but can't be reduced to mathematical certainty(what you meant by that, not enough proof to rely on? Am i getting this correctly?). Also the notion of them surviving better isn't proven (unless you can give me a reasonable proof to change my mind. I would prefer with a link to an article). Science changes all the time, it's even certain that when we ask WHAT IF questions. Just to satisfy ourselves we invented religion so we could focus on hunting rather than ask the question where we came from. It certainly doesn't in any way prove God exists as i've been saying. A child in modern day would ask these questions and if the child is so interested in finding out the question where everything began, it might be reasonable now. But if that happened in the old times. We would try to find answers for these questions and who knows what might have happened. For example, a guy asking where we came from and why we are here might divert everyones mind from gathering food or being productive. In some sense it does fall in to the category of God people surviving better. But who knows? What if it was to have control over people? What if we didn't have religion and still asked these questions and went forward? It's enough proof for both theories. Yet, not a proof for God. That's what I was trying to say. I'm not trying to annoy you, neither am I "not" following what you're without any logical thought. Like I wrote before, you might not understand my way of thinking. But I did consider this before as well. I stand my point on this not being a proof for God but something whole different. You are a human like me and we are all humans. The last word of what i meant was. You're laughing at it when i reply you (you wrote lol). You couldn't follow me all the time either when I made points. We both couldn't follow each other. Yet, I stand firm. I hope we can reach an agreement without resolving to childish manners. 744. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani You did resolve to childish ways of responding. Who else replies with "DUHHH, Oh geeezz, lol!"? My point is clear and simple. If i started to reply like this you wouldn't respond to me at all. 745. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "That’s a better answer yet you still behave like a child when replying. I’ve already explained why I wrote that sentences, I had a headache and it was late in the night." --Sure you did! "Finally you explain what you meant. Thank you for doing so." -- Uh.. Funny it should come from no where. I explained this many posts ago. But it eluded you, for some mystifying reason. "As you wrote there is proof for it but can’t be reduced to mathematical certainty(what you meant by that, not enough proof to rely on? Am i getting this correctly?)." -- Do NOT mistake proof and evidence. They are different, something I've been telling you many posts ago, but eluded you again and again. Do NOT ask for "exact" "solid" "proofs" for selection pressures, YOU cannot have it, will not have it. You can only have strong or weak evidence -- Like I've been saying, but you didn't comprehend. "It certainly doesn’t in any way prove God exists as i’ve been saying." -- There you go again. I wasn't arguing that it's proof that God exists. So don't imply that I was doing so. "I stand my point on this not being a proof for God but something whole different." -- See? There you go again. I wasn't arguing otherwise! This started when you asked for "solid" "exact" "proofs" for what I said about most people believing in some sort of God or transcendent reality. Sure I made the mistake of inserting the word "born". But Like I said, just as we aren't born desiring sex, we will desire it eventually because that behaviour makes humans fulfill their evolutionary goal of spreading their genes. By the same token, many evolutionary psychologists will argue that belief in a transcendent reality or a God made it conducive for our ancestors to survive. I've said this to you many posts ago. You can go look it up. But even after that, you keep misquoting me, accusing me of avoiding or running away from you and etc etc. DO YOU SEE NOW WHY I'M HAVING DIFFICULTY GETTING TO YOU? You somehow don't get the arguments I'm making, misinterpret them, and accuse me of something I've never done. For instance, I never accused you of wanting the "last laugh". I said you always wanted the "last word" without making sure that "last word" addresses the discussion at hand. Thos are 2 completely different things. You've done this MANY times --accusing me of things that are Ginormously different from what I've actually done. I've shown you examples of how you are going off at tangents, I've illustrated them to you. Then, as a response, you simply assert that I'm only saying "you don't understand, so bye!". Look, man, read this post. Read it until you get it. 746. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani "Oh sure you did" Childish... and no you haven't given a reasonable point. Just saying a term isn't going to help the whole argument without putting the term into use like you FINALLY DID. What does solid mean anyway? Solid as in strong evidence and proof, right? Exact proof is what I mean by solid proof and evidence. Exact is what i mean by strong enough evidence and proof. Dude I already know of this, no need to tell me that. You simply didn't understand what I meant by that. I already know what the terms mean, i used in context of STRONG EVIDENCE OR STRONG PROOF. The whole argument started about pointing out if god exists or not with the argument that had good amount of support for Gods existence. I already wrote "That doesn't prove that God exists" And then you wrote this, you totally took the argument somewhere else. If you did understand that, why even give this explanation? It doesn't prove gods existence. You should have stopped right there. You took it further and this is why I got lost. There was no proof of gods existence there. I've already explained about desire for sex. Maybe you should start reading my posts more? "By the same token, many evolutionary psychologists will argue that belief in a transcendent reality or a God made it conducive for our ancestors to survive." Yet, most of the scientists would go for more logical explanation. It just raises even more questions that end up with belief and faith. It's not going to go very far as a good explanation. Misrepresenting? You're doing that as well. I was only arguing the proof for existence of God. I've written that several times. Why can't you read my posts? Oh for cats sake, I've already explained that you laughed at it. That's why I pointed out "the last laugh" get it? Why don't you read my posts more clearly? I don't behave like a child when you don't understand my posts. Why should you? You're doing exactly the same thing as you're accusing me of doing. I've tried to approach you with good enough argument and then tried to be kind to resolve this. Yet you still go on catching up with one phrase. I highly doubt this is going any further, just in circles. 747. Charles B. Epic: Well, that's very progressive of you to let Billy go to the Baptist Vacation Bible School. In fact, we had lots of kids go to those whose parents didn't even come to church. I guess I would have flunked your cults class unless your professor was unbiased enough to give a good grade to a dissenting view of Jesus Camp. Yet another reason why not many Christians attend your classes at your school. Why wouldn't I be good in science? I love it! I read all the time. I was the highest scoring student in biology when I took it and even received a reward for excellence. I aced micro medical biology at the university level. I wrote a paper over genetics of bees in high school. Perhaps you can answer what I couldn't find: What is the genetics of a male bee? If they are the result of an unfertilized egg laid by the queen, how in the world can that "bee" possible? That is a serious question by the way. I don't have any problems with science, only the evolutionary atheistic conclusions drawn at every possible opportunity by many scientists. In fact, I'm thinking about going back to school and getting a masters degree, and I was thinking about science, because I enjoy it so much. Now why couldn't' I teach chemistry and biology to my own kid on my own? I think your exaggerating the teen sex rate as not "everyone" is doing it. My wife and I are proof you can make it through your "teen" years with your morality intact. And beyond. But, you are correct. It's a huge moral failure of the Church when their own children have the highest pregnancy rate. It's because so much of the Church are listening to "progressive" people like you and not instilling a sense of moral right and wrong in their kids. Indeed, it's a parenting failure, and one I hope to avoid with my own kids. The American church certainly isn't the best example to follow in many ways, I agree. I won't allow my kids to date until they leave home for college. Until then it's just not practical. Maybe. If they talk with me about it respectfully. I use condoms, why can't others? The solution to the AIDS epidemic is abstinence before marriage and faithfulness after marriage. Except for the Catholics, what is wrong with using condoms? I've never preached against condom use, just immoral acts. But granted, I can see if you are a sincere Christian, and you fall into unexpected unplanned temptation and you don't have them immediately on hand, how you could blame the Church. It happens, you're right. Lastly, if my son or daughter grew up to be an atheist, or a practicing homosexual, I'd be devastated, and feel like an utter failure as a parent, but I wouldn't disown them. I'd love them and pray for them and be there for them in any way I could to the best of my ability until I drew my last breath and then even beyond in my prayers as God has a long and lasting memory, but I'd never condone the lifestyle nor accept the rejection of God as being anything other than what it is: sin. Peace to you. 748. Laurie Robillard @Charles Home teaching is very good. I home taught my kids for a few years and put them back in the system because I thought they needed more social interaction. It does give them a boost. My kids were advanced also. I also had them in hockey, karate, swimming, piano lessons, and dance and two languages. They had paper routes to teach them work ethics and savings. They were very active in scouts and church activities. I didn't pay for their beginner's drivers liscence because I feel they really want it at 16 get a part time job. Two of my children walk in my footsteps, one is an atheist and one is floundering doesn't have a stand. My one child left at home has a homosexual friend that he brings home. He is a nice kid. He is interested in music. You love the person not the sin. My oldest son to make extra money has a hotdog stand and does festivals and calls my son and his friend who is homosexual to help him out and it gives the boys extra money. Now they are all world travelers and have seen more places in the world than I have. Hard work pays off. 749. young God is a delusion, although it may be beautiful to some, I consider life without it that much more rewarding. Kind of like the matrix, the gloomy reality can only appreciated by the strong and the few. Most will fight to stay in there pseudo-reality. 750. doc-fan @ Achems Razor & HaTe_MaChInE: Get a room! Anyway... People, keep in mind that any video is expressing prolongated studies done by many scientist. For many, who open mind for evidence and research, such videos might give brilliant information on how our universe works. For religious freaks such information might be result of brain fried like scrambled eggs left with out supervision :) now comes to important part... If you don't believe in it... DON'T WATCH IT!!! Another thing... @Laurie Robillard: "My oldest son to make extra money has a hotdog stand and does festivals and calls my son and his friend who is homosexual to help him out and it gives the boys extra money. Now they are all world travelers and have seen more places in the world than I have. Hard work pays off." So on the topic of this video... (Being sarcastic of course) Conclusion: I just want to underline: "If you don't believe in it... DON'T WATCH IT!!!" Regards... 751. Charles B. Prix: You said: "I will actually tell them [your kids] to think on their own and if they need words to explain things, I will be always there for them." Parents raise the children, the children don't raise the parents, Prix! You're supposed to lead them in the way that they should go, not let them float aimlessly downstream, and hope that they survive! You're very idealistic. Sounds like you've not yet had children. You said: "I would never scare my kids into believing [religious] things." Prix, the Bible says "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." Fear is proper in the right place. Fear of falling is a good thing when you're two! The fear of water is wise if you can't swim yet, and even then. Fear has its place in the world, and the fear of God (reverence, not cringing fear) is valuable in all ways, and good for both young and old alike. Dooms day (God's Judgment) is coming; it can't be stopped, but by all means we can try to make life better for all. To assume a disaster is unavoidable or nothing can be done to help others is not logical. I'm fully in support of the advancement of science and knowledge. What I'm opposed to is the use of science to thumb your nose at God, or worse yet, to say there isn't one! You said: The plague could have been avoided if everyone had focused on science and medicine. So many people's lives would have been saved. Well, yes, that's true. But people were ignorant apart from the church in medicine. Here's a bit of trivia for you: did you know that the Black Death was halted in a certain city by the practice of Hebrew cleansing laws (Biblical laws) being implemented? They isolated the dead, and washed their hands after touching them, and did all the recommendations found in the book of Leviticus for disease control. The plague stopped in that city. Not so in other cities. "Also, I’ve seen many religious people being racist in this age [mostly Christians]." Well, I'm sorry for that. People are people, Christian or otherwise. You have my apologies on behalf of the "Christians" at least if you have found them to be racist towards you. I'm married to an Asian, but I've not met any obstacles yet from anyone being racist so far, in my country or hers. You said: "I’ve found not one standard definition for a true christian." Hum. I can help you with that. God doesn't want "cookie cutter Christians"! In fact, it just will never happen that all that are true Christians will all believe the same way, understand the same things, or even act the same way. God wants sincere, faith-filled genuine believers. The definition of a "true Christian" is: "A true Christian is one that believes that mankind's only hope for salvation is through repentance from sins and faith in Jesus Christ to provide that atonement for their sins, and then accepting that sacrifice by faith, personally, and then doing their best to follow what they view as the will of God as defined in the Bible." It's really quite simple, but few seem to truly implement it. In fact, the Bible says that the way to life is narrow and few will find it. You said: "If we take everyone in the world (All Christians) and ask them to pray to God and hopefully someone can give an answer. Everyone would PROBABLY give different answers." I say, "Probably!" Even if ONLY the true Christians heard God's voice perfectly, and we all heard it clearly, why would God speak to us all the same thing anyway? A new Christian thinking about having sex with his girlfriend would hear: "Wait for marriage." The elderly woman alone in her house would hear: "Yes, I'm still with you and can't wait to show you Heaven soon!" A pastor would hear: "Be faithful. Share your heart openly and let Me worry about the rest." My son would hear: "Yes, bugs are nice! I made them ya know, and I like them too." But, Prix, we would all hear words encouraging us to be faith-filled, and faithful to what we know to be true, and kind, and honest, and true to the end for these are the characteristics of God. The trouble comes in when we disobey God's know commands, or we get selfish or "hard of hearing" and just go do our own thing. It's worse yet when people use "God" or religion for evil purposes. This is still just between God and man; it's even more complicated than that when you add Satan (a very real being) into the mix. Evil is real, Prix, but it's not in the one true redeemed Church (repentant and humble); that's a lie from the one who would want to do you the most harm, but it's certainly not God. You do have my respect, however, as you are obviously very smart and extremely gifted (linguistically, etc.) You're quite the deep thinker. Grace to you, and may God's peace and understanding be upon you. Charles B. 752. Charles B. Laurie: My sister put her kids back in public school when they reached high school, but homeschoolers in the U.S. have the right to all extra curricular activities the public school offers. They didn't miss a thing and came out better for it in the long run! I want to put my kids in a private school or homeschool so they don't get pulled back if they need to advance, and if they have troubles like I did academically, then they won't be left behind until their brains reach that all-valuable growth period where they can just soak it in like a sponge. My brother, flunking out of high school advanced from a 5th grade reading/writing level to college level in just two years with a private school that helped him so much! Literally. They said he was kennistetic and needed to learn differently then most kids. Had we left him in school, he'd have no education at all. It was homeschooling, but mom and dad didn't do it, and a friend did it for us, that's why it was called a "private school." Homeschooling is definately the way to go! 753. Prix @Charles B. I will lead my children, but not by telling them exactly what to do with absolutely with everything. For example the issue of racism, i'll explain it to them and explain the history. Why it's bad for other people and how people suffer from it. What the racist peoples views are. It's a physical thing I can demonstrate without confusing them. Al thought about God I cannot tell them. I cannot tell them which true god is, how he\she\it looks like, or smells like or even which religion is the true religion. If i teach them about one religion, they are going to stand firm on it. Specially if I use fear on them. But yes, you are correct my views can change when I have children. I'll let you know how that works out when I'm a father. That's exactly what i'm not going to do. I will not make them fear of something that they cannot touch, cannot find the true faith or even true meaning. Science so far has far better explanation for the diversity of species and human understanding than any religion. Even if science hasn't found every answer just yet doesn't mean it won't in the future. It's not about faith in science, facts and evidence that the kids can understand. Water they can touch and understand that they can drown, but for God it's just words and several hundreds different religions and religious words. If they so happen to believe in God and have any kind of religion, it's up to them. I will challange their views to make sure they have critical thinking.(when they are older) God's judgment day...we look at people that hid themselves when they thought the world was ending, burning books and everything dear to them because they were going to leave this earth. And then nothing happens. We think now that they were just foolish to believe so. Yet, we still keep on believing that. What if we leave earth and look back and say "oh those religious people thinking everyone is going to die how foolish". I meant if people had focused only on advancing in human body and understanding it. They would've found the cause. Maybe even advanced long before! Maybe even a cure. I haven't looked into what the church has done in plagues but what I meant was if the scientific knowledge had been more advanced it wouldn't have happened in the first place or maybe a cure. Btw sir, correct me if i'm wrong. But didn't most of the people wash their hands and stuff like that and also leave the dead and not come close to them? I don't mean the poor but most of the rich and famous people. Doctors? I have never actually faces a situation where someone made racist remarks in serious manner. When people did that they were my friends and we understand that it's only jokes. Their most common view is that black people (even brown people say this) are lazy. Also that other religions are fake and false. When i defend any religion(I usually argue to defend someone elses faith) they usually back off. I know what's coming next...the cursing and fights. Also most of the religious people talk behind every religions back, and those people have several friends from that same religion they were talking bad about. That's the problem with true definition of Christian. I mean look at all the wars that have plagued mankind because of religion. They stood firm that they were true believers and they defended God. Btw, isn't there a passage in the Bible where Jesus says "If they don't accept me as their lord, bring them here and kill them"? Something similar, correct me if i'm wrong. It was a long time ago I read about this. Are you really going to kill me? If the bible says so? There are several lines in the bible saying to either kill or abuse. If you would like, I can find them for you. Thanks for clarifying that definition about true Christian. The only problem is that by following this most of the sins have been committed (I'm still on wars and slaughter of people) Hmm sorry, It was my fault. I should have been more specific. If everyone tried to get the same answer they would always get totally different answers. That's just like Joseph Smith writing the mormon book second time saying "it will be different this time". Let's say "Why is Lucy suffering" and the people don't know anything about Lucy except she has a medical decease. They'll get it completely wrong. Hmm, actually I've been together with someone that saw dead people. She told me how real it was and how scared she was. Born Christian btw, she had horrible memories of how people made her think "it's the demons!" and such stuff made her feel even more insane and wanted to commit suicide. Under medication she was nearly all good, feeling good and being happy. I mean good people want to take the demons away and make humans feel good. Kind hearted people that want to do no harm, to think that god has told them to do this kind of stuff is just not right. Schizophrenic people see dead people, she did so. The only thing is she saw cartoon figures sometimes as well and several other things. Instead of having a supernatural explanation we can help them with science. Even when Christians think they're doing good, MAYBE they are doing things bad? Every religion is like this, trying to do good when in reality it is bad. To mix Satan in there is making things even more complicated for human beings. Specially the ones that need medical help. Thank you sir for your kind words. I need to be honest here, I usually try to avoid getting any kind of compliments. I usually try to question myself all the time and try to keep an open mind to all suggestions. I've already done so with religion and it didn't go that well...several times. I wouldn't consider myself a deep thinker. That's like letting my guard down and not thinking enough of one thing. Nor am I smart, linguistically gifted is just because of circumstances sir. It seems like it's matter of faith vs evidence and proof. I'm on the observable and scientific side. After getting to expand my knowledge about science and doing magic tricks, observing myself and other people when they believe in god. I'm standing on a firm ground and haven't moved from here around 5 years now. I've tried to keep an open mind to everything and still am. But religion doesn't cut it at all. I do have respect for the elders yet I do challenge their views. Usually in a respectful manner. I hope I've stayed true to this even with the disagreements we've had and will have. 754. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "What does solid mean anyway? Solid as in strong evidence and proof, right? Exact proof is what I mean by solid proof and evidence. Exact is what i mean by strong enough evidence and proof. Dude I already know of this, no need to tell me that. You simply didn’t understand what I meant by that." -- Funny how you say you "know this", but looking at your reply, you obviously don't. You cannot say "exact proof" is what you mean by "strong.. evidence". Because 'proof' is different from 'evidence'. Proof is indisputable. If I have proof that God exists, trust me, there would be zero atheists in the world. Theists will say that they have evidence that God exists --which atheists will try to dispute. They can say they have 'proved' it to themselves --which means they know for themselves, but we all know how that can be shaky. They are completely different terms. And you thumpingly say "I know it! Exact proof is what I mean by Exact/Strong evidence!" --wow. "The whole argument started about pointing out if god exists or not" -- You think this is the thing we were talking about, but that's coz you cannot follow. And here I won't just assert it, I'll show you: you said: "I’ve posted a comment further up and given you some links to some websites and very interesting answers about the whole “We are born to believe in God” that statement is completely false. No such thing, most people don’t even know what they are talking about when stating that." -- And then you further stated that I said that. So THAT'S how "the whole argument started". I said that that's not what I said. And I gave you a reason why I cannot give you "solid" "exact" "proof", but I did give you evidence. The evidence is that it's a fact that most of the people who've ever lived believe in a God. That calls for an explanation. Luckily, evolutionary psychologists have a very wonderful one. Then you accused me of a whole range of things I did not do, did not imply. You misinterpreted what I said, misunderstood the "mathematics" thing, and say I'm "running away" from you. Most of which I was able to illustrate how you did --but you completely avoided that. So YOU'RE WRONG AGAIN on how this "whole argument started". Here let me SHOW YOU AGAIN more of your dishonesty/inability to follow: "Oh for cats sake, I’ve already explained that you laughed at it. That’s why I pointed out “the last laugh” get it?" --No. This is what you said: "Alright, if you think i’m only writing that to have the last laugh go ahead. I’m through with it. No more mentioning of that instance." -- So here you accused me of accusing you, in-turn, of wanting the "last laugh". Which we've already established is ginormously different from what I was actually accusing you of. Now you want to worm your way out by saying: "I’ve already explained that you laughed at it. That’s why I pointed out “the last laugh” get it?" -- Sorry, but there's not enough wiggle room for you to pull that off. You are either being disingenuous, or unable to follow your own trains of thought. "Why don’t you read my posts more clearly? I don’t behave like a child when you don’t understand my posts. Why should you?" -- Yeah. Right. The funny thing is, I do think you read my posts. You just don't understand them. You are soo far away because you try to follow every tangent you bring up, completely disregarding previous topics. "You’re doing exactly the same thing as you’re accusing me of doing. I’ve tried to approach you with good enough argument and then tried to be kind to resolve this. " -- In you're "own [little] world", that's what you did. Sadly, you are the only resident of that delusion. 755. Prix @ilovemyselfmorethani And you still don't get it, the argument you put up for born and believing in god was not true. That's all that we have talked about, you're taking this whole thing into places where there is no need to go and you still continue. Read clearly i wrote you can have the last laugh. Get it? you wrote LOL after the sentence of "oh you still go on like you need the last word ect ect lol" that LOL over there was what I meant. oh, how many have been following our argument and can say i'm in a delusion of saying this? Go on, I've had enough with your twisting and turning. You still go on when i've written clearly several times. Even given examples, even given links, even tried to understand you. What you did was just try to turn as if I was doing all of this. I accept i didn't quote you directly. And then you turned your statement around without even taking a second look. You haven't made one statement that you say you aren't childish yet you insist just like a child. This is going in circles. I'd rather not waste both of our time going in this circle. My reply for whatever you write is, "I'm not going to go there just to end up in circles" For me this argument is over. You can do what you please. 756. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Prix "You still go on when i’ve written clearly several times. Even given examples, even given links, even tried to understand you." --You have done NONE of these. I've showed time and time again that YOU HAVE DONE NONE OF THESE. Must I really give you an example of your convoluted logic at every one of my responses to you? You are so dense. Don't take that personally. Learn from it. 757. ilovemyselfmorethani @Prix This is just really begging to be pointed out: You say: "Read clearly i wrote you can have the last laugh. Get it?" --NO!! What you said is this: "Alright, if you think i’m only writing that to have the last laugh go ahead." --Read that a million times and explain to me how that's supposed to show you allowing me to have the last laugh? What it shows is you accusing me of, in-turn, accusing you of wanting to have the "last laugh". The words I used were "last word" not "last laugh"! So you clearly...CLEARLY.. misinterpreted what I said. Yet you don't want to admit it. 758. Achems Razor @Prix and, Ilove myself. Com'on youse guys, your stuff is getting boring, don't even read it any more. You are wasting Vlatkos pixel space! 759. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Achems Razor Hahaha. Yeah, I think you're right. 760. Prix @Achems Razor I agree. All set to move on, chooo choo train moving on! 761. Epicurus @Charles, your understanding of science is A) outdated, and B) extremely bias and includes a double standard of evidence for anything that goes against your BELIEFS. you allow BELIEFS to outweigh evidence and reason....that is bad science. The amount of kids having sex is large enough to realize the reality of the situation...and even if it were a few, do those few deserve STDs or pregnancy because they make stupid childish decisions? what is so bad about a condom? if people are only permitted to have sex for procreation then why doesnt sex result in a baby 100% of the time? would you be against a sterile couple having sex? charles, waiting for marriage till sex might also have something to do with the divorce rate of christians. wow so christians can feel insulted when i call them delusional for believing myths made up by stone age people but you can call anyone who doesnt believe like you a sinner...it doesnt bother me because i know the term means absolutely nothing. it would be like me calling you a jibber wocky...nothing. however the intent behind it is disgusting..actually the contempt behind it is disgusting. you do know that we have mapped out the honey bee genome. i would really like you to clarify your question about the bees because if this is really a mystery i would love to explore it more. until you acknowledge the overwhelming evidence evolution has in its favour in both fields, chemistry and biology i do not think you should be allowed to teach those to your kids to the point where they are awarded a diploma. not at all. 762. Juancho This is a great documentary, it really touched on things that I never expected them to. I've been trying to read this whole discussion but it'll literally take me a day ... but a lot of people have great points. I have no qualms with religion, or the religious. I was raised Catholic and as soon as I was able to make my own decisions about church and prayer I stopped practicing the religion and havent really looked back since. I dont understand how the masses havent realized still to this day that religion is the reason the world is in the state it's in. Religion is a mental illness. The Bible is full of fairy tales that were written in order to portray a message of peace, morality and harmony. They were not meant to be taken literally ... the Bible is full of talking animals, "miracles", and all sorts of events that just havent been proven to have happened, or if the protagonist even existed. I say this not to be a terrible person, which is probably what the religious folk are thinking of me. I'm just saying what I believe, I believe that science will continue to shed light on what is REALLY going on and religion will continue to try to lay a sheet of darkness over the truth. Religion has been around for countless amounts of years, and has been instilled in us in such a way that when someone tries to disprove what it is your family has believed in for generations, the first instinct is to defend religion to the death. Sometimes I admire people that are able to live life believing in God (a God) and believe in organized religion. Because they are full of hope and will always look toward religion to help them with their problems, and when their problems are solved, they dont give themselves the credit, they thank the lord and hope for more assistance from him as life goes on. I give myself credit for everything i've achieved in life. I worked hard for it, and I deserve everything, for me to say I give all the credit to God for creating me as a smart, ambitious individual would be silly. I dont really have an argument except that Science can be proven, Religion cannot. My brother became a doctor and openly Atheist and it sort of rubbed off on me, because it makes sense. Religion doesnt. 763. Epicurus rather than nit picking one another for semantics, try to ignore the grasping for straws and focus on the focal point of the conversation. dont respond to this. dont respond to one another about how you respond to one another. just stick to the issues. lol you two are giving me a headache. just watched a new documentary on National Geographic channel the other day called Chimps: Nearly human. it covered chimps being altruistic (a non related male looked after a baby chimp for a mother who was nursing her injuries for two weeks) ALSO - and this is just amazing - they documented chimps making spears out of branches ( a number of them, different sizes for different jobs) and then go out hunting through trees for sleeping bush babies....absolutely amazing. also they enjoyed water...which chimps were thought to be hydrophobic. if Vlatko could find it he should really add it to the site. in the meantime you might want to do a search to see if it is anywhere else on the interwebs...remember it is a series of tubes! 764. Charles B. Prix: I can't think of anywhere where Jesus said that quote. It's Sunday. Let me work on it. There are "judgement" passages, but none exactly like that one. Later, please. 765. Prix @Epicurus I know which documentary you mean. I think it's on this website. I'll search for it, doesn't take that long and I was thinking about sending it to one of my friends. So brb! quick search! Found it! But I remember seeing different documentary about this. It was from Nova. tiny.cc/p9le9 That's the link for NOVA - Ape genius. I don't know if we have it on this site yet. But it's on video google. Just search for "nova ape genius" around 15:00 they start to talk about the emotion and the usage of tools. And I think I've found the one you talked about. Although you will need DIVX web player to watch this one. tiny.cc/x8088 NatGeo Wild. Chimps: nearly human. Just paste any of the links. For Chimps: Nearly human, click on "free stream" and just press play (once you do have DIVX webplayer) and wait for a couple of minutes. I would suggest waiting for about 15 to 30 minutes so you don't get interrupted. Maybe it's possible to upload it to a website that supports Flash instead of Divx web player without getting it removed. I'm not sure. If you don't have DIVX web player. Make sure when you install it you only take DIVX web player checked and nothing more. You don't want to be bother with other stuff that isn't all that important. Also it's free. There you go! Have fun watching. 766. Prix @Charles B. haha, no need to rush sir. You take your time. I've been occupied with forums lately and I haven't had time to spend some quality time with my girlfriend. I'll be slow as well because of it. Take care and have a nice Sunday sir. 767. eireannach666 @Laurie First let me say that my credentials are not important her and neither is any othe persons, including all the nut jobs you've mentioned above. In fact it wouldn't matter 1 bit to me if a person had 8000 degrees, if they beleived in anything as crazy and unfounded as religion , god santa claus or any fictitious entity that was preached by someone with no evidence to back him , than I say all your credentials just went down the drain along with your grasp on reality. My point is that mormonism is based on the words and guidance of a petty con artist and has absolutly no evidence in which to base its extreme claims and teachings upon. I have to say that Even though they have denounced polygamy, do you really think those that were already as such just said ok and up and changed? Even you have to be aware that saying and doing are two different things. And also , I can't even ponder hearing the mormon story about god etc without thinking about how desperate someone would have to be to belong in order to even think for s second that there was any truth to its beliefs on god. Which is funny ro me since I have to say that you guys are even more warped than the christians. (But less than the scientologistsm Right up there with the later day saint guys.) I mean come on Laurie , you seem to be a smart person, do you not even question the system a little? Don't think I have something against mormons any more than I do anyother cult because all of them are the same to me. Still they take aa person and strip them of their free will from the start and build them into good little sheep.Its been going on for a really long time and your cult has done pretty well for itself for getting such a late start. Besides all I was trying to accomplish with bringing joe smith into it was just to see how delusional you really were. As I see you are pretty deep into this cult. You even know their All-Star list and hall of fame members.Wow. Reguardless of how many successful mormons you name , there is still the fact that there is was and never will be a god and there is something wrong with teaching your. Kids this without showing them the facts. Your rweligion has done more bad than good to the world and has destroyed the innocence of many many children and mothers. Why be apart of that is what I'm asking you. Especially with the lame story starring joe smith they have. I mean come on a kid could come up with that in about an hour. Not even the brightest kid either. I'm talking a D student here. But hey go ahead and try to insult me all you want but it won't matter because your a mormon. Slainte. 768. eireannach666 Sorry for the typos my keyboard is messed up. 769. eireannach666 *not latter day saints guys I meant johovahs witness guys. Sorry I got distracted. But any who , here are a few fun facts about mormons: - that they intend to be gods themselves some day, and are helping to earn their exaltation to godhood by talking to you. - that they intend to have many wives in heaven, carrying on multiple sex relations throughout eternity, until they have enough children to populate their own earth, so they can be "Heavenly Father" over their own planet! - that you were once a spirit - child of their heavenly father, and one of his numerous wives before you were born on earth. - that the Virgin Mary really wasn't a virgin at all but had sex relations with their heavenly father to produce the Mormon version of Jesus Christ - that they believe Jesus had at least three wives and children while he was on this earth. - that the "heavenly father" they ask you to pray to with them, is really an exalted man that lives on a planet near the star base Kolob, and is not the Heavenly Father of the Bible at all-they believe that Jesus was really Lucifer's brother in the spirit world, and it was only due to a "heavenly council" vote that Jesus became our redeemer instead of Satan!! - that there are over one hundred divisions in Mormonism. They conveniently "forget" this while criticizing the many denominations within the body of Christ- that, like all bibles, all their so- called scriptures such as the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants, and even their official "Mormon Doctrine" statements contradict each other on MAJOR doctrinal points. The King James Bible is likewise contradicted. - that the reason the Book of Mormon has no maps is because there is not one scrap of archaeological evidence to support it -that the state of Utah, which is predominately Mormon, has a higher than the national average of wife-beating, child abuse, and teenage suicide. - that their prophet Joseph Smith was heavily involved in the occult before he was "chosen". that there are many accounts of Joseph Smith's first vision besides the one they present to you, and all are different -that before 1978 they considered the Negro race inferior, and even one drop of Negro blood prevented a person from entering their priesthood - that they expect Christ to return to their temple in Missouri, but they haven't built the temple He's supposed to return to, because they don't own the property. (It is owned by the "Temple Lot Mormons" who have plans of their own, and won't let the Salt Lake City group buy it), that they consider the Bible to be untrustworthy and full of errors. - that Jesus' death on the cross only partially saves the believer. And on and on. Like I said , right up there with scientologists.And this is just a few fun facts. But hey let's be fair here , all religions are full of these kind of things so at least they are keeping up with the pack. 770. eireannach666 Well since my other comment is being moderated, Ill correct myself here too. I meant johovahs witness guys not lds guys. I got distracted by someone sorry. But yeah right up there. 771. Laurie Robillard @eireannach666 @Laurie First let me say that my credentials are not important her and neither is any othe persons, Your credentials are important because you yourself has already passed the first estate. That is very important because you passed you are allowed to have a body. Having a body of flesh and bones is so important more than anybody can understand. It allows you to experience good and evil, bitter and sweet etc. Satan is jealous he can never have a body and he understands the importance of having a body. There is a story in the Bible when a man was possessed by evil spirits in the days of Jesus and they asked Him if they can enter the body of swines that were near by. Jesus gave them permission. What did the swines do? They ran off a cliff because they didn't want to cohabit with evil spirits. Today is Sunday no more time for this. Need to get the grandkids ready for church. 772. Laurie Robillard @eireannach666 My point is that mormonism is based on the words and guidance of a petty con artist and has absolutly no evidence in which to base its extreme claims and teachings upon. I have to say that Even though they have denounced polygamy, do you really think those that were already as such just said ok and up and changed? Not all the members lived polygamy. They had to be able to afford a second wife and they had to have the first wife's permission. Also it wasn't a civil ceremony so they had to pass higher laws. When polygamy was abandoned to obey the law of the land. The ones who were in a polygamist relationship were sent to live in Alberta, Canada. Those who engaged in polygamist relationships after it was abolished were ex-communicated. Polygamy is not an easy way to live. Most of the second wives were elderly women who needed to be part of a family to survive. They were living on the frontier. 773. Achems Razor @eire666: That was a very interesting read, you included on your post...08/29/2010 at 03:18 Stuff I never knew before. Just goes to show you how ridiculous religion really is, and how gullible religee's really are! I still say religee's are very child like. That means to me, a great percentage of the world is also childlike. 774. Prix @Achems Razor Hmm, I don't know but have you seen this short cartoon made by Mormons, or have you? youtube._com/watch?v=ervaWt03Z3w Just remove the _ and there you go. I haven't spent all that much time reading on Mormons but that religion is as crazy as any other religion. 775. eireannach666 @Prix HaHa! That came out in the 80's when I was younger. I remember it. @Achems Oh yes my friend, there is a lot more. Like ,for instance, some teach that the blacks were black because they were satans and the whites were of christ. Also the native americans were a lost tribe of Israel and were turned red due to their sin. Oh , and my favorite was that the first man and woman (adam and eve) originated in missouri or mississippi. , somewhere in the south. Implying life started there.LOL! Look what religion does to the world. Shame , isn't it. @Laurie Do credentials matter when the spoken word is fact? I would think not. As long as the truth is being spoken , its just as good wether it be from Dr.Bob or Senor Steve the taco bender. I have two degrees and am well read, if that maskes you feel that my statements are more valid. But regardless you can't argue fact. I mean you know this stuff and yet you still think of them ads good folks. Do you really think the church tells its herd everything? ,of course they don't. Oh and your statement of how you have to be able to afford to wives tells me that you really are delusional indeed,do you not think that some women work or that the law. Of the land says you can't marry but who says they have to marry these other women on paper? They do it a lot. Also why do you not at least question thes ideas of religion and weigh the facts availiable to you and look and see where the truth lies. Why just believe what mom and dad say? Why not look outside the box and see what else is out there. I mean heck, mormonism is quite new in the god game, so what makes you think everyone else is wrong that have been around for thousands of years? I'm just talkin, Richard Dawkins. @Randy When did you adopt a nephew on here? 776. Charles B. Epic: Did your post ever clear about LDS church? I can't find it. But, I know about it. I just wanted to see what you thought most "interesting" about it. Prix: Later today, maybe. 777. Epicurus "08/27/2010 at 04:13 Joseph Smith, Jr. was born on December 23, 1805, in Sharon, Vermont, to Joseph and Lucy Mack Smith, a working class couple." _________________________________________________________________ just search that without the quotations. either the sentence or the date. 778. eireannach666 @Epicurus What exactly was I to look at? I went there and saw a pretty humorous skit about Joe but did I miss something or was that what you were talking about? 779. Charles B. Ok. Thanks. Later. 780. Charles B. Prix: I have a headache today and I can't find your quote, but it was something like "Jesus said, "Bring them here and if they don't believe, then execute them before me." Or, that was the thought at least. Actually, that's not in the Bible unless is's a Islamic version of what they say Jesus said. Jesus gives one parable about the "talents" where the wicked "servant" that wasted his "talent" and told off the good ruler when he returned was cast into eternal punishment, but that is not quite the same. Jesus actually forbade His disciples from calling fire down from Heaven to consume unbelieving cities. He basically said, "That's not what I came here for" and eventually they will get theirs eventually during the judgement. As far as the mentally unstalbe, I had a friend who was paranoid schitchophrenic, sp? but to what extent it is demonic I'm not sure. I suspect it is a medical condition that demons can exloit. Whatever your weekness is, that is what they will exploit, mentally or physically or morally. That's the way I understand it. In other words, they exaserbate the condition and work through it like rats around garbage. Clean up the garbage, or work on the medical condition and often they have less avenue to meddle with the person's mind. My theory. Peace to you. 781. Epicurus @Charles, he was talking about luke19:27 luke19:27 King James Bible But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. charles. what is the verifiable or falsifiable test you would do for demons? what reason do you have to believe demons exist? especially when you are attributing natural things to them...its very very odd. my little brother is paranoid schizophrenic...i know much about schizophrenia and there is nothing demonic about it. and until you can show how it is you should be careful the things you say. ignorance does not give you free reign to just say whatever you like. 782. Charles B. Epic: My bad! Like I said, I have a headache today. Not my best day. The same story has a different ending in the Book of Matthew 25:14-30 with the stingy or wicked "servant" being cast into Hell, but without the "slaying" part. Prix: This parable wasn't talking about conversion to Christianity or worship of Jesus, per se. It does say "servants" not unbelievers that are under judgment here. This was a parable and depicts what will happen at the end of the age when it is time for judgment of those that belong to Christ (both in reality and in name only). It's not something that Christians are instructed to do concerning unbelievers, as we are not God and cannot make that judgment call. It's the "Lion and the Lamb" view of Christ. When He came 2000 years ago, he was the "Lamb." When He returns in the future, it will be as a "Lion." Nonetheless, unbelievers will also receive the same as this "unprofitable servant" at this time, so it's an argument of semantics. 783. Charles B. P.S. Prix: That was a good question, however. In summary: This is a judgment passage and it's in the future and for the future, not for us to practice today other than to be faithful with the "talents" that God has given us to work with. Epicurus: There isn't a set test for demonic activity. The "Exorcist" is just theatrical c-r-a-p that Hollywood puts out. But, some deliverance sessions do happen. A strong Christian can often command them to respond, and they often do so, etc. As I said, one of my best friends in high school was schizophrenic, and we were friends for years. When he told me once, "Charles, I've been diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic" and he thought I'd abandon him, I told him, "Oh really? I knew that 4 years ago, Mark! Don't worry about it." I never feared them until one I spent a lot of time with in China knifed my friend and father of six to death in church (could have been me) as I prayed with him often and it calmed him. I'm open to interpretation on the subject, however. I'm not 100% sure it's not demonic, and I'm not 100% sure it is, but I suspect much of it is. I base that conclusion on the fact that much more in our society that is evil is demonicly influenced then what we would suspect. Jesus dealt with a lot of demonic activity and deliverence in His ministry. What was valid then is valid now, but sadly many Christians just don't know how to deal with it or aren't capable (like Jesus Disciples) to handle it effectively. Me included. I'm sorry about your brother. It's a difficult situation. Does he improve with the proper meds? Peace to you both. 784. Achems Razor @Charles B: Of course they thought that paranoid schizophrenic people where possessed of demons in your stone age bible times, they never had any psychiatrists at those times. (LOL) Can't believe that you believe that gunk! 785. ilovemyselfmorethani @ Charles B I think there are very good arguments for the existence of God. I've also been able to experience God in many personal ways that affirms my beliefs. Bottomline, we agree it is rational to believe in God. But demons, not so much. 786. Charles B. I've run out of things to say, justlike everyone else I see. Peace. 787. Achems Razor @Charles B: We are all waiting for you on the new doc. "Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism" 788. eireannach666 @chuck B Speaking of the devil. Yeah we were just talking about you. 789. Epicurus @Charles, you said: "however. I’m not 100% sure it’s not demonic, and I’m not 100% sure it is, but I suspect much of it is. I base that conclusion on the fact that much more in our society that is evil is demonicly influenced then what we would suspect." you say you base that conclusion on the "FACT" that much in our society that is evil is demonicly influence more than what we would suspect......first off that isnt a FACT, that is a belief. i asked how you know about demons and you say because things in society are influenced by demons...that is circular, it doesnt make sense...how do you know things in society are influenced by demons? why does there have to be demons? what evidence points to demons and not nature? and saying that jesus says he dealt with demons is evidence is also circular logic...how do you know what jesus said? the bible says what jesus says....how do you know the bible is true? because jesus says its true....how do you know what jesus said? the bible says what jesus said.....how do you know the bible is true? because jesus says its true....and so on and so on....you have allowed a logical fallacy to work on you because the truth is YOU WANT TO BELIEVE IN GOD. it is all you have known and you wouldnt know how to be happy without this belief system. that is fine and i know that now, and there is nothing i can say that will change your mind because you would RATHER not know the truth if the truth is hard. that is fine....it cant be helped. 790. D-K Circular logic's a bitch 791. eireannach666 @DK You said it man. Get over to the thread were on man. Use that brain a while. 792. Charles B. Yeah, I noticed the focus was switched to the new doc. I can't bring myself to watch it yet. I needed some time off. Still have a headache and I'm in a rather bad mood. Had a tiff with the wife who doesn't like my internetting so much, but that wasn't what we fussed about. We'll see. Priorities. Peace to you. Where is BBC when you need him? Now he was a smart cookie. 793. Prix @Achems Razor Hehe, Yep I agree with you. But hey, that sums about every religion up. @Charles B. Sorry, I can't read through your post and reply. I just moved and started studying at a new school and country. So I'm mentally unstable right now because of the changes. I hope your headache gets better and that you and your wife can get over the fusses. The “Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism” is really great documentary. It actually sums up a lot of how I've come to look at religion. Not just one but most of them. I agree with every single thing he says. It's like he is speaking my mind! There are still some things missing but it's a solid argument overall. Do see it once you get the time and the troubles have gone away. Good luck to you Sir and have a nice day. 794. Abrahams Son Question: Why are non believers always trying to convince people of faith? If your logic is beyond question then why waste your time arguing with people about a mythical God? Faith will never be based on logic so arguing it is pointless. I understand opposing public policy such as not taxing churchs or religous teaching in public schools but you cant argue faith which is by definition not based on science? I can only surmise it has to do with trying prove intellectual superiority which gives meaning to life for people that have declared life has no meaning beyond the daily struggle for survival which has gone on since life began. I dont claim to have the answers to anything, only questions. Almost everything I see in the world and how believers and non believers treat each other would lead one to doubt the existence of a biblical God but my hope not my logic still clings to that search for meaning. Maybe I am unwilling to face the "truth" but see no other path. 795. Prix @Abrahams Son Hmm, you should get over to the new documentary. Watch it and comment. "Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism", it's well presented, well thought and also really good in scientific knowledge. 796. Charles B. Abraham's Son: You said "Faith will never be based on logic so arguing it is pointless." Ironically, that's not entirely true. I believe to the core Christian fundamental beliefs, but despite years of dedicated and prolonged exposure to Mormon teachings, I never converted. I mentally rejected the fundamentals of the denomination out of logic. Why do I believe one but not the other? It is a mystery, especially considering that most of the converts to Mormonism do come from other "Christian" denominations. 