Don't dictate beliefs

Don't dictate beliefs

There are 11177 comments on the The Star Press story from Sep 5, 2012, titled Don't dictate beliefs. In it, The Star Press reports that:

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Star Press.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9634 Dec 29, 2012
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Nor do I. But the use of "computer simulations" aka "computer programs that produce any result you want" as "proof" of anything .... how is that not hysterical??
Granted.^_^ That is kind of funny.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9635 Dec 29, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Put up a link or STFU.
Moron.
He already did, but it wasn't convincing, it was barely logical, and certainly not scientific.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9636 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
The odds of us be here from an exploding singularity and spontaneous life generation is simple impossible.
Perhaps you should check out a recent link of Dim's that provides further evidence for the Big Bang Theory.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9637 Dec 29, 2012
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you notice it was the scientific community that discovered the flaws in the work? No! Of course you didn't.
That is the business of science, correcting itself when it is wrong. That's how and why it has advanced our society out of the Dark Ages that Christianity created.
When does religion correct itself?... Never! Christianity is as wrong as it was when Christians butchered Hypatia of Alexandria.
Nicely put!

Nearly every post Dim makes serves to demonstrate how science will always weed out the frauds.

Religion is incapable of doing that, which explains why Christianity consists of thousands of different cults and sects, none of which can be shown to be frauds.

Deep down, Dim must wish his religion was as effective as science.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9638 Dec 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Somebody on another thread was asking why I thought Christians would still want to burn heretics. He thinks that you've been cured of your sadism. I hope you don't mind that I quoted you:
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE...
Lol

What a fine ambassador for love and tolerance KJV actually is!

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9639 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
It's usually pretty miner changes but they do keep the Bible updated with the oldest know writings.
Are they "quote miner" changes?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#9640 Dec 29, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Put up a link or STFU.
Moron.
The astronomy program "Night Sky" will show that there was a planetary conjunction back about 2k years ago which is postulated to explain the "star".

Forgetting the argument that an infallible book would document "planet" instead of "star", this still doe not in any way explain how any celestial object can delineate any specific spot on the planet. Even a jet at 30,000 feet can't do that.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#9641 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
He already did, but it wasn't convincing, it was barely logical, and certainly not scientific.
I missed it.

How far back?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9642 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
"When does religion correct itself?... "
All the time!!! Every time older documents are found they make the appropriate changes to the Bible. It's usually pretty miner changes but they do keep the Bible updated with the oldest know writings. And no one goes to jail for fraud. LOL
Really? Who are "they"?

Where are the corrections made to the Bible that incorporate the Acts of Paul and Thecla? Just think how you believers can thrill with excitement at the part where Thecla leaps into a moat full of man-eating seals and how Jehovah sends down a thunderbolt to kill all the seals.

Where's the Gospel of Thomas? It was found in 1945 and no insertions, deletions or amendments have been made to the Bible.

What about the Gospel of Peter? That was found in 1886. Where are the changes to the Bible made by these people you refer to as "they"?

You would have thought that they (whoever they may be) would have changed the Bible to accomodate Peter. After all, Peter's gospel provides the only eye-witness account of Jesus emerging from the tomb.

You believers love your eye-witness accounts so why hasn't the Bible been changed?

Peter tells us that Jesus emerged from the tomb with two angels and was followed by a talking cross. Once in the open, Jesus and the angels grew to a height of thousands of feet until their heads were lost in the heavens. According to the account, this was witnessed by a Roman centurion and his soldiers (usually eighty men) and also the Jewish Elders.

Why isn't this in the Bible?

Perhaps it's because your claims of amendments being made every time new documents are found is just another of your many lies.

Why do you lie?

You know it makes the baby Jesus weep.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#9644 Dec 29, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
The astronomy program "Night Sky" will show that there was a planetary conjunction back about 2k years ago which is postulated to explain the "star".
Forgetting the argument that an infallible book would document "planet" instead of "star", this still doe not in any way explain how any celestial object can delineate any specific spot on the planet. Even a jet at 30,000 feet can't do that.
And apparently it fails to take into account the earth's rotation.

