Prove there's a god.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622577 May 9, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>No- he said his morals are from the god who created him- who uh..... he just happens to believe is the god of the bible, so yeah- actually you're correct- LOL!!
Biblegod is the most morally reprehensible character in all of fiction.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622578 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>What? I agreed with you, several times in fact, that people of any religion can do science. My point was that "scientists" who start with the premise that god exists and created everything are not in fact scientists - which is why I ignore apologists.
LOL...that's right on the top of the list of the most ridiculous things I've seen you write. Anyone with expert scientific knowledge who uses scientic methods for research and study is a scientist...regardless of their personal belief...Do you live in a bubble or what?

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#622579 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Biblegod is the most morally reprehensible character in all of fiction.
I couldn't agree with you more.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622580 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thought so, as usual you go by the guidlines of your priest/cult's defintion..
Reason you cant answer is your position cant let you, or thats your fram of mind as well? Scary......
Well obviously you agree with Ted Bundy's morals as good and acceptable defintion of your view of human morals...
You are demented...
Actually, it is you who agrees with Ted Bundy. He became a Born Again Christian in the slammer. His slate was wiped clean. He's flawed but forgiven. He gets to wash the feet of Jesus right next to you, for eternity, while your 'soul body' has to wonder in fear of a relapse, a fall, a free will dose, you know, just like Biblesatan.

Biblesatan wasn't compelled by the story, even with first hand knowledge. Even Biblesatan knew Biblegod as an immoral, amoral fool.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622581 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL...that's right on the top of the list of the most ridiculous things I've seen you write. Anyone with expert scientific knowledge who uses scientic methods for research and study is a scientist...regardless of their personal belief...Do you live in a bubble or what?
The scientific method does not start with a conclusion.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622582 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL...that's right on the top of the list of the most ridiculous things I've seen you write. Anyone with expert scientific knowledge who uses scientic methods for research and study is a scientist...regardless of their personal belief...Do you live in a bubble or what?
And again, I agree with you that scientists can be scientists regardless of their religion, until they let their religion inform their science - meaning those who decide "goddidit and I'm gonna prove it" aren't scientists.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622583 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you explained why you do it - because you're searching for God. But that post wasn't addressed to people like you - you aren't an atheist.
Ok. Whatever you say.

No, we don't do it "because we aren't searching for god." Does our money say "in dracula we trust" or "in god we trust?"

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622584 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah I know, weird huh?
And hundreds say that God doesn't exist....
Yeah, it is weird how you think your personal revelation is better than the personal revelation of a man who believes in poseidon.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622585 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that one of those intellectual freethinkers I hear about?
If what he's saying is true, reverse it. Make his little show about God instead.
"What do you care if they believe in God? What, you don't wanna talk to your ugly kid for five minutes?? He's probably religious anyway."
He is a stand up comedian.

The "reverse" of homosexuality is god?

Substituting the word god in there made it meaningless. I would have no problem talking to my kids about religion. I'm not out there campaigning to prevent you from getting married. Not saying you do that, but some of your "brothers in christ" do.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622586 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thought so, as usual you go by the guidlines of your priest/cult's defintion..
Reason you cant answer is your position cant let you, or thats your fram of mind as well? Scary......
Well obviously you agree with Ted Bundy's morals as good and acceptable defintion of your view of human morals...
You are demented...
Even Biblegod has subjective morality. First, he trolled two naked teens In Da Gada Da Vida. Then, hey, let's let two nubile teens rape their drunken father. Oh, how about drowning an entire planet! Whoop! Watch those babies snatch their rattling last breaths with deep-sea diver sounds. Huzzah! What unbridled joy! Then, wait for it....substitutional atonement. Torture. Murder. Sell it to the kids! They'll eat it up. But, Biblegod loves you!

Loves us? Why does he allow Ted Bundy to rape young girls and then forgive him? Free will! What about the victim's free will not to be raped? Oh, that doesn't count. Why would a loving god allow such a thing? We can't know the nature or plan of God. Didn't you, with that statement, just presume to explain the nature of a god by explaining away the nature of a god? You mean this crazy god wants us to love him but makes his nature unknowable and all we have to go on are the maniacal ramblings of Bronze Age goat herders? No thank you.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622587 May 9, 2013
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>You insulted me more, by intentionally misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I write. Me calling you a few names, because I have to eternally write the same line post after post, is nothing.
You know it's a fact that science cannot issue a statement such that a molecular mechanism of emergent consciousness is more probable than a consciousness that has always existed and rooted in quantum reality.
"Intentionally" being the operative word here. Maybe your position is intentionally vague, and maybe you intentionally refine it to the point of absurdity (telling me I have to go back to the dawn of consciousness), but I still don't whimper and call names like a child when responding to you.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622588 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL...that's right on the top of the list of the most ridiculous things I've seen you write. Anyone with expert scientific knowledge who uses scientic methods for research and study is a scientist...regardless of their personal belief...Do you live in a bubble or what?
That is not what they wrote, at all. If you have to lie to support your position, you have no position.

