Prove there's a god.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#632031 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>What is more accommodating to revolutionary ideas? Science or religion?
Here's a clue. Religious people believe much the same thing as their ancestors did 1000 years ago. Do scientists?
We do?!

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632032 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's pure conjecture and you know it.
How is it conjecture? Scientists *do* change their beliefs. If they didn't, we'd be stuck with enlightenment era science, at best. Religious people don't, at least on the big issues. That's why you all believed in jesus 2k years ago and you still do.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#632033 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Um.. the fossils.
The fossils only prove that they are fossils, the rest is speculation.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#632034 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm just saying it's physically possible. My high school wrestling coach was a power lifter in his heyday and could do more than that with a lighter frame.
8 inches? We're on the internet, we all have footlongs here. Don't you?
Lol, I guess I'm behind the times.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#632035 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>So.. the guy that shoots himself in the head and survives is looking for attention? Why do you have such a base, black and white view of the world? I'm sure that some people do self harm for attention - but imagine the pain that leads one to consider such a drastic action in the first place. Asking you to empathize with someone might be a long shot though.
Don't be so quick to judge me. I've been there. I knew someone that went through a sudden and cheating divorce and tried to "kill" himself.

In actuality, all he was going was trying to get the attention of his cheating wife that wouldn't return his phone calls.

Pretty stupid if you ask me.

Ain't no bitch worth that.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632036 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that would be the engine's primary purpose, not the car.
Try again.
If you can boil a gun down to "pushing a projectile through a tube," then why can't I reduce a car to "sending power to the drive train?" That is, after all, what it does, and that's why cars move and are able to transport people. Aren't we ignoring the actual intended purpose of both cars and guns and disingenuously reducing them down to their base functions? Maybe I intend to use my car as a lawn ornament. Who are you to say it's meant to transport me?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632037 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you implying that there are no scientists that support and research ID?
O_o
That is what you implied in your post. You said that "scientists are too ignorant to perform god tests." Putting scientists on one side, and those that would perform "god tests" on the other.

And if there are, where's their science? Where's their proof?

To answer your question, there are no ID scientists, by definition. There may be scientists who support ID, but they do not perform ID science. It's not possible.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632038 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok fine.
Since there isn't way to test life from non-life, it had to be created.
I didn't say there is no way. There are many ways that the idea itself has been supported, just no definitive proof. The miller urey experiment is the most well known example. Do you have an analogous experiment for god?

“Input”

Since: Dec 10

Input

#632039 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Then a gun's task is to kill people without the hassle of using a pike. If I can't play semantics with cars, why can you guys play semantics with guns?
Because you imply an intent that can't be made by anyone but the user. You are now saying a guns primary use is to kill PEOPLE.
Tell that to the thousands of duck hunters and deer hunters ,I'm sure they will agree with you.
Then there are collectors who would never even fire the gun.
As well as you mentioned skeet/clay/bowling pin/ cowboy action shooter etc. No one is denying capability, but you attempt to vilify
an object that has far more uses than the one.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632040 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
We do?!
Do you believe in jesus?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632041 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be so quick to judge me. I've been there. I knew someone that went through a sudden and cheating divorce and tried to "kill" himself.
In actuality, all he was going was trying to get the attention of his cheating wife that wouldn't return his phone calls.
Pretty stupid if you ask me.
Ain't no bitch worth that.
I agree no one is worth that. He must have been in a lot of pain to consider doing that though, unless the attempt itself was a complete farce.

And either way, the anomalous "attention attempt" does not reflect the norm. Those that try usually don't try again. If it was all for attention, wouldn't they keep trying every time they wanted some extra attention? Like I said, it's usually a rash impulse brought on by great pain - not a decision arrived at via careful thought, whether the intent is attention or death.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632042 Jun 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Because you imply an intent that can't be made by anyone but the user. You are now saying a guns primary use is to kill PEOPLE.
Tell that to the thousands of duck hunters and deer hunters ,I'm sure they will agree with you.
Then there are collectors who would never even fire the gun.
As well as you mentioned skeet/clay/bowling pin/ cowboy action shooter etc. No one is denying capability, but you attempt to vilify
an object that has far more uses than the one.
Sorry, let me rephrase. A gun is meant to kill. I did not mean to say people.

