QUOTE (newguy+Dec 21 2005, 02:50 PM)
QUOTE (MessengerofSatan+)
Newdud should be proud that atheists think he's great. The reason RC think's he's great is because newdud fits into his Christian box - he acts like he thinks Christians should act - so he has him right where he wants him - right inside the box. Newdud worships a devilish version of god. As long as newdud does what RC expects, RC is safe. Got it? I, on the other hand, am actively persuing change, this is a direct threat to RC's security. Got it?
Messenger: You remind me of Jan Brady from the Brady Bunch. Always competing with Marcia. Well, how about it atheists??? Any of you "think I'm a dud"? Please, feel free to "chime in" on this one. So, let me see if I got this one straight... My "devilish version of god" causes me to cast out demons, confront religious hypocrites like me, lay my life down for your family, pray for the sick, give out Bibles, put everyone's life in jeopardy by preaching on street corners, etc., etc., etc. Silly me. I thought those were things that Jesus told His disciples to do. Like I said, He's "totally correct".
Newdud,
Sorry - but I don't see any competition here. You worship a devilish version of god - not even in the same league with the Creator God.
Why do you feel a need to tell me your good deeds - afraid they aren't adding up?
You should be comparing yourself to the devil - because that's who you resemble.
Uh, my funny bone just kicked in and I messed with your quote. Sorry.
Messenger: You remind me of Jan Brady from the Brady Bunch. Always competing with Marcia. Well, how about it atheists??? Any of you "think I'm a dud"? Please, feel free to "chime in" on this one. So, let me see if I got this one straight... My "devilish version of god" causes me to cast out demons, confront religious hypocrites like me, lay my life down for your family, pray for the sick, give out Bibles, put everyone's life in jeopardy by preaching on street corners, etc., etc., etc. Silly me. I thought those were things that Jesus told His disciples to do. Like I said, He's "totally correct".
Newdud,
Sorry - but I don't see any competition here. You worship a devilish version of god - not even in the same league with the Creator God.
Why do you feel a need to tell me your good deeds - afraid they aren't adding up?
You should be comparing yourself to the devil - because that's who you resemble.
Uh, my funny bone just kicked in and I messed with your quote. Sorry.
Messenger,
There is a chance I'm wrong here, but I'd hazard that I have not insulted you up to this point. I try to be patient and non-confrontational in my posts, the last of which was an obvious exception to this and for that I do apologise. Your responses to me have, however, been snappy and rude.
I do not have credentials yet. I have posted several times that I'm still in full time education and will begin my MChem degree next September. I like to think that I have shown I can be "reasonable at times" also. I never claimed to know a great deal about this subject, but I have done enough reading around it to spot bs when I see it.
I do not agree with Newguy calling you Messenger of Satan. Conversely, I do not agree with you calling him newdud, newdad, and so on. The second of these has, to me, a snide undertone of almost mockery.
Clearly not true - my presence here demonstrates this clearly. I've made a few, what I like to think are fairly logical and strong arguments given my limited knowledge and debating skills. I don't recall having any of these fall flat on its face. They've had their weaknesses and inaccuracies, naturally, and I concede this and work to rectify it in future. This is why I personally feel I'm basically accepted (or tolerated
) around here by the "bishops". If you made the same effort to be polite and would admit when you are wrong, we'd not end up having petty arguments like this.
Kaeroll
There is a chance I'm wrong here, but I'd hazard that I have not insulted you up to this point. I try to be patient and non-confrontational in my posts, the last of which was an obvious exception to this and for that I do apologise. Your responses to me have, however, been snappy and rude.
I do not have credentials yet. I have posted several times that I'm still in full time education and will begin my MChem degree next September. I like to think that I have shown I can be "reasonable at times" also. I never claimed to know a great deal about this subject, but I have done enough reading around it to spot bs when I see it.
I do not agree with Newguy calling you Messenger of Satan. Conversely, I do not agree with you calling him newdud, newdad, and so on. The second of these has, to me, a snide undertone of almost mockery.
QUOTE
You guys are just like religion - only priests and popes and bishops and what not - can speak - everyone else just be quiet and go away - you're worthless and useless and we don't like you - so please leave.
Clearly not true - my presence here demonstrates this clearly. I've made a few, what I like to think are fairly logical and strong arguments given my limited knowledge and debating skills. I don't recall having any of these fall flat on its face. They've had their weaknesses and inaccuracies, naturally, and I concede this and work to rectify it in future. This is why I personally feel I'm basically accepted (or tolerated
) around here by the "bishops". If you made the same effort to be polite and would admit when you are wrong, we'd not end up having petty arguments like this.Kaeroll
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 21 2005, 08:14 PM)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 21 2005, 01:16 AM)
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 21 2005, 05:39 AM)
Your mindset is one that causes you to look for ways to disprove any notion of any sort of god. What difference does it make to you if people believe in God?
Mess,
Believe it or not, I couldn't care less whether people believe in god or not. It's only when these people ALSO happen to be wilful ignoramuses who wish to deceitfully force OTHERS to do so 'by the back door' that alarm bells start ringing. And what gave you the idea that anyone wants to "disprove any notion of any sort of god"? We just observe and deduce the reality around us and apply the results as consistently as possible in that reality. Whether those results and that reality conflict with any one or other 'religious/superstitious text' is purely a matter for the relevant adherents to those texts. They can do what they like as long as their 'cognitive dissonance' does not impinge on others' rights and pursuit of objective reality for the long term benefit of humanity. That is all. The rest is YOUR problem and the problem of others in any similar 'religious/superstitious predicament' which the discovered objective reality puts you. Otherwise, we don't give a damn one way or the other. You and everyone else is free to believe what you like, as long as you don't foist either your 'religious/superstitious predicament' or your cognitive dissonance on others who DON'T have or want either, thank you very much.
