Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#558827 Nov 3, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>I dont want to look like I am arguing semantics but it is an important distinction I'd like to make. It isnt the concept of sin that is problamatic as it is simply a moral code.The control comes from fear and consequences of sin, especially what I view is an unsupported belief that hell is eternal for mortals when that only holds true for the false prophet and beast. The Bible teaches anillihation, which is what Christ taught and it what Judaism believes. But the threat of suffering forever coupled with the guilt of never being good enough or worthy has long been used as a means of control. And in many ways organized religion is little more than a pyramid scheme. But corrupt members dont invalidate Jesus' teachings any more than corrupt politicians invalidate what this country stands for.(T) PEACE
ya

each "christian" believes himself to have perfect understanding and kinship with the god.

christianity is a moral failure, one of the very best proofs that it is NOT the philosophy of a god.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#558828 Nov 3, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
only in the back
If you want to impress by putting a potato in your pants, it's better to put it in the front.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#558829 Nov 3, 2012
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>Arrogance huh? Please tell me what is arrogant in what I wrote. I asked nicely for answers because I didn't know them. You claimed to know them. That pretty much answers my question then, thanks. So YD *was* harrassed. You guys are twisted.
if you intend to defend that tub of feces you should put on a rubber suit.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558830 Nov 3, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you hate babies?
Your posting style bores me. Makes me feel like I am talking to an adolecent with a stick jammed up their a$$. But the books of Numbers and Deut show that people were not responsible for their disparing words against God unless they were 21 and counted in the census. Jesus also says for one to enter Heaven they must be like a child. He rebuked a diciple from trying to keep children from coming to Him and says those that lead children into sin deserve to have a millstone tied around their neck and thrown in the river. And the ones that led them to sin were the guilty ones. Deut says children do not know the difference between right and wrong. So I believe there is plenty of support for an 'age of accountability'. The Bible also speaks of those who REJECT Christ which obviously a child has not done

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#558831 Nov 3, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Your posting style bores me. Makes me feel like I am talking to an adolecent with a stick jammed up their a$$. But the books of Numbers and Deut show that people were not responsible for their disparing words against God unless they were 21 and counted in the census. Jesus also says for one to enter Heaven they must be like a child. He rebuked a diciple from trying to keep children from coming to Him and says those that lead children into sin deserve to have a millstone tied around their neck and thrown in the river. And the ones that led them to sin were the guilty ones. Deut says children do not know the difference between right and wrong. So I believe there is plenty of support for an 'age of accountability'. The Bible also speaks of those who REJECT Christ which obviously a child has not done
Oh, you also hate intelligence.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#558832 Nov 3, 2012
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>And more of the gang gangs up. I am speaking scientifically; there is no religion in my words except to say this all started with me comparing science to religion; that they both are based on fundamental assumptions.
Actually I'll give you that one can argue science doesn't necessarily assume fundamental forces are indeed fundamental. And that's all Hiding had to say and I would have said, "yea I suppose you're right". But she had to go and embarrass herself by going into "smokescreen mode" and telling me that she believes science can never attain anything absolute and that it's absurd to assume fundamental forces have no more fundamental of a cause.
So I may have to modify what I originally wrote. Let's see. Maybe I would have been better off by prequalifying it with, "if science wants to declare that fundamental forces are indeed fundamental, then we are basing science on an assumption". And Hiding is pretty much pushing for them being fundamental, without a cause. You seem to be doing it as well.
All I was getting at was that the absolute answers might change everything about what we thought we knew. And with that I'll remind you that science does actually operate on one thing that is irrefutably an assumption. That assumption is that we are observing a first order reality. How do we know that what we see is what we get? Until we can connect it to something absolute this could all be an illusion. Not saying it is, but it could be. You wouldn't want to assume it isn't either right? Not based on anything scientific anyway right?
to the extent that the reality we perceive is consistent, then it is accurate to the bounds of that consistency.

your inability to see this speaks to your rational instability.

science provides us with the very best explanation we have, and when improvements are made to that understanding then we will still have the very best explanation possible.

You wish a reality that is subject to your fears and hopes, there is no evidence that "shared reality" is malleable. Your "personal reality" is another matter as you well demonstrate.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558833 Nov 3, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
ya
each "christian" believes himself to have perfect understanding and kinship with the god.
christianity is a moral failure, one of the very best proofs that it is NOT the philosophy of a god.
So thats why you dont believe in God?And I never claimed to have a perfect understanding. Hey do you still think man never had a beginning and rejject abiogenesis and the possibility of intelligent life on other planets? And have you informed the scientific community they no longer need to try to discover anything any more since if it existed science would already have proof of it?

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#558834 Nov 3, 2012
Pokay wrote:
Testable hypotheses have not gotten us to anything absolute. So maybe it's time to make untestable hypotheses and just sit on them until someone finds a way to do it? Transcendant consciousness. That's a hypothesis. Mind and brain are the same thing; that's another. Those types of hypotheses will be filed waaay above the ones that include pink unicorns. But not if you guys have your way
not above at all

