The Religion Discussion

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

also, judging from the intelligence you have shown in your replies, i'm willing to bet you have NO idea how the formulas you posted work.. sad..

he doesnt, he is just copy and pasting
http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... -astronomy

those sites are myopic and if the reader cannot or will not think for themselves they will blindly believe it.

[bluefete]

There are only two ways to live your life:

One is as though nothing is a miracle.

The other is as though everything is a miracle.


Albert Einstein

[ITR]

I think that people who claim to believe in god do not really do so. They just wish to believe because they feel their lives are meaningless without god, and so they choose to close their eyes to evidence against the existence of god. There are so many scientific evidence/reasons for the non-existence yet you can carry on a thread of 44 pages.

it's all just wishful thinking. If you come to think of it, the bible have no proof of the existence of God.

In simple terms: santa clause, the tooth fairy and monsters under the bed are not real, neither is this god you speak of. Just a bunch of childhood memories you get from your parents. Get a life....

This thread is a total waste of f***ing time and bs on my part.

Most of us were raised to believe god and as we became older we realise these things weren't true. What happens to the ones who never heard of this god, will they die and go to hell? Is not there fault they dont know. What happens then:?:

Time to grow up.

next thread please

[ITR]

When was the last time you played marble pitch?

[MG Man]

this sheit still here?
WTF
y'all need to make a run down Villa and work some miracles

[bluefete]

Strange: The History Channel just showed how a pyroclastic flow from the Krakatoa eruption in 1883, in a matter of hours, formed imposing land cliffs. Part of the series on How The Earth Was Made.

This was due to the force and speed of the flows.

But of course this could not happen from an evolutionary perspective because God did not know what he was doing and evolution requires a very long time line.

Another amazing thing: All the licks you people have dished out have proven, to me at least, just how frustrated you are by your inabilities to disprove God's existence.

This frustration even shows in the wonderful array of names, you have chosen to call me. That is okay. I am used to it.

All you have done is attack where I got my info from without disproving it.

Remember my argument has always been that early writers of the scripture were given an insight into the creation process and so recorded it long before evolutionists came along to try and discredit God's existence.

Your arguments have been that without a clear rational, scientific explanation, then nothing that the scripture states is true or can be believed.

You guys have got it so wrong, it is not funny.

You have continually left out the fact that what was written was written. Even if you want to argue about how it was phrased, it does not change the fact that all you are discovering now as scientists and logical thinkers is what God had already plainly stated for the average Joe.

But nothwithstanding, I pray that God will continue to Bless all of you anyway and that one day you will realize that your Blessings in life do not come from your great abilities and talents but are given to you by the same God whom you deny.

"Blessed are you , when men shall revile you, ... and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad; for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets before you." (Matthew 5:11-12)

"But I say unto you, ... bless them that curse you ... " (Matthew 5:44)

[MG Man]

u still quotin from dat science fiction novel hoss?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

There are only two ways to live your life:

One is as though nothing is a miracle.

The other is as though everything is a miracle.


Albert Einstein

^ how true.

You do realise that Einstein is proving your theories wrong.

Do you think the innocent people and children that die in natural disasters is a miracle? You think AIDS and cancer are miracles? You think when a mother loses her 3 year old to painful leukemia that is a miracle?

[bluefete]

u still quotin from dat science fiction novel hoss?

Yes. There are some great tenets for living a productive, fruitful life in there.

Ah boy MGMan - We are definitely responsible for our own existence, not so?

[bluefete]

There are only two ways to live your life:

One is as though nothing is a miracle.

The other is as though everything is a miracle.


Albert Einstein

^ how true.

You do realise that Einstein is proving your theories wrong.

Do you think the innocent people and children that die in natural disasters is a miracle? You think AIDS and cancer are miracles? You think when a mother loses her 3 year old to painful leukemia that is a miracle?

Albert Einstein claimed to be an agnostic.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/einstein.html

Life & death co-exist at this point in human existence.

