Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#507974 Mar 22, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>But that is how she chooses to use the billboard.
She does not want to preach, she simply likes to write the bible on the billboard.
Maybe other Christians simply enjoy reading it. Why criticize her for that?
The title of the billboard is [why should Jesus love me]. I think her writing verses is appropriate. That not mean she has to elaborate on its meaning.
What billboard?

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507975 Mar 22, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Dunno. Ask a biologist.
It's the product of evolution. Has nothing to do with imagined beings.

Which is the opposite of what you must believe if you believe in a perfect creator. Otherwise, you're saying "my perfect creator isn't perfect."

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507976 Mar 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Ok. Why isn't the Creation of a Perfect Creator not Perfect?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Dunno. Why can't a clock breathe?
So...for you, a perfect timepiece should breathe? That's a measure of perfection in clocks for you?

For me, it's that they tell time.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#507977 Mar 22, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a fairly good article that is one take on whether masturbation is a sin.
http://www.acts17-11.com/dialogs_masturbation...
According to this writer (well not this writer but the one that wrote the article...since we all seem to be "writer") the act in itself is not sinful but the illicit sexual fantasies that causes an individual to feel the need to masturbate.
Hmmmm
This is the scripture that the writer based his opinions from...
Matt 5:28-29 (NIV)[Jesus:] "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell."
He follows up with...
"But what if no illicit fantasies are included in masturbation? Is the act then sinful? By scripture, there is nothing to indicate that it is. Specifically, if the act is done merely as a hedge against temptation and as the body requires then there is no need for the above sinful "crutches". This is hardly exciting, and a rote act of keeping the body in submission. It cannot be done often, as the body is not that demanding if left alone by a perverted imagination. On the other hand, if we attempt a pent-up self-sex life, then we find that the body needs help from the soul through illicit fantasies, and then sin is clearly being committed."
Interesting take on it...you can masturbate all you want as long as you have no illicit sexual fantasy as you do so.
Hahaha.

So, clearing the tubes is ok for a guy. A plumbing job.

But if masturbation is linked to sex, it's the lake of fire.

Isn't religion great?

“I.Spirit.Son.God”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#507978 Mar 22, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, good to know.
I'll uh....
....be back in a few minutes.
rofl!!!

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507979 Mar 22, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>hahahahahha!
I laugh at you too. You're very [lite]in science, may as well be an sociologist. And then you deny real hard scientific evidence from intellectual and scientific giants that you don't have enough credentials to shine their shoes, and you advocate for the abuse of animals to boot.
hahahaha at you too [hiding]:)
A sociologist knows so much more about science than you, there's no comparison.

I'm an evolutionary anthropologist. Quite different than a sociologist, but I'm not surprised you don't know the difference.

You haven't presented an iota of scientific evidence for me to deny. You've claimed a lot of unsupportable garbage and pretended the medical researchers you cite claim the same thing, but they don't. So you're misrepresenting their scientific claims.

And that is why we feel sorry for you.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#507980 Mar 22, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I don't think any life is more important than another.
I find it strange that you do.
I don't believe you.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507981 Mar 22, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a fairly good article that is one take on whether masturbation is a sin.
http://www.acts17-11.com/dialogs_masturbation...
According to this writer (well not this writer but the one that wrote the article...since we all seem to be "writer") the act in itself is not sinful but the illicit sexual fantasies that causes an individual to feel the need to masturbate.
Hmmmm
This is the scripture that the writer based his opinions from...
Matt 5:28-29 (NIV)[Jesus:] "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell."
He follows up with...
"But what if no illicit fantasies are included in masturbation? Is the act then sinful? By scripture, there is nothing to indicate that it is. Specifically, if the act is done merely as a hedge against temptation and as the body requires then there is no need for the above sinful "crutches". This is hardly exciting, and a rote act of keeping the body in submission. It cannot be done often, as the body is not that demanding if left alone by a perverted imagination. On the other hand, if we attempt a pent-up self-sex life, then we find that the body needs help from the soul through illicit fantasies, and then sin is clearly being committed."
Interesting take on it...you can masturbate all you want as long as you have no illicit sexual fantasy as you do so.
Outside of Christian culture, you can masturbate because you want to.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507982 Mar 22, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not a biologist...but I know how to google! LOL
This site says this...
http://www.malariasite.com/malaria/history_pa...
Man and Malaria seem to have evolved together.
While wiki states this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_malar...
What I found interesting was that both sites date malaria at around the same time that humans were created.
I haven't read in depth so I don't know how that was determined...not any type of scientist at all...well except when I bake.
The history of malaria predates humanity, as this ancient disease evolved before humans did.
The reason I'm bothering RR with malaria is because:

1. He claims to have a perfect creator as a deity
2. But RR cannot explain why pathogens exist

My point to RR is that, if he his deity really was a perfect deity, it would have created a perfect reality. Since we do not find ourselves in one, we can only conclude that no perfect creator deity exists.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#507983 Mar 22, 2013
Counter_Strike wrote:
Ha Satan (the devil) is a wile and hungry wolf, who has basically perfected his craft over centuries upon centuries of how to deceive man
You were doing so well, then kaboom, the wile and hungry wolf.

Dude, get real!!
Adam

Frankfurt Am Main, Germany

#507984 Mar 22, 2013
Homosexual relations as you call is not the same as heterosexual relation. Heterosexuals couples produces children gays only diseases.It´s such a shame that you won´t understand. Homosexuals produces nothing but a big shit. they don´t live in monogamous relations they spring from one bed to another. More than hetero couples. The spread of HIV and AIDS was carried out by the transfer from gays to bisexual and went finally over to the normal ppl.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507985 Mar 22, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not a biologist...but I know how to google! LOL
This site says this...
http://www.malariasite.com/malaria/history_pa...
Man and Malaria seem to have evolved together.
While wiki states this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_malar...
What I found interesting was that both sites date malaria at around the same time that humans were created.
I haven't read in depth so I don't know how that was determined...not any type of scientist at all...well except when I bake.
The history of malaria predates humanity, as this ancient disease evolved before humans did.
Btw, plasmodium existed before humans, but the kind of malaria that affects humans only evolved around 12 000 years ago, about the same time as people began farming.