797. Charles B. P.S. My pastor's wife when I was in my 20's also used to be Mormon, so her testimony helped me make the decision also. Perhaps it boils down to a sensitivity to God's voice. I'm sure Laurie would disagree with that conclusion however. 798. Laurie Robillard Charles B. from Laurie Religion is better than no religion. Your pastors wife what testimony are you talking about? Charles I was raised Catholic. French Catholic. I have done my genealogy and all my ancesters going back to at least 1663 were Catholic. They immigrated from France so I'm sure they were Catholic there also because under King Louis' rule they had to be Catholic to come to New France. I'm grateful my parent's taught me to worship and love God. They were very hurt when I got baptized in the LDS faith. I was isolated by my family. It was not easy. I took the hard road because I got to know God better. The prize was worth it. Now my family just accepts it and me. 799. Charles B. Laurie: That was a touching testimonial. I have a question for you, however. I found my family line on the Mormon database going all the way back to the 1600's. I'm quite sure it's my family line as my great grandfather and his brother had very unique names and it coincides with other information I found about distant ancestors. My question is this: Why would my family line be on the Mormon site? Did they record other family lines, besides active Mormons about 100 years ago? But, to be truthful, I think some of them were Mormon as a few had like a list of 4 or 5 wives. They were either outliving them by a lot and remarried, or something peculiar was going on. With that said, I'm puzzled as I know that my great grand father donated his mill stones to help build a Protestant church in Arkansas near the turn of the century. Just curious on your take on things. Special note: One of the women mentioned in my line was actually married to Chief Logan, a Native American cheif of some importance in that part of the country. Very unusual for a white woman, I would think, for the time period. If memeory serves me correctly. All my research has been lost in a move, I'm sorry to say. I need to re-do it and submit it to the town library before I die and it's lost. I'm so discouraged about that. 800. eireannach666 PRandy and Chuck B Yeah the have records of jewish holocaust casualties and slaves frim the civil war and a lot of records they shouldn't gave, they even ritualisticly Put them to res like a mormon funeral with out consent . It supposedly benefits them in some way , I forget now but thee is a dpoc pon it somewhere. Well at least it elaborates on it quite a bit. I'm crashing so my minds not workimg but maybe Vlatko can find the doc or visit pbs.org and find it. Laterz guys. 801. Charles B. Dr. Randy: I have a friend that is Mormon. I think they baptize for the dead (well, I know they do), but I think that the extensive listing of genealogies (usually very accurately) is so when a person becomes Mormon they can be baptized for their ancestors. I'm not sure what the purpose is, or how that works, but I think that is accurate. Maybe Laurie can elucidate (for me at least) as I'm curious about that practice. I was going to put my whole recent family line in the file I found, but I couldn't bring myself to do it as I'm not Mormon, but I wouldn't mind putting it in the library. 802. eireannach666 @Chuck B Yeah that what it was! See you answered your own question. And saved me from insanity because I couldn't remember. Anyhow I got on a mormon forum and asked about it and here is what I got: "The church maintains one of the largest single repositories in the world for genealogical research. The repository is contained in a very large library in Salt Lake City, Secure vaults in the canyons above Salt Lake City and in numerous branch libraries located around the world. 2. These records are of many types but I think the type you are most concerned with are the records contained in Pedigree files and Family Group files. These records are there becaus one or more individuals have submitted them, whether a member of the church or not. These records may or may not be accurate, you would have no way of determining that from the record. 3. You, as a person, are protected by the Privacy act. Anything but a person’s name, which is a common record, of anyone that is alive is marked private and there is no way to get it. If your information is found in other databases at the libraries it is there because it is a record open to the public. There is no national database program that I know of." After further digging I came across this : he first step toward being able to go to a Mormon temple is an interview with the "ward bishop" (roughly equivalent to a parish priest). During this interview a Mormon is questioned by the bishop to see if he has been faithful in his commitment to the teachings and ordinances of the Mormon church. The questions cover a variety of subjects, including his tithing track record; use of alcohol, tobacco, or caffeine; sexual immorality; and any failures to adhere to church doctrines and disciplines. If the applicant has had difficulties in any of these areas, he will not receive a temple recommend. For the one who does not pass the interview, there is no trip to the temple. It is interesting to note that the majority of Mormons do not have temple recommends. This is not to say that they fail their interviews with their bishops. Actually, for a variety of reasons, most Mormons never make the effort to obtain a temple recommend. But for the minority who do obtain one, their chief duties in the temple include baptism for the dead. On any given day, in more than fifty Mormon temples around the world, thousands of faithful Mormons are baptized vicariously for the dead. Most non-Mormons are dimly aware that the Mormons are interested in genealogy, but they are not sure why. While there is nothing wrong with being interested in genealogy as a hobby, this is far from a hobby for Mormons. They believe people who have died can be baptized by proxy, thus allowing them the opportunity to become Mormons after their death. The idea behind baptism for the dead is this: God wants each of us to be with him in glory. To effect this, he allows us to accept the Mormon gospel here on earth. If we do not, he sends us to a "spirit prison" until the Mormon gospel has been preached to us there and we convert. Mormons believe that their church has missionaries in the "spirit world" who are busy spreading the Mormon gospel to dead people who have not yet received it. Should any of these dead people want to convert to Mormonism, they are required to abide by all its rules, one of which is water baptism. Hence the need for proxies to receive the corporeal waters of baptism. You might be surprised to learn that the Mormon church has teams of men and women microfilming records of Catholic and Protestant parishes, cemetery records, birth and death certificates—virtually any sort of record pertaining to past generations. Temple Mormons hope, in time, to have all of the dead of previous generations baptized posthumously into the Mormon church. One reason Mormons advance the practice of baptism for the dead is a sense of justice. Billions of people have died without ever hearing the gospel of Christ and without having the chance to be baptized into his Church. How could God consign such people to damnation without giving them the chance to be saved? Surely he would give them that chance. But if they never heard the gospel in this life, when else could they hear and respond to it except in the next life? Thus the Mormon argument from fairness is not persuasive. There are other ways for accounting for God’s justice and mercy in dealing with those who have not heard of God and the gospel. It is not necessary to postulate another preaching of the gospel and second chance of repentance in the afterlife, much less the necessity of proxy baptism for the dead, on that basis. God can simply let whomever he wants into heaven, whether they have water baptism or not. God is not bound by the sacraments he himself instituted." Hope this helps you Charles. As for giving them records I'd say not a chance in any he** . I would get all I could together and take it to a government records library and find out what I had to do to get some security on them. Laterz. 803. eireannach666 @chuck B I provided a comment with some helpful info and links if it ever comes out of moderation. 804. Laurie Robillard @Charles B. My question is this: Why would my family line be on the Mormon site? Did they record other family lines, besides active Mormons about 100 years ago? I've been very busy so I haven't had any time for the computer. Today I took my grand children to a local fair. They were happy to see animals cows, pigs goats, horses, chickens, rabbits etc. They also enjoyed the rides and the ice cream. Needless to say I'm very tired. Picking up after my grandchildren being here all weekend. Concerning your genealogy on the Mormon records. I don't know exactly how your line got there but I have a few ideas. Mormons and non- Mormons can add their genealogy on the site. There are also teams of researches that go to the different churches and get baptisms marriages death records on micro fiche. My mother passed a way 6 years ago and I would have to have my father's permission to get her work done in the Temple. My father is 86 and when he dies I plan to get there work done. Baptism by proxi by myself and for my father by my son, endownment, and sealings for eternity. My parents are aware of this and have no comment. My siblings don't understand it and aren't religious except for one sister who is Catholic. 805. Ian the fine tuning of the universe is NO proof or even remotely valid argument in the favour of the presence of a God. It is VERY simple, if the conditions of the universe where any different, then we would not be around to observe them. The conditions of the universe are the way they are, because from our standpoint, its the only possible outcome. When people say " there are 1 in eighteen million thousand billion odds that the universe would turn out the way it did." that is to say we would not be alive in the universe. for us to be alive and to observe reality, there is a 100% chance that we would observe it EXACTLY the way it is. I am not sure if i am doing the best job conveying my points right now, but the universe HAS to be the way it is, there are simply no other options. 806. Randy @Ian I totally understand what you are saying. Absolutely. And it mystifies me that others don't "get" that... 807. Charles B. Laurie: That is interesting. I don't fully understand, however. You're waiting for your dad to die so you can what now? If people like me and your dad don't convert now, how is it that we can convert later after death? Please indulge me. I read Eireannach666's post. The worst I get in Mormonism is not making the Celestial Kingdom, but rather the terrestial one, but only sons of perdition (those that shed innocent blood) get the big toastola, as I understand it. eireannach666: That was very thorough and well written. I knew there as a lot of odd things in the Mormon teachings that I shied away from. I'll cut and paste and research later. Dr. Randy: My computer has AIDS! I have like this super nasty infection where I run the virus checker, and I kid you not, it doubles (hearly) every time I run the darn thing. I wonder if it's adding the viruses. But, I run the same program on my school computer and it came up with viruses, and then the next day came up clean. I wonder if this computer will die some horrid computer death soon. I had one do that once and it took four years of my college with it! How could people be so smart but so cruel at the same time to come up with these things. If I suddenly never comment again for a long time, it's most likely I'm busy with church work and/or my computer has went to Heaven before me. It would be nice, however, to get an e-mail contact so when I move (maybe in 4 months), we can keep tabs on eachother even if I can't do topdocs much any longer. Just a thought. Peace. 808. Randy Charles B. Af far as Mormonism, "Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown..." (if you don't get what that means, I am not going to go into it here...). The men wear "magic underwear" that keep them from "defiling" themselves... In the last 30 to 40 years they have even thrown UFOlogy into the mix, making it just as bat-sh** insane as Scientology! They are all grinning, smiling, happy masks with human demons behind them... IF they were not so depressingly powerful, it would be easier to ignore them, but alas... As far your computer problems... I too have had a couple of systems meltdown recently. Fortunately, I was able to back-up my work onto a tera-byte drive before they "gave up the ghost"! If you are using Windows systems? Apparently there was a major problem with some recent (June/July), Windows XP updates, including "Service Pack 3" which caused many newer XP systems, to self destruct. My research showed many, many possible solutions, but none of them worked in any permanent way... All I could do was get them limping along, long enough to back up the important work. Fortunately, I have many back-up systems and redundant networks... But, that may be your problem, other than a possible virus... 809. Charles B. Dr. Randy: Nope, it's viruses! I have two anti-virus programs on my computer (only one I know how to activate myself--the one with goggle eyes), but the other one "Norton" just popped on and is racking up the numbers too! Yeah! They're both in Korean, so it's frustrating to try to run anything, but the one I did run takes a long time. Norton seems quicker. I'm hoping between the two they'll get them all. It's like the replicators on SG-1. Where the H! do they keep coming from!?! Looks like when you run the anti-virus program and it finds a thousand (literally) and then the next day all you do is Facebook, and there's more! I just don't understand it . . . . . unless the viruses are more up-dated then the software trying to take them off. Anyway, Norton is running frantically now, and usually it comes up clean(er), but I see it's racking up the big numbers now. Let's hope it works, or I'll be out of a computer soon I think. Yeah, "Chinatown" is nothing to mess with I think! Been there, done that -- in the real China! :-) Charles B. 810. Laurie Robillard @Charles from Randy They are all grinning, smiling, happy masks with human demons behind them… IF they were not so depressingly powerful, it would be easier to ignore them, but alas… from Charles Yeah, “Chinatown” is nothing to mess with I think! Been there, done that — in the real China! :-) Charles do you think your friend the author the one you grew up with and respect is a demon with a human mask? If you don't be fair and stand up for her. 811. Laurie Robillard @Randy IF they were not so depressingly powerful, it would be easier to ignore them, but alas from Laurie How can a church that doesn't have a political opinion be so powerful? The church doesn't influence people to vote one way or another. Yes they own land for cattle and fruits and vegetables and canneries. Yes they own churches and temples and when they build a church or Temple they don't borrow money because they teach to be debt free. Is that a bad thing to be debt free? We don't have any paid ministry and the members clean the churches and the members work on the farms. My children have very good memories of working in the orchards growing up and camping on the grounds of the church owned orchards with the Scouts. We had square dances there and BBQs. We had a great time and we got to take home the seconds (fruits)home for canning making jam or juice. The purpose of these farms is for the people when they loose their jobs or become sick and have a reduced income and can't make ends meet. At least they get to eat decently. 812. Randy @Laurie You are so wrong in Canada! In my country, you have more money than the Vatican. With that money you buy and influence politicians and lawmakers... you affected laws in my country on mnay recent occasions, one of which Epicurus mentioned above. You even ran a dude for president a few elections back, and thank Batman ol' Mitt Romney didn't get past the primaries! If he had been elected, I would have eaten a bullet! And don't take the "mask" thing personally. I happen to know that all human beings are this way. The "evil" ones just try to repress it. They're the ones you see on the front page with the headline ending with, ..."before turning the gun on himself..." Anything you try to repress, just gets stronger. 813. Laurie Robillard @Charles B. The worst I get in Mormonism is not making the Celestial Kingdom, but rather the terrestial one, but only sons of perdition (those that shed innocent blood) get the big toastola, as I understand it. from Laurie We believe that families are together forever linked like a chain. I love my parents and want to continue a close association with them even after death. On this earth there is a veil over our memory of where we came from and we have to walk by faith. When we die our eyes are opened to the spirit world and people continue to learn and progress. Progression could mean letting go of some family traditions that prevents progression. My father goes to the Catholic church because of tradition. He has needs that are met there. We live in English Canada and the French who live outside Quebec tend to group together especially the elderly. They get to speak French go on little trips to Quebec such as the Maple Sugar parties even funerals are social events. My father goes to church every Sunday but he never discusses religion he doesn't read the Bible. My mother was religious and we had many many talks and she wants to be sealed to my father for eternity and have her children sealed to her and my father. She saw that out of four of her children that my children ( her grandchildren) were more respectful more thoughtful more involved in the community and youth programs more giving more helpful. She didn't think it was China town. She saw that Mormonism was good for me and my children. It would have been too much stress for her to change religion. Traditions are important to my parents. So when the Adamic language is spoken instead of English and French and countries and festive days are no longer a barrier things will change. First when my father dies he will see there is life after death ( right now he thinks when we dies all ends). He will be happy to see my mother again and his parents but he will be sad that their marriage is only until death. He will not be living in a family way. He will be taught that he can be sealed for eternity just as there love is eternal. Love doesn't die after death. My mother was one of those unfortunate people who had depression during her life so growing up wasn't always easy with mother being sick especially around October when the days are shorter less sunshine. After death there is no more illness so we (my siblings will know who she really is.) Hell is not a place for those who have taken a body on this earth. Those on this earth have passed the first estate. Hell is for spirit bodies like those of Satan and his followers. One third of Heaven. The others who are going there are those who sin against the Holy Ghost and few will do this. Most don't know enough to do this. A university degree won't get you to Hell. Those from earth who end up in the place called Hell will have a resurrected body and will have power over Satan because he and his followers who didn't pass the first estate will never have a body.Their progression has stopped forever.Where there is no progression there is regression. For the people of the earth after the resurrection there is the Terrestrial reward, the Telestial reward, the Celestial reward. The book of revelations talks about these places. One like unto the sun, the moon the stars. Wherever world you end up in you will be happy there but if you don't make it to the Celestial kingdom you will always know that you could have had more. More is living with your family and then some. The sin next to sinning against the Holy Ghost is murder. Murder stops the victims progression and repentance can't give that person's life back. So where do you think king David is going? Can he be compared to Hitler? Not in my books because he loved the Lord and served the Lord during his lifetime. He lusted after a married woman and didn't kill her husband personally and didn't get him assassinated but had him put in a place where death was a certainty. I don't have an answer for you but I thought you might think about it. 814. Laurie Robillard @Randy You even ran a dude for president a few elections back, and thank Batman ol’ Mitt Romney didn’t get past the primaries! If he had been elected, I would have eaten a bullet! Is there a law that Mormon individuals can't go into politics? Just because an individual goes into politics and chooses a certain party doesn't mean the church is behind him or her. The church doesn't have a political preference. Politics are not discussed in church. We just vote for the best man. I wouldn't vote for a party leader who would give everybody a gun. Sure there are a lot of wealthy Mormons and those individuals can donate or lobby where they want. They are not organized by the church. The church teaches principles and individuals govern themselves. The church does teach about marriage between man and women and not between man and man or woman and woman. However, the individual is cherished but not the sin. Having a tendency towards the same sex is not a sin but having sex with same sex is. Not different from I really like those shoes and think of ways to steal them but never steal them. It's called overcoming weaknesses. 815. Epicurus @ Laurie. hahahahahahahahahahahaha.....ohhhh hahahahahhahaha hahaha ha hahaha ha ha hahahahhahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *sigh* do you wear magical underwear laurie? also here is some HILARIOUS things the mormons believe....lol if anything is crazier than scientology it is this nutty cult. D&C 138: 8-14 8 “By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 9 “Which sometime were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.” (1 Peter 3:18—20.) 10 “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” (1 Peter 4:6.) 11 As I pondered over these things which are written, the eyes of my understanding were opened, and the Spirit of the Lord rested upon me, and I saw the hosts of the dead, both small and great. 12 And there were gathered together in one place an innumerable company of the spirits of the just, who had been faithful in the testimony of Jesus while they lived in mortality; 13 And who had offered sacrifice in the similitude of the great sacrifice of the Son of God, and had suffered tribulation in their Redeemer’s name. 14 All these had departed the mortal life, firm in the hope of a glorious resurrection, through the grace of God the Father and his Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ. This is about Jesus in America...LOL 3 Nephi 11: 7-12 7 Behold my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name—hear ye him. 8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them. 9 And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying: 10 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world. 11 And behold, I am the alight and the life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning. 12 And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into heaven. D&C 130: 22-23 22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. 23 A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him. In the LDS religion any worthy male can be given the priesthood and is given specific duties. Black people were not allowed to have the priesthood until 1978. Females are not allowed to have the priesthood. D&C 107: 1-5 1 There are, in the church, two priesthoods, namely, the Melchizedek and Aaronic, including the Levitical Priesthood. 2 Why the first is called the Melchizedek Priesthood is because Melchizedek was such a great high priest. 3 Before his day it was called the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God. 4 But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek, or the Melchizedek Priesthood. 5 All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to this priesthood. This deserves some explanation. Mormons believe that God created multiple worlds and each world has people living on it. They also believe that multiple Gods exist but each has their own universe. We are only subject to our God and if we obtain the highest level of heaven we can become gods ourselves. D&C 76: 24 24 That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God. D&C 93: 10 10 The worlds were made by him; men were made by him; all things were made by him, and through him, and of him. Moses 1: 33 33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten. D&C 76: 108 108 Then shall he be crowned with the crown of his glory, to sit on the throne of his power to reign forever and ever. D&C 131: 1-5 1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; 2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; 3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it. 4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase. 5 (May 17th, 1843.) The more sure word of prophecy means a man’s knowing that he is sealed up unto eternal life, by revelation and the spirit of prophecy, through the power of the Holy Priesthood. 816. D-K @Laurie: Most of what you said is just plain gibberish. I think you should take the time to formulate your thoughts better, or just think more critically. I also think your posts lack coherency, perhaps you should elaborate on some of your assertions instead of trying to get in as much faith-driven rhetoric as possible. "Hell is not a place for those who have taken a body on this earth. Those on this earth have passed the first estate. Hell is for spirit bodies like those of Satan and his followers. One third of Heaven. The others who are going there are those who sin against the Holy Ghost and few will do this. Most don’t know enough to do this. A university degree won’t get you to Hell. Those from earth who end up in the place called Hell will have a resurrected body and will have power over Satan because he and his followers who didn’t pass the first estate will never have a body.Their progression has stopped forever.Where there is no progression there is regression" This part is especially jarring. You assert tons of things while explaining none of them. 817. Achems Razor New fetish! Mormon magical underwear, Ha, Ha, Wonder what they look like? 818. Epicurus just google it achems, and go to images. you will see the mormon under garments 819. Nan What a fascinating doc - I was struck by lightning myself when I was 17, and I really related to the explainations of the neurophysicist about the heightened sense of "companionship"; I have had multiple experiences myself of feeling a presence while KNOWING I was alone, and these feelings didn't start happening until after the lightning strike... LOL and I thought I was just getting paranoid in my old age 820. Nan @ MILITANT TRUTHSEEKER: Your mathematical formula seems correct sir LOL You should publish your formulae :D 821. Achems Razor Thank's @Epi: Some videos on magic underwear... google.."youtube-magic mormon underwear". @Laurie, come back, want to hear about your magic underwear! 822. Laurie Robillard @Epicuru Females are not allowed to have the priesthood. from Laurie Why would I want the priesthood I have motherhood. That is enough work for one person. 823. Epicurus its not about whether you want it or not. its the view you are held in by your religion. you are inferior. you are not equal. when and how did you decide to become mormon? do you have a fun conversion story. 824. eireannach666 @Epi HaHaHa! Wow I didn't even think about youtubing it, lol. Leave it to them to ha e anything. But see almost or just as crazy as them sighingtologists. I wasn't BSing about madness. But I'm with you about Laurie. @Laurie Why did you become a m@#$& I mean Mormon in the first place? What about it made you see truth in its stories and beliefs? And if you could, please tell me why in light of all the proof against a god and all the evidence for smith being a loon why come to the conclusions you've reached. And you do realize that the odds of your religion being right as opposed to any of the thousand othees out there, is slim to none right?

