Prove there's a god.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640570 Jul 14, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
word salad and solopsism...
Enough innocents have been exonerated after the death penalty was handed down in countries which actually have due process to know that the death penalty and ANY form of capital punishment are very very wrong. To have the death penalty in countries with APPALLING human rights records and a system of 'justice'(and I use the term loosely) which is not fit for purpose is simply par for the course.
As the state, which is the entity which has the monopoly on coercive force...you apply those ethics to yourself, first and foremost.
If someone cuts off my hand for stealing a loaf of bread because I was hungry, do I then have the ability to get a job and pay my way?
No I do not! I am labelled as a thief and beyond redemption, nor do I have two hands to carry out manual labour, SO I AM REDUCED TO STEALING AGAIN.
...why am I even typing this to a fanatic.
Indeed. It's an absurd system.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640571 Jul 14, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Surely you would realise that it is nowhere near as simple as you portray.
It's not as simple as "He stole! Chop his hand!" or "He murdered! Chop his head!". I don't know of any country in the world that carries out law like that, nor would I ever accept such a system as civilized.
Murder and theft are always handled on a case by case basis. No two cases are the same. Circumstances, and how definitive the evidence is, the plea, past offenses, and a whole host of other things. It all counts. Punishment by chopping is only to be used in extreme cases. Deliberate pre-meditated murder, career theft, serial killing.
And a person with 1 hand can find work, and it is reasonable to expect that the person would not steal, and behave in a trustworthy manner at least for the sake of keeping his remaining hand.
You are on the extreme left. You are a fanatic, so anyone who's not on the extreme left would look like fanatics to you.
I wouldn't quite call disagreeing with dismemberment and execution via beheading "extreme."

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#640572 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
get some help...seriously!
take your own advice

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#640573 Jul 14, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Blasphemy.
It's scary indey.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640574 Jul 14, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
Josephus on jesus:
"So...I was having a rip roaring time in Rome, I had just gorged myself on suckling pig and I was off to the vomitorium for the sixth time while contemplating a visit to the local brothel.....oh and by the way there was this dude in the province of judea who was OBVIOUSLY THE SON OF GOD.....when I discovered that some little urchin had picked my toga and I found myself financially embarassed, so I had to get a sub from Marcus Graxus Platypus, and you know what he's like, he'll never let me forget it....JESUS IS LORD OK!"
...seems legit.
Lol... really not that far from the truth.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#640575 Jul 14, 2013
uidiotRaceMAKEWORLDPEACE wrote:
<quoted text> the bad US military and hired gunslingers need mass murder the Bison and Indians before r ailroad can be build! Stop defending evil!
I think your version of history is a bit biased, The earliest such railroad, built from Quincy, Mass. to the Neponset River dates from 1826, and in the next year another was built in Pennsylvania from the coal mines in Carbon County to the Lehigh River
Between the Rocky Mountains and the States lying along the Mississippi River on the west, from Minnesota to Louisiana, the whole country was one vast buffalo range, inhabited by millions of buffaloes. One could fill a volume with the records of plainsmen and pioneers who penetrated or crossed that vast region between 1800 and 1870, and were in turn surprised, astounded, and frequently dismayed by the tens of thousands of buffaloes they observed, avoided, or escaped from. They lived and moved as no other quadrupeds ever have, in great multitudes, like grand armies in review, covering scores of square miles at once. They were so numerous they frequently stopped boats in the rivers, threatened to overwhelm travelers on the plains, and in later years derailed locomotives and cars, until railway engineers learned by experience the wisdom of stopping their trains whenever there were buffaloes crossing the track.
The primary cause of the buffalo's extermination, and the one which embraced all others, was the descent of civilization, with all its elements of destructiveness, upon the whole of the country inhabited by that animal. From the Great Slave Lake to the Rio Grande the home of the buffalo was everywhere overrun by the man with a gun; and, as has ever been the case, the wild creatures were gradually swept away, the largest and most conspicuous forms being the first to go.

