Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#571409 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You should tattoo that on your ass.
I can not reach

you want to do it to me?

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#571410 Dec 8, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
only to the extent that no attributes are assigned to the god
only to the extent that no empirical act is assigned to the god
otherwise, the claim can be investigated, and found, in the case of the abrahamic god, to be entirely untrue.
Exactly.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#571411 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, they were different religions. That should show you that Christianity wasn't plagiarized.
I never said it was did I.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#571412 Dec 8, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
the most vile entity ever imagined
Why talk about yourself so badly?

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#571414 Dec 8, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said it was did I.
Wasn't it you?

I don't know, I get all you people mixed up. Many of you claim that Jesus, God & Christianity is a plagiarized pagan story. Or some bullshit like that.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#571415 Dec 8, 2012
Apocalypse666 wrote:
Come on and do it.
Prove there's a god.
Don;t read off scripture or anything like that just prove there's a god.
The Sun that rises over the horizon is everyone's God no matter what religion you believe or don't belive it. It creates and allows creation of life and it kills life through Sun exposure, drought and gives cancer to those who are unprotected. It creates forest fires. It gives us warmth and protects us from freezing and gives UVA/UVB rays for fluoridation process to grow our food. The Sun is very much a God. It creates and destroys just like any God from any scripture and it has evil effects of any devil. You can even drop your 666 because it doesn't represent Satan, it represents Nero. I had to be the one to tell you. Don't believe me? Look it up. Good luck on your search for meaning.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#571416 Dec 8, 2012
speedlik wrote:
<quoted text>
The Sun that rises over the horizon is everyone's God no matter what religion you believe or don't belive it. It creates and allows creation of life and it kills life through Sun exposure, drought and gives cancer to those who are unprotected. It creates forest fires. It gives us warmth and protects us from freezing and gives UVA/UVB rays for fluoridation process to grow our food. The Sun is very much a God. It creates and destroys just like any God from any scripture and it has evil effects of any devil. You can even drop your 666 because it doesn't represent Satan, it represents Nero. I had to be the one to tell you. Don't believe me? Look it up. Good luck on your search for meaning.
Sadly, Apocalypse666 has passed on.

But the atheists look down to him for inspiration.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#571417 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. So I'll assume that when that science teacher has that Darwin fish in the science class, you'll be right there at the school board getting him in trouble.
If he's got a Jesus with a cross up his ass, then I'd be there getting him in trouble.

I'd also offer him $20 for his Jesus figurine. Might be worth something someday.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#571418 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Wasn't it you?
I don't know, I get all you people mixed up. Many of you claim that Jesus, God & Christianity is a plagiarized pagan story. Or some bullshit like that.
it is an evolved religion, any amount of study shows the origins, which myths were employed in the assembly

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#571419 Dec 8, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
If he's got a Jesus with a cross up his ass, then I'd be there getting him in trouble.
I'd also offer him $20 for his Jesus figurine. Might be worth something someday.
lol, wth?

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#571420 Dec 8, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
it is an evolved religion, any amount of study shows the origins, which myths were employed in the assembly
Right.

And an equal amount of study proves your study wrong.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#571422 Dec 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
lol, wth?
Where do you come up with this stuff?
Archaeological effing evidence.

Splinters were found.

Lube was found.

Video tape was found.

All of this can be confirmed by believing it to be true.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#571423 Dec 8, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have to say that "evolution theory" was first a hypothesis emanating from the observance of the world around us by inquisitive individuals seeking answers. The evidence collected was then tested and verified as experiment and only then was it considered a viable theory. There was and is no intent on the part of science to prove or disprove any "supernatural", as it can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment.
Why do you keep trying to intermingle the two when they are not even compatible or comparable in experiment...unless you are being less than honest.
FAir enough. I can accept that.

Or at least I was accepting that, up to the part where you say "There was and is no intent on the part of science to prove or disprove any "supernatural", as it can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment."

I should like to hear why or how you arrive at that conclusion, especially the last part "... as it can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment."

Could you please provide a description of or otherwise identify the the attributes of a supernatural entity that cause it to "... can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment"?
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#571424 Dec 8, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy...are you ever in the wrong boat.
Placing a religious symbol in a classroom has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with espousing a preference to religious bias on the part of the teacher-and therefore the establishment which the teacher represents.
Not everyone is like you!
Thank the stars.
So if placing a religious symbol in a classroom has nothing to do with science; what the heck are you nagging about?

So what if the religious institution espouses religious preferences...?

While the institution does not assert or otherwise try to convince people that their religious views are right, better or that they hold any authority on the knowledge, data, the nature of knowledge or education; what the heck is your problem? Personal beliefs don't compromise the integrity of an individuals observations or ability to identify facts. If it did, none of you would be worthy to approach anything scientific.

Cant you see that there are scientists who are both religious and accept evolution theory? Does that restrict their capacity to appreciate evolutionary concepts and contribute valuably to the field of study? Do they taint scientific results with religious views?