825. eireannach666

Ok vlatko sorry. Just take out the *7a** part but I wa only joking. But I see why the moderation. My bad.

826. Charles B.

Wow.

Laurie: Yes, my Mormon friend is worthy of respect and a paragon of virtue; I was just thinking of the teachings of the LDS in general, and not her specifically. She had/has/and will have my respect in the future, even if I don't always agree with her doctrines.

Dr. Randy: You're right, they are better friends then foes politically. Laurie wasn't completely in-touch with how formidable they can be, but fortunately for me, Mormons tend to be mostly on the same side of the political agendas as I am. Their generosity is very Mormoncentric, however. Unemployed Protestants like myself need not apply for apples sauce! So I've heard. They're also the only ones that I know of that makes it a requirement to pay tithes to be in good graces with the denomination. In Protestant churches, tithes are only paid by like 20% at any one time, and unless you want to be a pastor, they don't send the "tithe police" out to get you.

My sermon tomorrow is over "love" (I Corinthians chapter 13) and I've been thinking so much about this-----"love" is the yardstick by which God judges His own: if we love Him and if we love others and if our motives are based on love and not selfishness. Are my actions based on care and love for others?

I could even be a minister, and if I do not act in "love" then the Bible says I'm litterally "nothing" and all my efforts are null and void in God's sight. Perhaps, just perhaps, that is one thing I have against the Mormons. I didn't feel a lot of "love" there, just pressure to conform and being pushed out if you don't. Again, not my friend, personally, but the denomination as a whole.

I try to put my own name in I Cor. 13 in place of "love": "Charles is patient, Charles is kind; Charles is not self-seeking; Charles is not easily provoked to anger. etc." Do I fit that bill? Not always.

"God help me to be a true "lover" of mankind, so that I might make a difference in an eternal sense. May it be my soul's deepest motivator in all that I do. If I can. Amen."

Anyway, I digress. I cannot bring myself to accept the teachings of the Mormons, but I cannot keep my soul from believing to the core that God is real and I cannot keep my heart from wanting to love and serve Him more very day.

I just hope that someday that science advances to the point where we have all the answers without just more questions, and that we can see God in all that He has made and done. I don't expect that day tomorrow, or even the next day, but perhaps, just perhaps, in my lifetime we shall see it.

What do you think, Dr. Randy?

P.S. I've never been hit by lightning! Can't blame my mindset on that, thank you very much! :-)

P.S.S. Epic: anything in the book of Mormon I know nothing about, but anything in the Bible I can explain what it means if you'd like, such as what happened during the time Jesus died and was resurrected wich was when he "preached" to those in "Hell" or "Sheol" which was not what we consider "Hell" per se now. If you'd like.

827. Laurie Robillard

@Charles B.
They’re also the only ones that I know of that makes it a requirement to pay tithes to be in good graces with the denomination.

from Laurie
Tithing means one tenth. One tenth of income. Tithing is in the Bible. The only time needed to be a full tithing payer is to get a temple recommend. A person cannot go to the temple without a temple recommend just like you cannot go to another country without a passport. The Mormons aren't perfect there are many who don't pay tithing and they are not held back from having callings. The fact that a person pays tithing or not is between the individual and the bishop. It is not announced to the membership at large of who pays tithing and who doesn't. If you want to belong to a certain golf club and the requirement is to wear a red T-shirt and you hate the colour red you have a choice shut up and wear the red T-shirt or go to another club. If you want to go to the temple and the requirement is to pay tithing you have choices also.

828. Laurie Robillard

@Charles B.
Unemployed Protestants like myself need not apply for apples sauce!
Do you know that the church has sent ship loads of food and water and medicals supplies and sanitary kits, new born kits, and doctors and interpreters and engineers to Haiti after the quake? It wasn't a requirement to be a Mormon to receive these goods and services.
It sounds to me like you have a lot of anger against the LDS church. I understand that it is hard to be unemployed especially when you have a family to look after. Does your church have a welfare program? The Catholic church has Saint Vincent de Paul the Salvation Army also helps people in need. When a man in the LDS church is called to be bishop he isn't only bishop over the Mormons he is bishop over the area he is assigned to. So if your church doesn't have a welfare program approach the Mormon bishop in your area on a Sunday at the chapel and he will bring you in his office and you might just be surprised of the help you will get. More than apple sauce my friend !! The church doesn't work like a welfare system as you know it. Receive a monthly check and thank you mam. The church will give you a little job for the help you receive. Maybe driving somebody to the hospital for whatever or cutting somebodies grass. That way you won't feel you are getting something for nothing you can retain your dignity. To me that is the definition of love.

829. Laurie Robillard

@Charles B.
Mormons tend to be mostly on the same side of the political agendas as I am.

What side is that Charles? I don't know what side they are on.

830. Laurie Robillard

@Charles B.
hey don’t send the “tithe police” out to get you.

Explain to me how loving you are with this statement Charles. You are saying untrue things. Saying things that are not true hurts other people Charles. Was it a joke? I missed the humour.
The only time that I have been questioned about my tithing is once a year at tithing settlement in December. It is also a voluntary thing for me to go into the bishop's office to declare if I am a tithe payer or not. If I happen to be in the possession of a temple recommend and I inform the bishop that I haven't paid my tithing in 6 months the possibilities are that he will ask for my recommend and put it on hold until I resolve my issues and if I need help I can get counseling if I choose and if I need food to help me out I will be given the food.

831. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus

its not about whether you want it or not. its the view you are held in by your religion. you are inferior. you are not equal.

I don't feel inferior at all. It is you who thinks I'm inferior. I can give public prayers just like a priesthood holder. I can give public talks at the pulpit just like a priesthood holder. I can teach a class just like a priesthood holder. I can go to the temple just like a priesthood leader.
I can't be bishop but I can be Relief society President. Men and women are different and we are given different jobs but we compliment one another.

832. Vlatko

Listen @Laurie Robillard,

This is a scientific documentary that somewhat touches the existence of a Creator. It is not a documentary about Mormonism. So please if you have any intelligent arguments regarding the documentary we will be happy to hear them. Otherwise please refrain from non-stop writing about Mormons. They have nothing to do with this documentary.

833. Epicurus

@Laurie, you sound just like a black person in the 1930's. not one of the smart black people who fought for civil rights. but an uncle tom. a yessum boss type black person.

you have accepted that you are not treated as equal and your belief system has made you think that is okay or normal,

men and women ARE different but what makes men so superior to women in mormonism....hmmm does it have anything to do with being made up by men in a time of sexism?? hmmm no that would make too much sense...i think believing in gods and lost jews and jesus in america with garden of eden in missouri makes MUUUUCH more sense.

lol how can anyone who claims to be a responsible thinking adult say they believe in this make believe nonsense.

between charles and laurie i feel like im talking to either children or schizophrenics.

834. Achems Razor

Okay! thats the first time you made me laugh @Epic:
"children or schizo's" funny!

Or maybe they are drunk "Yoda's" as per a commenter called "yavanna" on his blog.

835. Randy

@Vlatko

In Laurie's defense, I think she was just defending herself against me. I can be something of an intellectual bully at times...

I'm sorry...

836. Laurie Robillard

@Charles

My pastor’s wife was Mormon, and she said that when she left they didn’t show much concern for her leaving other than someone called and wanted to know why her tithing had suddenly ended.

Tithing is never discussed over the phone. Tithing is discussed in the bishop's office. Only the bishop or stake president discussed tithing. Tithing is not what they are worried about when someone leaves the church. Not paying tithing is a sign of a bigger problem. My husband use to be in the bishopric so I know.

837. Charles B.

Laurie: OK. I'll take your word for it. It sounds like you know, as long as every ward works precisely according to the rules. If she were still my pastor, I'd fact check and get back to you, least I be the one embellishing her story. I'm working on 15 to 20 year old memories.

Peace to you.

838. eireannach666

@Laurie

Ok let's all stop the preaching for a bit and the rest of us can chill for a second, I believe the topic here originally was if whether or not the universe earth and us were the results of a creator or designer or not.

So let me ask you this. Since yoy obviously are a believer of a creator and a divine plan , I want to ask why do you side this way and what proof of there being a creator can you present to us? Try to answer without using any unreliable or should I say hear say from any doctrine of any religion. So no bible etc. Because that is not proof only propagandic speculation and as I said hear say. Real evidence , I'm looking for. Something that can be tested band reviewed.

Because my argument is that there is no evidence at all and it is insane to have such conviction for nothing but superstitious beliefs and unfounded claims of hope and eternal peace.

839. Laurie Robillard

@Charles B.

When someone has been a long standing member and they leave the church it has to do with pride. Somebody offended them, or they got chastised for fornication or adultary.

840. Laurie Robillard

eireannach666

We are living in a sick world, in a time when wisdom of the wise shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid. That is the condition of the world today.

It doesn't matter what I say. You would refuse to heed. You place yourself in a position of saying to our Heavenly Father who owns this world --he is our landlord--"We do not need you. We will do just as we please."

You want me to tell you, you are right. No matter how wrong it may be.

Do you fear that just maybe their is a God? Fear is a chief weapon of Satan. Are you looking for company to justify yourself?

Like I said before God knows all of this wonderful science He is the greatest mathematician and scientist and men are only discovering his creations.

841. Achems Razor

Actually @ez2b12 and I are trying to figure out exactly where any bibles even mention such a thing as a Satan, devil, demons, Etc: where "o" where can they be? do you know @Laurie?
What are the scriptures/passages?

The only one that I have found is Isaiah 14:12 NKJ and then it only refers to a morning star!

842. Laurie Robillard

Can the evolution of species (or their apparent gradual development over millions of years) jive with the existence of a supreme Creator? We believe all truth must be consistent, and if there is a conflict, something needs to be revised. Brigham Young said, "Our religion embraces all truth and every fact in existence, no matter whether in heaven, earth, or hell. A fact is a fact, all truth issues forth from the Fountain of truth, and the sciences are facts as far as men have proved them" ("Remarks by President Brigham Young, Attending Meetings--Religion and Science--Geology--The Creation," Delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, May 14, 1871, Journal of Discourses, 14: 117.)

843. Laurie Robillard

Achems Razorez2b12

from Laurie
You need to ask Vlatko if I have permission to answer that question. (quoting scripture) He has more tolerance for Charles so until I get approval to answer that. It might be faster to ask Charles

844. Laurie Robillard

@Randy
You even ran a dude for president a few elections back, and thank Batman ol’ Mitt Romney didn’t get past the primaries! If he had been elected, I would have eaten a bullet!

Randy is your concern about Mitt’s religion boils down to people doubting Mitt’s ability to think straight. I mean, how smart can someone be who believes that Joseph Smith was a Prophet who received tablets from an angel recounting an alternative Biblical history that took place in America?

Before you answer remember you also said this.I can be something of an intellectual bully at times…

845. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

No need to quote any scriptures, just tell us where in the bibles that stuff is.

Not trying to prove your religion, just as the doc. suggests is there a creator? and if so, part and parcel comprises of the opposite, a nemesis, the so called "Devil" Yes?

846. Charles B.

Laurie: I'm rushing! I forgot to mention that I'm not currently unemployed. I wanted to mention that so you didn't think I was being dishonest purposely. I noticed it could be viewed that way after I hit the comment button, but you can't edit! LOL. I meant I'm protestant and should I be unemployed (as many are) . . . well, you get the picture. Yes, aid for Haiti, etc.! Good. God judges the heart and Not I. Let's call a truce. I'll try not to joke (too much) if I can at your expense. :-) But, sometimes I even poke fun at myself.

Peace to you.

847. Laurie Robillard

Achems Razor
What are you researching?

New Testament Jude verse 6 about the angels that didn't keep their first estate

Old testament Isaiah 14:12 about Lucifer son of the morning

New Testament Revelation 12:7,8,9 the war in heaven against the dragon, dragon cast out, old serpent called the Devil

New Testament Revelation 12:4 one third of Heaven cast out with Lucifer

New Testament John:14:30 the prince of darkness

New Testament 1 Peter 5:8 adversary the devil

New Testament St Mark:3:22 prince of the devils

848. Epicurus

@laurie, in reference to Isaiah:

Isaiah 14:12-24 is interpreted by some as referring to Satan by the name "helel" in Hebrew. This is often translated as "Lucifer" or "Morning Star." The passage describes how he had fallen from heaven, was thrown to earth, expressed a desire to sit "on the mountains where the Gods assemble", wished to be like God, and had attacked many cities, leaving them in ruins. At first glance, this looks like a description of some of the activities of Satan. However, verse 4 clearly states that the passage refers to the King of Babylon, not to Satan. Isaiah was simply showing "sarcastic contempt for the mighty Babylonian monarch that had recently fallen, vanished as does [the morning star] Venus from the daytime sky."

and The Book of Revelation describes Jesus' judgment and destruction of the early Roman Empire.

however the other passages are good examples of references to Satan.

this whole satan vs god thing makes the entire myth seem even more fantasy to me. i just shake my head and wonder how people believe the stories of stone age people.

why would god allow satan to do what he does? why even allow him to exist? here is where morality comes into play. If god has the power to stop satan but doesnt then he is not good.

what makes more sense is that these are just fables made up by stone age sheep herders. the fact that you believe it is just jaw dropping.

849. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Only one mention of Lucifer in OT. which is more of conjecture than anything else, the references of Lucifer et al: is in New Testament only. Which in my books was made by royal decree by Emperor Constantine.
So again all complete fallacy, and fables.

850. Charles B.

Mr. Razor: Just curious, to what degree is the New Testament a construct of Emperor Constantine? 100%? That would be hard to support as the Christian faith was well under way by the time Constantine came along, and had texts circulating before his time.

There are a lot of concepts that are "ebryotic" in the Old Testament, such as the concept of "Satan". It doesn't mean the fleshing out of such in the New Testament is fable. In fact, in Psalms, it says that it is to God's glory to hide a matter, and it is for the glory of Kings to seek it out (that can be applied to all of us). There is a time for ever discovery under Heaven. Perhaps the time of God's greatest unvailing will be in our lifetimes.

@ Achems Razor
just a random question; are you Welsh?!
if your not, thats ok - we are still psychic sisters (because I used to be the Mars Representative in Ockham - many years ago I must add)
high 5 bro xxx

@ Achems Razor
ps I think you are Fab

853. Randy

@Laurie

I do not wish to engage you on these points any longer.

Yes, Mitt's first allegiance would be to the Church. You know it, I know it, even the largely brain-addled American people knew it.

And let me put this out there: You and Charles have the right to believe what ever you want. In the privacy of your homes. IF you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone.