Sincerely and without hatred of ANY kind; yours,
RealityCheck.
.
RC,
[[1]]You should care whether people believe or not - and you should respect them, regardless of their beliefs. All human beings deserve respect. That's the problem with evolution - you think that because we're 'animals' you can shove some of us under the carpet. All you do is succeed in making us angry, and it pushes us more into politics and into schools. Your original intent is destroyed.
[[2]]I don't give a dang one way or the other - whether scientists think we came from chimpanzees or bananas (it's obvious that you came from the banana choir section). Until science can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no God - then God is innocent and science is guilty of false witness.
[[3]]Science holds onto their superstiticious beliefs just as much as religion does. Science has been proven wrong time after time after time after time after time.
God still stands.
[[4]]Evolution is a myth, (if not, then prove it) a theory created by the godless for the godless. Atheists are its biggest followers (if not, then prove it). No fool in his right mind would believe in such a ridiculous myth if presented with all the material and allowed to peruse it in depth (if not, then prove it). Why are there no Christians on this forum spouting your nonsense? The only way you can get followers is to force small children to learn about evolution in school against their will or choice (if not, then prove it). That's why you don't want ID mentioned in school - kids might start thinking.
OMG!
[[5]]I have listed proof, theories, thoughts, and other ideas on why evolution is wrong. You ding dongs pick out some innocent comment from my posts and attack the poster. If I say Jesus is the reason for the season, you say it's not. If I say the sky is blue, you say it's not. You know nothing. You act like trolls, waste time and energy attacking the poster - you have a closed mind. Your mind is made up and there is no point in your being here other than to bug people. And that's a fact.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[[6]]Don't believe me? OK - prove it:
Please go back through my posts and respond to the legitimate arguments I have posted against evolution. Do it without attacking me personally - or people who believe in things the way I do.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Steveo,
Newdud should be proud that atheists think he's great. [[7]]The reason RC think's he's great is because newdud fits into his Christian box - he acts like he thinks Christians should act - so he has him right where he wants him - right inside the box. Newdud worships a devilish version of god. As long as newdud does what RC expects, RC is safe. Got it? I, on the other hand, am actively persuing change, this is a direct threat to RC's security. Got it?
You may think that I am not qualified to discuss science. [[8]]But I have not found much science being discussed in this Creation/Evolution section of PhysOrg - so I don't know how you could come to that conclusion. There is nothing but crapola coming from my opposition here.
Let's say for a moment that I (which I don't) concede to you that I may not be qualified to discuss science. [[9]] Well then, I would say to you that you are not qualified to talk about the things of God. You have no say so - everything you say is garbage - doesn't count - put it to the curb for the garbage truck. Just because you read the Bible doesn't mean you're qualified to have any say in what the world believes, or what is taught in schools, [[10]]about God. That's completely up to me and people like me. Newdud's not qualified either, because he sells t-shirts. You're not qualified. Your opinion is worth zero, nada, zip, nothing.
[[11]]Now, how does that make you feel?
.
Mess....as per highlighted numbers above:-
[[1]] Why should I care? I respect other people who respect me, regardless of race, colour or creed, and as long as their 'beliefs' don't translate into 'actions' that infringe on the rights of others. Animals are as animals do...animals lack the wherewithal to REASON IN THE ABSTRACT to 'get out of the box' of instinctive response and feedback mechanisms. If YOU behave such as to display a lack reason, and only operate on 'instinctive' reactions against science and scientific evidence rather than honest debate, then who is behaving like an 'animal', you or I? You are mistaken: science (like evolution) has NO 'intent'; and since we are scientists, we follow the logic and evidence implied/discovered via the OBJECTIVE scientific method procedures...nothing more, nothing less. Any 'intent' on our 'side' is purely imputed by YOU; which means also that any 'intent' is YOURS and NOT 'ours'.
[[2]] If you really "don't give a dang", then why are you moved to immediately insult me with that crack about 'banana choir section'? And what have you not understood about "science doesn't have any 'intention' of ANY sort; least of all 'proving' the existence or otherwise of YOUR 'god'. If science is guilty of anything, it is TOTAL INDIFFERENCE to both YOU and your 'god'. So give that particular accusation/challenge a rest, will you Mess? It's 'not a good look' for you when someone has to repeat this now-too-oft-explained and OBVIOUS 'fact of life' to you.
[[3]]Whatever 'beliefs' science holds are mere 'working assumptions' until FURTHER objective evidence is forthcoming that will cause that science to correct/refine those working assumptions. Religion has no comparable mechanism; and even in the unlikely event that such a mechanism could be found, such a mechanism would have NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE upon which it could act...either to arrive at 'first' assumptions, or to 'correct' any such assumptions. Religion and superstition are by their very nature 'intractable' for scientific treatment...hence why any attempts to treat such things as 'equal' to 'science' are tragi-comically misplaced, and doomed to both logical and practical FAILURE.
[[4]] Apparently, your two 'poster boys' (whom you have been moved to praise before now) DO believe in evolution.....dadl in "Super-Duper-Hyper-Evolution"; and S. Bilderback in a "pre-programmed-Evolution". Would they be some of these "atheists" you speak of?
