Prove there's a god.

Posted in the Top Stories Forum

Comments (Page 26,053)

Showing posts 521,041 - 521,060 of680,943
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547645
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

10

10

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Please don't worry, Riverside, there's a cure on the horizon.
LMAO! Whatever! "gay scientists are counseling Christians"

Even as a Christian, that was funny right there!

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547646
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

11

11

10

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
When the Bible is used to attack people and claim that they are wrong as people (as it was against Jews, as it is now against homosexuals and atheists). The Bible condoned genocide of the Malachites - not an overly moral book from the world's only "perfect being." It's also used to attack science, history and thus, education. For example, stem cell research was largely cancelled in your country because of the president's religious beliefs. That allowed other nations to exceed yours and develop stronger biotech programs (it also allowed your country to develop alternatives that may have gone unexplored for a while, but are turning out not as powerful as stem cells - so religion isn't necessarily bad ONLY because people find a way around it).
So I see the Bible as being used as a tool to further people's misery. It doesn't have to be used thusly. There's lots of wisdom in it. It could be used to build meaningful spiritual lives but in many cases, or perhaps just in the loudest cases, it's not.
You know, the early Christian leaders, when debating what books to include in the Bible, nearly left the entire OT out? Some people argue that you would have had a much better religion had you done so. The OT is, of course, where you get the angry, genocidal, jealous God.
As long as the Bible's been around, it has taught the same thing about gays. Saying that it is "now" against homosexuals is incorrect.

There is a lot of wisdom on the Bible, I agree. SOME Christians & CHristian leaders have used its teaching immoraly & unjustly. But only some.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547647
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

8

1

1

Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>No,you prefer Tampon, the only time she uses one is when she writes her name. I heard you came from a family of pig farmers..........You parents got tired of being around pigs all day and wanted a child.......when you were 5 years old, they told you, 7 years and still no child....oink....
You're thinking of Buck.

Whole other animal.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547648
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

9

1

1

Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>Can't we all just get along?
Nope.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547649
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

1

1

Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>No, your iggits are incapable, I guess it is an atheist mental disorder.

How dare you say a word to Nano, for responding to the trash garbage that you are a part of. Homosexuality is a mental disorder, and lesbians primarily take it out on normal peoples, due to their abnormality.
What the hell are his iggits?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547650
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

1

1

Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>you're
That makes even less sense.

I didn't think that was possible.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547651
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

11

1

1

Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. if someone says, "I don't like anyone who indulges in oral sex because the bible calls it an abomination," it's the same as saying "I dislike everyone who indulges in oral sex." It's all prejudice and bigotry and has nothing to do with the person ..
.. replace 'oral sex' with homosexuality'........
"I don't like homosexuals because the bible calls the practice an abomination," and it's the same as saying "I dislike all homosexuals."

__________
So, if you say that you do not like pedophiles, rapists, gays and incest because they are gays, it's the same as saying "I dislike everyone who indulges in immoral sex. You think it is all prejudice and bigotry, and has nothing to dow with the person.

The problem with your analogy is this, there is no such thing as a homosexual person. There are people who engage in homosexual behavior, so when a person says that I know that homosexual sex is wrong and a sin, it jsut like saying murder is wrong and a sin, it has nothing to do with the person but all to do with the behavior, which can be changed.

****FUNNY THING, GAYS HATE THAT THEY WANT SPECIAL RIGHTS, BUT WHEN WE APPLY THE SAME THING TO OTHER BEHAVIORS,WE FIND GAYS DISMISSING THEM*******

******KEY THING: INSERT INCEST, PEDOPHILES, RAPISTS AND MURDERERS INTO ANY GAYS CALL GAY RIGHTS, AND SEE HOW IT SOUNDS TO THEM.****
How long have you known you were gay?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547652
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

11

1

1

Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
Their....
Yay!

Gold star.

“Pepsi is better than coke”

Since: Mar 11

and better with rum

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547653
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not true.
I kidnapped her parents once and she made me give them back.
Heh, heh, heh, you still haven't figured out where I put yours.

“Pepsi is better than coke”

Since: Mar 11

and better with rum

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547654
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as the Bible's been around, it has taught the same thing about gays. Saying that it is "now" against homosexuals is incorrect.
There is a lot of wisdom on the Bible, I agree. SOME Christians & CHristian leaders have used its teaching immoraly & unjustly. But only some.
It wasn't always interpreted that way, though. The word "homosexuality" didn't exist in its current definition until around 1930 - Freud introduced it as it stands. It probably was used this way among the general populace up to 10 years earlier, though.