same as

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#558835 Nov 3, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Hmm, perhaps I missed something.
Are you denying mountain-building by vulcanism and plate tectonics?
Both are readily observed and measurable today.
I cite the Hawaiian Islands, which until very recently were NOT islands, and the Himalayas, which are still growing higher.
Ararat (not a single mountain, BTW, but a massif with two major peaks both called "Ararat") is a pretty good example of both phenomena.
No not denying that it happens at all. Geologists have demonstrated this. Ararat is a massif. Not many people know that. But I still find the evidence more compelling that there was water at 14,000 feet there at one time during the early years of man. The pillow lava is consistent with this.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#558836 Nov 3, 2012
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>I see you are trained in diversion as well. Glad you agree work is involved. Power is the rate at which work is done. Can you do work without power? Maybe time does not exist in the realm of fundamental forces aye? Well if so then we have a bigger problem because they still cause work to be done and, still, fundamental forces are most likely not truly fundamental. "the total work along a path is similarly the time-integral of instantaneous power applied along the trajectory of the point of application"
that would be limited to 4 dimensions.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#558837 Nov 3, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Your posting style bores me. Makes me feel like I am talking to an adolecent with a stick jammed up their a$$. But the books of Numbers and Deut show that people were not responsible for their disparing words against God unless they were 21 and counted in the census. Jesus also says for one to enter Heaven they must be like a child. He rebuked a diciple from trying to keep children from coming to Him and says those that lead children into sin deserve to have a millstone tied around their neck and thrown in the river. And the ones that led them to sin were the guilty ones. Deut says children do not know the difference between right and wrong. So I believe there is plenty of support for an 'age of accountability'. The Bible also speaks of those who REJECT Christ which obviously a child has not done
And yet these innocent little children sometimes get leukemia.

Nice god you have there.

Or do you have an answer for this one too?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558838 Nov 3, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So your god would prefer a believer who leads a so-so life to a nonbeliever who lives a life of honesty, integrity, service and goodness, always showing compassion for her fellow human beings?
Faithfullness AND obedience is required. The book of John quotes Jesus as saying we can do nothing apart from the father as we are all branches on the same tree. Those that refuse to be obedient are cut off and burned away. Jesus stayed in the Father's love by obedience and so must we be obedient to stay in Christ's love. There are dozens of similiar versus that say basically the same thing as far as why obedience is needed.(T) PEACE

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#558839 Nov 3, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>I never said there wasnt a hell in the Bible, I said it teaches anniliation of body and soul. Those who go to hell will experience 'second death' or soul-death and will cease to exist. And yes there are some thoughts that are sinful such as envy, lust, anger, etc
Ah. How is that different from a fear motivating manipulation technique?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558840 Nov 3, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet these innocent little children sometimes get leukemia.
Nice god you have there.
Or do you have an answer for this one too?
Yes..you are an idiot if you think God gives little kids leukemia. Do you blame him for making you stupid, thus your subsequent unbelief? I rank you just barely above a troll. I think our conversations are probably over

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#558841 Nov 3, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>So thats why you dont believe in God?And I never claimed to have a perfect understanding. Hey do you still think man never had a beginning and rejject abiogenesis and the possibility of intelligent life on other planets? And have you informed the scientific community they no longer need to try to discover anything any more since if it existed science would already have proof of it?
I think supernatural stuff is for children, like the invisible friend sitting with them on the bus seat.

But by age 8 or 9 at the latest, critical thinking should click in and hocus pocus should be left behind.

I believe this would be the natural maturing process, but for enculturation and indoctrination.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#558842 Nov 3, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you're entering into existentialism, the meaning of existence? Why does there have to be a meaning to anything?
purpose and meaning the ingredients to build a god for those slightly more sophisticated than the "but where did it all come from" religitards

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558843 Nov 3, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you also hate intelligence.
LOL...Yeah you are just too smart for me

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#558844 Nov 3, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
@Hiding...dont know how i cut off rest of my post about sins of thought. But doesnt your own moral code tell you it is wrong to lust after another man's wife or to want to cheat on your wife or to be jealous of others?You saiid religion created sin to control but only God knows what one thinks and if the idea is to be moral in both thought and deed because it is the right way to live, how is that a negative?
No, my moral code doesn't tell me lust is wrong. It tells me that lust is healthy. Acting on it, without consent of the interested parties, may be wrong in some cultures.

Yes, religion - specifically the Abrahamic ones - invented the concept of "sin." It doesn't exist in other cultures as such. I reject the existence of your deity, so I see no point in basing an argument on its whims. However, your religion is a means of producing and reproducing culture. So your justification of "sin" through the mind of your deity is an example of how "sin" works, how the mechanism of control functions.

As a believer, it's real for you. It actually shapes your behavior and thought processes. In your words above you are solidifying its control over you.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558845 Nov 3, 2012
Sorry Catcher...didnt see you wrote that..I thought it was from Kitten-kodder. Although still....really? Come on, I expect better from ya than my God gives kids diseases. To think that you would have to believe in him and you dont and I believe in him and dont think that.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#558846 Nov 3, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
No, my moral code doesn't tell me lust is wrong. It tells me that lust is healthy. Acting on it, without consent of the interested parties, may be wrong in some cultures.
Yes, religion - specifically the Abrahamic ones - invented the concept of "sin." It doesn't exist in other cultures as such. I reject the existence of youn its whims. However, your relg and reproducing culture. So your justification of "sin" through the mind of your deity is an example of how "sin" works, how the mechanism of control functions.
As a believer, it's real for you. It actually shapes your behavior and thought processes. In your words above you are solidifying its control over you.
I didnt say lust in general. I was speaking to coveting another man's life. And of course a moral code I respect amd believe in is going to influence me. I allow it to because it advoates such things as love thy neighter and do Unto others as you'd have them do unto you

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
What do u think of Jesus Christ?(God) (Oct '06) 6 min RiccardoFire 70,127
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min Liam1 582,853
Why Won't The Government Help Against Select Po... (Aug '12) 8 min dbfact 242
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 41 min gundee123 442,477
News Sarah Palin to Contribute to Fox News (Jan '10) 44 min stayinganonymous 9,083
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Jac 98,831
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 1 hr Al Capone 5,771
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Clearwater 176,372
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Ugly Truth from d... 611,782
More from around the web