[[5]] No 'proof' of any kind have you posted; but rather 'wishes' and thoughts and ideas as to how the world SHOULD be rather than what the reality shows it to be. Just because YOU aren't comfortable with YOUR perception of reality doesn't mean others can't handle the OBJECTIVE truth that is all around anyone who bothers to look and REALLY 'understand' instead of trying to 'superstitiously rationalise it away' as you and others of your bent seem to want to do at all costs to reason and enlightenment for others not of your bent. Closed minds? If you have the courage, look at yourself in the mirror when next you accuse others here of being closed-minded. That is all that needs to be said on that score, I think, Mess.
[[6]] Believe it or not, I have read all that you, SoLoved, dadl & S. Bilderback have posted...which is why I know that what you have put forward are in no way 'legitimate in a 'scientifically tenable' sense. And that such was pointed out in the reasoned rebuttals to same from MANY here. Such an exercise as you wish me to undertake now would serve no good purpose...it would merely be 'rubbing salt into your wounds', and I'm not the sadistic-dadl type who enjoys such things. Besides, it has been shown that both reason and repetition is lost on you and your type....and futility is not my bag, either.
[[7]]I disagree VEHEMENTLY with newguy as a RELIGIONIST PER SE; HOWEVER, I RESPECT newguy as a PERSON PER SE who displays integrity AT ALL COSTS to himself. Like evolution and religion, the 'Religionist and the Person' are two MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE areas of respect/interaction. I know it is difficult for you to understand this, mainly because you have demonstrated that you also find it difficult to understand that evolution and religion are also mutually exclusive areas of human affairs. And since I began to truly think for myself at age nine, I can safely say that 'fear' is conquered by 'knowledge'...so I can assure YOU that neither you NOR newguy hold any terrors for yours truly...I am afraid of NOTHING except leaving my work unfinished....but what will you?...one must play as best as one can the cards that reality deals out to one...musn't one? I am moved to wonder if YOU are playing your cards as best you can, given the 'intellectual handicap' that is 'superstitious habit'.
[[8]]Have you considered the possibility that less science than would be desirable is being discussed in such forums because YOU BRING NO SCIENCE TO IT YOURSELF? Meaning that the scope of what science arguments WE can put in reply must perforce be greatly circumscribed by the limitations put on such input when it is called upon to address 'non-science' arguments.
[[9 & 10]] So, it's completely up to YOU to say what is taught about 'god' in our schools, is it? We who have just as much, if not more, comprehension than yourself of the religion that we grew up with (and many still maintain, in (heretofore) 'peaceful co-existence with science) DO have a say in HOW it is taught...ie., it should be taught as what it IS: Religion...and NOT science. Has THAT penetrated the ivory dome? Any one so blinkered as you and your type have NO BUSINESS TELLING ANYONE WHAT TO DO ABOUT ANYTHING AT ALL, let alone what happens in secular schools. These schools are designed to produce 'objective thinkers' capable of eventually fitting into a society whose aim is to ensure the running of essential services to ALL. This is why we pay taxes: because the people who will keep the society functioning at all levels from sewage to medicine, from communications to transport, from personal development to social cohesion etc, etc, will come from such a system of education. So as long as your toilets work, your transportation works, your TV/Computer works etc, you are SHARING in the benefits we ALL pay for whether you 'utilise' them 'to the hilt' or just rarely...in any event, AS LONG AS THEY ARE MAINTAINED TO BE THERE WHEN YOU NEED THEM, we all benefit sooner or later from such 'secular' institutional education. Like newguy and many others say, anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL to 'modify' his/her interaction with society's institutional systems/benefits.
[[111]] Like I've been hitting my head against a brick wall. How does it make YOU feel?
Sincerely and without hate (do you understand this at last?); yours,
RealityCheck.
.
Mess,
Believe it or not, I couldn't care less whether people believe in god or not. It's only when these people ALSO happen to be wilful ignoramuses who wish to deceitfully force OTHERS to do so 'by the back door' that alarm bells start ringing. And what gave you the idea that anyone wants to "disprove any notion of any sort of god"? We just observe and deduce the reality around us and apply the results as consistently as possible in that reality. Whether those results and that reality conflict with any one or other 'religious/superstitious text' is purely a matter for the relevant adherents to those texts. They can do what they like as long as their 'cognitive dissonance' does not impinge on others' rights and pursuit of objective reality for the long term benefit of humanity. That is all. The rest is YOUR problem and the problem of others in any similar 'religious/superstitious predicament' which the discovered objective reality puts you. Otherwise, we don't give a damn one way or the other. You and everyone else is free to believe what you like, as long as you don't foist either your 'religious/superstitious predicament' or your cognitive dissonance on others who DON'T have or want either, thank you very much.
Sincerely and without hatred of ANY kind; yours,
RealityCheck.
.
RC,
[[1]]You should care whether people believe or not - and you should respect them, regardless of their beliefs. All human beings deserve respect. That's the problem with evolution - you think that because we're 'animals' you can shove some of us under the carpet. All you do is succeed in making us angry, and it pushes us more into politics and into schools. Your original intent is destroyed.
[[2]]I don't give a dang one way or the other - whether scientists think we came from chimpanzees or bananas (it's obvious that you came from the banana choir section). Until science can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no God - then God is innocent and science is guilty of false witness.
[[3]]Science holds onto their superstiticious beliefs just as much as religion does. Science has been proven wrong time after time after time after time after time.
God still stands.
