“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#572166 Dec 11, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
He is asking an invalid question. We as believer hold that God was not created/caused; therefore he is beyond the principle of causation.
God uses the principle of causation as a tool for creation; but it does not apply to Him because He was not created. He transcends principle of cause and effect.
His sophisticated babbling is nothing more than that: sophisticated babbling.
You are correct.

God is the cause AND the effect.

*atheists are scratching their heads now*
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572167 Dec 11, 2012
Somali Pirate wrote:
<quoted text>
So if you are blind you simply believe what others tell you is the truth?
No. Thats what YOU do.

You cant see the reality, so you rely on others men's idea to define your reality. You call it scientific thought.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#572169 Dec 11, 2012
Somali Pirate wrote:
<quoted text>
God made man in the and beasts in some order of a couple days depending on which book of the bible you read.
Dinosaurs predate humans by millions that's 1000000's of years. How long are gods days?
You're applying a very common atheist mistake: God doesn't have "days".....

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#572170 Dec 11, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
This one should get a few Christians' dander up.
Not so much.

*YAAAAAAWNS*

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#572171 Dec 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Dinosaurs?!
Where is bacteria in the bible?
Dumb ass.....
It's not a biology book.
RIIIIGHT...

It's a book of mythology.

You tell'em, Ar Ar.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#572174 Dec 11, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
All that meaningfulness means nothing WHEN the certain scale of space and time is ended.
Your life is meaninglessly meaningful. I get it.
By the way, in light of scientific fact that you provided, all that meaning you speak of is pure philosophy and "pipe dreaming".
Science proves/supports my claim that your existence is meaningless, eventually futile.
Science itself agrees with me that your existence is meaningless.
The light from a candle is not meaningless because the candle is eventually blown out.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#572175 Dec 11, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
Lets begin by asking: how did you arrive at this conclusion?
By what line of logic or method of research or experimentation?
It is certainly not a scientifically valid expression; because science cannot be built on a negative argument.
Not at all sure why you would think that. I can think of several 'negative arguments' that are very important in science. For example, that the different types of perpetual motion machines are impossible. That violation of any number of conservation laws is impossible. That global decrease of entropy is impossible.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572176 Dec 11, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
It's hard to say how much reality is in the Jesus stories. There was definitely no supernaturalism: nobody born to a virgin, nobody following stars to mangers, nobody performing miracles, and nobody resurrected from the dead.
Was there an itinerant holy man named Jesus? Probably. Probably several.
Was there a Jesus of Nazareth? Probably not, Nazareth doesn't seem to have existed when it was needed. And we know that there was no census in Bethlehem when it was needed to support the story.
My guess is that there was no Jesus - that the character was purely a composite based on earlier mythological traditions.
<quoted text>
No, not necessarily. But his relevance will plummet.
I notice that you doctored my quote: "What race of gods; the race of the god/gods that you dont believe in"...

Thats not fair; but science is not about fairness so I dont expect scientific thinkers to have much equity in thought or action.

You would love to hear that there is no evidence of a historical Jesus; but thats your fatal flaw.

The historical existence of Jesus is confessed even by people who should have been more interested to see his memory wiped out of the earth. Even those who should have preferred to see the memory of him wiped out reported about him.

That stunt was tried by one evolution theory advocate who had to apologize for it.

At the point: 9:30

&fe ature=related

You are a liar and the product of liars.

You dont even understand what is meant by the expression "there is no need for God". That term relates to the idea that it is not necessary to involve God in studying the universe; but the absence of a need to involve God in the investigation does not mean He was not involved in the creation.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572178 Dec 11, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The light from a candle is not meaningless because the candle is eventually blown out.
But when all the world that the candle is in will dissolve into non-existence; the world, the light, the candle and even the person who lighted it are meaningless.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572179 Dec 11, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all sure why you would think that. I can think of several 'negative arguments' that are very important in science. For example, that the different types of perpetual motion machines are impossible. That violation of any number of conservation laws is impossible. That global decrease of entropy is impossible.
The moment you can build a science on a negative argument; you have open the floodgates for all kinds of entities.