You are being paranoid! All you have to hear is one word about God and you get an erection. Sheesh!
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#571425 Dec 8, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think that I can agree with you.
<quoted text>
Yes. So are you.
<quoted text>
Sure there is. Express them.
<quoted text>
Correct. A reference to intelligence is not a demonstration of it.
<quoted text>
You're looking at it.
How does one measure an expression or action to test the degree of intelligence that is being demonstrated?

What I'm trying to find out exactly, is this:

if the processes (natural or otherwise) that created an intelligent being are not a demonstration of intelligence; then how is man' ability to super intelligent machines and ultra intelligent entities, in any way a demonstration of intelligence?

Simply put: if natural intelligence doesn't exist, then how are you intelligent; supernaturally?

Come to think of it; how is it that you can believe "natural selection", but you deny "natural intelligence"?

I detect ill-logic and hypocrisy in you.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#571426 Dec 8, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
The two aren't the same, nor related. My honesty and your accuracy are independent variables. There is no if/then to it.
Make yourself plain and stop "psycho-babbling".

I compared my honest to yours and you responded regarding my accuracy and your your honesty; is it that 'what is accurate to me is honest to you' or is it the other way around?

My accuracy and you honesty are independent variables; I agree.

Yet while "honesty" and/or "honest" is a general concept or one agreed on, YOUR HONESTY MUST DEPEND ON MY HONESTY as the context may be; in that the same standard used to measure your honesty must be the exact one used to measure my honesty.

So as a matter of fact there is an if/then to it.

The Law of Equality must prevail: you aint goin nowhere... unless what I understand is not what you mean.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#571427 Dec 8, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
tho i am of lighter/olive skin, i shall be addressed henceforth as euro-mideastern-american-princ e, thank you very much!:)
"white" is unacceptable and racist; just as would be calling you "black-but-not-quite-wess ley-snipes-black-with-usually- very-white-teeth-and-smelling- of-curry"
That aint happenin'!!!

What? But i'm not even black, i have an olive complexion too, you sayin' that wouldn't even be racist, it would be stupid, coz it's an obvious false statement. You would look dumb!

White/black/brown is not racist!! It's the truth. It's just telling you what skin colour people have.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#571428 Dec 8, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
An accurate description of reality does have to be factual to be accurate
...
In light of this fact, why is it that you fail to appreciate that there may be validity in religions material such as scriptures and symbols in that, they may contain profound insight into the nature of reality?

You use the expression "religious faith" quite ambiguously there?

"Faith" implies "confidence or trust in a person or thing"
[http://dictionary.reference.c om/browse/faith?s=t&ld=112 5]

"Religious" implies "scrupulously faithful; conscientious: religious care" {http://dictionary.reference.c om/browse/religious?s=t&ld =1125}

What do you mean by religious?

A person does not have to be spiritual to be religious.

A person does not have to adhere to a religion or even be aware of one, to be religious.

A man can be religious about facts.

A man can be religious about science.

A MAN CAN BE RELIGIOUS ABOUT EVOLUTION though evidence is not proof; much like yourself?

Evidence is not proof, it "lends" support.

I can give evidence of God but that will not be proof that He exists.

You can give evidence of evolution but that will not prove that it exists.

How are you not demonstrating religious faith and religious zeal and religious fervour by so adamantly advocating for evolution theory?
HickUp

North Augusta, SC

#571429 Dec 8, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
FAir enough. I can accept that.
Or at least I was accepting that, up to the part where you say "There was and is no intent on the part of science to prove or disprove any "supernatural", as it can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment."
I should like to hear why or how you arrive at that conclusion, especially the last part "... as it can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment."
Could you please provide a description of or otherwise identify the the attributes of a supernatural entity that cause it to "... can not even enter into the equation as verifiable or viable as a testable element of experiment"?
Duh! If you allow for magic in any scientific experiment, then anything imaginable can be proven.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#571430 Dec 8, 2012
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not [everyone] does that. Symbols are better and faster definitions of ideas than the written word, once one understands what the symbols represent, and the context in which they are displayed. It is like "speed reading" so to speak.
So what need is there to teach learners the meanings of the symbols they see hanging over the doorway if the symbols don't contribute to the lessons?

Do I have to even look over the door or anywhere else to investigate symbols in order to learn what is necessary or according to the national standard?

The things you are talking about are meaningless.

You are paranoid.

YOU are the one suffering from "The God Delusion".

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
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 7 min Lyndi 173,747
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 27 min Gordon 227,693
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 27 min confrinting with ... 542,877
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 34 min curiouslu 441,339
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 1 hr Roger 874
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr KiMare 95,524
jawan bhanji ki chudai kaise karu (Apr '13) 2 hr raj 37
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 hr MUQ1 259,621
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 15 hr ms simmer 153

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••