[[4]]Evolution is a myth, (if not, then prove it) a theory created by the godless for the godless. Atheists are its biggest followers (if not, then prove it). No fool in his right mind would believe in such a ridiculous myth if presented with all the material and allowed to peruse it in depth (if not, then prove it). Why are there no Christians on this forum spouting your nonsense? The only way you can get followers is to force small children to learn about evolution in school against their will or choice (if not, then prove it). That's why you don't want ID mentioned in school - kids might start thinking.
OMG![[5]]I have listed proof, theories, thoughts, and other ideas on why evolution is wrong. You ding dongs pick out some innocent comment from my posts and attack the poster. If I say Jesus is the reason for the season, you say it's not. If I say the sky is blue, you say it's not. You know nothing. You act like trolls, waste time and energy attacking the poster - you have a closed mind. Your mind is made up and there is no point in your being here other than to bug people. And that's a fact.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[[6]]Don't believe me? OK - prove it:
Please go back through my posts and respond to the legitimate arguments I have posted against evolution. Do it without attacking me personally - or people who believe in things the way I do.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Steveo,
Newdud should be proud that atheists think he's great. [[7]]The reason RC think's he's great is because newdud fits into his Christian box - he acts like he thinks Christians should act - so he has him right where he wants him - right inside the box. Newdud worships a devilish version of god. As long as newdud does what RC expects, RC is safe. Got it? I, on the other hand, am actively persuing change, this is a direct threat to RC's security. Got it?
You may think that I am not qualified to discuss science. [[8]]But I have not found much science being discussed in this Creation/Evolution section of PhysOrg - so I don't know how you could come to that conclusion. There is nothing but crapola coming from my opposition here.
Let's say for a moment that I (which I don't) concede to you that I may not be qualified to discuss science. [[9]] Well then, I would say to you that you are not qualified to talk about the things of God. You have no say so - everything you say is garbage - doesn't count - put it to the curb for the garbage truck. Just because you read the Bible doesn't mean you're qualified to have any say in what the world believes, or what is taught in schools, [[10]]about God. That's completely up to me and people like me. Newdud's not qualified either, because he sells t-shirts. You're not qualified. Your opinion is worth zero, nada, zip, nothing.
[[11]]Now, how does that make you feel?
.
Mess....as per highlighted numbers above:-
[[1]] Why should I care? I respect other people who respect me, regardless of race, colour or creed, and as long as their 'beliefs' don't translate into 'actions' that infringe on the rights of others. Animals are as animals do...animals lack the wherewithal to REASON IN THE ABSTRACT to 'get out of the box' of instinctive response and feedback mechanisms. If YOU behave such as to display a lack reason, and only operate on 'instinctive' reactions against science and scientific evidence rather than honest debate, then who is behaving like an 'animal', you or I? You are mistaken: science (like evolution) has NO 'intent'; and since we are scientists, we follow the logic and evidence implied/discovered via the OBJECTIVE scientific method procedures...nothing more, nothing less. Any 'intent' on our 'side' is purely imputed by YOU; which means also that any 'intent' is YOURS and NOT 'ours'.
[[2]] If you really "don't give a dang", then why are you moved to immediately insult me with that crack about 'banana choir section'? And what have you not understood about "science doesn't have any 'intention' of ANY sort; least of all 'proving' the existence or otherwise of YOUR 'god'. If science is guilty of anything, it is TOTAL INDIFFERENCE to both YOU and your 'god'. So give that particular accusation/challenge a rest, will you Mess? It's 'not a good look' for you when someone has to repeat this now-too-oft-explained and OBVIOUS 'fact of life' to you.
[[3]]Whatever 'beliefs' science holds are mere 'working assumptions' until FURTHER objective evidence is forthcoming that will cause that science to correct/refine those working assumptions. Religion has no comparable mechanism; and even in the unlikely event that such a mechanism could be found, such a mechanism would have NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE upon which it could act...either to arrive at 'first' assumptions, or to 'correct' any such assumptions. Religion and superstition are by their very nature 'intractable' for scientific treatment...hence why any attempts to treat such things as 'equal' to 'science' are tragi-comically misplaced, and doomed to both logical and practical FAILURE.
[[4]] Apparently, your two 'poster boys' (whom you have been moved to praise before now) DO believe in evolution.....dadl in "Super-Duper-Hyper-Evolution"; and S. Bilderback in a "pre-programmed-Evolution". Would they be some of these "atheists" you speak of?
[[5]] No 'proof' of any kind have you posted; but rather 'wishes' and thoughts and ideas as to how the world SHOULD be rather than what the reality shows it to be. Just because YOU aren't comfortable with YOUR perception of reality doesn't mean others can't handle the OBJECTIVE truth that is all around anyone who bothers to look and REALLY 'understand' instead of trying to 'superstitiously rationalise it away' as you and others of your bent seem to want to do at all costs to reason and enlightenment for others not of your bent. Closed minds? If you have the courage, look at yourself in the mirror when next you accuse others here of being closed-minded. That is all that needs to be said on that score, I think, Mess.
[[6]] Believe it or not, I have read all that you, SoLoved, dadl & S. Bilderback have posted...which is why I know that what you have put forward are in no way 'legitimate in a 'scientifically tenable' sense. And that such was pointed out in the reasoned rebuttals to same from MANY here. Such an exercise as you wish me to undertake now would serve no good purpose...it would merely be 'rubbing salt into your wounds', and I'm not the sadistic-dadl type who enjoys such things. Besides, it has been shown that both reason and repetition is lost on you and your type....and futility is not my bag, either.