If you open the floodgates of valid negative arguments; you'll be up to your neck in mythical creatures by tomorrow. Good luck!

“I never claimed to be Perfect”

Since: Nov 10

just better than yesterday

#572180 Dec 11, 2012
Laconic Assassins wrote:
<quoted text>You're not qualified to do anything except kiss butt. Oh yeah, you just did. <pucker up> ~~smile~~
You hurt my feelings you big, mean evil brute.
Perhaps tact rather than knuckle dragging might help improve your civility.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#572181 Dec 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Again with the Tripoli thing?
That was a negatiation & ass kissing tactic to not go to war with Muslim pirates.
It was intended to let them know that America will not have a Holy War - a war casued by and for a religion.
Nothing more.
Except that we're not a christian nation.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572183 Dec 11, 2012
Somali Pirate wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's start by defining science.
Will you agree science is a process?
The process begins with a hypothesis, it can be a positive or negative, or lack of positive.
A scientific fact can in fact be a negative. Such as an absolute such as the speed of light. No matter what arbitrary numbers you use to describe it, it is still a definable absolute number.
One could therefore prove the speed of light by showing it is not every other possibility. You can hold every negative position and show a positive.
The negative is a description of the positive.

The accurate description of a thing as "NOT white" is not possible until one is able to say "IT IS" some other colour.

Furthermore, no negative fact can be tested except by evaluating the positive and then it is actually the positive that is tested. So science as it involves testability is based on the positive.

SO all that talking says nothing.

It merely demonstrates your will to dispose of even the fundamental principles of science in order to prove your meaningless point.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#572185 Dec 11, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all sure why you would think that. I can think of several 'negative arguments' that are very important in science. For example, that the different types of perpetual motion machines are impossible. That violation of any number of conservation laws is impossible. That global decrease of entropy is impossible.
I did see one somewhere that has been going for several years. It was really neat. I'll see if I can find it again.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#572186 Dec 11, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all sure why you would think that. I can think of several 'negative arguments' that are very important in science. For example, that the different types of perpetual motion machines are impossible. That violation of any number of conservation laws is impossible. That global decrease of entropy is impossible.
Here it is:

God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572188 Dec 11, 2012
Somali Pirate wrote:
<quoted text>
He is using the typical religious view that science is not a process of discovery.
Science is an attempt to understand. To define the universe.
Religion is a small minded view that we already know how it all works..... Magic
Actually that's YOUR idea of religion. Not everyone believes in magic. I don't.

You are simply trying to impose your stupidity on others; spreading propaganda in the process.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#572189 Dec 11, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =tlx2PgESXhsXX
OK. Days. It will go for several days.

It's not perpetual, but this thing is pretty clever. Maybe up to 99% efficient.

Still, his hopes to DRAW energy from it is fantasy. It would need better than 100% efficiency.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572191 Dec 11, 2012
Somali Pirate wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the exact point..... We are having a discussion about a mythical creature.
No, no. YOU are having a discussion about a mythical creature. The impression you get of God is that He is a Mythical creature.

I dont share your views regarding God, so technically we are not discussing the same thing. That which is God to you is not the same as that which is God to me.

Why cant you people see that the thing which you are referring to as mythical and magical and supernatural IS NOT what other people hold to be God.

People may describe God using those terms (mythical and magical and supernatural etc), but those terms may also be applied to the description of ice cream and massages and food.

Get it through your skull:

YOUR IMPRESSION OF GOD IS FORMED FROM FAIRY TALES; SOME PEOPLE GET THEIR IMPRESSIONS OF GOD FROM EXPERIENCE.
God Himself

Kingston, Jamaica

#572194 Dec 11, 2012
Somali Pirate wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol. So you start by saying a negative is only a description, it's defined only by a positive.....
Then one could never present the negative with out first proving the positive. But you can't prove the positive exists with out a negative.
It's a dead end argument......
Is it?