Prior to that, in the late 1800's, homosexuality was a medical diagnosis for someone who had too much sex with the same sex. Heterosexuality was its opposite: someone who had too much sex with the opposite sex. At that time, sexologists believed that too much sex was dangerous and was therefore a medical category.

Prior to these times, non-opposite intercourse was covered by the word "sodomy." It didn't just mean anal sex as it does now, but covered everything that was considered not normal (i.e., not missionary position). If you go back to pre-Luther, then the Bible isn't even in English, but in Latin. So it had different meanings at that time, too.

Also, if you read the sexual history of the church, all throughout, priests and nuns were enjoying all kinds of sexual behavior, including same sex encounters - with brief interludes where one bishop or another would get all upity and forbid it. In the 15th century a famous anti-same sex bishop died and at his funeral, one bishop said to another "oh, thank god. Now we can go back to buggering."

---

To your second point: if you religion hates people based on their sexual preferences (assuming adult consenting sex here), it's not a moral religion. Moral goodness does not include bigotry.

If you really have the "perfect being" behind your religion, He Created same sex sexual behavior, too. You want to interpret that He concurrently hates it but is all-loving? That makes no sense.

A perfectly moral being wouldn't judge people the way that you or I do. I expect true leadership in morals from those who claim access to divinity - but I never see it. Why not? Why don't Christians inspire us all with their closeness to perfect?

Seriously - doesn't your connection to the Almighty, the Creator of the Universe give you some sense of peace and happiness where you can understand and accept all of His Creations? I really don't get it. If a perfect being spoke to me, I'd be happy about it.

:p

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547655
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone who stops taking the Bible literally, learns to respect differences and adds happiness to the world instead of misery.
(I almost wrote: one who becomes an atheist)
:)
could you please define 'respecting differences'? it's always very confusing to me that people who use such terms are the very one's who can't seem to respect any one who disagrees with them.....:(

“Jesus is Love”

Since: Jul 12

Hutchinson, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547656
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

12

12

11

Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>It is okay. According to CM if you are christian you can go out and kill people and blame it on her hateful posts and then the murders that you committed will be her fault for making anti-religious comments in the first place.
Once again, a horrid anti=theist immediately referring to violence while trying to debate me. Can you use some other type of examples next time? Your evil , wicked, death-wishing examples are so , so ,... so "atheistic" of you. Try something new next time, like kindness. Oh wait, you are not capable of that.

Christine M is wrong, so your example failed right out of the gate.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547657
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

9

9

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
It wasn't always interpreted that way, though. The word "homosexuality" didn't exist in its current definition until around 1930 - Freud introduced it as it stands. It probably was used this way among the general populace up to 10 years earlier, though.
Prior to that, in the late 1800's, homosexuality was a medical diagnosis for someone who had too much sex with the same sex. Heterosexuality was its opposite: someone who had too much sex with the opposite sex. At that time, sexologists believed that too much sex was dangerous and was therefore a medical category.
Prior to these times, non-opposite intercourse was covered by the word "sodomy." It didn't just mean anal sex as it does now, but covered everything that was considered not normal (i.e., not missionary position). If you go back to pre-Luther, then the Bible isn't even in English, but in Latin. So it had different meanings at that time, too.
Also, if you read the sexual history of the church, all throughout, priests and nuns were enjoying all kinds of sexual behavior, including same sex encounters - with brief interludes where one bishop or another would get all upity and forbid it. In the 15th century a famous anti-same sex bishop died and at his funeral, one bishop said to another "oh, thank god. Now we can go back to buggering."
---
To your second point: if you religion hates people based on their sexual preferences (assuming adult consenting sex here), it's not a moral religion. Moral goodness does not include bigotry.
If you really have the "perfect being" behind your religion, He Created same sex sexual behavior, too. You want to interpret that He concurrently hates it but is all-loving? That makes no sense.
A perfectly moral being wouldn't judge people the way that you or I do. I expect true leadership in morals from those who claim access to divinity - but I never see it. Why not? Why don't Christians inspire us all with their closeness to perfect?
Seriously - doesn't your connection to the Almighty, the Creator of the Universe give you some sense of peace and happiness where you can understand and accept all of His Creations? I really don't get it. If a perfect being spoke to me, I'd be happy about it.
:p
Ok, the word "homosexuality" is relatively new to describe gays. But in the Bible it says that one man can not lay with another man the way he would with a woman, it is an abomination. Pretty cut & dry, eh?

And to your second point, my religion does not hate people based on their sexual preferences, so....