But, as soon as your religions try and compromise my civil rights, or my country's Constitutional intergrity, then I will fight tooth and claw. You are NOT allowed to do that!

Sorry.

But you ARE doing it. And it sickens me.

Seperation of church and state, the gov'ment can't mess with you, and YOU can't mess with the gov'ment... simple, why is it getting messed up?

Because the bible tells you so...?

Worthless book. It doesn't even make good toilet paper...

854. Randy

And since you guys were talking about it, I will put this out to the room, again, as I have written dozens of times before:

Jews don't know anything about Hell or Satan. It's not part of their religion. And since, this jesus character was supposed to be Jewish, where would he have gotten it from?

Indeed, where did christianity and islam get these ideas if NOT from their parent religion, Abrahamic-Judaism?

Let me help: IT WAS PUT IN THERE LATER ON BY SILLY MEN! Borrowed from Zoroasterianism, Egyptology, and later refined by Greco-Roman, and other pagan imagery...

855. Charles B.

Ok. You win for the night.

Peace.

856. Achems Razor

Am half Scottish, but probably admixtures of some Celtic blood with the Cornish, Welsh and lowland Scots.

I have green "cats eyes" like some of the Welsh though, (LOL)
And am a "He"

@ Achems Razor

mmmmm im now building a mental picture of Achems.....gimmee a minute, I cant get past this vision of Mel Gibson only taller, with green eyes, and minus the celtic blue facepaint.......ok im almost swooning lol
(at least Ive had a break from reading the Mormon info! btw Donny Osmonds family - his mothers parents were from Merthyr Tydfil! - small world as Merthyr is onnly 15 miles from me - up the A470.
The Quaker religion was firmly rooted in Pontypool - still has a large following.
et moi? I sits on the fence - been sitting there sooo long Ive got a big dent in my .....laterzzzzzz

ok back to the subject matter - feeling much more focussed after throwing myself head first into the Afon Llwyd River (the deep part) and Achems is but a distant memory...
Everybody has a different opinion on the subject matter - I dont need to throw my nine penneth in - because it is what it is - just an opinion. I think the underlying problem here - and one which leads to the hot debates is that we are confusing science with doctrine.

859. eireannach666

@ the Celt

Ahh , Ciamar a sibh , my new Gaelic friend? I was just checking back in this thread noticed some action and new blood.

Have you watched this series yet? What did you think and what are your viuews on the unuiverses coming to be what it is?

Is it created or evolved? Designed or chaotic? Just an inquiry to get to understand your statements better.

Slainte

860. Laurie Robillard

Epicurus

Isaiah 14:4-21 Isaiah sang a song for Babylon

This satirical or taunting song, given in Isaiah's own beautiful poetry , is a song of judgment against the Babylon of unrighteousness Isaiah strides through the future in this powerful Hebrew meter, leaving Babylon trodden down and vanquished in the triumph of Israel.

Isaiah 14 12-15 Who was Lucifer Son of the Morning?
Isaiah again used dualism. Chapter 13-14 describe the downfall of Babylon, both of Babylon as an empire and of Babylon as the symbol of the world. You think "Lucifer son of the morning" is the king of Babylon , probably Nebuchadnezzar. In the symbolic use of Babylon , (Babylon as a spiritual wickedness and the kingdom of Satan). Satan and Babylonian's prince aspire to take kingly glory to themselves, but in fact will be thrust into hell where there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.

861. Epicurus

what makes you assume that is dualism there? and even if it is, maybe its just symbolic and they recognized the use of satan as just symbolic for someone or something causing great evil?

PS...you might want to leave out the rhetoric in your speech. you talk as though im listening to a preacher and i would rather just hear this stuff objectively without all that emotional appeal and whatnot...just the colourful use of adjectives could be toned down. just a suggestion not a demand.

862. eireannach666

@Laurie

I don't know why people quote the bible as if it were the same now as when it was first written. Ever play that game when you were a kid in school, where you sit in a circle and on person whispers something to the person next to them and repeat. And in the end when the last person has his the message given to them its nothing like what was told to the first kid? Get the point? In other words this bible you quote has been mistranslated , forgotten an lost and then filled in by the church as they saw fit. Plus do not think for a second that the church used and uses this bible and your need to have a crutch to lean on when your down to profit and control the simple minded herd. You guys are as cattle to the church. No more than food and clothing for the manipulative so called teacher of false promises and hope. Which he dishes out in multiple servings until you are so full of it that you smell , speak , act , think and believe the trash that has been ingested. Unfortunate these scriptures you quote don't really prove the existence of god or satan but only entertain the thought of such characters.

Now the bible has some historical fact correct but not near as many as are off or just made up. Regardless the fact remains that the bible today os not the same as it once was and the bible as it was wasn't the same as the original writings. Just as the bid today was "edited" to meet the editors personal propagandic perception of these documents, so was the one of old and so on. Ill bet that one fifty percent of it contradicts the original texts before compiled to this book of ridiculous claims and disney characters like talking snakes , angles, virgin mothers and flaming bushes etc...

Not to mention translation al issues from one to the next.

But hey I'm not trying to make you denounce your faith but rather question yourself and the faction of which you are a part of and protect/ defend so vigorously. The church for 1000s of yrs has been one if not the most corrupt entity on the planet and you followers are like the guy just building computer chips for a living , not ever questioning the reasons for or what. Never knowing those chips are put I'm bombs and desolate cities. Etc...

And our cult is just like any other. Its not different except for instead of a funny hat you guys get funnier underwear. (Got to have your sign I guess. Like bloods have red rags and crips blue)

Question is , sorry Achems, is there a creator? And do you consider this unreliable ancient text as a sort of proof or evidence towards one? Can you give me and everyone some type of observable,testable evidence other than a bunch of fiction novelists making a name and a lot of money off of the fabrication of a super hero type activist,rebel of innocence?

I want to know what happened here, I mean where is all the seas parting and dead raising at these days? I mean heck it would seem if god was not fictitious then what haPpened? Did he run out of magic dust? Give up? Or possibly even met his end and passed away? When something bad happens to you what do you say? Why didn't he help or send his angles?

The only reason satan was added in was to provide the bad guy for super zombie to fight.without one the other doesn't have as much impact.

Come on Laurie please question things and weigh the evidence available to you by all the research done over thousands of yrs by believers and non. All have came up with nothing to support the creative theory.

Can you argue your point Charles or Laurie without quoting or referencing any bible?
Layerz

863. eireannach666

*your cult, sorry keys are small on a bb

864. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Can't help it, but your last post brings to mind again, Jack Nicholson's memorable quotes...

"Where do they teach you to talk like this? in some Panama City "Sailor wanna hump-hump bar" or is it getaway day and your last shot at his whiskey? sell crazy someplace else, were all stocked up here.

@ eireannach666

Tha mi gu math, tapadh leat, Anna! Ciamar a tha thu fhien?

at least i think your name is Anna? thank you for the welcome. I am nowhere near as intelligent as most of the people commenting o this site, but I am learning from the written comments as much as I am from the documentarys Anna!
I dont feel confident enough to give opinions on the Documentary that you mentioned, I am just reading at the moment - and taking it all in! - My special interests are Religion (but I am NOT religious), Archaeology (been on loads of digs) History (my friend in Caerleon reckons that King Arthur is buried under her Summer House!) and Philosophy (Socrates would have loved me! - but look what happened to Socrates!)
What about you? - are you in Ireland now? - I was on Valencia Island not long ago - nice break.

866. Randy

*Randy speaks in a New Jersey mobster accent*

"Somebody needs ta t'row dat Socrates a good beatin'-- deadbeat, degenerate gambler owes me five large! You see dat freakin' guy, you tell 'im Randy da Ripper's lookin' for 'im-- you get me, cookie?"

@Achems

I have used that classic line many times on this site... "Sell crazy somewhere else, we're all full up here!"

Good stuff.

867. Charles B.

Sade: How did you get involved with the digs? I want to get a MA in archeology if I can. Is King Arthur really buried under your friend's summer house?

868. Laurie Robillard

eireannach666
@eireannach666

The only reason satan was added in was to provide the bad guy for super zombie to fight.without one the other doesn’t have as much impact.

The Lord does not agree with Satan or agree to his evil deeds; however Satan is permitted by the Lord to afflict and torment man until Lucifer's allotted time on earth is done. It fit's God's purposes.

869. Randy

@Laurie

IF this creature, this tyranical beast that you worship does, indeed, exist, then we as human beings MUST oppose it.

I do not care about its "purposes"!

Who is this alien monster that claims to be my king? I didn't vote for him-- he can eat me!

870. Laurie Robillard

@eireannach666

If we looked at mortality as the whole of existence, then pain, sorrow,failure, and short life would be calamity. But if we look upon life as an eternal thing stretching far into the premortal past and on into the eternal post-death future, then all happenings may be put in proper perspective.

Part of suffering is educative.
Trials for us to rise above
responsibilities that we might achieve
work to harden our muscles
sorrows to try our souls
temptation to test our strengtht
sickness that we might learn patience
death that we might be immortalized and glorified

If all the sick for whom we pray were healed if all the righteous were protected and the wicked destroyed , the whole program of the Father would be anulled and the basic principals of the Gospel , free agency , would be ended. No man would have to live by faith.

871. D-K

@Laurie:

What does this mean exactly: "If we looked at mortality as the whole of existence, then pain, sorrow,failure, and short life would be calamity"

872. Randy

@D-K

She has no idea what it means. She seldom knows what anything means, that's part of her charm...

How are you man? Go to see you!

873. Randy

^^ should be "good to see you..." obviously...

874. D-K

I dislike non-sequitors.

875. Randy

@Laurie

I would like to sincerely apologize for that comment aimed at you above...

I jotted it out on the fly, in between two other tasks, and when I read it back, I was a little ashamed.

It was glib, and harsh, and dissrespectful.

It IS hard to watch you commit intellectual suicide in front of me with each post... but, you do deserve better treatment than that...

Sorry, again..

876. eireannach666

No this is not Anna , mo mhùirnìn and I wish I was in Ireland. Been there though. We are Wexford people but I am an American. My gIpa insisted on us learning our roots and to be proud of them.

Wow, I'm impressed with your journeys , a bit jealous. Don't sell your self short my Gaelic Piuthar. As your humbleness shows your intelligence and that you think before you speak. Very refreshing. And it seems to me that your interests are that of my own and others here. Don't be afraid to be vocal. Besides I got your back and I'm sure Achems and our Gaelic colleague Dr Randy does as weLl amongst others. You re amongst friends.

Any ways I have to get back to the other comments above since they were directed at me but I hope to see you on here more often.

Slainte

877. eireannach666

@Laurie

Think about it , evil or idea of an evil entity opposite of god or jesux , only adds the action and drama needed to create any good story. Good triumphing over evil. I mean come on its got everything from incest, to a battle of two opposing forces in the finale. Its made up is all I'm sayting and without satan to blame everything bad on then who would catch the rap? God would and they can't have that. Or us which we are made in his image, according to this story so ,of course , a scapegoat was created to have a way of protecting the name of the god and the to give an answer to those who questioned the church? Now all they have to say is its the devil tempting you or thats of the devil and the flock obeys the commands of their Shepard coerced by the devil. Couldn't have the sheep blaming the herder for the wolves now could they .but of course you also had to invent a reward for obeying sO heaven and an afterlife came as well as the place called he**. So you really have to admit , if not obey but to yourself, that it seems pretty convenient that the church always has an answer but yet has no proof of these claims. Plus control by fear is always easiest and most lasting. You all were terrified into religion and then embraced it becausw it promised you bliss if you obeyed.

I left some gaps there but you get my point. It would take all day to detail that notion.

I don't see how you or anyone can buy something as demanding and life dictating as god without seeing it first. I'm not going to give you a million dollars for a spaceship if you can't show it to me. Would you?

So really religions argument is simply nothing but talk. And anyone can talk that kind of stuff and have and made religions with it. LeVey ,Crowlley , Jones even those Nike wearing fools that all died for nothing but talk.

If there is a god then surely we would ALL be aware of this and not just the ones unable to cope with life on their own.

Its a scam to prey on the weak and vulnerable. They are opportunists looking for someone to give them money for comfort and the piece of mind that you should be able to get from yourself.

Self help isn't counseling its helping yourself.

878. eireannach666

@Laurie

Answer me this then, claim to have this vast knowledge of god and good morality , what do you know about the other side o things? I mean like satan and evil, sin in all its forms of indulgence and vanity. Pure evil isn't from no entity of he** or spirit ghost of sin but I'm telling you first hand that its from within the mind of oneself. We've heard the argument for gods existence and truly it fails so let's ask the question , does satan exist or lucifer whatever? Surely if god does then lucifer does as well no?

879. Epicurus

the real question ought to be what makes a belief valid? what is the reasoning or logic behind holding a certain belief.

we can list all the things we know and give good reasons as to why we know them. we can show evidence and provide tests to see whether these beliefs are actually true.

what allows a RELIGIOUS belief to be exempt from these requirements? why is faith all of a sudden an acceptable tool to make a true or false claim about reality? why is faith in this instance MORE valid than evidence or logic?

why can a person of one religion accept the claims made for their religion on faith but not the claims of another one on just faith?

@ eireannach666

Noswaith Dda butty! I cant believe your from County Wexford! - so am I! saything that, I never lived there but thats where my Fathers family came from (Wateford). I dont know much Gaelic - and I get confused with Scottish, Irish & Welsh Gaelic dialects / versions! - so I usually speak Welsh, but I find that apart from the usual slight differences in pronounciation and spelling its all very much the same...(dont shoot me, Im only the piano player!)
What part of America are you living in? - I married an American and lived there for a few years, quite advantageous for my Daughter - shes got 2 of the most valuable passports in the World! and shes always back and forth. as for me - I couldnt even get a green card - my ex was so spiteful lol ...only joking, we are such good friends - I love him dearly....as long as the pond is between us.

My Grandparents were your typical Celts - My Grandmother could cure just about anything with home made potions. I still make stinging nettle pop - or 'nettle beer' as some call it - do you know the nettles im talking about? - jeeze they bring you out in welts if you touch them...but boil them for beer and its delicious. Comfrey was used for any cuts or bruises, Bi-carb for upset stomachs - I hope Im not boring you - but its your heritage too!

I spent last Christmas on the Isle of Skye - now THAT was an adventure - those Cullen Mountains take your breath away.

Did you know that Valencia Island was where the (old) telephone cable lines used to disappear under the sea - connecting USA with Europe? obviously its obselete now, but the cables are still there - fascinating. Also they have slate quarry on Valencia - and the slate is very unusual - brown and shiny,and very expensive! - its used on the roof of the houses of Parliament! - yes eireannach666 - you are rightly proud of your Irish heritage.

ps does this mean that Achems knows Ive kissed the Blarney Stone? so.....he will realise I as teasing him? aww noooo!
chow for now xxx

@ Charles B

Good evening Charles! Yes indeed my friend (Lisa Thomas) has always maintained that King Arthur was under the Summer House! we used to laugh about it, but as the legend goes, there is evidence to suggest that the Round table was somewhere around the Wye valley. and her parents house was within the huge walls surrounding the town of Caerleon, which as you probably know is a major Roman town, the Romans settled in Caerleon because it was located conveliently on the river (the Usk river) which leads into the Bristol Channel. Now the Romans built an outdoor Amphitheatre in Caerleon, and its one of just two surviving today! - Caerleon is crammed full of Roman history, it was only about 20 years ago that a Roam baths was found! - I went on this dig and it was incredible! we found hair ornaments, 'strigils' (which are like blunt razors) and are used to scrape the oils off the body whilst in the steamy baths. I suppose I am kind of used to living amongst such history, I am fortunate.
i did study at the University of Wales - Caerleon Campus, so I was often on field trips as part of my degree, thats how I got involved in the Archaelogical digs - and it went from there really. I would gladly put you in contact with plenty of archelogists that would so appreciate your interest and enthusiam - its hard to find people who are willing to devote the time and care and sensitivity needed when the area is rich in artefacts. - in other words leave the bulldozer at home! - I wish you lived closer - Korea would be a nighmare to commute from Charles! hey...but if your THAT willing - so are we!
Thanks for your comments Charles - I think we have a lot of interests in common - and if you want anything at all - just ask! regards Sade

882. Randy

Why would anyone enslave themselves to some invisible man in the sky, just because someone told them he was up there?

Say for example, I was to come up to you and say, "See that big bush over there? Yeah, that one. There's a tiger behind that bush! Yep! Big one.

You better get into this iron cage and lock yourself in, because-- WHOO-BOY! You don't wanna get eaten by no tiger!"

So, you jump in the cage, lock yourself in, without any actual proof or evidence that there was ever a tiger behind any of the bushes up there. And I go off and rob your house.

You live your whole life in the cage, and as you die, you say, with your last breath, "At least... I never... got... eaten by a ...tiger..." *gurgle--dies*

Now, would it be wrong of me to laugh and jeer at you for being so f00lish?

This to me is a perfect illustration for the origins of all religions.

883. eireannach666

@Ep

Right. I agree 100 percent hence the analogy I gave of the space ship that was sold to but never seen. But I was kind of just working my way into that since Lauriw won't come right out and answer a question without the quotation of the book of hymn. (My favorite is incineratehymn.) But I feel you for sure. That question is why its so irritating to discuss the subject of a possible (but not likely) creator. But hey its out there now. I look forward to her next response.

Its just like Epicurus to get right to it without the fun. Lol.

Peace brotha.

884. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus
@laurie, in reference to Isaiah:
had recently fallen, vanished as does [the morning star] Venus from the daytime sky.”

from Laurie
"This name-title of Satan (Son of the Morning), indicates he was one of the early born spirit children of the Father. Always used in association with the name Lucifer, son of the morning also apparently signifies son of light or son of prominence, meaning that Satan held a position of power and authority in pre-existence.

885. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus

How's this for astronomy?

Jesus Christ is the Evening and Morning Star
The Savior said, "I Jesus...am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star" (Rev. 22:16). By this He was almost certainly acknowledging the sign or symbol of our morning and evening star, the planet Venus.

According to Native American tradition, the cycle of Venus is like the life of the white, bearded god who visited them in the first century A.D. Venus is born as an evening star rising in the west, dim but growing brighter every day. Several months later, just when it nears its brightest point, it dies, plunging quickly into the earth and disappearing as an evening star. For several days it remains underground, fighting evil forces, until it conquers death and resurrects in the east as a radiant morning star. The parallels with the life, death, and resurrection of the Savior are obvious.

886. D-K

I think that's closer to astrology than astronomy, personally.

celestial bodies + symmbolism = astrology
celestial bodies + (f)actual science = astronomy

887. eireannach666

Lucifer is latin. I can't see how its in hebrew text prior to the romans having a roman language. Its because it wasn't. Once again the church decided to play editor. In Isaiah, it says things like, fallen angles and the ruler of he**, right? Well in the hebrew text, the same verses of isaiah there is nothing at all about fallen angels and hell. Instead babylonian king. He was said to have abused israel but no Satan. Not all. No angels and no he**. They just decided satan and fallen angels. Never once were any of these nor any ruler of any underworld was even talked about once in the original text. So this was made up and doctored and the end result was giving this guy the name lucifer because of the latin decent of the word it is what it is today.

How come it wasn't joe or bob? Well when translate by the romans Romans n according to their own astronomy, it was the name of the morning star or Venus really but "lucem ferre", bringer of light. However in the real first texts in hebrew , the word used to refer to that babylonian king was helal, or "son of the Dawn" Loosely translated as I don't know hebrew but have reliable sources.

The great editors who were to do the king james version , the one most read bt all bible faiths ,didn't even use the original texts but used revised copies that were written by st. Jerome a looong time afterwards. Like four hundred yrs long.. Jerome had either made a mistake or made an edit and took the hebrew word lucifer and the morning star ends up a fallen angel that pi**ed off god and now has to reign in he**.Or it was on purpose or as an investment. And over time lucifer the king that abused his rule became (hail)satan, devil etc..

But knowing this is yet another fact that the book of the rock is made up and unreliable as well as a forgery also plagiarism at its finest.

Just like every single page. And its not just the christian faith but all of them.