[[7]]I disagree VEHEMENTLY with newguy as a RELIGIONIST PER SE; HOWEVER, I RESPECT newguy as a PERSON PER SE who displays integrity AT ALL COSTS to himself. Like evolution and religion, the 'Religionist and the Person' are two MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE areas of respect/interaction. I know it is difficult for you to understand this, mainly because you have demonstrated that you also find it difficult to understand that evolution and religion are also mutually exclusive areas of human affairs. And since I began to truly think for myself at age nine, I can safely say that 'fear' is conquered by 'knowledge'...so I can assure YOU that neither you NOR newguy hold any terrors for yours truly...I am afraid of NOTHING except leaving my work unfinished....but what will you?...one must play as best as one can the cards that reality deals out to one...musn't one? I am moved to wonder if YOU are playing your cards as best you can, given the 'intellectual handicap' that is 'superstitious habit'.
[[8]]Have you considered the possibility that less science than would be desirable is being discussed in such forums because YOU BRING NO SCIENCE TO IT YOURSELF? Meaning that the scope of what science arguments WE can put in reply must perforce be greatly circumscribed by the limitations put on such input when it is called upon to address 'non-science' arguments.
[[9 & 10]] So, it's completely up to YOU to say what is taught about 'god' in our schools, is it? We who have just as much, if not more, comprehension than yourself of the religion that we grew up with (and many still maintain, in (heretofore) 'peaceful co-existence with science) DO have a say in HOW it is taught...ie., it should be taught as what it IS: Religion...and NOT science. Has THAT penetrated the ivory dome? Any one so blinkered as you and your type have NO BUSINESS TELLING ANYONE WHAT TO DO ABOUT ANYTHING AT ALL, let alone what happens in secular schools. These schools are designed to produce 'objective thinkers' capable of eventually fitting into a society whose aim is to ensure the running of essential services to ALL. This is why we pay taxes: because the people who will keep the society functioning at all levels from sewage to medicine, from communications to transport, from personal development to social cohesion etc, etc, will come from such a system of education. So as long as your toilets work, your transportation works, your TV/Computer works etc, you are SHARING in the benefits we ALL pay for whether you 'utilise' them 'to the hilt' or just rarely...in any event, AS LONG AS THEY ARE MAINTAINED TO BE THERE WHEN YOU NEED THEM, we all benefit sooner or later from such 'secular' institutional education. Like newguy and many others say, anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL to 'modify' his/her interaction with society's institutional systems/benefits.
[[111]] Like I've been hitting my head against a brick wall. How does it make YOU feel?
Sincerely and without hate (do you understand this at last?); yours,
RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE (newguy+Dec 21 2005, 05:24 PM)
QUOTE (MessengerofSatan+)
I don't believe demons exist anymore for newdud to be casting them out - and that's why he's selling t-shirts.
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils..."(Mark 16:17)
Only an idiot like yourself could attempt to separate the casting out of devils or demons from "going into all the world"(that would include today) and "preaching the gospel to every creature"(ditto). Just because you're powerless(clueless, too), doesn't mean everyone else is. I've already accurately explained why I'm selling t-shirts, but, as I've said repeatedly, you are simply incapable of grasping the simplest truth. Later Jan.
P.S. Paul was a tentmaker, Peter, Andrew, James & John were fishermen, Matthew was a tax collector, etc., etc., etc.
If the Kingdom of God was established by Jesus in 70s AD - then that assignment was completed. Satan was destroyed - demons are gone, bye bye, sayonara. I do not say that we should not continue to preach the gospel. But the gospel is a much more positive and joyful message today - than it was when Jesus said those words. Paul said in his writings that the gospel was preached to the ends of the earth. (if you can't find it - just let me know). Please come back and explain this when you wake up from fainting after you see the truth.
It is not your occupation I have a problem with. It is the insinuation by the 'science types' that only scientists are allowed to discuss CREATION and evolution in this forum.
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils..."(Mark 16:17)
Only an idiot like yourself could attempt to separate the casting out of devils or demons from "going into all the world"(that would include today) and "preaching the gospel to every creature"(ditto). Just because you're powerless(clueless, too), doesn't mean everyone else is. I've already accurately explained why I'm selling t-shirts, but, as I've said repeatedly, you are simply incapable of grasping the simplest truth. Later Jan.
P.S. Paul was a tentmaker, Peter, Andrew, James & John were fishermen, Matthew was a tax collector, etc., etc., etc.
If the Kingdom of God was established by Jesus in 70s AD - then that assignment was completed. Satan was destroyed - demons are gone, bye bye, sayonara. I do not say that we should not continue to preach the gospel. But the gospel is a much more positive and joyful message today - than it was when Jesus said those words. Paul said in his writings that the gospel was preached to the ends of the earth. (if you can't find it - just let me know). Please come back and explain this when you wake up from fainting after you see the truth.
QUOTE
QUOTE
P.S. Paul was a tentmaker, Peter, Andrew, James & John were fishermen, Matthew was a tax collector, etc., etc., etc
P.S. Paul was a tentmaker, Peter, Andrew, James & John were fishermen, Matthew was a tax collector, etc., etc., etc
It is not your occupation I have a problem with. It is the insinuation by the 'science types' that only scientists are allowed to discuss CREATION and evolution in this forum.
Ive got a BSc in physics and compsci if you really want to know, im hardly a biologist but i know enough that ID is not science...
QUOTE (Kaeroll+Dec 21 2005, 05:30 PM)
Messenger,
There is a chance I'm wrong here, but I'd hazard that I have not insulted you up to this point. I try to be patient and non-confrontational in my posts, the last of which was an obvious exception to this and for that I do apologise. Your responses to me have, however, been snappy and rude.
