i just noticed vicky ran from me on this topic....get back here vic, and answer the questions!!

good post btw nextnewstar...put that ape in his place!!!
:mad:
and i will take the aproach they take on us...and that is putting the question to them, in reverse!
see when i asked visky to answer the very same question in reverse...she ran like roaches when you cut the light on....shamefull!!!
just shamefull!!!
:tdown:

Uh sorry I have not run any where. I asked you the question first and you will answer it before I do. Its as simple as that. If you can't meet the challenge then so be it.

Well Joe Baboon,

You have done a good job of spewing the kind of antagonism people who are psuedo-atheistic but obviously not very well read or studied tend to emit.

Sure you came off sounding like you want to have a "deep philosophical debate" but yet you have not posited a premise, a researched theory. You have not raised one true point of hueristic value. All you have done is argue in an attempt to sound evolved.

The mere fact that you said "science disproves the bible everyday" proves how woefully under-informed you are. In fact, science has yet to disprove the theory of a First Cause, and if you were sufficently well versed in the things you "appear" to know about, you would be able to take an attempt at starting a debate deeper than you have gone thus far.

By the way, in case you havent heard, Christians are not the only monotheists, or theists for that matter at all, out there.

A person that wants to take a stab at existential thinking needs to approach the subject more maturely than you have. Sure Im sure you have seen the many double-standards of organised religion and over time have attempted to formulate a viewpoint, which is fine.

Except, my friend, the way to challenge other people's minds is to first challenge your own. You named the names of Darwinists and Aetheists. Can you prolificly name other proponents of marginal and opposing theories?

By the way. You said you learned your religion from those including Einstein? Im glad you mentioned him. Did you know that in Einstein's memoirs and writings, he (as well as other scientists) conlcluded that his research led inevitably to a First Cause, but in his memoirs he said he cannot accept God as it were, beause he could not resolve within his mind the issue of why evil exists if God does.

Lets be real my friend. You have not evolved. You, like pretty much everyone else, are searching, and trying to goad others into debating. Its a good way of showing that you still are not certain of what you think you are, just as you accuse others of being uncertain.

One.


Faith is just that, it is not fact.

It is futile to debate what is not debatable..that is what people believe. If you believe in God, then for someone to argue with you is foolish. If you dont believe in God the same holds true.

After all, for those who say they believe in (or follow) God, you could only have come to do so by divine intervention, and if that is true, why do you seek to use, by natural (argumentative) means, methods of convincing someone of your viewpoint?

Why do you dispute points of doctrine with people? Why do you make the Bible your whipping tool? Has that same Bible whipped you into the spiritual perfection you want to sound like you have reached? Did Jesus do this? He didnt argue, but He confirmed what was already true by the demonstration of Himself. No one can convince man of God but God Himself.

And if you dont believe in God, why do you feign superiority by saying those that do are weak and dependant when you for all you knowledge cannot even control the day you are born, the breath you breathe or the time you will die, your own mental fortitude which through a germ cell can be wiped out? The fundamentals of life?

Why do you put down people just because you have learned to read and have accepted a position? Havent they done the same? Why do you worship your intellectual independence, but if you or someone you love is struck by a calamity or disaster, you dont run for a biology book but you, whether by mental assent or otherwise, seek for something outside of yourself?

Is is not pride that makes us agrue either way?

Are we not proud when we believe we have cornered the market on God? Are we not proud when we dismiss what we cannot explain? Many natural phenomena we accept as fact today has not yet been "proven" or "irreducibly explained" by science, and conversely Christians for example, for all their "faith and power" cannot live according to their beliefs or pray themselves out of a head cold.

Why have we read books and now think that we have arrived? Why do we hear a sermon and believe the same? When the truth is many of us, for all our learning, still cannot answer within our hearts life's most puzzling questions.

To me, whether you believe in God or not, a fool is he or she that thinks they know something, they really do not.

wow.....after it's all said and done, what Rory said was true. Most religions are grounded in faith..one's resolution to believe. And that's pretty much it.

wow.....after it's all said and done, what Rory said was true. Most religions are grounded in faith..one's resolution to believe. And that's pretty much it.

True, but I find it interesting to find out why one believes (or not.)