888. eireannach666

I'm with DK. Its mumbo jumbo made when the earth was flat. Step into this century please.

Hey there bunny. That's cool you are from tht same CO. As my family was. Small world I guess.

889. Charles B.

Sadie: I have one last class to grade a writing test for, and I just can't bring myself to do it today. I've done 310 today. I guess that's enough.

Anyway, I would most love to do archeology in the Middle East. I wish I could do Biblical archeology in Isreal. I've also always wanted to hunt dino fossils, but I'd get drummed out of advanced classes once they started the evolution pollution solution mantra again. I've even heard of people already working in the field with PH.D. degrees that put forth an unliked contra-evolution explination and they get shunned and never get published; I'm sure they'd love me, then!

But, archeology sounds terribly interesting! I was asked to be the T.A. for the history professor in college, but unfortunately, I was already a T.A. for the New Testament prof. and he kept me grading paper all term long and I couldn't have done both! Five inches of papers equals about 2 days of hard work. I gave my lazy roommate a "C" and the prof. agreed with my assesments nearly 98% of the time and never went higher, but sometimes dropped the grade I gave. Those were the days! I loved college and I want to go back now for my advanced degrees at the University of the Philippines. I plan to study Theology, of course, and then I want to do something for myself in education so I can get my teaching license like my wife has, and then something just for me in an interest whether or not I ever get to teach/use it later.

Eventually I'd like to be a theology/Bible professor and/or a full-time pastor. These are exciting days we live in, aren't they? I'm very excited.

Anyway, fiddle faddled enough time away that I think I can head home now.

Peace to all.

@ Charles B.

Gosh you really are busy - I feel lots of energy coming from your words - a real inquisitive brain is lurking i think Chas!

I admire your diversity - perhaps you should be looking to study Paleontology? Im pretty useless as a source of pre-history but I am always learning.

I dont understand your Education Charles - forgive me but I was never educated in America or the Phillapines or anywhere other than UK for that matter. I can tell you that if I obtained a B.Sc, then I would be qualified to teach all age groups. but I didn't so I was only qualified to teach adults.
To enable me to teach ALL ge groups, I had to do a P.G.C.E. - which I did at Bath University.
its as broad as its long really - a B.Sc takes 4 years full time studying, and a B.A. takes 3 years F/T, & with a PGCE taking a year. both these paths tke 4 years full time.
After graduating it is possible to embark on an M.A. thats another 2 years - and then a Ph.D - which takes another few years. The Phd is 'Doctor' status - of which I am sure you already know.
In order for you to get where you want to go, in acadamia, it may be a good idea to focus on wht your exect goal is? is it digging in Egypt - or teaching Theology? or teaching Religion? or being a Pastor?
Im NO expert Charles, but I would think that you need to focus on exactly what you want to do, and go for it! - its easy to get sidetracked by fascinating 'offshoots' - but there is plenty of time to follow interests when you are where you ant to be.
I hope I havent missed the point here? Im trying to help!

@ erieannach666
yes I know what you were referring to in your analogy of the whispering in class, we called it 'Chinese Whispers' -
My grandfather said that when he was in the War - the Commanding Officer said to the 1st solder to pass the message of "send reinforcements, we are going to advance"... the soldier passed the message down the line - and the last Soldier said to the Colonal - "send 3 and 4 pence we are going to a dance"
I dont know if it was true - but thats what he said.

@ Randy

o0o I just read your post directed at me....errrr can you translate please? hahahahaha Im falling about laughing here! you win Randy! nice one! hahaha

@ everyone

I am reading everything that everybody has written - Im trying to decipher each persons religious stance - but its hard. It seems that Relgion and Science seem to get permanently interwoven on this site, but hey, thats ok with me if its ok with you.
Im just feeling my way - and as a starting point, I would like to ask you all a question.
Has anybody studied the Bible? by this I mean STUDIED it as a primary source? and if so, does anyone know anything about the 'Q' source?
Cymru am byth

893. Randy

I have studied the bible at length and depth. It is important to know one's enemy...

It is bunk, every version, through and through... it is a novel and has nothing to do with reality. I do not live in fantasy worlds, I live in the worlds of logic, Pure Reason, and science, if that answers your question about my position.

I have discected human bodies, animal bodies, and I found them all the same, and no soul was needed to explain them.

My personal library dwarfs the public one in my county, and though I will not allow a judeo-christian bible into my home, I do have a q'ran, a book of mormon, A Satanic Bible, a Witches Bible, and holy books from dozens of schools of thought around the world.

My "occult" section is legendary... I have an entire section on Satan, in fact... my favorite mythological character...

Here is a personal warning to you; take it as you will:

In my youth, I used to be a con-artist, working the psychic/shaman spritual advisor game. I was very good. My look was perfect, skinny, pale, dressed all in black (LONG before the "goth" movement) with long flowing coats, long hair and a goatee trimmed to a point. I wore mystical talismans all over and had credentials from several bizzare churches and spiritual temples. I sometimes walked with a long staff like a wizard.

My favorite victims were the gentle, loving, trusting hippies and vegans. Thirsty for hidden knowledge of the ESOTERICA of their lives!

I'd throw in some watered down, half-baked eastern philosphies, a few magic tricks, and then some keen psychic insight and predictions of the future! (I was very good at "cold reading")

I'd walk away with whole bank accounts, and they would THANK ME FOR IT!

How do you think I could afford all of those colleges?

But, then, I just couldn't live like a parasite anymore. I couldn't live with myself. Not for them, they deserved to be taken--- if not me, some other guru would eat them alive... but for ME. I just couldn't be proud of myself, or have any self respect...

This is a warning to you, because reading over your posts, I see that you are vulnerable to wolves like I was. Remember that every single spiritual advisor that exists, from the Pope to Deepak Chopra and everyone in between, is a con-artist. There is no magical world. There is physics.

Sorry, about the long post... I hate to see nice people get hurt by predators like me...

894. Randy

Oh, BTW, I still look that way, which is pretty ridiculous for a man my age, but... what the hell, I own the business-- I can do what I want!

'Course, now, I have MS, so the walking stick is sometimes essential and not just a costume... LOL!

@ Randy

hey! hold on a minute! please dont give a any 'personal warnings' except those that are factual like (there is a gun being pointed at your head) ...I would be grateful if you would warn me of such.

Randy, everything you just wrote was based solely on your personal opinions - I could not find one shred of evidence, and whilst I am interested in your point of view, its not substantited.

So you have disected Corpes? bully for you.
what that got to do with the question?

896. eireannach666

Well well well. Its my newest favorite person on TDF.

Ahh well let me say first , dia duit, a chailin alainn Sadie!
Now that the formalities are out of the way , let me say first that I agree all the way with what Randy stated and I too have studied a great deal on religion. All of them. As Randy said and I say again, know thine enemy. In the sense that you must know what it is your questioning or debating in order to have a valid argument against whatever it is your debating.

However I don't understand what it is you are referring to as "Q" question. Please elaborate on this. I'm sure I will have an answer for you. Or someone else can inform me. Never heard that before. I was raised around religion. One side catholic and the other christian. I found a large distaste for it even at a young age, I realized that there was no rOom for questioning and no room for individuality and I did not respond well. Religion of any kind is evil in so many ways.

I've spent time researching these prophets and gods like jesux and moohoemed etc and found very little credibility in any of the text written of them. Some small amounts of fact yes but a lot of BS inbetween. I mean a lot!

So what is you question specificly and I'm sure you will get more than a few opinions from this thread.

Laterz, Erin go brach! Slainte.

897. Randy

I have posted evidence all over the site... I have done the research, the homework... I have thousands of books that I have collected and read, Vlatko has hundreds of docs that show the evidence... but I am not going to type out 6000 pages of text here.

Do your own work, but I am offering the knowledge that I have gained through long hard life...

Please. How can I offer you all of the evidence in one post... be realistic.

898. Randy

I basically said she is falling for a con... and nobody likes the truth.

But, I am only trying to help, Sadie, like I helped that boy with the burned leg...

@ Randy

Yeah, it goes back to what I said earlier - that mankinds biggest downfall is 'EGO' and 'GREED' - if your bank account was getting full from pandering to the whims of the needy - you obviously are suffering because of this. perhaps you should not have been so obsesses with mateial gain? ie greedy?

Im sorry to hear you have MS - but its got nothing to do with the question I asked - I simply wanted to know who had studied the Bible - THOROUGHLY
and that was all I asked, - praps thats why you deviated.

instead of dissecting corpes, why dont you dissect the Bible? there are heaps and heaps of arguments - all supported with evidence, from countless sources, both 'for' and 'against' various doctrines.

Im still sitting on the fence - I am not religious.
but I sure get weary of people 'spouting' verbatim

@ Randy

'Ive read books' 'ive got a huge library' 'ive wore robes' - these are the type of things that people say to elevate their status! and its usually when they are short on knowledge. its superfluous banter - and unless your being sociable, totally unnecessary....
Yes Ive rambles on about stupid stuff....but i never avoid the issue, and when ANYBODY states facts - they should be prepared to back it up with EVIDENCE
im not saying you are wrong - but for goodness sake stop using your experiences as a source of knowledge because its not.
nobody can learn experiences by proxy

901. Randy

I was merely establishing that I have some authority on this subject. And you know that I was talking directly to all of your points, every single one you have made on this site.

And I realized I was doing the wrong thing when I was running the cons. I even tried to give some money back, you know what I heard?

"You think it was a trick," they'd say to me, "but, you have real psychic powers, you don't even know it..."

People would rather believe a comfortable lie, than a hard truth.

@ eireannach666

Im getting mad here! - I am no going to use this forum as a lectern to preach my own beliefs - because I dont have any.

you said 'know thine enemy' - how arrogant is that? please let me find my own way.....just warn me if im 6 inches from a cliff or something.
Anything else I will find out for myself.

I can honestly say that I am incredibly frustrated by the way you handle discussions. Its great to chat, I love to chat with anyone about anything. But a question is a question, and I am sat here wondering if any of you guys have ever written dissertations? or have you sat exams - ?
All I ask is that you keep to the point! - straying away from the subject matter is so annoying for me to read - especially when its about you and your beliefs.
The 'Q' source is just another unknown source of biblical knowledge - its hypothetical and I asked i randomly - to see what came back
Im disappointed

904. Randy

I liked you and I reached out, that's all.

Don't worry, though. That's over now. I see exactly what you are.

905. eireannach666

Meow Sadie. Calm down. It was meant in the sense that one can't argue or decide without first knowing what it is he's debating.

I know what you are referring to a "Q" now but its been referred to in different terms to me. I say that it is still really an unestablishes group of texts seeing as it hasn't been fully translated yet and that it is missing a lot of text from its multiple volumes if you will. Its not like the 4 gospels which are in the bible today and those have been picked to pieces by scholars worldwide. I even commented on that as well on another thread about creationism . These texts of which you speak are basically different from the 4 because they offer a bit more detailed sayings of jesux, and also I believe they start with some from john the baptist supposed author of th fourth gospel.. But the problem is that there are missing pieces in these "q" texts; one major missing link is the passion narrative.

But these texts have no more validity than the rest of the bible seeing there is no evidence of an author or to where these were written. But I think the german scholars leading the way along with humorous others are working on that.

Put the claws away my dear, I'm only stating what I know as fact. And I like you so please try and not to misread ny words or take them out of context.

I didn't know you were so feisty. Hissss.

Now please be nice. Any follow up questions for me , lass?

906. D-K

I don't think it would be very practical to debate the supposed existance of a Q document, or even its implications.
The evidence for it is circumstantial at best and as far as I know, there is virtually nothing known about it's contents.

Having said that, I am by no means a theologian, so there may have been recent murmerings about it that I've missed.

907. eireannach666

And I want to add that this is all just hear say until someone can provide these texts. As far as I know they have stuff left over from like the late 1800s from the research done then on this topic but I don't think anyone has even seen any of these supposed texts for something like 2 thousand years or so. I don't like the idea of debating a topic that I don't know much about. Apparently its similar to Marks version but heck I don't know neither does anyone else.

Its probably just as unreliable as the rest and wasn't included like the other gospels left out of the bible. Its all a scam for power,control an money. Even today. Greatest story ever told indeed.

@DK
Agreed I'm done. Well assuming nobody has any slick remarks as usually happens.

So how about the weather, huh? Lol.

908. D-K

Very, very windy, and with the recent floods that means virtually no people on the streets. I actually set up shop outside, something I usually don't do.. y'know.. because of the people.. but I'm loving it now.

Stuff blows past me, it's that good kind of cool, temperature-wise, and the street is dark and abandoned. It sounds depressing but I'm typing this with a smile of cartoonish proportions.

I'm feeding the stray cats again in the neighbourhood while I contemplate my TOE of human experiences, do a little amateur stargazing and I found a nice little Hawking lecture that's new to me.

It's a good night.

Actually my "g" button just blew away, hahahahaha classic..

909. Randy

D-K,

You nutty psychopath... get back inside 'fore ya catch yer death!

LOL!

910. Achems Razor

Yeah, nice to get away from all this God stuff for a change.
Ha,Ha, love @Randy's blogs, should strike fear in most religee's hearts or at least p*ss them off to a great extent.

Will look forward to Hawking's new book "The Grand Design" wonder if it will come to our big library where I reside.

Hawking is a proponent of the Universe from absolutely nothing theory, in a lot of his lectures. In his new book, he states there is no need for any gods. Do you think that is from eating to many "Arby's" EH, Randy?

911. eireannach666

HaHa! Way to take it and run DK. Not here its hot and humid. I have the luxury of rebuilding an engine twenty yrs old and long past deceased. 2 more hrs.

@Randy/Achems

Yeah so what's ole Steves total bill up to now, 100 dollars? Beef n chedders seem to have a hold on the man. maybe Arbys sauce fuels his super hove-a-round.

Yeah I wonder how much that books going to be? Or if we can preorder a copy?

912. Randy

Achems and eireannach666,

HAHA! Yes... you know, I am sooo out of touch, I did not know he had a new book coming out!

What a doofus, I am! I gotta get that... Thank you for letting me know, Achems!

Although, I SHOULD get it for free, what with all the Arby's I've bought for the man over the years...

913. Epicurus

@lauri

you said:

"According to Native American tradition, the cycle of Venus is like the life of the white, bearded god who visited them in the first century A.D"

which native americans? where is the record of this? i have studied first nations people for a while now and have heard NOTHING about this myth from outside the mormon church. it is a complete fabrication and the fact you would believe it without evidence hurts my head...you are an adult you say??

you say:
"For several days it remains underground, fighting evil forces, until it conquers death and resurrects in the east as a radiant morning star. The parallels with the life, death, and resurrection of the Savior are obvious."

no that is NOT what venus does. Venus is just a planet. also the parallels of STORIES have nothing to do with the stories being connected but HUMAN NATURE being connected.

you are searching so hard for any type of confirmation of your religion that the straws you are grasping are utterly pathetic.

@Charles, how would you partake in an archaeological dig if someone found an artifact dating from the sumerian kingdom? or any time before your book states the earth was made.

you would have to ignore the entire stone age development and the agricultural revolution. dont bother becoming an archaeologist. you will just muddy the water.

914. Achems Razor

@Randy:

Here is what Stephen Hawking said in reply to you.

"Ive heard all your stories before"
Hawking's scoffed, as he rolled through the door.
"Though a wormhole's sublime,
You won't travel in time.
For you, there's a black hole in store"

915. Randy

Wonderful, Achems... just like Dr. Suess... how pleasant...

Listen, here's what Stephen Hawking said to you:

"Get. A. Job. You. Dirty. Hippie. So's. You can. Score. Me. Some. Arby's..."

Not quite as pleasant.

LOL! All love, dude!

916. Laurie Robillard

@ Epi
from Laurie
Venus Testifies of Christ (look it up)

The Aztecs compared Venus to their white and bearded god Quetzalcoatl, who was born an insignificant boy, then rose to great brightness, and then was sacrificed shortly after his prime. Then in the underworld, he conquered the forces of death, and he resurrected as the bright and morning star in the east. He then finally ascended to become a god. They also maintained that he resurrected at the same time as the planet Venus. It was this tradition, and its similarity to the life of Jesus Christ, that induced me see if Venus was actually rising at the time of Christ's resurrection. It turned out it was indeed, and that led to the discovery of this entire Venus Calendar. The Native Americans watched the phases of the Dawn Star

917. Laurie Robillard

@Epi
from Laurie

Jesus had an uncanny understanding of all of the stars, constellations, and houses of the zodiac based on Enoch's calendar, and the fact that he was not born in December, but during the Spring Equinox. To determine when the spring equinox would occur to the day during Jesus' time, one had to have thorough understanding of the movements of the sun, moon, and the morning star (venus). He is the morning star becasue his birth was prophesized and planned to happen at the very moment of that equinox, not because of any mysticism or because he "claimed to be God."

918. Randy

@Laurie

I'm sorry dear, I can't resist...

Jesus had no uncanny understanding of anything, because HE NEVER EXISTED! He was a mythological character, like Attis, Mithras, Hercules, King Arthur, Robin Hood, or Gilgamesh.

There is no concrete evidence that this jesus, or yeshua, or esu, or any of the names by which he has been known was a real person.

At best it is an amalgalm of many characters/messiahs of that time, at worst he is simply a retelling of an ancient pagan god-man myth...

It means nothing. It is sad that you devoted your life to a fantasy, but move on, I did, you can too!

919. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Actually, "Jesus Christ was a Mushroom", namely the fly agaric,"Amanita Muscaria", from which most religions have sprung, the magic mushroom gave religious epiphany's, it is even mentioned in the Veda texts. True stuff!

920. Randy

@Achems

I am familiar with that scholarship. The conclusions are compelling, but hardly conclusive. I am inclined to believe them, but, I would hardly call them "truth".

Understand, also, that certain abnormal brain states, like schizophrenia, have the exact same effect.

In fact, in the ancient world, the insane were considered in touch with the gods. The term "touched in the head" or "touched" in reference to a "crazy" person, is a direct descendant of that idea.

It is interesting that most aberrant brain states, including drug induced psychosis, seem to include some religious-type experiences...

Of course, I have always known that the religious were "touched in the head"...

921. Achems Razor

@Randy:

When I say "true stuff" that is just an inflection of speech, just like you "Jersey boys" say "youse". Don't forget am Canadian, EH?

I know that the magic mushroom thing is a whole conundrum of alternate beliefs, can't say theories. I have devoted some time to this mushroom stuff on various blogs here on TDF.

922. Randy

Ah, I gotcha, LOL! Sorry, dude!

It could very well be. The circumstancial evidence for it is compelling.

It's like the theory, you've probably read about it, that ergot poisoning was responsible for the Salem Witch Panics in early colonial America. (Salem Mass. is a very cool place, btw... well NOW, probably not THEN...)

Good theory, probably true, but without bodies to autopsy, at least bodies with soft tissue left in them, there really is no way to know for sure.

(I didn't offend you with my little Stephen Hawking thing above, did I? I really liked your poem! I was just kidding you, and your poem DID throw me into a black hole at the end... not very nice...! I'm just sayin'...)

923. Achems Razor

@Randy:

Why would it offend? You worry to much, have we not been through this?
Yeah, the Salem witch trials are something else, as a matter of fact, have the movie, "The Crucible" an adaptation of "Arthur Millers" play, of the Salem witch trials of 1692, interesting.

924. Randy

Well, my sense of humor can be... easily misconstrued as "insulting". I have made many enemies in life by being a smart-a**!

Certainly, there are people around here I do not mind offending and even go out of my WAY to offend, Vlatko help me... but not you or Epicurus, or Eiren666, or D-K, or Vlatko.

Too much respect, there.

@ eireannach666
@ Randy

Im sorry for losing my temper. I know I kicked off like a ninja but I have calmed down now and I feel ashamed...

As you can probably see, I dont have a sense of humour, well I maybe have a little - but its British and thats my handicap.

And I guess thats why my Marraige faied - he was an American..... and Im from the Welsh vallies - its so different.