There is Too Much Evil and Suffering For God to Exist?
by Rich Deem

Atheists often claim that the presence of evil is an argument against the existence of God. The Christian God is supposed to be both loving and all-powerful. Despite these characteristics, God seems to be unable or unwilling to prevent the vast amount of evil and suffering in the world. The atheist concludes that either God is not loving or not all-powerful or that God does not exist, because if He did exist, He could stop all the suffering. The atheistic arguments contain some subtle assumptions that, as I will show, do not apply to the God of the Bible and His created universe. Even the assumption that evil and suffering are bad for us must be questioned in light of what the Bible says. This page specifically defends the principle that moral evil must exist. Another page examines the reasons why natural evil must exist. Although many atheists claim the presence of moral evil precludes the existence of God, others admit that God would be completely justified in allowing moral evil.1

The atheists' logical argument

What I have found is that atheists like to say that their arguments against God's existence specifically exclude the God of the Bible as a God who could exist. However, in reality, atheists produce generic arguments against a generic God whose characteristics and creation do not match those that are described in the Bible. Atheists may not accept what the Bible says, but they cannot say the God of the Bible cannot logically exist and then ignore what the Bible has to say about the characteristics of God. If the atheist states that the God of the Bible is logically impossible, he cannot pick and choose which arguments from the Bible to accept in order to "prove" his point. Let's formalize the atheist's arguments:

1. God is all-powerful, loving, and perfect.
2. A perfect, loving God would create a universe that was perfect (e.g., no evil and suffering).
3. The universe is not perfect but contains evil and suffering.

Therefore, God does not exist.

The Bible's Response

The Bible does state that God is "all powerful." In the Old Testament, one of God's titles is "El Shadday," which is translated "God Almighty."2 The Bible also states that God is loving.3 In fact, the Bible indicates that God is love.4 The Bible also indicates that God is perfect.5 So, we can agree that the first statement is a correct interpretation of what the Bible says about the characteristics of God.

The next statement indicates that a perfect, loving God must create a universe that is perfect. This is the statement that is false and invalidates the argument. Nowhere does the Bible state that the universe was created to be perfect. God Himself called it "good"6 and "very good,"7 but never "perfect." In fact, God Himself stated that part of the original creation was "not good."8 The Bible states that the current universe is not perfect,9 but was designed to be temporary10 and will be replaced with a perfect universe11 that will be permanent.12 Science also tells us that the universe was designed to be temporary.13

Why two creations instead of one?

Why would God create an imperfect, temporary universe only to replace it later with a perfect one? Why wouldn't God have created a perfect universe in the first place? This is a good question, but shows a lack of understanding of the biblical reason of why God created the universe. One can find the reason for the creation of the universe in the first few chapters of the Bible. God created humans in order to have a personal relationship with them, which He had with Adam and Eve before they sinned (Genesis 2). Jesus said that the first and foremost commandment was to "Love the Lord your God..."14 A personal relationship, characterized by the possibility of love, is only possible if created beings are given free will. If God had created the universe with no possibility of evil or sin, then the created beings would have had no free will, and, as such, would essentially be programmed computers. Such beings would be incapable of love, since love involves making a choice - which requires the ability to choose not to love. For example, I can program my computer to say "I love you" when it starts up. Does this mean that the computer really loves me? Of course not! Likewise, God could have programmed humans to say that they loved Him, without the possibility of rejecting Him or performing evil deeds. However, these programmed beings would exhibit about as much true love as my computer - not a very satisfying relationship. Therefore, God created the universe for the express purpose of allowing free will spiritual beings the opportunity to have fellowship with Him (and likewise, reject Him).

Read The rest here:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... ering.html

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

so you were quoting from an agnostic and agreeing with him?
you love contradicting yourself?

the sites you are quoting from their examples are flawed:
Take the last example you made here

[ For example, I can program my computer to say "I love you" when it starts up. Does this mean that the computer really loves me? Of course not! Likewise, God could have programmed humans to say that they loved Him, without the possibility of rejecting Him or performing evil deeds. However, these programmed beings would exhibit about as much true love as my computer - not a very satisfying relationship. Therefore, God created the universe for the express purpose of allowing free will spiritual beings the opportunity to have fellowship with Him (and likewise, reject Him).