And I agree with you - there are people who use their gun solely for sport. That does not change what guns are primarily made for. If intent can only be divined on a case by case basis, then cars are only meant for driving until someone drives it. Until then, it might be an expensive lawn decoration or a wrecking ball or any other number of things. I don't deny that guns can be used for things other than killing - I'm just saying that their primary purpose is to kill or wound. Just like a car can be used for other things - but it's primary purpose is transportation.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632043 Jun 21, 2013
kill or wound* not just kill

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632044 Jun 21, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Yep, by his logic my machete is guilty by association with my hand.
I never said guns were guilty.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#632045 Jun 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Because you imply an intent that can't be made by anyone but the user. You are now saying a guns primary use is to kill PEOPLE.
Tell that to the thousands of duck hunters and deer hunters ,I'm sure they will agree with you.
Then there are collectors who would never even fire the gun.
As well as you mentioned skeet/clay/bowling pin/ cowboy action shooter etc. No one is denying capability, but you attempt to vilify
an object that has far more uses than the one.
They make good doorstops. ;)

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#632046 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I never said guns were guilty.
It's late and my brain was itchin'.

“Input”

Since: Dec 10

Input

#632047 Jun 21, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, let me rephrase. A gun is meant to kill. I did not mean to say people.
And I agree with you - there are people who use their gun solely for sport. That does not change what guns are primarily made for. If intent can only be divined on a case by case basis, then cars are only meant for driving until someone drives it. Until then, it might be an expensive lawn decoration or a wrecking ball or any other number of things. I don't deny that guns can be used for things other than killing - I'm just saying that their primary purpose is to kill or wound. Just like a car can be used for other things - but it's primary purpose is transportation.
Well that only holds true in a limited scope, when we talk about cars being transportation. Then we have trucks and suvs etc.
The primary function changes, the same is true of the gun.
For instance you may have a 4wd that it's primary function is mudding and it's off road capabilities.

From a military standpoint all issued firearms would carry that intent as a primary function. But I have to disagree with making the intended function of privately owned firearms a singular thing.
Because just like cars some are specifically made to do something else. But just as the 4wd truck is capable of being just transportation, that was not it's design intent.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#632048 Jun 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that only holds true in a limited scope, when we talk about cars being transportation. Then we have trucks and suvs etc.
The primary function changes, the same is true of the gun.
For instance you may have a 4wd that it's primary function is mudding and it's off road capabilities.
From a military standpoint all issued firearms would carry that intent as a primary function. But I have to disagree with making the intended function of privately owned firearms a singular thing.
Because just like cars some are specifically made to do something else. But just as the 4wd truck is capable of being just transportation, that was not it's design intent.
Mudding still counts as transportation. And even if I grant that there are "cars" whose primary purpose is not transportation, that does not change the primary purpose of cars in general. Paintball guns are completely for fun and sport - but they don't change the main purpose of firearms.

And again, I'm not arguing with you - I do agree that guns are used for many things and I don't say that their *only* purpose is to kill, just that their primary purpose is to kill.
Forum

Carlsbad, NM

#632049 Jun 22, 2013
Paula Dean is a hillbilly.
Bald Eagle

Laconia, NH

#632050 Jun 22, 2013
GOD IS REAL. (in my opinion)

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 6 min emperorjohn 4,212
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 31 min Robert F 603,863
Habesha 1 hr Insta names 1
News The Latest: Husband: Kentucky clerk is 'standin... 1 hr GOD loves GAYS mo... 68
Has anyone ever heard of the Coudenhoven-Kalerg... 1 hr One Planet One Pe... 11
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 1 hr The swamiji 7,718
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 2 hr Freebird USA 177,911
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 3 hr dollarsbill 8,459
More from around the web