The secondary cuases of the extermination of the buffalo may be catalogued as follows:

(1) Man's reckless greed, his wanton destructiveness, and improvidence in not husbanding such resources as come to him from the hand of nature ready made.(2) The total and utterly inexcusable absence of protective measures and agencies on the part of the National Government and of the Western States and Territories.(3) The fatal preference on the part of hunters generally, both white and red, for the robe and flesh of the cow over that furnished by the bull,(4) The phenomenal stupidity of the animals themselves, and their indifference to man.(5) The perfection of modern breech-loading rifles and other sporting fire-arms in general...

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640576 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh hem! Look around you Scar...I don't care how many different scenarios you come up with for it to happen or how many different molecules you try to place together. I don't have the scientific data to back it up...right off the top of my head, but I would guarentee since Darwin proposed the idea in the 1870/ there have been countless failed experiments. And beyond that, nature itself, which supposedly caused this magnificent phenomena to occur, has never repeated the act again. If what I said boggles your mind...you're easily boggled. It's pretty simple math.
You are basing your "nature has never done this again" argument on how large a slice of the universe?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#640577 Jul 14, 2013

“LOL Really?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#640578 Jul 14, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
He did too~/.
Imagine his surprise when "she" turned over.

We all look like sisters when we bend over. It's the duct tape that gives it away.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640579 Jul 14, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Unable to dispute any of it, huh?
It doesn't need to be disputed. Any large enough volume of quackery will hit on a few things. How do you think the bible would fare if we subjected every single claim in it to scientific scrutiny? Yes, I know you would claim "metaphor," but that's besides the point. You can't pick and choose, and you can't take the word of scientists when it confirms your beliefs but discard it when it contradicts your beliefs (the flood, etc).

Also, you can't claim the few "scientific claims" of the bible to be indicative of its truth if you won't allow that same logic to apply to any religious text.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640580 Jul 14, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>

We all have our skills but we all rely on each other's skills as well.
A profound breakthrough.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#640581 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
are you a scientists?
for you

what would make someone a scientist?
uidiotRaceMAKEWO RLDPEACE

United States

#640582 Jul 14, 2013
oneear69 wrote:
The “Corporate Criminal’s” need to secure a business’s profitability is no different in basis than the “General Criminal’s” need to survive. While the latter typically commits crimes to live, the former commits crimes to further secure their positions of power, lifestyle and wealth. It is based on fear.
The notion of “Greed”, which manifests from a perpetual insecurity derived from the fear of losing
what one has, serves as the motivating factor for most corporate crimes. It is like a gambling
addiction. The more you get, the more you want. This neurosis is perpetuated/reinforced by the
social stratification that the monetary system creates, for there is a never-ending progression of
“luxuries” available as one’s purchasing power increases (i.e.: mansions, yachts, limos, diamonds,
land, etc). More on this will be addressed in the next section:“The Distortion of Values”.
Government Crime is one of the more complex and difficult forms of conduct to consider, for
perception of government is highly modified by the prevailing values this “ruling class” perpetuates
through society, via the mass media and traditional jingoism. In other words, if we look back at the
horrors of Hitler, many often forget that many of the German people also maintained the anti-
Semitic value system, propagated by the regime through pamphlets and broadcasts. The same can be
said for the US Invasion of Iraq, which was fueled initially by public support, simply because of the
hate and fear of so called “Islamic terrorists”, generated by the attacks of September 11th 2001. That
being said, let’s put aside our traditionalized values of loyalty and “patriotism” and take an objective look at what government within a Monetary System actually is and represents.
How many wars US been in since inception of a nation, a warring Empire !

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640583 Jul 14, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagus_nerve
Let your heart stop and see what it does to your thinking. Change the circuitry and you change the values your brain and heart synched to since you were born. A transplant will do just that. You won't have the same neural connections nor as I mentioned the same DNA info passing. There will be a scar tissue effect in those neural connections on a transplant. This will throw your physical thinking off on the lowest autonomic scale. This will in turn affect your physical conscious thinking. You will always have this nagging something ain't right feeling working on your psyche. The best you can do is train your thinking to accept that, which will require neural additions and changes in the brain. In a strictly material consciousness sense, the belief that consciousness is strictly physical, there can only be an action/reaction sequence trying to correct the situation, and not one under control. Trial and error. You can't really "train" yourself to make corrections unless you have something beyond the purely physical guiding the process.
Dave, this is the problem with extrapolating your knowledge of circuitry to *everything.* There is certainly the possibility that having a transplant might "mess with your head" in a purely psychological sense, but if you are asserting that any changes in consciousness would be a direct, physical result of the transplant, that's pure nonsense.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#640584 Jul 14, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Imagine his surprise when "she" turned over.
We all look like sisters when we bend over. It's the duct tape that gives it away.
<RiversideRedneck> "nnNNN...MANO...?"