We do not yet have the ability to make a computer have real feelings. So the most we CAN do is to make the computer only say the words.
However if God is all powerful then he can make us say AND feel it and anything else he wants. So why doesn't he?

Even if God just loved to see a soul freely accept God and each soul is important to God then why extinguish lives before they have the opportunity to realise God and the Bible? That's a waste of souls don't you think?

Bluefete if you are so right then this should have been an easy argument for you to win in 4 pages, however at 44 pages you are struggling to find sites on Google to quote and read from that support your point of view while the rest of us are using common sense and logic to refute you successfully, page by page, for the past 44 pages!


Oh and you never answered to my rebuttal

^ you've heard of blind faith - this seems to be blind, deaf and dumb faith.

DFC: If you create a robot and gave it free will, will that robot ever be higher than you?

Let's say you give the robot artificial intelligence, would that robot ever be smarter than you, who made it?

Why abrogate unto yourself, a power that you do not and will never have?

oh dear
every day man makes computers and machines that are more capable than we are. A computer can do complex calculations that we cannot humanly do - yet WE created computers. Robots are known to be stronger, faster, more resilient and less prone to error - already that is superior to their creator.

Another thing to think about:
Man is far from perfect. If we make robots with AI and free will, are we their God? should we insist that they pray to us and fear us? Would it be immoral to do so?

Luckily though with their intelligence and heuristics the robots will be smart and logical enough to know not to write texts about their creator and fill it with feelings, emotions, stories and ideas to make themselves feel comfortable in the universe.

[Gladiator]

Strange: The History Channel just showed how a pyroclastic flow from the Krakatoa eruption in 1883, in a matter of hours, formed imposing land cliffs. Part of the series on How The Earth Was Made.

This was due to the force and speed of the flows.

But of course this could not happen from an evolutionary perspective because God did not know what he was doing and evolution requires a very long time line.

What does land formations have to do with evolution......whats your point here...

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ LOL - I think he is saying that since he saw a mountain made in a couple of hours on TV proves how God made the earth in a week.

the thing is, he says evolution "requires a very long time" but that's for ANIMALS, not land masses

[bluefete]

so you were quoting from an agnostic and agreeing with him?
you love contradicting yourself?

the sites you are quoting from their examples are flawed:
Take the last example you made here

[ For example, I can program my computer to say "I love you" when it starts up. Does this mean that the computer really loves me? Of course not! Likewise, God could have programmed humans to say that they loved Him, without the possibility of rejecting Him or performing evil deeds. However, these programmed beings would exhibit about as much true love as my computer - not a very satisfying relationship. Therefore, God created the universe for the express purpose of allowing free will spiritual beings the opportunity to have fellowship with Him (and likewise, reject Him).

We do not yet have the ability to make a computer have real feelings. So the most we CAN do is to make the computer only say the words.
However if God is all powerful then he can make us say AND feel it and anything else he wants. So why doesn't he?

Even if God just loved to see a soul freely accept God and each soul is important to God then why extinguish lives before they have the opportunity to realise God and the Bible? That's a waste of souls don't you think?

Bluefete if you are so right then this should have been an easy argument for you to win in 4 pages, however at 44 pages you are struggling to find sites on Google to quote and read from that support your point of view while the rest of us are using common sense and logic to refute you successfully, page by page, for the past 44 pages!


Oh and you never answered to my rebuttal

^ you've heard of blind faith - this seems to be blind, deaf and dumb faith.

DFC: If you create a robot and gave it free will, will that robot ever be higher than you?

Let's say you give the robot artificial intelligence, would that robot ever be smarter than you, who made it?

Why abrogate unto yourself, a power that you do not and will never have?

oh dear
every day man makes computers and machines that are more capable than we are. A computer can do complex calculations that we cannot humanly do - yet WE created computers. Robots are known to be stronger, faster, more resilient and less prone to error - already that is superior to their creator.

Another thing to think about:
Man is far from perfect. If we make robots with AI and free will, are we their God? should we insist that they pray to us and fear us? Would it be immoral to do so?