Anyway, Im off out with a new boyfriend tonight, Ill try and behave......Bye

926. eireannach666

@Randy

I'm the same way. I tend to be condescending when I don't care for someone and always go on the offensive if provoked. But I can debate anything as long as a person does actually take true evidence and fact into consideration when presented. Instead of arguing their point by showing their evidence ans debunking my own. Then I tend to just start picking at them because I see that there is no getting past the delusional wall some people have that won't let them accept that they are wrong.

Laurie

Every one looked at the stars in that period and before and wondered. Worshiped and offered. They didn't have a clue as to why and howm neither did jesux. He thought the world was flat too. Wait ...wouldn't gods son know better or was he smart for a human or a god with downs syndrome?

927. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus
which native americans? where is the record of this? i have studied first nations people for a while now and have heard NOTHING about this myth from outside the mormon church.

from Laurie
Let's take a walk to the South American jungle Epi

The Feathered Serpent. Native Americans of Central America had a legend about Venus which is still useful to help remember where Venus is in its orbit. The equated Venus, which they called the Dawn Star, with their god Quetzalcoatl, the "Feathered Serpent." They believe he came to earth and lived as a man and that the evening star represented his life. Thus, point 3 in the orbit when Venus first rises in the west as an evening star would represent the "birth" of Venus. It is then on the far side of its orbit, and so it is at about its faintest at birth. It then grows a little brighter every day as an evening star in the west, like a child growing up, until it gets to point 4 in the orbit. That point is called the greatest eastern elongation because it is as far east of the sun as it can get. By this time, Venus is in its "prime" of life, and is very bright. It then continues to get even brighter for about another month until it is so bright it can cast a shadow on a moonless night and is often the cause of flying saucer reports from someone who looked at the sky for the first time. Because it is at this time so near the earth, it seems to plunge surprisingly quickly into the earth and "die" at point 5 in the illustration.

It is about the death of Venus that the Native Americans have best preserved their legends for us. A good reference on this is Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico by Anthony Aveni (Austin, Texas: U. of Texas, 1980). He quotes (p. 187) the legend from the Anales de Quauhtitlán (Seler, 1904, pp. 364-365):

928. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus

from Laurie
astronomer-astrologers (the Magi)

Why identify Venus as the Star of Bethlehem?
Jesus called himself “the bright morning star” (Rev. 22:16). Venus is ‘the bright morning star’.

How can the ‘bright morning star’ be identified as Venus? First, Venus at its brightest is the brightest natural object in the sky after the sun and moon. It is the brightest object that can be called a star. Second, the ancients referred to exactly two planets as ‘morning stars’, they were called morning stars because they were normally only visible for a few hours before dawn. The morning stars are Mercury and Venus. They are morning stars because when they are visible in the morning they are normally only visible for a few hours before sunrise. This is a result of their orbits being closer to the sun than the earth. All other heavenly bodies are further from the sun than the earth and are therefore visible throughout the night. Mercury and Venus are also the evening stars. Again they are the evening stars because when they are visible in the evening they are only visible for a few hours after sunset. Since Jesus calls himself the bright morning star or Venus and the Magi saw His star as it rose, it is likely Venus was the star the Magi saw and we call the Star of Bethlehem. Venus rises as both the morning and the evening star. Since Jesus is ‘the bright morning star,’ it had to be Venus rising in the morning not in the evening. Venus spends about half of its cycle as a morning star. Once every 1.6 years (584 days), Venus rises for the first time with the sun in the morning. Venus rose to mark Jesus’ resurrection Sunday April 5, A.D. 33.[4] When Venus rose near Jesus’ birth, the Magi had to spot Venus on the first day it rose to observe these signs. The Magi where professional astronomer-astrologers so they would be able to spot Venus at the earliest possible time. Since Venus is the brighter of the two morning stars and Jesus is the bright morning star, it is logical to conclude that Venus is His star. The Magi observed His star at its rising therefore the day they observed Venus rise for the first time in a particular cycle would be that time to which they are referring.

929. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

It seems that all you are saying is that your Jesus, your religion, has all its origin in the Sun and the planets etc: No?
It is all anthromorphized and classed as pareidolia, through astrology.

930. Laurie Robillard

@ Randy, Epi,Achems Razor

Truth

Let's take just a moment to talk about truth. If science can never prove a theory "true," then truth really has no place at all in science. By "truth" I mean what is "really" going on. Truth has to do with ultimate causes, which are nearly always extremely elusive and beyond the realm of science. Science deals with theories, usually mathematical, which predict outcomes of experiments. For example, if we drop a rock off a cliff, the law of gravity combined with theories of air resistance and other forces can be used to calculate just how long it will take to hit the ground, and how fast it will go, etc. But science does not answer the question of just exactly what gravity is, or why things fall. It just states that given certain conditions, they will fall. In general, science answers questions like "how," "when," "where", but never "why" in the ultimate sense.

As an example of the interplay of the three concepts of observations, theories and truth, consider the courtroom. The observations may be that a man was seen shooting a gun and that the person hit by the bullet died. The theory may be that it was cold-blooded murder, but the truth may be that it was self-defense. Truth tends to be invisible and hidden, such as someone's motives, whereas observations are usually visible. Courts are very interested in truth, where the motive (the ultimate cause) for actions is given considerable weight. The distinction between first-degree and second degree murder is based on intent. Motives are not as yet observable in science, and hence are beyond science.

931. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

Truths??

So where are the truths that you so speak of, for your religious meanderings. Give us the hard empirical, take it to the bank type of evidence. Remember you said it not I.

@ Laurie Robillard

YES! thats almost what I wanted to say - but Im not very good at English as a first language, thank you very much laurie, Sade

@ Laurie

Laurie - do you agree that Jesus ws born on january 6th? at least that was the date I calculted, but I may be wrong - comments?? thanks Sadie x

sorry - I should have added IF jesus existed....
phew ....I thinked too fast there

935. Laurie Robillard

@ Laurie

Laurie – do you agree that Jesus ws born on january 6th? at least that was the date I calculted, but I may be wrong – comments?? thanks Sadie x

from Laurie
Jesus was born March 6 in the spring. How did you come up with your calculation? Do you study astrology astronomy?

What language do you speak? My first language is French.

936. Laurie Robillard

Epicurus
from Laurie
So what if John Pratt is a Mormon astronomer and university professor. Is there a law that Mormons can't study the sky and calendars? Just because you have no interest in those fields doesn't mean it is silly.

937. Randy

Well, there certainly SHOULD be a law that mormons can't be university professors but... alas, I do not rule the world, (which is a GOOD thing because all ya'll would end up in a wood chipper! KIDDING!)

What Epicurus is saying is that your professor there is coloring all of his observations with a lovely glaze of mormon. You need unbiased observation to reach any real conclusions.

You cannot tell me that the information taught at Brigham Young University is not first "cooked" in the foul-smelling broth of Joseph Smith, before being fed to the hapless victims/students there...

938. Randy

And Laurie, all of your statements today are completely without merit. Theories do become scientific laws when they are proven true.

Theories are not "guesses" they are based on real veryfiable evidence.

Science, like the law, has a "jury system" to test all truth in a very strict manner. It's called Peer Review.

And motives are easy to figure out. People are NOT mysterious. A good cold reader like I am, can figure out a great deal about a person in ten minutes. A good forensic psychiatrist can see a criminal motive a mile away.

Oh that's right, you don't believe in psychiatry... neither does Scientology... hmmm...

@ Laurie Robillard

Non Laurie je comprend le francais dupuis cinq ans (en ecole) mais j'oblez beaucoup! my first language is Welsh - not Celtic, not Gaelic - just Welsh.

Again no, I dont study Asrology or Astronomy - I used another method, but its obviously inaccurate - I will get back to the drawing board - and then back to you!

940. D-K

The question of "why" is irrelevant and philosophic in nature, that's why science doesn't answer the "why" questions.

You simply cannot find the answer to a why, not at this point, there is no way to account for the variables in a universe/multiverse which we don't fully understand or even have explored yet.

"Why, is often the first question asked, yet the last question answered"

I do have a nice "why" for you though; Why do you look up the opinions of a specifically morman astronomer? I'm positive that if you objectively judge your motivation for doing so, it'd be an eye-opener.

Or you can go ahead and ignore me again ;)

@ Laurie Robillard
je m'excuse! oublez*

942. Laurie Robillard

@Randy
Theories do become scientific laws when they are proven true.

Scientific laws. Is that the Hall of Fame of science?

from Laurie
Not-yet-measured Equated to Non-existent. Even worse than ignoring the observations of those who can see something which you cannot is the tendency of science to declare that something does not even exist if cannot be measured by an instrument. This is an extra step into ignorance.

943. Laurie Robillard

D-K

The question of “why” is irrelevant and philosophic in nature, that’s why science doesn’t answer the “why” questions.

from Laurie
Science is considered to be methodologically empirical in nature.

944. D-K

Science has not fully explained brain chemistry and its quirks, having said that, hallucinations, altered perception and sensory deprivation all result in people "seeing" things. Just because you "see" something does not mean it exists.

Science (the entity) has a tendency to discard useless information because humans have a tendency to lie for personal gain, i.e psychics.

945. Laurie Robillard

@D-K
Science (the entity) has a tendency to discard useless information because humans have a tendency to lie for personal gain, i.e psychics.
from Laurie
Isn't that what Randy did to earn money to pay for his university.

from Laurie
Is this how science discards useless information?
The classical example goes from a series of observations:
Swan no. 1 was white, Swan no. 2 was white… Swan no. 3 was white… to the general statement: All swans are white.

946. Laurie Robillard

@Randy

Theories are not “guesses” they are based on real veryfiable evidence.

Science, like the law, has a “jury system” to test all truth in a very strict manner. It’s called Peer Review.

from Laurie
No induction can prove that all swans are white, since this will require an infinite number of observations, but that the observation of a single non-white swan will falsify the statement that all swans are white

947. Laurie Robillard

@ Randy

And Laurie, all of your statements today are completely without merit. Theories do become scientific laws when they are proven true.Observations are made

from Laurie
1) A theory is proposed to explain the observations
2) The theory is used to predict the results of future observations, which might prove the theory false.

Note also that no experiment ever proves a theory to be "true," but only that it has survived one more possible falsification test.

948. Laurie Robillard

@ Randy

Theories which have survived the test of time are sometimes honored with the name "laws". The theory is never proven true because there is always the chance that a new experiment will be devised which will require more than a minor revision to explain the result. A scientific law is really just a theory that has been inducted into the scientific hall of fame.

949. Laurie Robillard

@D-K
Science (the entity) has a tendency to discard useless information because humans have a tendency to lie for personal gain, i.e psychics.

Remember that if the meaning is "observation," then it is as fallible as the observer. If it is a "theory," then it also could be disproven someday.

If it is claimed to be "truth," then it is a statement of the personal conviction of the speaker, which is outside the domain of science.

If most people were blind, would it be "scientific" to ignore all observations by the few who could see only because blind scientists could not invent a camcorder and connect it to their optic nerves?

950. Randy

Yes, the "conclusion" of a theory is often proved to be inconsistant with evidence. Therefore, it is changed.

Science is a self correcting mechanism. It can be wrong for as long as it needs to be until it is right.

Religion should be right all the time, everytime, and never make mistakes... afterall, it's divinely inspired, ain't it?

And do not give me that "I feel it in my heart, so I know it's true!!" and then the violin swells and the piano goes "tinkly-tink..." This ain't TV, sister!

I can show you on an FMRI exactly where that feeling comes from. I can describe the chemical process in the brain and the endochrine system that produces the chemicals...

Means nothing. Science tests, with peer review and instruments, because the "feelings" mean nothing.

951. D-K

" Is this how science discards useless information?
The classical example goes from a series of observations:
Swan no. 1 was white, Swan no. 2 was white… Swan no. 3 was white… to the general statement: All swans are white"

A scientist using an actual scientific method will not succumb to post hoc ergo propter hoc. The general statement in that instance should be:

All observed swans are white. The extrapolation from those obersvation would be that swans have a propensity towards developing a white coat, i.e have a high probability in general to develop a white coat.

You strawman a specific example and couple it with reductio ad absurdum to devaluate the entire scientific method.

Shame on you.

Side note: Randy indeed claims to have preyed on the ignorant with "psychic" abilities, but he also states that he did so full knowing and stating that the "art" from which his "abilities" derived, was and is, pure hokum.

---

"Science is considered to be methodologically empirical in nature."

I don't know that point you made there, or if you were agreeing with me, but you pretty much just re-phrased my sentiments; "The question of “why” is irrelevant and philosophic in nature, that’s why science doesn’t answer the “why” questions"

952. Randy

You know Laurie, you want to believe in this magical world of yours, I get that. Maybe you NEED to believe in it. I get that, too.

You know what I call people who WANT to believe in, god, demons, angels, unicorns, goblins, faeries, UFO's, conspiracy theories, sparkly vampires, etc...

Willing victims...

953. D-K

"If most people were blind, would it be “scientific” to ignore all observations by the few who could see only because blind scientists could not invent a camcorder and connect it to their optic nerves"

When people "see" things, it's most likely not due to the optic nerves, but interference of specific regions of the brain that shouldn't be active in the process.

Study shows that with certain visuals or scenarios, people will subconsiously engage regions from the limbic system, which means that between the observation and conversion from short-term to long term memory, other part of the brain have tampered with the observation.

I could probably look up the research for you, but google is also at your fingertips.

954. Laurie Robillard

@Randy

Tell me again Who are victims?

Government and Special Interests. Most scientific research done today is funded by governments, so scientists must tailor their agenda (and even findings?) accordingly, or be out of work. This is particularly unfortunate in countries where secret combinations are in control. Similarly, large corporations hire scientists to prove that their products are safe to use or superior to their competitors. We can hardly expect an unbiased report of their findings.

955. Laurie Robillard

@D-K

You strawman a specific example and couple it with reductio ad absurdum to devaluate the entire scientific method.

Shame on you.

from Laurie
Shame on me so here is a better example
For millennia it was assumed that the plane geometry of Euclid was "true," but then Einstein and others proposed "curved space" which has proven to be a very fruitful theory. Similarly space and time were believed to be absolute and matter was believed to be different from energy, and again it was Einstein who has argued convincingly otherwise. When the underlying foundations are wrong, it often requires rebuilding the entire scientific edifice, as was the case with Einstein.

956. Randy

That's actually very true, Laurie. Many scientists are compromised by religious and political agendas.

That's why you and I must search diligently and do our homework on any study. Who funds it? At what point are they in the research? Is it preliminary, or conclusive? (News outlets love to shout preliminary results of health studies, for example, because they make good headlines, but when the study doesn't prove out, the news never reports that...)

Again, science is a HUMAN thing and can be corrupted by RELIGION, and politics, and money-men... what's religion's excuse? Isn't there some diety protecting it?

It will sometimes take me two years of study before I can accept any scientific evidence to be accurate. I have to know the credit rating of the scientist running the study! (exaggerating to make a point...).

This is called "critical thought".

957. D-K

You're going to have to spell out the point you're making there, because I'm probably missing it.

"When the underlying foundations are wrong, it often requires rebuilding the entire scientific edifice"

That, I can disagree with in advance, because a faulty theory does not devaluate the scientific method, logical insonsistancies come forth from our incomplete understanding of natural laws.

958. D-K

@Randy:

Isn't that called "scientific scrutiny"?

959. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

What websites are you copying/paste from? my guess, mormon right?
And/or, it seems to me you are being prompted by someone else, a third party, am I right again? is it your mormon friends?

960. Randy

@D-K

Well, sure, "scientific scrutiny" is a term that could apply, but, I always think of that as something actual scientists do.

Critical thought is a process that can apply to lay-people as well, and really, every human being should employ it, all the time, every second, of every day of their lives-- AND, for every time/space event that happens in their lives

Otherwise, just lay down, go to sleep, and get out of the way... (them, not YOU, D-K, you're cool...)

961. D-K

I'm cool? That's a first, lol.

On second though, I'd revise my statement. Scrutiny is a instrument belonging to the overarching methodology of critical thinking, so in a sense, we're both right.

Score!

962. D-K

Epicurus:

Establishing inherent doubt in scientific explanations/conclusions is a guerilla warfare technique. By pointing out inherent uncertainty, one can equate, for example creationism, to a theory with well-established logical inconsistansies in an attempt to put both explanations on equal footing.

It's a convoluted form of mud-slinging.

Such would indicate that there isn't a conclusion, only circular logic.

The documentary was interesting, Id like to get some consensus as to the common ground with regard to content.
Does everyone agree on the 4 forces? what do you think would happen if they were out of sync?
do you think that Garrett Lisi could be proved right with his 280 twisted circles (E8LeeGroup) (sic)
What would happen if his theory is proved? - do you agree that it would be a blueprint for divine geometry?
Im only interested in the finite if anyone cares to tell me what they think? Id be grateful

964. Laurie Robillard

from Laurie
Since you read all the post then you know that I'm a Mormon. We believe
1) The bible is incomplete since revelation continues
2) The Bible has numerous errors in translation
plain and precious material has been dropped

3)Certain segments such as song of Solomon are of dubious inspiration
4)Certain passages such as Eve being formed from Adam’s rib should be interpreted figuratively

Even those most devout and sincere believers in the bible realize that it is, like most other book, filled with metaphor, simile, allegory, and parable which no intelligent person could be compelled to accept in a literal sense.

The Lord has not taken from those who believe in his word the power of reason

The opening chapters of Genesis, and scriptures were never intended as a textbook of geology, archaeology, earth –science, or man science. Holy Scriptures will endure while the conceptions of men change with new discoveries. God works in accordance with natural laws.
True science is a discovery of the secret, immutable and eternal laws, by which the universe is governed. Scientific truth cannot be theological lie. They have the common ground of truth on which to meet.
I suppose I and Charles are the God Squad. x

965. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus
you are really not arguing for anything here. you are saying theories are not facts. no one is saying they are. what is your point in bringing this up. what is your conclusion for the argument?

from Laurie
Creationism contrast sharply with fundamental LDS (Mormon) beliefs, which teach of harmony between science and religion.

There is a fundamental and unproven dogma underlying much of modern science, especially evolution. This is the assumption of scientific naturalism, namely the philosophy that empirical nature is THE ONLY REALITY about which we can have solid knowledge. As a result the hypothesis that a God or an Intelligent Designer was involved in the creation of life on earth is , in effect excluded from scientific discourse. If scientists removed their naturalistic blinders, they might see the creation in an entirely new light.

When the Lord reigns during the millennium, we can expect that the typical scientist will believe like Louis Agassiz, probably the greatest naturalist of his day, who said, "In our study of natural objects we are approaching the thoughts of the Creator, reading his conceptions, interpreting a system that is His and not ours."

This is your school of thought

In our day, the world teaches that scientists should be atheistic so that they are not prejudiced by the false traditions of religion, which hamper progress. A century ago the name of God appeared in many science books, but now his name has systematically been removed. We are taught that the thought of mixing God into science is "unscientific."

I say
Science Need Not Be Atheistic.

966. Achems Razor

@Laurie:

You never did answer me, do you wear magic underwear? maybe to go along with your "magic Wand"?

967. over the edge

@ laurie
i wonder why you omitted #5 on your list
"(5) the Bible and other LDS scriptures are subject to official interpretation by the First Presidency -- the scriptural texts themselves are not the final authority."
maybe because it basically states the beliefs of your church can change and what you are supposed to believe is not up to you in the churches eyes. also science deals with the natural world and takes no stance on religion . religion is a belief outside of the natural world and therefore it cannot be looked at scientifically . now you have the right to your religion and your beliefs don't affect me, but the fact you or others want them included in science offends me. by sheer definition they are not science.

968. Randy

Science should be and usually IS, atheistic.

Science says, if it's not measurable, testable, or provable, it is meaningless. Can you measure god? No? Meaningless-- move on...

Science builds things in the real world. Physics makes your DVD players, and computers, and electronic data storage possible. Not jesus, physical science.

There are some scientists that believe in god, but they put that aside when they are doing science. Like the catholic astronomers at the Vatican observatory. One of the best observatories in the world, and some of the best scientists, even though they are priests.

They don't talk about god and astronomy in the same sentence. They keep it seperate.