Also, there are religions that make tremendous claims for themselves. The claims, are based (as they would say) on facts. I say, produce those facts and let us debate.

CG, where were you when i was in junior high? :)

CG, where were you when i was in junior high? :)

I probably was teaching religion! :)

wow.....after it's all said and done, what Rory said was true. Most religions are grounded in faith..one's resolution to believe. And that's pretty much it.


With that said. Should laws be based on someone’s faith even if it discriminates against someone else who is not of that faith????

It is futile to debate what is not debatable..that is what people believe. If you believe in God, then for someone to argue with you is foolish. If you dont believe in God the same holds true.

After all, for those who say they believe in (or follow) God, you could only have come to do so by divine intervention, and if that is true, why do you seek to use, by natural (argumentative) means, methods of convincing someone of your viewpoint?
Not all the time its more a case of monkey see monkey do. You are brought up in the faith that is in your household. It’s like your mother tong. Just as the middle eastern countries have many suicide bombes because that what they are taught from childhood. It’s a form of brain washing.
Why do you dispute points of doctrine with people? Why do you make the Bible your whipping tool? Has that same Bible whipped you into the spiritual perfection you want to sound like you have reached? Did Jesus do this? He didnt argue, but He confirmed what was already true by the demonstration of Himself. No one can convince man of God but God Himself.

And if you dont believe in God, why do you feign superiority by saying those that do are weak and dependant when you for all you knowledge cannot even control the day you are born, the breath you breathe or the time you will die, your own mental fortitude which through a germ cell can be wiped out? The fundamentals of life?

Why do you put down people just because you have learned to read and have accepted a position? Havent they done the same? Why do you worship your intellectual independence, but if you or someone you love is struck by a calamity or disaster, you dont run for a biology book but you, whether by mental assent or otherwise, seek for something outside of yourself?

Is is not pride that makes us agrue either way?

Are we not proud when we believe we have cornered the market on God? Are we not proud when we dismiss what we cannot explain? Many natural phenomena we accept as fact today has not yet been "proven" or "irreducibly explained" by science, and conversely Christians for example, for all their "faith and power" cannot live according to their beliefs or pray themselves out of a head cold.

Why have we read books and now think that we have arrived? Why do we hear a sermon and believe the same? When the truth is many of us, for all our learning, still cannot answer within our hearts life's most puzzling questions.

To me, whether you believe in God or not, a fool is he or she that thinks they know something, they really do not.

To Truthseeker and ProudOpenMind:

Excellent questions. I have a few of my own.

The first two, illustrating the soundness of fallacy.

Prove to me that humans exist without using human history or anything humane. And yet, (and answer my question in a Yes/No format please) do humans exist?

Prove to me logic exists without using anything logical. And yet, (answer my question in a Yes/No format please) does logic exist?

The Third and Fourth question

This tests your ...ahem...knowledge and my belief, let's see who correct-

I know you both can count. How many times has your heart beat since Jan 1st, 1992 12:00AM GMT?
I BELIEVE that YOU don't KNOW. Which's correct, my belief or your knowledge.

The Fifth, deals with Science

A general rule of thumb is that everything that exists can be reduced to mathematical equations.
A sequence of numbers:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
I'll stop at nine, but you BOTH know as well as I do, that the continuation can go on for an infinity.

A simple question really: count from "0" to "1" and be thorough.

And now for something completely different:

"There is no reconciliation between science and religion. Science is based on empirical evidence while religion is based on superstition and faith. It is not in my estimation foolish to believe that humans evolve over many millions of years but it is quite unbelivable and foolhardy to suppose we came into existance through some invisible, non-material supreme spirit being who breathe life into Adam in some perfect garden."

To TruthSeeker....

I'd like you to check out the testimony of Ezekiel Bar Buzi an Old Testament Prophet (Ezekiel 1). Please pay close attention to verse 16 of that chapter. THEN, four posts above mine is a guy named koolbonze. Look at his avatar (the image that represents his online persona).
Now, the both of you...would you mind using your combined mental powers to explain how EONS before the official scientific discovery of the atom, how that ended up in the Scriptures? Furthermore, if there is no reconciliation between science and religion, moreover, Judaism and Christianity... how did this biblically described object come to be adopted as the very avatar of Nuclear Physics?