Luckily though with their intelligence and heuristics the robots will be smart and logical enough to know not to write texts about their creator and fill it with feelings, emotions, stories and ideas to make themselves feel comfortable in the universe.

Duane: There you go again. I did not contradict myself. Einstein's statement gave 2 choices. I just placed them in the public domain. It so happens that I agree with ONE of the choices. You guess . That does not make me an agnostic.

God even uses agnostics/atheists to show people his created beauty.

So one day we will make robots that can experience emos, right?

All the AI in the world will not a human-robot make. You miss the key word - Artificial- meaning not Natural. Robots can be "programmed". They do not have the capacity to experience natural feelings as God gave us.

More importantly, they do not have free will. That is the major distinction that we cannot programme into them. The choice to do good or evil.

(Robocop nothwithstanding - but then he was part-robot, much like the $6 Million Dollar Man).

Robots are not made to live forever. They did not originally start off from that perspective. Humans were created within a broader strategic plan (Methinks, I repeat myself here).

Remember it is Religion NOT God that has the world in a mess. If there were so many different Gods and not just one God, why do humans of different religions share so many similarities?

I mean, if there are so many creating Gods how come they made us to come out the same passageway? Do they have the same blueprint?

Why do we ALL have to die? How come one religion does not have the "dibs" on people living "naturally" forever?

I suppose you will tell me that it is all part of the natural evolutionary process that applies only to Animals.

So therefore, leaving God out of the equation, we are born into a natural, imperfect world; conditioned into its natural, imperfect society; live according to its natural imperfect laws; and then die a natural/accidental death - and that is it. There is nothing to look forward too thereafter. And this has been the natural way of the world for thousands (billions -according to you & others) of years.

This seems a recipe for me, according to MGMan, to go to Villa/Seamen or whatever it is called & live it up because once I dead, that's it.

Our existence therefore becomes according to the song by Kansas - "Dust in the Wind".

That misses the beauty of God. He lays out the parameters and allows us to go whichever way we choose but there are consequences for either choice.

Let me share something with you. My grandmother died in 1945, decades before I was born. Prior to her death, while she was in the hospital, she said this lady came to her and told her that she would return for her at a particular date and time. My grandmother asked the lady if she could have some time to finalize her earthly matters. So she gave her one month.

About 2 minutes after this, my uncle and father visited her and she immediately asked them if they saw a woman in the corridor. They said no.

One month later to the day, she died.

What does this prove? Nothing - To You. A Lot - To Me.

[bluefete]

^ LOL - I think he is saying that since he saw a mountain made in a couple of hours on TV proves how God made the earth in a week.

the thing is, he says evolution "requires a very long time" but that's for ANIMALS, not land masses

Now you guys are being disingenuous again. So it is okay to say the universe started with a big bang from which everything Evolved but now you only want to apply it to people/animals. Come on. Logic??

Is either it did or it did not!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, sorry, again. Evolution does not consider how life started; only that we came from a branch of the monkey family.

Good going, there.

[Jonathan]

Geebus Kerrrr-ist, this thread is frustrating to read!

[Razkal]

^the trick is to not read anything by bluefete, it becomes more manageable and sensible...

[16 cycles]

[quote="bluefete"][quote="16 cycles"]please don't lock as yet, waiting for the following

[quote="bluefete"]
Recession of the Moon:
As the moon orbits the earth, its gravity pulls on the earth's oceans, causing tides. Since the earth rotates faster than the moon orbits, the tidal bulges induced by the moon are always "ahead" of the moon.

ok.....but what about the other parameters that contribute to tidal variations? e.g. Sun as well as other astronomical variables...take for example spring tides...ref spring and neap tides

For this reason the tides actually "pull forward" on the moon, which causes the moon to gain energy and gradually spiral outward.

if what you are proposing is true, how can i pull something and cause it to move away? do you have any equations to support your pull theory to increase the orbital acceleration of the moon? if this is so, what causes low tides? if the tides are causing the moon to continually spiral outwards, then a force like that over 6000 yrs would fling the moon out of its orbit