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#640585 Jul 14, 2013
oneear69 wrote:
Again and I have now asked this question many times now, since this form is "Prove there's a god", could you give proof of the person named jesus christ, ever existing, or is it a story derived from the changing of the winter solstice.Or more specifically, the winter solstice and our solar systems movement in our Milky Way Galaxy, known to some as the changing of the Ages,or Astrology.The mapping of our constellations.As the Egyptians , Mayans,Native Americans, Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, and Chinese calenders have all done, in all continents, of all civilizations, of different times of mankinds social history.
the Fabrication of the jesus the christ story does not rise to that level, it is plagiarized mythology.
uidiotRaceMAKEWO RLDPEACE

United States

#640586 Jul 14, 2013
oneear69 wrote:
<quoted text>I think your version of history is a bit biased, The earliest such railroad, built from Quincy, Mass. to the Neponset River dates from 1826, and in the next year another was built in Pennsylvania from the coal mines in Carbon County to the Lehigh River
Between the Rocky Mountains and the States lying along the Mississippi River on the west, from Minnesota to Louisiana, the whole country was one vast buffalo range, inhabited by millions of buffaloes. One could fill a volume with the records of plainsmen and pioneers who penetrated or crossed that vast region between 1800 and 1870, and were in turn surprised, astounded, and frequently dismayed by the tens of thousands of buffaloes they observed, avoided, or escaped from. They lived and moved as no other quadrupeds ever have, in great multitudes, like grand armies in review, covering scores of square miles at once. They were so numerous they frequently stopped boats in the rivers, threatened to overwhelm travelers on the plains, and in later years derailed locomotives and cars, until railway engineers learned by experience the wisdom of stopping their trains whenever there were buffaloes crossing the track.
The primary cause of the buffalo's extermination, and the one which embraced all others, was the descent of civilization, with all its elements of destructiveness, upon the whole of the country inhabited by that animal. From the Great Slave Lake to the Rio Grande the home of the buffalo was everywhere overrun by the man with a gun; and, as has ever been the case, the wild creatures were gradually swept away, the largest and most conspicuous forms being the first to go.
The secondary cuases of the extermination of the buffalo may be catalogued as follows:
(1) Man's reckless greed, his wanton destructiveness, and improvidence in not husbanding such resources as come to him from the hand of nature ready made.(2) The total and utterly inexcusable absence of protective measures and agencies on the part of the National Government and of the Western States and Territories.(3) The fatal preference on the part of hunters generally, both white and red, for the robe and flesh of the cow over that furnished by the bull,(4) The phenomenal stupidity of the animals themselves, and their indifference to man.(5) The perfection of modern breech-loading rifles and other sporting fire-arms in general...
Better rethink the Redman did NOT kill for sport but for food only if necessary! The greedy White man are real invaders and mass murders of the many Bison aand Indians!

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640587 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
I do focus on the beginning and still hold that "believes" is the key word...because they aren't saying we believe something to be true because we "have" clear evidence...they are saying we believe X provides clear evidence. Does that make sense?
I mean to say "provides clear evidence" is the key statement without focusing on the fact that only believe X provides clear evidence, is misleading. How different would that statement be if they had said, "The research team (found) the presence of amino acids in these meteorites (providing) clear evidence that the early solar system was richer in life&#146;s raw materials than previously thought and that these materials may have helped to kick-start life on this planet."
I don't know how scientists talk...but as a lay person...that would sufficiently ease some of my skepticism. The fact that they only "believe" the presence of amino acids provides evidence...and do not know...leads to greater skepticism.
As for making an authoritative pronouncement such as "there's no way abiogenesis occured"...well to be honest, I don't believe, until science can provide evidence to the contrary, it would take a scientist to conclude that. On most scientific theories, hypotheses, and/or ideas...yes, I agree, one might need a fairly decent background in science in order to argue. But, on Abiogenesis...I don't necessarily agree, considering what the idea proposes. I mean any lay individual can pretty well figure out, just from observation of nature...non-living things don't suddenly spring into life. When science can give the world a reason to believe otherwise, even it's it's just a singular event, then....yes...one might have to retract such a staement.
But...to prevent coming off as insulting, which I really don't want to do...I'll say this..."I don't believe science can demonstrate that".
:)
Every natural scientist from before plato up until a few centuries ago would like a word with you. It used to be quite obvious that life sprung from non life all the time. You owe your knowledge of the falsity of spontaneous generation to modern science.