Presuppositional apologetics are not science.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622589 May 9, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>I couldn't agree with you more.
Those that claim to follow its unsupported, convoluted code are either up to no good or completely clueless.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622590 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your point is?
No need, just step outside your front door this day and time...ya find em run around free as a bird..
Yes. Fundamentalist Christians.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622591 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Even Biblegod has subjective morality. First, he trolled two naked teens In Da Gada Da Vida. Then, hey, let's let two nubile teens rape their drunken father. Oh, how about drowning an entire planet! Whoop! Watch those babies snatch their rattling last breaths with deep-sea diver sounds. Huzzah! What unbridled joy! Then, wait for it....substitutional atonement. Torture. Murder. Sell it to the kids! They'll eat it up. But, Biblegod loves you!
Loves us? Why does he allow Ted Bundy to rape young girls and then forgive him? Free will! What about the victim's free will not to be raped? Oh, that doesn't count. Why would a loving god allow such a thing? We can't know the nature or plan of God. Didn't you, with that statement, just presume to explain the nature of a god by explaining away the nature of a god? You mean this crazy god wants us to love him but makes his nature unknowable and all we have to go on are the maniacal ramblings of Bronze Age goat herders? No thank you.
One point of fact you missed, this god thing of theirs also changed it's mind, yet the same book also says it's unchanging.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622592 May 9, 2013
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text> If a sense of being can persist then why can't it persist when the recording device is turned off? You make no sense; you're reinforcing my belief by saying that. How is it flawed? You can't just say it is flawed. You have to show me how it is flawed. Without 'memory' we would have no idea if we maintained our sense of being while our body/brain sleeps. Without a recording device we can only sense things instantaneously, "in the now".
I can remember that I was "aware" since I woke this morning but only because my re-activated recording device has created a memory out of the 'event' of waking up. But I can't remember the sense of being itself because there is no event associated with just "being".
That's my belief and it is on level ground with your belief that we have no sense of being while we sleep.
You said "mass clearly has something to do with gravity," but you won't extend that same logical leap to consciousness and the brain. That's my only point.
I did not say it possibly can't, I have no way of knowing that, I am only pointing out the flaw in *your* logic. You suggested that we don't remember our sense of being while asleep simply because we can't record it, and I showed you that a sense of being can persist without a working hippocampus. That's it. So if our sense of being does seem to disappear while we sleep, and we clearly do have the ability to form memories (in the form of dreams), why should our sense of being only appear in short, garbled spurts throughout the night? A man without a hippocampus can self report on his sense of being, but ours just goes away for 8 hrs a night? Shouldn't we pop into our dreams fully lucid?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622593 May 9, 2013
Pokay wrote:
That last sentence about mass and gravity was clearly out of place in the last post. I didn't see it there when I posted. Please disregard. That was your line, Hiding.
You must have missed it, we are all hiding, every one of us. Your buddy "Truths" is just too clever. You must give us credit, operating about a thousand dummy accounts is pretty impressive. We made up our back stories with ad libs.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622594 May 9, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You do understand that abiogenesis and evolution are separate studies, don't you?
You do, don't you?
Ahem.

No.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622595 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I respect the fact that you respect science, and i myself have respect for science,like i have said many times they have done many great things to help in the medical fields, Dr, in sickness and disabilties etc etc...
Now thats about as far as i will go, cause i cant bring myself to abandon reality after that point, which would to believe in evolution.
Funny, because the science most responsible for medical advances in the 21st Century is evolutionary science, no matter how many holes you try to ostrich your head into.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622596 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I respect the fact that you respect science, and i myself have respect for science,like i have said many times they have done many great things to help in the medical fields, Dr, in sickness and disabilties etc etc...
Now thats about as far as i will go, cause i cant bring myself to abandon reality after that point, which would to believe in evolution.
You're right man. Medicine is the *only* real scientific field. All the other ones are jokes.

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 Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 4 min NoStress4me 27,901
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 7 min Classic 3,551
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 14 min Praise Jesus 637,006
Should Black People Forgive White People for Sl... (Jun '07) 22 min Joe Fortuna 4,713
Why do white men hate white women who want blac... (May '11) 23 min Paul is dead 3,571
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 29 min RiccardoFire 44,057
Renzenberger : STEALING MILLIONS from their dri... (Feb '15) 30 min bosslady 24
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr DebraE 104,190
More from around the web