“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#622688 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, it is you who agrees with Ted Bundy.
Hogwash, my morals are NOTHING like that demons was, and what that sick man done was pure Evil....
He became a Born Again Christian in the slammer. His slate was wiped clean. He's flawed but forgiven.
So he says, and thats all we have to go on. If he repented, then i am sure i will see em...
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.
As for the rest of this foolish gabber, looks like you are clueless about Salvation/God's Grace....

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#622689 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text> You're missing the point. If a man without a hippocampus has a sense of being even in the absence of the ability to form long term memories, then I see no reason why we shouldn't have a sense of being while sleeping (if being is eternal), especially considering we *do* have the ability to form long term memories. What I'm saying is: not having a hippocampus clearly does not "shut off" our sense of being, so your claim that we simply "can't remember" our sense of being is fallacious, since we do have the ability to record memories during sleep. There's no reason why we shouldn't remember our nights and be lucid in every dream, unless we are in fact unconscious. Stop it with that "event" crap. Why should our sense of being only be active when an "event" happens? And if this is true, and a dream is an "event," then why is our sense of being so garbled and sometimes not even present during dreams?
No,*you* are not making any sense, or *you* are not understanding *me*. You state that in the absence of a hippocampus we still have a sense of being. That supports my belief. What does that have to do with memory? If a person without a hippocampus 'sleeps without dreaming' they too will have no memory of "being". If a person with a hippocampus 'sleeps without dreaming' they will have no memory of "being" either. So how does this help you?

Even if a person with a functioning hippocampus is awake they still can't remember their sense of being because as I've explained, it is not an event, and for another reason that I'll explain.

Take a moment, try to close out your senses. No tasting, no feeling (except for your @$$ against the chair, but that is a "given" so we will have to ignore that; pretend you are in a dark zero-g chamber), no sight, no sound, no smell. OK, the one thing you cannot close out is your sense of being. You sense that you are "there" or "alive".

You are familiar with that sense of being but it doesn't form a memory because it is not an event. You know you were awake a minute ago but you can't remember your exact specific 'sense of being' from a minute ago because, just as electrons behave the same under the same conditions, the sense of being is exactly the same no matter in what instant of time you are sensing your being.

Get it? The sense of being never changes. You may feel old but your sense of being never ages, your sense of being still feels like it always did.

Your recording device is on when awake but you still can't remember your sense of being because it is always exactly the same.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#622690 May 9, 2013
IMO, the sense of being is unaltered even if someone drops an anvil on their toe. Sure you are in intense pain and you probably cannot concentrate on your sense of being. But if you could block out the pain (and I'm sure there are people (monks?) that can), then you would still feel your sense of being. I myself am in pain most of the time and sometimes it can get intense. but I have gotten good at blocking it out. Matter fact sometimes the more pain I'm in the more I can separate my sense of being from my "body". Another way of saying that is that I can separate myself from my body.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#622691 May 9, 2013
X marks the spot. Thanks for the attention. If you guys would at least admit the obvious truths then you might earn a little more respect around here. Yea, we don't have to know anything about how molecules became aware of themselves in order to assume they did. And you guys give Intelligent Design people a hard time? Hey I give them a hard time too if they ask for too much, because I agree it cannot be a theory, but you guys are just as bad as they are, in an opposing direction.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#622692 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>"Apologists have a need to believe in god, and this need informs their opinion on the science. If you can find me work by actual scientists, those working without a preconceived agenda, then that's another story. Their religious belief is irrelevant until they allow it to interfere with their ability to be objective."
Snipped from one of my posts. I even left in the context so you can't accuse me of quote mining. Do I need to find more posts where I echo a similar sentiment (that religious belief is not important until it interferes with objectivity) or do you accept that I clearly have no issue with religious scientists, only with "scientists" who allow their religion to inform their science?
Im sorry, but lady you have to be the most foolish hypocrit thats EVER been on topix...... Double standard, and many other things i could think of......

How can you NOW say this, ohh never mind too late u done did....

Do you want me to find THE post of yours where you PLAINLY stated that,,

"science REMOVES >>>> bias <<<<<< and human errors"""?

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#622693 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
If a scientist uses the scientific method and has data to substantiate it, it doesn't matter what they believe. science is science and they are still a scientist. Who are you to say their faith informed their science? You won't even be objective and read the data...no...you immediately assume it's biased. what that tells me is one of two things...you're either prejudice or shallow. maybe both... Pick one.
I pick "A, B, C, D, E, F, G, etc etc..........Z

Just saying.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#622694 May 9, 2013
How can you remember your sense of being from a minute ago when it is no different from your sense of being that you are feeling now?

If you inhale *exactly* the same way 60 times, and *all* other variables are *exactly* the same, you can't tell one from the other; you can only differentiate them by chronology. You know you inhaled 60 times but that's all.

Just like you know you existed for the last 60 seconds, but not because you can differentiate one integral slice of time from another (unless some other variable changes).

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#622695 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>No, not technically.

But when atheists advocate a Santa display while at the same time denigrate a Manger display, I see that as biased and somewhat symbolizing atheism.