No objects, other than our geostationary satellites, stay over one spot on the earth. Even Polaris, our north star, describes a small circle as it's not precisely over the pole.

Even answersingenesis recognizes these facts and explains them away by claiming that god can suspend the laws of nature anytime he wants and that's what he did for the star of Bethlehem.

Funny that he hasn't suspended any of the laws of nature lately. It would solve so much conflict.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9645 Dec 29, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I missed it.
How far back?
Gah! My memory isn't that great. A few pages maybe.
KJV

United States

#9646 Dec 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>That had to hurt to type. I'll bet you used your tit.
It was very funny to type.

Can no one see any humor around here?

You know this does not have be a life and death discussion. Enjoy the debates but have fun with them.
After all you don't really know who you're talking to and many play roll with many as I am told they are called socks.

Now did they call them Socks as in Sock puppets or because they always come as a pair but maybe because of the ability for socks to jump to other universes while in the dryer?

Oh I could not really use my tits to type
As least I've never attempted it. You bring up such interesting conversation.

I will ponder the tit typing but I highly doubt I'll try it.

Have a good day
KJV

United States

#9647 Dec 29, 2012
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>Ruse.
Yes Ruse

"derek4 wrote:
The below link is from Michael Ruse, atheist, authot, and philsopher of biology at Florida State University. In his conclusion, he makes the point of the damage atheists are doing in fighting to keep creationism out of public schools. He goes on to explain that the first ammendment doesn't ban teaching science in schools – but if atheists get it established that Creationism is SCIENCE rather than religion, then they are creating a problem for themselves which will work against them.
Also, he explains that if teaching that God exists is a religion, then it's also a religion to teach God does not exist.
He sees P.Z. Myers as a “disaster”, lol.
He also says that “The God Delusion”(book) made him “ashamed” to be an atheist.
Thank you, Mr. Ruse.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/scienceandthesacred...
Statements in this post were authored by the poster and are not copyrighted material."

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9648 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes Ruse
"derek4 wrote:
The below link is from Michael Ruse, atheist, authot, and philsopher of biology at Florida State University. In his conclusion, he makes the point of the damage atheists are doing in fighting to keep creationism out of public schools. He goes on to explain that the first ammendment doesn't ban teaching science in schools – but if atheists get it established that Creationism is SCIENCE rather than religion, then they are creating a problem for themselves which will work against them.
Also, he explains that if teaching that God exists is a religion, then it's also a religion to teach God does not exist.
He sees P.Z. Myers as a “disaster”, lol.
He also says that “The God Delusion”(book) made him “ashamed” to be an atheist.
Thank you, Mr. Ruse.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/scienceandthesacred...
Statements in this post were authored by the poster and are not copyrighted material."
To which it has already been pointed out that Ruse is a troll.
KJV

United States

#9649 Dec 29, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>Then we are safe to assume there are flaws in what the scientists say today, right?

Of course. I think I'll wait for them to correct some more flaws and frauds.

Prudent, huh?
Buck
You quoted what I had quoted from the poster. Those were not my words. I put it in quotations and then I responded to the above quote.

"Yes of course they (science)found some (fraud). They did not find all (science fraud) by any means"

The law is working on those.
KJV

United States

#9650 Dec 29, 2012
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>What about your background, do you think enables you to calculate odds (and probabilities) accurately?
Why yes of course. See I was created you mutated.
KJV

United States

#9651 Dec 29, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>No, "moral" behavior is not conducive to survival because morality is a social construct and is often used to justify murder, rape, torture, and a slew of other actions which weaken our species.

However ethical and equal treatment are, and they are the result of natural pressures combined with genetic mutations, resulting in a stronger social construct and thus a more adaptable species.
You think Cannibalism is ok if the majority of the tribe says it's ok.