I do not have credentials yet. I have posted several times that I'm still in full time education and will begin my MChem degree next September. I like to think that I have shown I can be "reasonable at times" also. I never claimed to know a great deal about this subject, but I have done enough reading around it to spot bs when I see it.
I do not agree with Newguy calling you Messenger of Satan. Conversely, I do not agree with you calling him newdud, newdad, and so on. The second of these has, to me, a snide undertone of almost mockery.
Clearly not true - my presence here demonstrates this clearly. I've made a few, what I like to think are fairly logical and strong arguments given my limited knowledge and debating skills. I don't recall having any of these fall flat on its face. They've had their weaknesses and inaccuracies, naturally, and I concede this and work to rectify it in future. This is why I personally feel I'm basically accepted (or tolerated) around here by the "bishops". If you made the same effort to be polite and would admit when you are wrong, we'd not end up having petty arguments like this.
Kaeroll
Kaeroll,
For the most part I agree with you. I appreciate your sincerity. Thank you.
But what we have here now is an individual defense mechanism. You're saying - 'there's nothing wrong with me' - 'I'm not acting like these others'. You defend me against another 'christian' like newdud - but you don't defend me against the likes of RC and MX (my two most favorite persons - just under newdud).
I beg to differ with you in the area of politeness. I've tried it all - and I repeat - I have received nothing but crapola. It leads me to believe that believers of evolution are simply afraid to debate. They only copy and paste what they read in their peer-reviewed science books. They are not capable of thinking outside of that realm of knowledge.
There is within every human being a spirit that comes from God (or something like that) - science does not respect this fact - and that is so evident here. If you guys (well, not all of you guys) are an example of what true scientists think, then I feel truly and deeply sorry for this current generation.
You are not a fool. Right? Then open your eyes.
Nessus,
Well then, according to Steveo - you're not qualified to discuss Creation or evolution. But don't yell at me - take your case to him.
There is a chance I'm wrong here, but I'd hazard that I have not insulted you up to this point. I try to be patient and non-confrontational in my posts, the last of which was an obvious exception to this and for that I do apologise. Your responses to me have, however, been snappy and rude.
I do not have credentials yet. I have posted several times that I'm still in full time education and will begin my MChem degree next September. I like to think that I have shown I can be "reasonable at times" also. I never claimed to know a great deal about this subject, but I have done enough reading around it to spot bs when I see it.
I do not agree with Newguy calling you Messenger of Satan. Conversely, I do not agree with you calling him newdud, newdad, and so on. The second of these has, to me, a snide undertone of almost mockery.
QUOTE
You guys are just like religion - only priests and popes and bishops and what not - can speak - everyone else just be quiet and go away - you're worthless and useless and we don't like you - so please leave.
Clearly not true - my presence here demonstrates this clearly. I've made a few, what I like to think are fairly logical and strong arguments given my limited knowledge and debating skills. I don't recall having any of these fall flat on its face. They've had their weaknesses and inaccuracies, naturally, and I concede this and work to rectify it in future. This is why I personally feel I'm basically accepted (or tolerated
) around here by the "bishops". If you made the same effort to be polite and would admit when you are wrong, we'd not end up having petty arguments like this.Kaeroll
Kaeroll,
For the most part I agree with you. I appreciate your sincerity. Thank you.
But what we have here now is an individual defense mechanism. You're saying - 'there's nothing wrong with me' - 'I'm not acting like these others'. You defend me against another 'christian' like newdud - but you don't defend me against the likes of RC and MX (my two most favorite persons - just under newdud).
I beg to differ with you in the area of politeness. I've tried it all - and I repeat - I have received nothing but crapola. It leads me to believe that believers of evolution are simply afraid to debate. They only copy and paste what they read in their peer-reviewed science books. They are not capable of thinking outside of that realm of knowledge.
There is within every human being a spirit that comes from God (or something like that) - science does not respect this fact - and that is so evident here. If you guys (well, not all of you guys) are an example of what true scientists think, then I feel truly and deeply sorry for this current generation.
You are not a fool. Right? Then open your eyes.
Nessus,
Well then, according to Steveo - you're not qualified to discuss Creation or evolution. But don't yell at me - take your case to him.
A few comments if i may:
Well, that would be because if something is already established, there is no need for debate.
Well, that would be because if something is already established, there is no need for debate.
There is within every human being a spirit that comes from God (or something like that) - science does not respect this fact - and that is so evident here. If you guys (well, not all of you guys) are an example of what true scientists think, then I feel truly and deeply sorry for this current generation.
The concept is not that it does not respect the fact, it does not Deal with this 'concept' at all. Time and time again it has been tried to be stated that there are some things that science does not cover. Spirit, soul, religion, etc.
If you want to make a claim akin to 'science does not respect this fact' then show where 'science' is indeed doing just that.
- Amok
QUOTE
It leads me to believe that believers of evolution are simply afraid to debate. They only copy and paste what they read in their peer-reviewed science books.
Well, that would be because if something is already established, there is no need for debate.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| It leads me to believe that believers of evolution are simply afraid to debate. They only copy and paste what they read in their peer-reviewed science books. |
Well, that would be because if something is already established, there is no need for debate.
There is within every human being a spirit that comes from God (or something like that) - science does not respect this fact - and that is so evident here. If you guys (well, not all of you guys) are an example of what true scientists think, then I feel truly and deeply sorry for this current generation.
The concept is not that it does not respect the fact, it does not Deal with this 'concept' at all. Time and time again it has been tried to be stated that there are some things that science does not cover. Spirit, soul, religion, etc.