So is science based on a dead argument? After all it is scientific principle that a science cannot be based on a negative.

I know that negative and positive support each other. Its you that must justify the sudden and radical change in your thought on a principle that is fundamental to science.

By the way, did you reach your conclusion of "dead argument" by way of consensus or is it just your subjective (more accurately "subjected") observation?

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#572200 Dec 11, 2012
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks. I didn't mind the nude shots on the video effects. The instrumental parts I couldn't listen to very long. The voice is not bad, but the style of music doesn't attract me that much. If I had a choice between that and rap, then I would pick that. Rap I wouldn't listen, to as much of it isn't music anyway, but just some guy/girl, who can't sing, speaking words and a lot of noise in the background.
Now what do you think of Ken Curtis, Festus from Gunsmoke, and star of Ripcord - replaced Frank Sinatra on Tommy Dorsey for a few years? Try actor Ned Beatty. So far you haven't recognized any of those names, right, and the tv shows were before you were born.
Roger Whittaker, Gordon Lightfoot *, Anne Murray, Johnny Cash, Jim Reeves, Stompin Tom Connors *, Hank Williams Sr, some Elvis Presley, some Beatles, Charley Pride *, Harry Belafonte *, John McDermott *(saw him in concert with Nana Mouskouri), 3 Tenors (one now dead), Strauss, Mozart, and most of the other old classical but not opera.
* I have seen in concert.
Jim Reeves would be my overall favorite of the above.
Two other world famous Canadians, Celine Dion - like some of hers; Shania Twain (probably haven't heard much of her but she is cute. My brother lived with her 1st cousin for a few years, and I think met her a at a relative's funeral)
Now one of the biggest music stars today, who was raised in a town not far from where I lived for a number of years, and I have been there many times, is Justin Bieber, but I haven't heard his singing, and probably would not be interested in it.
I am definitely not 'with it', right?
I was to a Rolling Stones concert in 2005, which was phenomenal, but I would not likely have gone across the street to see them otherwise, but my spouse at the time wanted to go, and they put on an amazing show with great effects. I think mainly what capture me was the two old guys who have abused themselves all their lives could still put on a show, and Mick Jagger never stopped running across the stage for the entire performance.
lol!

Nah, I don't understand rap either.

Who is justin Bieber? lol. Only 12 year old girls have a crush on that dummy. Back in my day, john trovolta was a real man!! hehehehe, look at the God walking, there is no man that can ever beat him, not even christian bale!!! He is the hottest thing i've ever seen!!!



I do recognise some of those names, I'm an old fashioned British girl. My papa is 'white' even though he has brown skin. He was born and brought up in England, until he married my mummy he couldn't even speak his own language. I was a daddy's girl and me and my papa used to watch old westerns starring john wayne etc...

I used to love watching musicals with gene kelly in them, omg, he taught me that newspapers can be fun if you dance on them! lol. His dancing can always make ya smile!!:-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

My papa wasn't a big fan of Rolling Stones, so that's why i'm not either. We love the Bee Gees and songs like, this is a man's world....

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
The movements of O.J. Simpson on the night of J... 3 min Doctor REALITY 2
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 3 min eyeful 1,959
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 4 min Truth from dr Sh... 607,241
Homosexuals are servants and human children of ... 4 min Rick in Kansas 24
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 min onemale 267,503
What Your Church Won't Tell You by Dave and Gar... (Apr '10) 16 min Truth from dr Sh... 33,185
how long after taking the Vivitrol shot can i f... (Nov '12) 22 min gazzipants 79
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 31 min guest 568,395
Scientific proof for God's existence 1 hr eyeful 606
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 2 hr AN NFL FAN 120,750
More from around the web