God did not create homosexuality no more than He created S&M... Homosexuality is man-made & not natural.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547658
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

10

10

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
It wasn't always interpreted that way, though. The word "homosexuality" didn't exist in its current definition until around 1930 - Freud introduced it as it stands. It probably was used this way among the general populace up to 10 years earlier, though.
Prior to that, in the late 1800's, homosexuality was a medical diagnosis for someone who had too much sex with the same sex. Heterosexuality was its opposite: someone who had too much sex with the opposite sex. At that time, sexologists believed that too much sex was dangerous and was therefore a medical category.
Prior to these times, non-opposite intercourse was covered by the word "sodomy." It didn't just mean anal sex as it does now, but covered everything that was considered not normal (i.e., not missionary position). If you go back to pre-Luther, then the Bible isn't even in English, but in Latin. So it had different meanings at that time, too.
Also, if you read the sexual history of the church, all throughout, priests and nuns were enjoying all kinds of sexual behavior, including same sex encounters - with brief interludes where one bishop or another would get all upity and forbid it. In the 15th century a famous anti-same sex bishop died and at his funeral, one bishop said to another "oh, thank god. Now we can go back to buggering."
---
To your second point: if you religion hates people based on their sexual preferences (assuming adult consenting sex here), it's not a moral religion. Moral goodness does not include bigotry.
If you really have the "perfect being" behind your religion, He Created same sex sexual behavior, too. You want to interpret that He concurrently hates it but is all-loving? That makes no sense.
A perfectly moral being wouldn't judge people the way that you or I do. I expect true leadership in morals from those who claim access to divinity - but I never see it. Why not? Why don't Christians inspire us all with their closeness to perfect?
Seriously - doesn't your connection to the Almighty, the Creator of the Universe give you some sense of peace and happiness where you can understand and accept all of His Creations? I really don't get it. If a perfect being spoke to me, I'd be happy about it.
:p
enough of ancient times; what are your personal feelings on sodomy?;)

“Jesus is Love”

Since: Jul 12

Hutchinson, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547659
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

12

11

11

waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
could you please define 'respecting differences'? it's always very confusing to me that people who use such terms are the very one's who can't seem to respect any one who disagrees with them.....:(
Liberal code words for being "tolerant". I'm against being tolerant. I think things that are wrong and sinful should be pointed out, exposed, and punished.....not blindly ignored and swept under the rug.

That's what atheists try to do as they make attempts to hide from their guilt of sin and rebellion and try to deny their upcoming eternal punishment.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547660
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

10

2

Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Here's one intelligent design......
The giant and colossal squids have a donut shaped brain and their esophagus runs right through the center of it.
If they swallow anything to large , they suffer brain damage.
Intelligent design at work!
That's to keep them from overeating and becoming obese.

There's nothing worse than an obese giant squid.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547661
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

9

9

9

Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>Dude, are you under 30, or just clueless? The Theory of Evolution absolutely did try to explain the origin of life, but when all kinds of holes were punched into it, they started separating it into the study of abiogenesis, microevolution, macro, allele frequency of populations, the age of the universe,etc. You know this, which is why you try to lump all else as Intelligent design.

What evolutionist say is: I can't explain it, observe it, test it, or examine it, so it must be evolution.

You try to call science the study of natural phenomenon but they you call man infused breeding part of evolution, you call the white rat part of evolution when it is a lab rat, you call the domestic dog and cat part of evolution when it is humanly manipulated.

Here is the clue: When man inserts himself into the object of his observation, it no longer becomes natural. That is why models are told to forget that the camera and the photographer are present.
Do you do everything backwards?

Or is it just reason.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547662
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

10

10

Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Please don't worry, Riverside, there's a cure on the horizon.
It's not up to you to decide to cure anyone of their beliefs.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547665
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

10

10

2

Just Results wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberal code words for being "tolerant". I'm against being tolerant. I think things that are wrong and sinful should be pointed out, exposed, and punished.....not blindly ignored and swept under the rug.
That's what atheists try to do as they make attempts to hide from their guilt of sin and rebellion and try to deny their upcoming eternal punishment.
i agree! that's why i'm eternally greatful that Jesus pointed out, exposed and punished sin in His own body forever & for all who will believe in His Name!

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#547670
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>You see no reason for such an extreme act of deception?

Yeah...right.
Is that you in your avatar?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 521,041 - 521,060 of680,943
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

637 Users are viewing the Top Stories Forum right now

Search the Top Stories Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 3 min Sheilaa 109,796
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 4 min RiccardoFire 89,620
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 5 min River Tam 217,304
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min truth 512,363
Weird News 18 min xxx 1
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 18 min lovewithin 38,037
Why do BLACK People hate Mexicans so much? 28 min Johnny 78
Girls snapchat names?(dirty) 3 hr Me and u 288
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 4 hr Joshuas Polaris 2000 596,624
•••
•••
•••