If you want to make a claim akin to 'science does not respect this fact' then show where 'science' is indeed doing just that.
- Amok
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 21 2005, 11:53 PM)
They only copy and paste what they read in their peer-reviewed science books. They are not capable of thinking outside of that realm of knowledge.
Outside the realm of knowledge? How can you think outside the realm of knowledge in science?
In science, there is only current knowledge and future knowledge. BEFORE you have knowledge of something, you cannot call it a scientific theory.
Outside the realm of knowledge? How can you think outside the realm of knowledge in science?
In science, there is only current knowledge and future knowledge. BEFORE you have knowledge of something, you cannot call it a scientific theory.
QUOTE (MXWordNerd+Dec 22 2005, 02:59 AM)
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 21 2005, 11:53 PM)
They only copy and paste what they read in their peer-reviewed science books. They are not capable of thinking outside of that realm of knowledge.
Outside the realm of knowledge? How can you think outside the realm of knowledge in science?
In science, there is only current knowledge and future knowledge. BEFORE you have knowledge of something, you cannot call it a scientific theory.
I think Messenger meant 'outside the realm of peer reviewed science books', not outside the realm of knowledge in general.
For the record, I have a bachelor's in math & comp. science, twenty-something years in computer software, and am now semi-retired, remodeling houses and loving the concreteness of it all!
I think more to the point as far as 'credentials' is not what one's pedigree is, but what their current knowledge is on evolutionary theory. I will admit that my reading on evolution (except for an occasional article now and then) went back many years to high school and college, but I have certainly had quite a refresher course in this forum. Thanks all for that.
I have also looked at the various creationists and other religious websites. Science is science, and religion is religion, is all I can say. Religion and science can co-exist, except if one believes the bible is the literal truth, and then of course most of science must be rejected. I personally think this latter case is the path to severe cognitive dissonance, headaches, and medication. Or a general retreat from the modern world into a very insular little bubble of 'personal truth'.
Why should I care about you? I'll respect you when you respect me. You see how silly it sounds when it comes right back at you?
Why should I care about you? I'll respect you when you respect me. You see how silly it sounds when it comes right back at you?
[[2]] If you really "don't give a dang", then why are you moved to immediately insult me with that crack about 'banana choir section'? And what have you not understood about "science doesn't have any 'intention' of ANY sort; least of all 'proving' the existence or otherwise of YOUR 'god'. If science is guilty of anything, it is TOTAL INDIFFERENCE to both YOU and your 'god'. So give that particular accusation/challenge a rest, will you Mess? It's 'not a good look' for you when someone has to repeat this now-too-oft-explained and OBVIOUS 'fact of life' to you.
Because I thought it was funny and very clever.
I don't have a problem with science. I have a problem with evolution.
I say that you are not indifferent towards me and my God because you teach that we came from animals. All historical records regarding the Judeo Christian religion point to a special creation of human beings. If I wanted to get along with everybody I could just say 'I don't have a problem with evolution' - like some of the churches someone (birdan?) just mentioned. It's not that I don't want to get along (I certainly don't enjoy the abuse) - I just don't see the similarity between any animals of any kind in relation to humans.
For the life of me I cannot understand why I cannot get this across to you. There is no animal on this planet that displays human qualities.
If I could see a community of primates that displayed anything at all resembling human qualities - I could see some merit in evolution. But there is nothing. While humans have historical human accounts and documents up the ying yang to support the idea of a God and a special creation of human beings (and animals for that matter) - evolutionists have nothing. God said animals were created after 'their kind' - so monkeys have various traits but are of one kind, and so it goes for every animal down the line.
I posted a very interesting article just a few days ago - a peer reviewed science article with an evolution slant. This article stated that humans have about a 20% increase in intelligence over primates. (for the record, I can just as easily put an ID slant on this article). Where did this extra 20% intelligence come from? Not one of you responded to that article.
There's another article about how white people evolved from black people. Many people (including many Christians) believe that Africa is the cradle of civilization and that all human life originated there from one set of DNA. All indications are that the first two human beings were black. As population spread to northern areas, certain information was lost and/or not needed in the colder climates......or something like that. I'm operating from memory on this story. There is not a prejudiced bone in my body - so I have no problem with this. How does this square with your current knowledge of evolution? Can you provide me with a diagram of some sort that would prove this? Maybe there was a time in our history where God mutated the primates and increased their intelligence so they would become more like 'their image'.
I can't wait to see everyone's response to this story. It's not my story - it's a science story - so don't go picking on me now.
How conveeeeeenient. That's like saying my God changes to suit the times. NOT. My God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. No changes necessary - because He got it right the first time.
Evolution is the one without a mechanism. Spiritual rebirth, or being born again, is the Christian's proof and mechanism. Experienced by billions of people.
Did anyone watch the Barbara Walters - what is heaven special on Tuesday night - the 20th? They actually did a good job with the Christian portion of that program. The Mohammed Muslim viewpoint was quite shocking and direct - and was very similar to how newdud feels about the devilish god he seems to worship.
Science and religion need to work together. That's all there is to it. Science has no mechanism for connecting the spiritual with the material. That's why we need to work together. Everyone benefits. 95% of the people in the world believe in God and will be very happy to see this connection made. We're tired of trying to pacify a 5% minority. I'm sorry you're offended - but you offend me. No personal hate intended. Nothing personal.
How conveeeeeenient. That's like saying my God changes to suit the times. NOT. My God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. No changes necessary - because He got it right the first time.