The moon moves about an inch and a half farther away from the earth each year because of this tidal interaction. Thus the moon would have been closer to the earth in the past.

see above question and take into account the G=Mm/r.r to factor in land masses into working out tidal variations

6,000 years ago, the moon would have been about 800 feet closer to the earth. So this 'spiralling away" of the moon is not a problem over the biblical time scale of 6,000 years, but if the earth & moon were over 4 billion years old (as the big-bang supporters say), then we have big problems.

use your equations and put a value to that orbital force from "tidal pull". Your assumption seems to be flawed into thinking that the moon is constantly spiralling outwards due to tidal interaction. Perhaps it oscillates in its orbit?

This is because the moon would have been so close that it actually would have been touching the earth less than 1.5 billion years ago. This suggests that the moon cannot possibly be as old as secular astronomers claim.

again, please review your linear assumption of constant push due to tidal interaction - what causes low tides then?

Secular astronomers who assume the big bang is true must invoke other explanations to get around this.

For example, they might assume that the rate at which the moon was receding was actually smaller in the past but this is an extra assumption needed to make their billions-of-years model work. why still assume linearity in your model? many things in nature have already proven themselves to be of exponential nature - ref any quantum physics book or the red bean experiment from standard 4

The simplest explanation is that the moon has not been around that long. The recession of the moon is a problem for a belief in billions of years, but is perfectly consistent with a young age.

if based on your theory of linearity - and not accounting for all the other astronomical variables that help induce tidal variations and a little bit of fairy dust - yeah, maybe?

DETAILED EXPLANATION:

Tidal bulges develop on earth because the moon is closer to one side of the earth than the other, and thus its gravity pulls harder on the near side. This causes the overall shape of the earth to be slightly elliptical.

[color]you forgot the effect of the sun as well, spring and neap, diurnal, semi-diurnal[/color]

The height of the tidal bulges would be greater if the moon were closer to the earth. The earth rotates faster than the moon revolves; thus, the tidal bulges are always ahead of the moon.

Since they pull forward on the moon, the bulges transfer angular momentum and kinetic energy, increasing the moon's orbital energy and causing it to move away from the earth. The rate of this recession is approximately proportional to the inverse sixth power of the earth-moon distance.

This can be show, roughly, as follows:

The tidal bulges are approximated as a dipole (2 points separated from the centre of the earth). The dipole separation is proportional to: l / r³, where r is the earth-moon separation.

So the tidal-bulge height would be roughly: h = l / r³

However, the forces with which the tidal bulges pull back on the moon also goes as h / r³ for a given height (h). So we should expect the rate of tidal recession to be approximately l / râ

[hydroep]

LOL...here's the proof:



When yuh doh have any is better to just make up some...

[QG]

There are only two ways to live your life:

One is as though nothing is a miracle.

The other is as though everything is a miracle.


Albert Einstein

^ how true.

You do realise that Einstein is proving your theories wrong.

Do you think the innocent people and children that die in natural disasters is a miracle? You think AIDS and cancer are miracles? You think when a mother loses her 3 year old to painful leukemia that is a miracle?

Albert Einstein claimed to be an agnostic.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/einstein.html

Life & death co-exist at this point in human existence.

There is Too Much Evil and Suffering For God to Exist?
by Rich Deem

Atheists often claim that the presence of evil is an argument against the existence of God. The Christian God is supposed to be both loving and all-powerful. Despite these characteristics, God seems to be unable or unwilling to prevent the vast amount of evil and suffering in the world. The atheist concludes that either God is not loving or not all-powerful or that God does not exist, because if He did exist, He could stop all the suffering. The atheistic arguments contain some subtle assumptions that, as I will show, do not apply to the God of the Bible and His created universe. Even the assumption that evil and suffering are bad for us must be questioned in light of what the Bible says. This page specifically defends the principle that moral evil must exist. Another page examines the reasons why natural evil must exist. Although many atheists claim the presence of moral evil precludes the existence of God, others admit that God would be completely justified in allowing moral evil.1

