100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
Topic:
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN
|
|
Repent means to feel remorse or regret I don't know how ytou got that God "changed his mind" Lets assume you are correct and god didnt change his mind. Why would he feel remorse or regret. He is god. He never makes mistakes. He is perfect. Obviously not if he starts to feel sorry for a screw up! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
a legit question
|
|
boy you confuse me spider your answers are so adamant yet it says in the book god is seen as a bright light many times - light is not invisible - unless you have an explanation for his light also being invisible? either he is >invisible< or he's not - which is it? it can't be stating someplaces he's this bright light or that moses see's his back or other statements and then you declare that he is >>invisible<<? it also says the angels see this .light. of god? make up your mind or explain. John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. Those who have seen God, have seen Jesus. Also, the fact that God is light doesn't mean God isn't invisible. God calls the light about himself his glory. and how does that explain moses seeing god on the mountain? Psychotropic acacia bushes, being 80 years old, yomping up a 2000metre mountain and in 40 degC temperature ... Been there, done that - been called a heathen 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN
|
|
Quelle Shock!!!
A ... a .... a.... contradictory statement?
He .... CHANGED his mind????
.... or is this a cunning ploy to cause an argument
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
I have a question
|
|
Yes, if I applied faulty logic and false definitions, I would come to the same conclusion as you. But since I use the correct definitions and proper logic, I have come to a different conclusion. 
You're doing just find Spider. Just keep moving forward a little bit at time. You've already discovered that God can't be omnipotent, that's a good start.
By your silly definition, God couldn't be omnipotent. By your definitions, your god couldn't exist at all. But Christians and Jews have a God who does exist and isn't made up with a foundation of shifting sand. Dont forget the Muslims - they have a god that exists too. oh, and the Shintoists and the Buddhists and not forgetting Zoroastrians believe in one God too ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
A Chip Off the Ole Block
|
|
When God created man she was only joking
When man created god, he was probably drunk 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
I have a question
|
|
Nope. Sorry, a Burrito could not physically withstand the heat. God - 0 Burrito - 1 Next.
But if god made the burrito to start with, then he could make it fire retardant! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
I have a question
|
|
sure God can do anything Can he create a rock so big he cannot lift it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
a legit question
|
|
How can anyone truly believe that everything came from nothing If you think so, you are ignorant of science. As far as we know, energy/matter is eternal. It may be that space is infinite. It may be that energy is eternal. But does that imply the possibility of a god that is also eternal? I think not. It is is a far cry from matter and energy to a sentient, omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, male-gender, nonphysical, non-aging, non-ingesting being who is interested in the personal lives of 6 billion human beings on a small planet orbiting one star out of billions of trillions of other stars in the vast emptiness of space, who delights in the smell of burning goat flesh, who specified that entering the holy place without wearing bells can result in death (EX 28:34-35), and who killed 50,000 people for merely looking at the box that contained the tablets of the 10 commandments. HMMM? - are you trying to make some kind of point here MR. B - ??? -
Im just struggling to see how any sensible, reasonably intelligent human being with all their faculties could see that one minute there was god picking his arse, in the middle of hyper, cyber, cryper (and any other made-up word that has -ber or -per at the end of it) and then KAZAAAM He has created a world full of trouble and miniscule beings who desire nothing more than to shag themselves stupid, eat themselves to an early grave and kill each other to extinction. It beggars belief - well my belief anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
a legit question
|
|
How can anyone truly believe that everything came from nothing
If you think so, you are ignorant of science. As far as we know, energy/matter is eternal. It may be that space is infinite. It may be that energy is eternal. But does that imply the possibility of a god that is also eternal? I think not. It is is a far cry from matter and energy to a sentient, omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, male-gender, nonphysical, non-aging, non-ingesting being who is interested in the personal lives of 6 billion human beings on a small planet orbiting one star out of billions of trillions of other stars in the vast emptiness of space, who delights in the smell of burning goat flesh, who specified that entering the holy place without wearing bells can result in death (EX 28:34-35), and who killed 50,000 people for merely looking at the box that contained the tablets of the 10 commandments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im waiting for Spider to do his thing ...
[sits down, grabs another biscuit for his morning coffee] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Belushi
on
Mon 08/18/08 09:07 AM
|
|
See this brings my point home so well.......It is truth to me....and if you and all your cronies would leave it at that....you could talk about "your" beliefs until your called to wherever it is your going. But see this is my beef.....you all don't leave me to my beliefs....you just disputee and call them fables....I don't have one single problem with you putting out what you believe any of you....JUST LEAVE WHAT I BELIEVE OUT OF IT.....pretty simple....you would think, but I have yet to see it. Then why start a thread like this. You believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden and so do all your believer entourage - finito! This thread was your way of starting an argument so that you can stamp your little foot and shout "leave me alone!!!" Also dont start quoting scriptures when the rest of us debate religious topics unless you want someone to ridicule your bed-time horror tales. You brought this on yourself - so live with it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awe Abra, why'd you have to go and respond to this thread. I thought it looked pretty good just the way it was. I did a good job back then, yup, my work on this thread is done.! Feral's the one who kicked it up. I was just making sure the mummies were dead.
yea did you prove anything the first....hmmmm, nope But then neither did you - par for the course. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 months between the death of this thread and its resurrection. Getting desperate are you feral? 