969. Randy

@Laurie

Achems mentioned your magic/zero-point energy-wand and it made me think of a "guff".

Grifters, (con-artists) like I was, called the props we used in a "game", guffs. A guff can be a useless thing you make and sell, telling the "mark" (victim), that it has special properties, or just something to add credence to your con-game.

In a "quack" (a medical scam, the worst of the games, because it can really hurt and kill), the guff is some useless item that the mark thinks will heal him or her, so they pay through the nose for it.

My game was called a "head-game", the psychic, spiritual advisor game, and I suppose my tarot cards, atrological charts, and crystal orbs could be called guffs. But, I made a fortune selling little clay talismans that I sculpted for each mark.

Each guff was personalized and could attract money, the opposite sex, good fortune, etc... you get the idea. I sold them for 50-200 bucks US, (depending on how much the mark could afford...)

You zero-point energy wand is a guff.

970. Epicurus

@Laurie
"There is a fundamental and unproven dogma underlying much of modern science, especially evolution. This is the assumption of scientific naturalism, namely the philosophy that empirical nature is THE ONLY REALITY about which we can have solid knowledge. As a result the hypothesis that a God or an Intelligent Designer was involved in the creation of life on earth is , in effect excluded from scientific discourse. If scientists removed their naturalistic blinders, they might see the creation in an entirely new light."

the reason there is a basic assumption in naturalism is because nothing has been shown otherwise. it isnt just scientific methods that show religious and superstitious claims to be false but actual LOGIC. IF someone can give a way to test whatever else you propose there is then the world would be HAPPY to embrace it. i will admit the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but it certainly is evidence to be skeptical and not just take it on faith.

NEVER has the idea of a designer been excluded. we have shown no reason to assume a creator and any time we search for one we dont find it. if you removed your western religion blinders you might see creation in a new light also. you might see it naturalistic. why not look at creation from a hindu viewpoint?

you said:
"When the Lord reigns during the millennium, we can expect that the typical scientist will believe like Louis Agassiz, probably the greatest naturalist of his day, who said, “In our study of natural objects we are approaching the thoughts of the Creator, reading his conceptions, interpreting a system that is His and not ours.""

this is funny because you start the sentence with your assumption that there is a lord and it will reign during this millennium...amazing how people always think the coming of their god is always in a time close to their lives...now bringing up someone from the 1800's again and trying to pass them off as some authority is just silly and shows you lack the ability to tell real logic from rhetoric.

however if you actually payed attention to the real world you would notice that as science and understanding of this universe progresses our beliefs fade away. how about we quote stephen hawking, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing," he writes. "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

there i used a quote, therefore im right.

you say:
"in our day, the world teaches that scientists should be atheistic so that they are not prejudiced by the false traditions of religion, which hamper progress. A century ago the name of God appeared in many science books, but now his name has systematically been removed. We are taught that the thought of mixing God into science is “unscientific.”

I say
Science Need Not Be Atheistic."

the world doesnt teach scientists to be atheists. they decide that on their own by shedding off the idea that religious claims cant be questioned. you are trying to make a positive claim for something you cant prove, so you try to say that it cant be proven because of the way we view the world. this is a very immature cop out. if you can give us a way to test god or any claim made for god using science then we would be VERY happy to put it to the test. but it is the religious people making excuses why their god cant be tested. and that is clearly because it doesnt exist.

science need not be atheistic but it need be skeptical and not based on faith.

971. eireannach666

Hey there Miss Sadie, ciamar a tha thu? I hope your claws have since retracted ,as our wounds have yet to heal.

1.Of Course I agree that the four forces are a definite factor on everything that is. We however have a lot of research to do in order to really understand the impact on the quantum level. Although there are many examples tha these factors impact us at all times. 2 if these factors were to change in some way , I'd speculate that we would cease to exist but as for everything else, I have no clue but can only speculate, which I do not really like to do. You know what they say, when you assume you make an "a*s" out of "u" and "me"

As far as geometry ,therein lies a question I know a bit about. But divine to me implies a creator and I can not see that as even an idea gut universal geometry is a different thing.and it all starts with general relativity. In which einstein , (one more time , eienstein) shows how mass curves space, and anything of mass travelling in curved space will have their paths altered, like if a force had "acted" on them. This is relevant because it depends on if you are talking 2d or 4d. Because curvature of 4d spacetime is much harder to explain or understand but not too much so.

GR says that space as a whole, not something in sace but space as a singlular context, can be curved. Which is how we get that we don't exist in just a 2d universe but rather a 3space + 1time universe and is proven or explained mathematically using the same maths you'd use on 2d. Relevant
for the geometry of the Universe that would have 3 possible outcomes that are one with how much mass and strength of the gravitation the univers has. Which is cool because this would mean there is a different past and future for our and possible other unniverses (string,M,etc).

The universe could be either 1.open 2.flat or 3.closed. I personally have always thought closed was more conceivable to me. As the universe implodes and explodes imfinetly forever. However all are valid theories and require knowledge greater than mine to prove. An open universe would mean the universe has a negative curve and would just expand forever and ever and a flat universe or "euclidian universe" (yes euclidian like in high school.) Because it would have just the right amount of mass in the universe to cause the expansion to cease but would have unlimited space and would expand forever, but the expansion would come to a stop after an infinite amount of time. Which I don't care for this one much, but still maybe true. We just have no ways to calculate the mass of the universe to say with certainty which is correct but even if we could say, that just opens more questions
and leaves just another small .00001 percent of wiggle room for the religees to still believe and thump their comic books ata us.

They kind of got a handle on measuring the mass but not so much to convince me that's its a fact one way or the other. The geometry of the universe is a tuff question but god is not even in the multiple choice list on this. And I know we haven't and may not ever detect or know all the mass that is in niverse yet

The general ideas of most of the scientists comes from the cosmic inflation)thing and they seem to lean towards a flat universe where it would just stop. But who knows. We could all be just the offspring of another diminsion or reality . I love some science, like randy said an if you can't test it it or show results than shut the Fu** up and try something else.

9osmology and astronomy , real science, not to be confused with theology or astrologY, dum*a** sciences and actually scratch that because they are not worthu to be included with the word of logic and reason. The word of Science H. Logic. So Science da** you pseudobeliefsyatems!. ?

Hope this shed some light for you In the name of the Logic the Reason and the Mathematics , Slainte.

.

972. over the edge

@dr randy aka batman
how come every time i say something you say it better lol.

973. Randy

HA! Not at all, over the edge, I thought your comment was far better. Much less smart-assery, much more direct, and you brought up that aspect of mormonism that I had forgotten about!

974. Epicurus

"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"

Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle -- but no dragon.

"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so. The only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You'd wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then, why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least, maybe I've seriously underestimated human fallibility. Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded. So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it's unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative -- merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of "not proved."

Imagine that things had gone otherwise. The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off-scale. The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons -- to say nothing about invisible ones -- you must now acknowledge that there's something here, and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing dragon.

Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you that they have dragons in their garages -- but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I'd rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all.

Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they're never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself. On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such "evidence" -- no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it -- is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.

Carl Sagan.

975. eireannach666

@Laurie

Boy , you sure are persistent aren't you? Will you please just quit the scripture and religion quoting and answer a question with just pure evidence and not opinion and hearsay?

Or do you only believe in fairy tales?

Now don't get your magic undies in a bunch but try this.
Provide evidence of creation and then I will rebutle with my evidence of no creation on top of the tons presented here on this thread and others and then we can weigh them to see which ones hold up to end the debate on a productive note.

Doesn't have to be long just list your verifiable evidence, verified meaning I can see it and its been tested by real scientists in a peer reviewed situation and tested as well in an environmental controlled and perhaps blind. Situation.

Ok go.

976. eireannach666

@Ep

Bravo.Bravo! *whistles *applause! Best post today goes to 2picurus the man of logical reason! *baloons and confetti. You have won an all new.never worn and fully loaded nothing!

Nice one man. Hats off for sure.

977. Randy

You know this doc is quickly becoming the number one commented one on the site... it was ok, but not cool enough for that. Not like, "Why People Laugh at Creationists"!

I'm not trying to convince Laurie that I am right and she should think like I do, I just want her to get her religion out of my science, her chocolate out of my peanut butter!

I am trying to get her stop trying to use science AGAINST science, to prove her magic-books RIGHT.

And I must admit, like I was with Sadie, I am a little concerned that she is falling for a con... In all my mysanthropy, I still have some kind of empathy for humans...

I don't like 'em, but I don't like seein' 'em get hurt... Like spiders, I am terrified of spiders, but I can't kill one, or see one suffer.

978. eireannach666

@Ep sorry about the *2* up there. These BB keys are small and I hit the wrong key sometimes.

But again that was broken down to where that dude from the show "Life foes on" Corky could understand and retract. I was rollin dude.

979. Randy

@eireannach666

Listen, I love Epicurus' genius as much as much as the next really smart guy, but he cribs some Carl Sagan and you gush all over him. I made up a perfectly good alegorical story about a tiger behind a bush, (scroll up), and I get nuttin'!

I mean, my little alegory had a whole thing with a cage that represented how people limit themselves out of some fear of an imagined god, and everything!

I even had an illustration of how you can get robbed by that fear... where's the love? Is all's I'm askin'!

I mean, my stuff was all original... and stuff...

No? *sigh* Ok, fine...

@ Laurie Robbiard
@ Eireannach666
@ everyone

Laurie, thank you, eireannach - again I apologise
I think its evident that I am not approaching you all correctly! - like you said Eire - I am fiesty, but I mean well. The reason I am tying to filter out the relgious aspect id not because I am not interested - its simply that I am short on time. My cousin Andrew graduated in Pure Mathematics from Oxford - it runs in the family, (the purity of knowledge I mean) and fascinates me - but I know I approach it in the wrong way.
SO! the rugby season is about to descend on us, which cam only mean that the cricket season is over. I say this because I am heading off to Stanton Harcourt in a few hours, I need to talk to someone about my 'pitch' - and I dont mean Im the opening Batsman either!
I plan on getting some advice to improve my techinique (what technique!!) I know grrrr

981. eireannach666

@Randy

Ha! Nah my brotha you have it all wrong on this one , rare as it may be, but I just liked the fact that laurie was quoting this and that verse and then some dou**e of a supposed scientist, then after he checked her on it he pretty much was just making a side point on that by showing her an example of how to quote someone while supporting what was being said against her argument. Plus that was a great pick on Sagan material relevant to their talk.

Trust me , you shouldn't see it in that light as you have because I always quote your stuff and have the utmost respect and admiration for you sir. As my elder ,a teacher, a fellow seeker of truth and knowledge and a friend as well. I loved your example you gave and laughed as I read it because of the fact ,(and I'm sure you were thinking) that it had to be and was broken down so simply and still she would not budge. It was funny it came to belittling condescending examples even a child could understand.

The way you explain things is always good to me. I always look forward to the next 3andy bong of truth session, trust that.

I think that his pick on that specific quote by an undeniably brilliant scientist , was a good way to show her how to and to make the point together.

Don't look into it too much ,man. I learn a lot from you guys especially. You mostly since we both enjoy and despise the same things , so you should already know I agree with you on almost all things.apologies if you felt that credit was due and wasn't because I'm going to steal that from you ant ways lol. I was really just following along until Ep busted out the Sagan. Heck I expected you to enjoy that as well, seeing as I myself liked sagan and knew of him and his work. Knew of the cilosmos series but didn't have the admiration I do now for him if it wasn't for me talking with you on here.

Point being , I think you took that in the wring light. Plus I got caught up in the whole universal geometry thing and obviously wasted time on Sadie since she claimed to want to discuss UG but instead seemed to like Laurie delusional jabber over some really interesting basic ideas on the way the universe operates. So I too sigh as you on that one. Like said my bad for spacing out there. Love ya man. Your the CEO remember and the dealer that loads the bong of truth and sparing nobody. Se you like the hunt as I. Can't forget ; Achems the man of few words but they are always well mostly right on, Ep because as far as evolution is concerned he's up on his game on that and I've always supported and acknowledged it as fact but I like the way he speaks on it. Usually a lot of info in there , most are usual to me but he throws in a curve from time to time that makes ya think a bit., HM because he and I just don't like the major majority of our species and are all about ruffling some feathers(as are you) with no regard for someone's pansy feelings and religious beliefs and of course the fast talking one who entertains us with some of the best double-sided posts on here , the infamous DK when he's not on one of his off the wall trips of mass ridiculed though he makes my chuckle with his (no offense) for lack of better words)sluggish sarcasm.

You see what I mean now bro? Its a given that I support your thoughts and ideas. I think you are the only one besides Acjems that I havnt gotten into it with before. (And Epi Log,whom I haven't seen on here in a long time. Hmm?)

I think you catch my drift no? Horns and thorns for anything,physical or ideological , that puts a man on his knees. Only one exception and that being a beautiful woman.

Hey changing subject because now I feel like I'm pivoting in a circle catching se"guys" all over. You all can now have your nu*z back.

I was thinking the other day, about how many signature you would need and is it even possible/plausible to petition religion abolishment in public and/gor all together? Maybe in just one state? Any thoughts? I mean especially get it out of the government and science. I mean like you said jokingly?,"In a wood chipper." But I think the grand canyon would make a great place for elimination and disposal, lol N/K.

@ Eireannaech666

I had to stop at Aust services - love yr blog im getting addicted to this! am I the 'double poster' to which you refer Eire? I hope I am because thats such a compliment its make me euphorically happy, truly its what I want to be, and that dont meant im 2 two faced. just two minds. im pecking this message out on nokia E71 - is hard going, im on a mission now ill be back tomoz thank you Eire for that! have a lovly day evey one. over and out from Sadie (over the border on the M4)

983. Randy

My Gealic Brother,

Dude, I was just breakin' yer balls a little bit, there...

No worries!

BTW, just for the anthropological edification of everyone here, earlier, I wrote to Eireannaech666, "Where's the love, is all's I'm ASKIN'..."

Now if I truley wanted to do a Jersey accent with that line, it should have been "all's I'm AXIN'..." See? We "axe" people questions.

LOL! It always cracks me up when some Jersey girl or guy says, "Let me axe you sumthin'..." or "Can I axe you a question?"

I ususally respond, "Well you can try, but I think that's really considered aggrivated assault with a deadly weapon... carries a fairly heavy prison term..."

@ Randy

if i had balls theym shattered for sure and if i keep sending mesges when driving im gonna die and who would argue with you then dr randy? thank you for being kind to me, i know im hard work. whoooosh that was close call ( oh those juggernauts) x x x s q x

985. Laurie Robillard

I don't have time to look at all the blogs to see who it is that asked me if I have Mormon friends helping me with posting. Not at my age. We don't get together for posting. We don't get together and look at u-tube and stuff. My kids however ask me to look at videos or listen to a song on the net. My kids don't live at home anymore so that is a rare thing. Maybe on Thanksgiving when we get together. I don't know what made you think that anyway. I think that I'm more open-minded than some of my Mormon friends because I also have friends outside my religion. I have certain friends for shopping, others for going to the movies, others for home parties, others for discussing books others for exercise etc. I'm on my own here.
Why am I here? You heard the statement no pain no gain. Well I have a child like love for the Gospel and I want to grow strong muscles. One way is to read things that piss me off. You challenge me.

986. Laurie Robillard

@ Dr. Randy Batman the American

I appreciate you as a research person. I'm confused. On the 10th anniversary of 911 who is financing the mosque? What does Cordova Spain Islam mean? Is religion and government together for power? Are we all placed in boxes pitted against each other for those who want power??

987. Randy

@Laurie

First of all, it's not a mosque, it's a muslim community center. And, though I think it is disrespectful for them to try and build it there, I do not think it is right for Americans to prohibit it.

Better that they come to their senses, have better manners, and build somewhere else. Too sensitive an area, whether it's right or wrong, is irrelevant.

Cordova Spain Islam is part of an overarching ideology of Islamic fundamentalists to try and bring back the Great Caliphate.

You remember that Spain was once part of the Islamic Empire around the time that the Great Caliphates basically ruled the world.

There was a time, from about the 7th century and up and around the time of the Black Plague, that Islam was at a Golden Age of knowledge, medicine, science, literacy, etc. We have much to owe to that time in their history, (including the cure for the Black Death, which is atrributed to King Saladin and administered by none other than Nostradamus... that's a long story...).

The crusades were all about christendom trying to wrest that control back into the hands of what was left of the ROman Empire, the Catholic Church.

This is a simplified history, obviously.

The rest of your comments are trying to get me into conspiracy thoeries and I am not going to get into that, except to say, no one is in charge, there are just a bunch of greedy, unintelligent, rich guys running away with our money. Nothing personal, they are just thieves.

988. Laurie Robillard

@Epicurus

Do you know that in America there is history lost and erased for a reason. What's happening in America isn't about truth. There is a difference between Divine Providence and manifest destiny. Manifest destiny perverts things it is a collusion for power.
An example of a good recipe for transformation.
Ben Franklin Science
Thomas Jefferson Government
Alexander Hamilton Commerce
They were all in check of course that is in the past. (old stuff)

When government wants to expand, commerce wants more land and money, and science says that Native Americans are savages, and religion says the son's of Noah are not all quite human that is a recipe for collusion for power.

Have you heard of The Kensinton Runestone dated 1362. It was declared a hoax but scientist today are saying different.

989. Laurie Robillard

This is a quote and I don't know who wrote but it's how I feel.

What seems to be proved may not be embraced: but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned.

Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish."

990. Epicurus

@Laurie

why did you say that to me....it seems extremely pointless that you would brought it up. but i guess i will bite.

Gustavson, Helmer. "The non-enigmatic runes of the Kensington stone". Viking Heritage Magazine (Gotland University) 2004 (3). "[...] every Scandinavian runologist and expert in Scandinavian historical linguistics has declared the Kensington stone a hoax [...]"

Scientists today are NOT saying different. you probably found an example of one scientist who never heard of it and believes in it. but in no way are "scientists" starting to say it is authentic. actually what scientists do say is that it is a hoax from around 1898.

A swedish/canadian scientist who studies it Birgitta Wallace disagrees -- forcefully. Wallace, who is considered a foremost expert in west Norse archeology, gave the keynote address at the conference at which Wolter and Hanson (the scientists arguing for its authenticity) presented their hypothesis. She blasted their views. said, "Neither the runes nor the vocabulary reflect the 1300s, If you know
Swedish, that is the way my grandfather would write, not my ancestors from the 1300s."
Also, she said, the idea of Norsemen exploring for the sake of exploration, as the runic legend suggests, is ridiculous. There were no economic reasons to go to Minnesota, nor has even one artifact been found that suggests the Norse were anywhere nearby in the 1300s. She finds the coincidence "amusing" that Norsemen explored an area more than 600 years before it was heavily settled by Scandinavians. Plus, geologic studies indicate that a cold climate prevailed in much of the 1300s, making travel very difficult in mid-America.

now would you like to explain why you even brought that up? how it was relevant to anything i previously said?

991. eireannach666

@Randy

Well I thought you were as lil tipsy pisky and was getting all emotional on me. LOL then I decided to include the rest out of respect for those that keep it real on here . Ended up forgetting to acknowledge Vlatko. Sorry 7Vlatko you know I include you in the same category.

But ok you got me to take the worm on that one.(sounded a little fa*ish)
Still, I say I work around a bunch of great mechanical geniuses
But when it come to any other science they are as a box of rocks. I'm the onle non-religious person up there and the conversations I have consist of work related issues and a bunch of idle BS that I normally avoid. That is why it is refreshing to talk to you guys after wasting so much brain space listning to the garbage work and society's average persons thoughts. But my old lady is as I and my good friends as well. But you know I don't really do a whole lot these days. Got to stay out of the streets. Too much trouble to get into and it always seemsto find its way around. I mean don't get me wrong at all, as history has shown , I don't want any trouble but I'm not scared of it,in fact while in the moment I enjoy it tremendously. So I just try to stay away from society as I despise it and loathe the constant pushing of commercialism and religion down my throat everytime I step out of my house or turn on a tv. It sickens me to the point of outright disgust and pure unadulterated hate.

Wish I could petition for a religious free and pop culture/mainstream free state or even city for me