It evolved because we altered the landscape. The most interesting part of malaria is that where it is worst, humans evolved genetic counter measures.

The clearest example is the sickle-cell anemia. More interested genetic adaptations exist though, such as the G6PD-deficiency and the gene for the inability of Asians to metabolize alcohol. Both are protective against malaria.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#507986 Mar 22, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think any life is more important than another.
I find it strange that you do.
Baloney.

I'll be you'd swat a fly, or step on a bug, ending their life instantly, without a second thought.

But you wouldn't do that to a bunny rabbit, or a puppy, let alone a little baby.

You're a weird guy, RR.

You say the strangest things.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507987 Mar 22, 2013
AnnieJ wrote:
What I found interesting was that both sites date malaria at around the same time that humans were created.
I haven't read in depth so I don't know how that was determined...not any type of scientist at all...well except when I bake.
Humans weren't "created" 12 000 years ago. Our ancestors started farming in earnest at that time - and altered the landscape to do so.

Irrigation creates pools of water, clearing forest land for farmland creates standing bodies of water, farming communities are sedentary - and they rely upon and create standing bodies of water, all of which are used by mosquitoes. The plasmodium uses the mosquito to get us, as does dengue fever.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#507988 Mar 22, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. like all scientists, Parnia has an agenda - publish or perish. Trifecta has confirmation bias ..
I have the suspicion Parnia's ultimate goal may be to debunk the entire NDE/OBE phenomenon, at least as far as medically supported avenues.

That's just my take.

During these discussions, I've checked out a couple lectures he has given, read a few things here and there, and to me, in my opinion, I think he certainly looks to some sort of verification, but I think his rational mind is on the side of no scientific legitimacy for the event(S)- and to be honest, it appears that is where the evidence is actually pointing.

A brain/electric impulse/chemical process that exists for some time after a flat line, but that process has an eventual and definite end - complete, irreversible death.

One thing I do think is happening here, is this research is expanding or helping to expand death timeline resuscitation techniques and knowledge of the limits involved medically.

It's a classic example of science in action; A hypothesis is formed - involving a fringe idea/belief/possibility - but worthy of investigation - research and experimentation or data gathering is performed, a theory evolves, and ultimately the discipline will be enhanced as a result.

For some reason trifecta thinks that atheism is innately tied to death/casket/worms/over. Finis.

Okay, so, let's look at what the stories surrounding the NDE do present.

On examination, there doesn't seem to be any sort of "heaven"(Abrahamic mythology etc..) event - or any recognizable deity afterlife belief currently imagined by man.

So, if there is some sort of continuance after our life, it doesn't appear to fit any outline held within theism.

I'm not sure why trifecta thinks that alters the atheist and not having a theistic deity belief.

Atheism doesn't speak to but one thing; Deities and the lack of theistic belief they exist.

Atheism has nothing to do with death, beaver dams, go carts, milk prices, or why vultures hang out in a tree in the woods behind your house...

If you get me.

Personally, I think the end result of the research will be that NDE's etc., will just be the last vestiges of awareness of a dying brain.

The "control center" in the last stages of shutting down.

<lights out, door closes, a neuron hangs a sign in the window *Closed for Business*, the faucet drips one last time....silence>

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#507989 Mar 22, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe you.
So.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#507990 Mar 22, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think any life is more important than another.
I find it strange that you do.
So...if you had to choose between the life of a flesh eating bacteria or one of your kids, you would just flip a coin?

C'mon, RR.

Try to think before you type.

“Quo Vadis”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#507991 Mar 22, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Dude, free will is the ability to make choices.
It's overly anthropomorphic to ascribe such an ability to nature, wouldn't you say?
And for those here who like country music, ascribe means attribute. Or, well, ok never mind.
We have rules, and thank goodness for that, or your type of 'Free Will' would get us all killed.

Shalom.

Counter_Strike.

“Mercury bubbles blast!”

Since: Mar 11

Mercury

#507992 Mar 22, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think any life is more important than another.
I find it strange that you do.
You seriously believe that a single celled organism is as important as a human life?

Alright. Stop using soap. Every time you use soap, you kill thousands and thousands of single celled organisms.

Also, stop everyone you know from using antibiotics - that stuff kills life. Make sure you let your feet get moist, so that you get athlete's foot - that's life right there, growing on your foot.

Oh, and start eating raw pig and ingesting dirt so that you can harbor parasites - you seem to be arguing that they have a "moral right" to the resources you are tying up in your body.

Of course some life is more important than other life! Why would you ever imagine that single celled organisms are as important as fully conscious human beings?

“Quo Vadis”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#507993 Mar 22, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You were doing so well, then kaboom, the wile and hungry wolf.
Dude, get real!!
What would you have rather I say; the wile and hungry cornish hen?

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dental seo 5 min VerbatimMarketing 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Doctor Justice_ 880,415
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 6 min RiccardoFire 8,306
www.mygiftcardsite.com balance - Mygiftcardsite... (Dec '12) 24 min Claudianjr123 43
The Christian Atheist debate 27 min messianic114 3,991
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 41 min New Age Spiritual... 603,506
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 1 hr WasteWater 6,406
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 2 hr Lyndi 177,899
More from around the web