No just proving a point that you all never prove anything....and time and time again I do.....nuff said. You havent proved anything ... NO first century historian confirms the existence of Jesus. There were historians (Philo-Judaeus and Justus of Tiberius, for example) living in or near Jerusalem during Christ's alleged lifetime, but wrote not one word about him. Then there is Flavius Josephus, who was born in 37 CE, and has two mentions of Jesus. But most scholars, including many Christian ones, agree that Josephus's accounts are third century forgeries-- earlier versions of his work dating from before the second century do not mention Jesus at all. The flowery and worshipful paragraph on Jesus was probably added to Josephus's work at the beginning of the 3th century CE, during Constantine's reign, by Bishop Eusebius (who said that it was permissible for Christians to lie in order to further the kingdom of god). The following passage is from The Jesus Problem, pages 121-122, by historian J. M. Robertson, published in 1917: If the defenders of the historicity of the gospel Jesus would really stand by Josephus as a historian of Jewry in the first Christian century, they would have to admit that he is the most destructive of all the witnesses against them.
It is not merely that the famous interpolated passage is flagrantly spurious in every aspect in its impossible context; its impossible language of semi-worship; its "He was (the) Christ"; its assertion of the resurrection; and its allusion to "ten thousand other wonderful things" of which the historian gives no other hint, but that the flagrant interpolation brings into deadly relief the absence of all mention of the crucified Jesus and his sect where mention must have been made by the historian if they had existed. If, to say nothing of "ten thousand wonderful things," there was any movement of a Jesus of Nazareth with twelve disciples in the period of Pilate, how came the historian to ignore it utterly? If, to say nothing of the resurrection story, Jesus had been crucified by Pilate, how came it that there is no hint of such an episode in connection with Josephus' account of the Samaritan tumult in the next chapter? And if a belief in Jesus as a slain and returning Messiah had been long on foot before the fall of the Temple, how comes it that Josephus says nothing of it in connection with his full account of the expectation of a coming Messiah at that point. By every test of loyal historiography, we are not merely forced to reject the spurious passage as the most obvious interpolation in all literature: we are bound to confess that the "Silence of Josephus," as is insisted by Professor Smith, is an insurmountable negation of the gospel story. For that silence, no tenable reason can be given, on the assumption of the general historicity of the gospels and Acts." The existence of an actual Jesus is very much in doubt. The famous humanitarian Albert Schweitzer studied the problem of Jesus and concluded that he did not exist. Most of the Founding Fathers of America, including Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, James Madison and George Washington, denied the divinity of Jesus. The New Testament gospels were written 80-100 CE, and the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were attached later by the early church. Matthew and Luke were constructed from Mark, and John is thought to be written even later by early church leaders. There is no evidence that these people lived at all. The messiah construct was very common 2000+ years ago. Consider Mithra, a messianic figure who pre-dated Christ by several hundred years, and who also was born of a virgin, had a last supper and was crucified. And he had 12 apostles. Other messiah figures also had 12 followers - representing the 12 mystical signs of the zodiac. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
So That's How It Is!!!!!
|
|
I still say cats got a free ride. 
Dogs have owners, cats have staff |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 months between the death of this thread and its resurrection.
Getting desperate are you feral?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The presumption of Atheism
|
|
I think I'm me... I like me and believe in me. Who needs a space-magician to make them act right and be happy when they believe in themselves? Well, not only that. But if you were the creator of a bunch of bozos wouldn't you be thrilled with the ones that could actually take care of themselves without having to lean on you? My God! What a pleasant surprise that would be! I've always realized that God must be just tickled pink by all the righteous atheists. What could possible make a parent happier than to have children who are willing to be good without being threatened to be sent to their rooms, or being bribed with an allowance? Those are the children that parents are overjoyed with! No wonder Jesus said he'd be happy with the non-believers. What a relief! He said that he only came for the sinners anyway. It's just that the sinners are confused and think that everyone is like them. 
They just can't imagine what it must be like to be a naturally good person who doesn't need instructions on how to act proper. Look at the witches! They've been getting along with God just fine. If those nasty Christians would just quite roasting them on spits they would have never had a problem. Now that we've made laws preventing Christians from doing that the witches are able to go back to their normal practice of healing people. Blessed Be to all the witches! 
You mean I have been a goodie two shoes for no reason? Im going to heaven anyway? Aww nutz!!! Well, I might as well find a telephone book and rip the last pages out of it!! Then they will never know whether the butler did it or not! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cute too
http://www.stumbleupon.com/demo/?review=1#url=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5834871067999456290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Flying spaghetti monster
Edited by
Belushi
on
Fri 08/15/08 09:26 PM
|
|
So? That's peanuts. They spent millions of dollars making The Lord of The Rings. Shouldnt you have said ... So? That's hoops or letters. They spent millions of dollars making The Lord of The Strings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
question......
|
|
Yes...the operative word being "IF" !!! Exactly - IF there was a god. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Power of prayer
|
|
i've heard people talk about how they were terminally sick and who prayed very hard, or had other people pray very hard for them to get better and they did, therefore it is assumed that their God answered their prayers. I mean it's wonderful that such people got better and all and in such events i'm truly and sincerely happy for them but... I don't understand. What about those many people (sometimes young innocent children) who have prayed and who still died horrible deaths. Is this to mean that they're prayers were of less value? Can't it be reasonably noted that people, whether they pray or not do die from terminal illness in most instances, and there are people who whether or not they are religious also pull through from terminal illness on very rare occasions. Isn't it possible that perhaps, just perhaps, the determining factor here isn't the power of prayer. Good question ... in fact ... damn fine question. I think the power of the mind has a lot to do with the ailments of the body. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