The atheists' logical argument

What I have found is that atheists like to say that their arguments against God's existence specifically exclude the God of the Bible as a God who could exist. However, in reality, atheists produce generic arguments against a generic God whose characteristics and creation do not match those that are described in the Bible. Atheists may not accept what the Bible says, but they cannot say the God of the Bible cannot logically exist and then ignore what the Bible has to say about the characteristics of God. If the atheist states that the God of the Bible is logically impossible, he cannot pick and choose which arguments from the Bible to accept in order to "prove" his point. Let's formalize the atheist's arguments:

1. God is all-powerful, loving, and perfect.
2. A perfect, loving God would create a universe that was perfect (e.g., no evil and suffering).
3. The universe is not perfect but contains evil and suffering.

Therefore, God does not exist.

The Bible's Response

The Bible does state that God is "all powerful." In the Old Testament, one of God's titles is "El Shadday," which is translated "God Almighty."2 The Bible also states that God is loving.3 In fact, the Bible indicates that God is love.4 The Bible also indicates that God is perfect.5 So, we can agree that the first statement is a correct interpretation of what the Bible says about the characteristics of God.

The next statement indicates that a perfect, loving God must create a universe that is perfect. This is the statement that is false and invalidates the argument. Nowhere does the Bible state that the universe was created to be perfect. God Himself called it "good"6 and "very good,"7 but never "perfect." In fact, God Himself stated that part of the original creation was "not good."8 The Bible states that the current universe is not perfect,9 but was designed to be temporary10 and will be replaced with a perfect universe11 that will be permanent.12 Science also tells us that the universe was designed to be temporary.13

Why two creations instead of one?

Why would God create an imperfect, temporary universe only to replace it later with a perfect one? Why wouldn't God have created a perfect universe in the first place? This is a good question, but shows a lack of understanding of the biblical reason of why God created the universe. One can find the reason for the creation of the universe in the first few chapters of the Bible. God created humans in order to have a personal relationship with them, which He had with Adam and Eve before they sinned (Genesis 2). Jesus said that the first and foremost commandment was to "Love the Lord your God..."14 A personal relationship, characterized by the possibility of love, is only possible if created beings are given free will. If God had created the universe with no possibility of evil or sin, then the created beings would have had no free will, and, as such, would essentially be programmed computers. Such beings would be incapable of love, since love involves making a choice - which requires the ability to choose not to love. For example, I can program my computer to say "I love you" when it starts up. Does this mean that the computer really loves me? Of course not! Likewise, God could have programmed humans to say that they loved Him, without the possibility of rejecting Him or performing evil deeds. However, these programmed beings would exhibit about as much true love as my computer - not a very satisfying relationship. Therefore, God created the universe for the express purpose of allowing free will spiritual beings the opportunity to have fellowship with Him (and likewise, reject Him).

Read The rest here:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... ering.html

Good post Bluefete.
This takes us back to JOB, remember what SATAN did to him?
Satan plagued him, yet JOB was still faitful to God.
Satan got God's permission to attack JOB, but God said not to KILL him.

This leads me back to my older post...GOD TESTS OUR FAITH.
It's hard to deal with Cancer and other ailments, but the truth to it...WE ARE NOT HERE TO LIVE FOREVER.
We all have an appointment with DEATH....like it or not!

[MG Man]

'god tests our faith'

pffffffffffft
another retarded way religious types try to explain the random crap that occurs in life.....

[Skanky]

Friends,trinis lend me your ears.

This debate is fundamentally flawed for one simple reason....bluefete thought process(or lack thereof).

Those using science/logic/sense will admit that once it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt we will be willing to admit it exists....basically we can be swayed once the argument/evidence is sensible/logical etc.

bluefete et al, on the other hand whether we prove or disprove the existence of god(notwithstanding the evidence) will always believe there is a god.

So even though we are open to reason nothing youall can do will convince bluefete otherwise.

So allyuh beating a dead horse.

Is the night before the holiday...go and see if allyuh could logic allyuh way into some panties....at least dais more progress than you will ever make in this thread.

[bluefete]

'god tests our faith'

pffffffffffft
another retarded way religious types try to explain the random crap that occurs in life.....