My point being - no, the average lay person is not a reasonable authority on whether or not something is possible. The average lay person would have believed in spontaneous generation a few centuries ago (so did the scientists), and we now know that it doesn't happen because of modern science.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640588 Jul 14, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Every natural scientist from before plato up until a few centuries ago would like a word with you. It used to be quite obvious that life sprung from non life all the time. You owe your knowledge of the falsity of spontaneous generation to modern science.
My point being - no, the average lay person is not a reasonable authority on whether or not something is possible. The average lay person would have believed in spontaneous generation a few centuries ago (so did the scientists), and we now know that it doesn't happen because of modern science.
If we go off what appears "obvious" to the lay person, then it is quite obvious that life comes from non life. Leave some meat out for a few days. Poof - life appears on it.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#640589 Jul 14, 2013
Here is something to keep in mind as you read this article. Ask yourself this question. Could historic passages have been forged? Could the volumes of the historians have been tampered with? The answer is: yes they could have. Where were these historic volumes stored? In the local public library? In individuals' private homes? No. They were in the posession of the Church, who studied from them and made copies of them. In what form did these writings take? On a typeset page, bound like a modern book? No. The printing press was not invented for a further 1300 years. The fact that the Church could write means that the forgeries could have been made. The Church had the opportunity, the means, and the motive to forge historical documents.

This simple truth is widely admitted by Christian scholars. One case in point is our first example: Josephus Flavius, a famous historian. There are two alleged mentions of Jesus in his histories. The first of them, the more extensive and more famous one, is no longer quoted by Christian scholars. That is because they know it is a blatant Christian forgery. The second passage is still in use.

"Josephus, the renowned Jewish historian, was a native of Judea. He was born in 37 A. D., and was a contemporary of the Apostles. He was, for a time, Governor of Galilee, the province in which Christ lived and taught. He traversed every part of this province and visited the places where but a generation before Christ had performed his prodigies. He resided in Cana, the very city in which Christ is said to have wrought his first miracle. He mentions every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event which occurred there during the first seventy years of the Christian era. But Christ was of too little consequence and his deeds too trivial to merit a line from this historian's pen." (Remsberg, Ibid.)

But first things first. Josephus was not a contemporary historian. He was born in the year 37 C.E., several years after Jesus' alleged death. There is no way he could have known about Jesus from is own personal experience. At best, he could have recorded the activities of the new cult of Christianity, and what they said about their crucified leader. So, even if Josephus wrote about Jesus, it is not a credible source. The first "Jesus Passage" is discussed below. The paragraph on Jesus was added to Josephus's work at the beginning of the 4th century, during Constantine's reign, probably by or under the order of Bishop Eusebius, who was known for saying that it was permissible for Christians to lie in order to further the Kingdom of God. This behavior is justified directly in the New Testament, where Paul writes in the 3rd Chapter of Romans: "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?"

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
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 min As It Is 26,213
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 min Gods r Delusion x... 685,757
David Duke: "We're going to take our country ba... 2 hr Doctor REALITY 58
to Maria Chapelle-Nadal: it's time to ROLL, sista' 3 hr Doctor REALITY 1
I hate Haiti (Jan '10) 4 hr Anne Nonymiss 109
"BIGGEST SCAM in WORLD HISTORY...." 5 hr YTube 1st 1
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 hr Here For Now 619,748
More from around the web