"Do you believe that enjoyment, love and fun is all there is to life? If so, why should a child molester be denied his enjoyment and fun even if it is at the expense of others? If morals are in fact subjective, who are you to tell him that he is wrong given the subjective standard he has adopted?

Do you believe that man evolved? If so, is it not true that man also evolved a mechanism to kill his enemies, to spread his sexual seed via rape (which happens in the animal kingdom), to abide by natural selection? If so, is rape truly wrong seeing that it is just insuring the propagation of the human race AND BY WHAT STANDARD IS IT WRONG? Was Hitler truly wrong by killing 6 million Jews that he deemed to be slowing down the progression of the evolution of the human race? After all, these are tools of natural selection, are they not? Also, spontaneous generation has been disproven, so how do you account for non-life begetting life?

If man did in fact evolve, and there is nothing outside of the material universe, then there cannot be free will and free choice, can there? Meaning, if the material universe is all there is, then there is no such thing as an immaterial object; hence there can be no such thing as a law of thought, logic and morality. The result of this is that you do not have free will; you do not think freely; the reasons that you are stating this very thing is because your brain chemicals are forcing you to say such a thing. Why should I trust your brain chemicals over my brain chemicals? Why do you believe what you are stating if you cannot help what you are stating because it is simply an electro-chemical reaction? This once again leads us to ask the question; is truly wrong for a child molester to prey upon his victims? If so, what standard are you appealing to? My standard is the Bible, the very words of God Himself. My standard is a priori (apart form self) and objective. What is yours?"

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#9653 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Why yes of course. See I was created you mutated.
Created by what or whom? And who or what created that creator?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9654 Dec 29, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
And apparently it fails to take into account the earth's rotation.
No objects, other than our geostationary satellites, stay over one spot on the earth. Even Polaris, our north star, describes a small circle as it's not precisely over the pole.
Even answersingenesis recognizes these facts and explains them away by claiming that god can suspend the laws of nature anytime he wants and that's what he did for the star of Bethlehem.
Funny that he hasn't suspended any of the laws of nature lately. It would solve so much conflict.
Yes, he/she/it appears to have stopped suspending the laws of nature around the same time as humanity developed means of recording visual and audible phenomena.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9655 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You think Cannibalism is ok if the majority of the tribe says it's ok.
"Do you believe that enjoyment, love and fun is all there is to life? If so, why should a child molester be denied his enjoyment and fun even if it is at the expense of others? If morals are in fact subjective, who are you to tell him that he is wrong given the subjective standard he has adopted?
Do you believe that man evolved? If so, is it not true that man also evolved a mechanism to kill his enemies, to spread his sexual seed via rape (which happens in the animal kingdom), to abide by natural selection? If so, is rape truly wrong seeing that it is just insuring the propagation of the human race AND BY WHAT STANDARD IS IT WRONG? Was Hitler truly wrong by killing 6 million Jews that he deemed to be slowing down the progression of the evolution of the human race? After all, these are tools of natural selection, are they not? Also, spontaneous generation has been disproven, so how do you account for non-life begetting life?
If man did in fact evolve, and there is nothing outside of the material universe, then there cannot be free will and free choice, can there? Meaning, if the material universe is all there is, then there is no such thing as an immaterial object; hence there can be no such thing as a law of thought, logic and morality. The result of this is that you do not have free will; you do not think freely; the reasons that you are stating this very thing is because your brain chemicals are forcing you to say such a thing. Why should I trust your brain chemicals over my brain chemicals? Why do you believe what you are stating if you cannot help what you are stating because it is simply an electro-chemical reaction? This once again leads us to ask the question; is truly wrong for a child molester to prey upon his victims? If so, what standard are you appealing to? My standard is the Bible, the very words of God Himself. My standard is a priori (apart form self) and objective. What is yours?"
Strawman.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Dogen 52,440
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr Dogen 541
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Dogen 24,926
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 2 hr ChristineM 11,463
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 3 hr Thinking 22,201
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... 8 hr Bob Zanotti 232
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 9 hr Passion of the Ma... 1,684
More from around the web