Do you see yourself as a random occurrence? Conceptualized with a random sperm? Hitting a random egg? Having a life with no direction and no purpose? Being subjected to random crap?

"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born and a time to die ..." (Ecclesiastes 3:1-2)

"I know that whatsoever God doeth, it shall be forever: nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it; and God doeth it, that men should fear before him. That which hath been is now and that which is to be hath already been: and God required that which is past." (Ecclesiastes 3: 14-15)

[MG Man]

even if I believed in god, I would not put any faith in the bible
any religion that proclaims it is right is clearly wrong
you lose on all counts

[bluefete]

You keep mixing up religion and God. The 2 don't necessarily mix. If you put no faith in the Bible, Qu'ran, Gita, and so on; is this life all there is?

You guys are afraid of your own mortality. You are not a random mutation placed here by accident. There is a beautiful purpose for your existence (other than denying God down to the last) and in your denials, God is using you to help show others his existence.

The beauty of free will at a price.

[MG Man]

You keep mixing up religion and God. The 2 don't necessarily mix. If you put no faith in the Bible, Qu'ran, Gita, and so on; is this life all there is?

You guys are afraid of your own mortality. You are not a random mutation placed here by accident. There is a beautiful purpose for your existence (other than denying God down to the last) and in your denials, God is using you to help show others his existence.

The beauty of free will at a price.

you keep citing the bible as proof / evidence
do the math skippy

[bluefete]

And you keep ignoring the words that were written long before modern day instruments were invented to prove the writings.

[Gladiator]

And you keep ignoring the words that were written long before modern day instruments were invented to prove the writings.

And what about words written before those words you speak of.... there were books written beofore biblical texts you know....what makes this word you speak of the correct and best one of all...

At the end of the day you cant even read the language the word was written in so you leave it up to another person to translate.... how you so sure they tell you the right translations.

Finally you would think that a so important word should have been written on a material that can whitstand time like stone or metal... but instead it was written on organic paper that was almost disintegrated when found.

Whats your take on the dead sea scrolls and the gospel of judas.... these were proven to be authentic ancient texts from the biblical age, however your church and your religion deny its words although these texts have more info of the life and times of Jesus and his followers.

The truth is man that you have been fooled. The same vatican that wrote your bible excluded the material that they couldnt control and that were in the public domain (dead sea scrolls and Judas gospel) The information in these texts will weaken their grip on people like you and they dont want this.

Remember my friend, the white man were wandering tribes of plundering babarians at the same time the Chineese, Indians, Egyptians, babalonians etc were already civilized and had traditions, religions and teachings beyond any white mans imagination. Dont let them rule you now... get yourself out of mental slavery. If you want to follow religion and find a God, go back to your ancestry find what and where you came from and regain what was taken from you.

Colonialisation is still at large and the colonialists enslave your minds with this thinking..... come on man bluefete dont let them fool yuh.

[bluefete]

Gladiator: Good point.

But I still maintain, if there are so many other Gods for so many different beliefs, how is it that we share so many commonalities?

How is it that we have (generally) 5 fingers & toes, faces,eyes, noses?

How is it that we are born (generally) via a birth canal?

So, if there is not one God but many different Gods, how come we don't have some people laying eggs, others having babies through their mouths, others via the birth canal?

Is it that they all have the same blueprint for human reproduction, for example?

There is perfect symmetry in God's creations and while we may be born into different beliefs or none at all, it does not change the fact that there seems to have been one common design for humans.

For the evolutionists looking for the non-existent "missing link": Did we start off as egg layers and then evolve into having live births?

[Razkal]

^they found the missing link idiot. a fossil specimen found in europe, called Darwinius masillae, fondly called Ida...and very well documented in a link another user has been pestering you to check out a couple pages back. but you're too oblivious to real logic and grown-up reasoning...stick to the tales you've been reading, clearly you've done alright following that junk, and clearly nothing has prevented atheists from living comfortably...so i rather keep our sensible logic, seeing as even when forced down your throat (religious style) you still can't swallow the reality of things.