"Why did not the bible provide us with useful knowlege about medicine, engineering, law, mathematics etc."

Moreover, How do you know it didn't? The Council of Nicea determined what to keep and what to throw away, look at what The Roman Catholic Church did to Galileo. Who's to say what got taken/kept out of the Bible as a result of corrupt church organizations?

But, tell me something, during the Auto De Fe and Inquisition who were renowned as being the best doctors as far as civilization was concerned?
http://pnews.org/art/1art/TALMUD.shtml

Now scroll slowly down the page and take your time to read VERY slowly the big pink words.
Hmmm, well look at that! Imagine that. Wonder why? Read some more about Moses Ben Miamon. "Accept the Truth, whatever the source."

And don't forget the mentioning of the two firmaments in The Pentateuch, hmmm two completely seperate/different atmospheres (Ocean and Sky) called by the same name (firmament) long before Turbidity and Meteorology became sciences...

Also, son at this point, were I you, I would stop and ask myself: Just how much of a role did The Cult of Aescapulus have to play concerning The Hippocratic Oath which ALL doctors HAVE to take in order to become doctors?
Your starting points are here :

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/nicea.htm
http://drblayney.com/Asclepius.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html

Do your own research and come back when you have a sound reason as to why you lead a hypocritical-atheistic life. If you want nothing to do with God, gods or goddess...then you should stay away from "those Brer Bookie" hospitals from now on, because...well...you know...all that medical knowledge and science you so laud is based upon "religious crap."
Granted you may not believe in it, adherence to it's doctrines and practices got you, your friend Proud Open Mind, your wife and your two children here. Now, you go onto having a nice day and please come back, because I'd like to scientifically observe how you react to the backbone of your argument being broken and your belief system (or lack of one) flipped upside down.

To Truthseeker and ProudOpenMind:

Excellent questions. I have a few of my own.

The first two, illustrating the soundness of fallacy.

Prove to me that humans exist without using human history or anything humane. And yet, (and answer my question in a Yes/No format please) do humans exist?

Prove to me logic exists without using anything logical. And yet, (answer my question in a Yes/No format please) does logic exist?

The Third and Fourth question

This tests your ...ahem...knowledge and my belief, let's see who correct-

I know you both can count. How many times has your heart beat since Jan 1st, 1992 12:00AM GMT?
I BELIEVE that YOU don't KNOW. Which's correct, my belief or your knowledge.

The Fifth, deals with Science

A general rule of thumb is that everything that exists can be reduced to mathematical equations.
A sequence of numbers:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
I'll stop at nine, but you BOTH know as well as I do, that the continuation can go on for an infinity.

A simple question really: count from "0" to "1" and be thorough.

And now for something completely different:

"There is no reconciliation between science and religion. Science is based on empirical evidence while religion is based on superstition and faith. It is not in my estimation foolish to believe that humans evolve over many millions of years but it is quite unbelivable and foolhardy to suppose we came into existance through some invisible, non-material supreme spirit being who breathe life into Adam in some perfect garden."

To TruthSeeker....

I'd like you to check out the testimony of Ezekiel Bar Buzi an Old Testament Prophet (Ezekiel 1). Please pay close attention to verse 16 of that chapter. THEN, four posts above mine is a guy named koolbonze. Look at his avatar (the image that represents his online persona).
Now, the both of you...would you mind using your combined mental powers to explain how EONS before the official scientific discovery of the atom, how that ended up in the Scriptures? Furthermore, if there is no reconciliation between science and religion, moreover, Judaism and Christianity... how did this biblically described object come to be adopted as the very avatar of Nuclear Physics?

"Why did not the bible provide us with useful knowlege about medicine, engineering, law, mathematics etc."

Moreover, How do you know it didn't? The Council of Nicea determined what to keep and what to throw away, look at what The Roman Catholic Church did to Galileo. Who's to say what got taken/kept out of the Bible as a result of corrupt church organizations?

But, tell me something, during the Auto De Fe and Inquisition who were renowned as being the best doctors as far as civilization was concerned?
http://pnews.org/art/1art/TALMUD.shtml

Now scroll slowly down the page and take your time to read VERY slowly the big pink words.
Hmmm, well look at that! Imagine that. Wonder why? Read some more about Moses Ben Miamon. "Accept the Truth, whatever the source."