Or how atheists bitch n whine about prayer in school then turn around and throw a St Patrick's Day party (leprechauns and all), that's more symbolism and bias.
Atheists throw St. Patrick's day parties?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#622696 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>What is our 'common ancestor'?

The theory of evolution hinges on the idea that all life came from one life. What life is that?

Since that question has never been answered, how could it be taught in a basic biology class?

Oh, that's right. I'm being childish and ignorant and I should just "believe" in evolution like you do.

Yes of course. But my line of questioning is about the supposed common ancestor we all share.

Of which Koder claimed is a simple biology class but has yet to definitively answer.
Nobody has that answer.

Not even you.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622697 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
Any scientific data...if an expert scientist uses the scientific method for any research...it doesn't matter what their personal beliefs are...they are still scientists.
So then why do creationist "scientists" not use the scientific method?

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#622698 May 9, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
But the medical fields would collapse if evolution weren't true.
Im not sure if i follow you, but what does "evolution of man from one ancestor" have to do with medicine, if thats what ur implying? And why does it have to be true??? I get the concept and agree, of Evolving diseases, and new strings of flu etc etc appearing, but again why are you saying it would collapse if evolution weren't true?
Since you approve of medical science in general, ask any doctor if they "believe" in evolution.
Let me know if you find one that doesn't.
Ill ask around... but first you will need to clarify what you mean by Evolution, in general or just the concept of diseases evolving..

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622699 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? Did you ask me a question, and are you expecting an answer?
Surely not.......
You cannot answer, because if you say that the laws are not subjective, you prove you are a liar or that the bible is. If you say that laws are objective, you still prove that the bible is wrong. Either way, you cannot answer without exposing a lie.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#622700 May 9, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks fake to me.
My thoughts too, said it was caught in South America. The artical in portugese said it was a mutation from a pestiside.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622701 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Right. But you need to look up the word presuppositional. And, point to the scientific evidence for supernatural entities. When you do, go take the JREF Million Dollar Challenge. I'll wait.
I know exactly what presuppositional means...for peters sake...what is it with you people. Timn's whole argument is presuppositional. he's already concluded that any science done by someone who believes in God...is useless...basically. It's really a useless argument and I'm pretty much over it... I'm not an idiot...and again...there is no scientific evidence for any spiritual or supernatural being. Get a grip Bart...seriously!

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622702 May 9, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So then why do creationist "scientists" not use the scientific method?
How can you be sure they don't? Seems for many, maybe not you, I'm not sure...it would be impossible to assume they don't since most won't even read anything they publish.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622703 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I pick "A, B, C, D, E, F, G, etc etc..........Z
Just saying.
:) and I say you picked right!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622704 May 9, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Im not sure if i follow you, but what does "evolution of man from one ancestor" have to do with medicine, if thats what ur implying? And why does it have to be true??? I get the concept and agree, of Evolving diseases, and new strings of flu etc etc appearing, but again why are you saying it would collapse if evolution weren't true?
<quoted text>
Ill ask around... but first you will need to clarify what you mean by Evolution, in general or just the concept of diseases evolving..
It doesn't have to be true ... or not, but the theory of evolution has made medical science today possible.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622705 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
I know exactly what presuppositional means...for peters sake...what is it with you people. Timn's whole argument is presuppositional. he's already concluded that any science done by someone who believes in God...is useless...basically. It's really a useless argument and I'm pretty much over it... I'm not an idiot...and again...there is no scientific evidence for any spiritual or supernatural being. Get a grip Bart...seriously!
Yet, you still believe that everything points to a god, in spite of there being no such evidence. You presupposition is more damaging.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622706 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_science
The whole point of creation science is to prove the bible is correct and that god made everything. This means they start with a conclusion.
This isn't about just conversing with people who believe differently than you. My question was, specifically, would you value the research of a muslim on the specific question of jesus's divinity. His conclusion is set in stone from the beginning, so I have no clue why you would value his "research."
Well duh...what if his research proved my belief wrong? I could research Jesus Divinity all day long...and my personal belief may or may not cloud my judgement. it's always best to get the views of others. Especially those who disagree...they bring new info to the table that you may otherwise never know. I try to always look at what the opposers say...you can't make a truly well-informed decision if you're only looking at one side.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622707 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
How can you be sure they don't? Seems for many, maybe not you, I'm not sure...it would be impossible to assume they don't since most won't even read anything they publish.
Well, so far no scientific paper claiming "god dun it" has been published. There is no evidence supporting or even suggesting creationism. There is no evidence supporting the supernatural claims in the bible. So, if they are using the scientific method, it has not once demonstrated that your god or bible is fact.

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
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 5 min hojo 568,627
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 min WasteWater 267,599
Keystone pipeline wins Senate vote in victory f... 21 min Kid_Tomorrow 31
female working girl. 1 hr minxy781 2
Why do white men hate white women who want blac... (May '11) 1 hr Paul is dead 2,968
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 1 hr cheer the f up 120,777
Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says (Jun '07) 1 hr RiccardoFire 38,070
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Here For Now 607,255
Scientific proof for God's existence 3 hr let your brother rip 647
More from around the web