And don't forget the mentioning of the two firmaments in The Pentateuch, hmmm two completely seperate/different atmospheres (Ocean and Sky) called by the same name (firmament) long before Turbidity and Meteorology became sciences...

Also, son at this point, were I you, I would stop and ask myself: Just how much of a role did The Cult of Aescapulus have to play concerning The Hippocratic Oath which ALL doctors HAVE to take in order to become doctors?
Your starting points are here :

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/nicea.htm
http://drblayney.com/Asclepius.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html

Do your own research and come back when you have a sound reason as to why you lead a hypocritical-atheistic life. If you want nothing to do with God, gods or goddess...then you should stay away from "those Brer Bookie" hospitals from now on, because...well...you know...all that medical knowledge and science you so laud is based upon "religious crap."
Granted you may not believe in it, adherence to it's doctrines and practices got you, your friend Proud Open Mind, your wife and your two children here. Now, you go onto having a nice day and please come back, because I'd like to scientifically observe how you react to the backbone of your argument being broken and your belief system (or lack of one) flipped upside down.

We are all strugglers on the "road of life." We are all hypocrites, in one form or another. Part of my signature says, "I'm not OK, you're not OK, but its OK."

Religious people are hypocrites, atheists are hypocrites - few people are consistent in their system of belief. It seems to be part of the human condition to be inconstant. I believe God understands that and judges us more kindly that some of his followers. No one is 100%, 100% of the time. If we were, we would be God!

"Religious people are hypocrites, atheists are hypocrites - few people are consistent in their system of belief. It seems to be part of the human condition to be inconstant. I believe God understands that and judges us more kindly that some of his followers. No one is 100%, 100% of the time. If we were, we would be God!"

Das cool, but I'd like my questions answered by Truthseeker and ProudOpenMind. Pardon my exorbitant focus.

....... I'd like my questions answered by Truthseeker and ProudOpenMind. Pardon my exorbitant focus.

No problem. Just throwing in my two cents. I would like to read their answers too.

Uh sorry I have not run any where. I asked you the question first and you will answer it before I do. Its as simple as that. If you can't meet the challenge then so be it.

and i answered it by telling me what you know...
ok start from the God of adam, and work it down to bhuda!
;)
i keep forgetting you are a man...

Nota Bene: If and when TruthSeeker and ProudOpenMind show up.

Please study the Philosophy of Alchemy and how it became the "father" of Modern Chemistry.

You've both come on this website asking for PROOF, you should by now have understood that what constitutes as proof for both of you is subjective.

And speaking of proof, as I said before in "Bible: Fact or Fiction": There is a reason alcohol is said to be called a spirit. Our "unintelligent" forebears noticed that drinking 'expiring'/dying nectar didn't destroy it's refreshing potential, but rather summoned a new one. One that altered our perception and reception of the world around and within. And mind you, in certain cultures alcohol is still used in "summoning." Whether it be for summoning other spirits or for summoning forces of propulsion.


"Energy cannot be created or destroyed."

And it's funny too, because most psychologists will tell you now that there are only TWO basic reasons as to why people drink.

ONE: They don't like the person they are (or individual spirit they have inside) and they drink to acquire a different personality (a different spirit, preferentially one that is more relaxed or in the vein of levity).

OR

TWO: The persona they project to the world is not sincere and they drink to acquire said sincerity and be themselves.

You may argue that it is a mental thing, I argue that it is spiritual, because that is my perception. You can NOT tell me where the seat of consciousness is in humans anymore than I can tell you: so our respective proofs are subjective.
But this remains- it is still VERY much so a matter of altered states.
Now, you tell me who figured that one out first, the staid logic of the scientists or the religious groupthink of the bushmen?

Well lemme ask you another question.

Now, way-back-when people thought (and some still do today) that fire is a spirit- a living thing.
It reproduces. It devours. It responds to stimuli. It consumes oxygen.
Baffled the first scientists for years, because this life-form was in one way different. How? You had to summon it. And the only way to destroy fire (a spirit) is with another spirit.
We can weigh wind, we can weigh water, we can weigh earth.
Can we weigh fire yet?