Evolution is the one without a mechanism. Spiritual rebirth, or being born again, is the Christian's proof and mechanism. Experienced by billions of people.
Did anyone watch the Barbara Walters - what is heaven special on Tuesday night - the 20th? They actually did a good job with the Christian portion of that program. The Mohammed Muslim viewpoint was quite shocking and direct - and was very similar to how newdud feels about the devilish god he seems to worship.
Science and religion need to work together. That's all there is to it. Science has no mechanism for connecting the spiritual with the material. That's why we need to work together. Everyone benefits. 95% of the people in the world believe in God and will be very happy to see this connection made. We're tired of trying to pacify a 5% minority. I'm sorry you're offended - but you offend me. No personal hate intended. Nothing personal.
[[4]] Apparently, your two 'poster boys' (whom you have been moved to praise before now) DO believe in evolution.....dadl in "Super-Duper-Hyper-Evolution"; and S. Bilderback in a "pre-programmed-Evolution". Would they be some of these "atheists" you speak of?
I consider Bilderback a good example of someone who can debate without taking things too personally. I don't know about Dad1 - seems to me you have been talking to him a great deal more than I have. He has his beliefs and that's fine - I have no desire to discuss it with him - because I don't agree with him.
I don't have a problem with what people choose to believe in, really. But I would like the opportunity to debate it in a civilized manner. I don't want to be attacked because of what I believe. If I am, I'm just telling you, you'll just get it right back.
This may be a science forum - but it is not school. I'm just here to have what I hope will be friendly conversations about new ideas. Maybe I'm looking for a scientific slant on certain ideas that I have. Thus far, you haven't been very helpful.
This may be a science forum - but it is not school. I'm just here to have what I hope will be friendly conversations about new ideas. Maybe I'm looking for a scientific slant on certain ideas that I have. Thus far, you haven't been very helpful.
[[6]] Believe it or not, I have read all that you, SoLoved, dadl & S. Bilderback have posted...which is why I know that what you have put forward are in no way 'legitimate in a 'scientifically tenable' sense. And that such was pointed out in the reasoned rebuttals to same from MANY here. Such an exercise as you wish me to undertake now would serve no good purpose...it would merely be 'rubbing salt into your wounds', and I'm not the sadistic-dadl type who enjoys such things. Besides, it has been shown that both reason and repetition is lost on you and your type....and futility is not my bag, either.
Well, I'm flattered that you honored my posts with your eyeballs - perhaps you could engage your brain next, heh? Like I said, this is not school. I see this as an area to discuss ideas that relate to Creation (Creation/evoluion forum). If you want to post new theories and such, I'm happy to listen and respond. If you're just going to copy and paste - then what's the point? I'm not saying you shouldn't copy and paste pertinent information - but what I'm really looking for here is personal commentary. UNLIKE YOU GUYS (Not all you guys) - I do value your personal commentary. I just don't value name calling and personal attacks. I consider such behavior utterly abhorrent. What bothers me even more is how I could stoop to your level. Me bad.
Hear that newdud - he vehemently disagrees with your stuff. But then you go all goofy on me RC - by inserting the word integrity. What is integrous about name calling, not answering direct questions, 'rebuking' his wife, calling people (not just me) liars, teaching that his god will make you burn in hell for your disbelief, etc?
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. In order for their to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god - there must be inclusiveness.
I am not superstitious. I'm not the one who still believes in demons, remember? I'm the one who's calling for a change in the church, remember? I'm the one who thinks we have a God who loves all His creation, remember? I'm the one who believes in a God of love, not a god of eternal conscious punishment. Why do you hate this message so?
This post is getting way too long.
Hear that newdud - he vehemently disagrees with your stuff. But then you go all goofy on me RC - by inserting the word integrity. What is integrous about name calling, not answering direct questions, 'rebuking' his wife, calling people (not just me) liars, teaching that his god will make you burn in hell for your disbelief, etc?
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. In order for their to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god - there must be inclusiveness.
I am not superstitious. I'm not the one who still believes in demons, remember? I'm the one who's calling for a change in the church, remember? I'm the one who thinks we have a God who loves all His creation, remember? I'm the one who believes in a God of love, not a god of eternal conscious punishment. Why do you hate this message so?
This post is getting way too long.
[[8]]Have you considered the possibility that less science than would be desirable is being discussed in such forums because YOU BRING NO SCIENCE TO IT YOURSELF? Meaning that the scope of what science arguments WE can put in reply must perforce be greatly circumscribed by the limitations put on such input when it is called upon to address 'non-science' arguments.
Everytime I bring science, what I consider good stuff, no one responds to it. I sit here and wonder what the heck is wrong with you guys. Then I come to the conclusion that you just don't know, can't think for yourself, so you don't respond to the issues - you start with the personal attacks. Go back and look - see for yourself.
You guys have been going back and forth with Dad1 for quite a while now. What in his hypothesis (?) do you consider science? Or are you just playing with him? Which is pretty much what I figure you're doing.
So, not only am I not allowed to talk about science - now I can't talk about anything at all. Wow. For being part of the atheist minority - you sure make an awful lot of noise. Since you're an atheist you of all people - are not qualified to discuss creation. See how silly you sound when it comes right back at you?
I'm pretty much fine with the second part of your paragraph.
I don't have a problem with religion being taught in schools. That's the best idea you've had so far.
They should teach evolution in private schools or seperate classes - and only for the parents who choose to allow their children to hear it. You, an atheist, should have no say in discussing the origins of human beings to children.
Like it or not, evolution is forced on all children in public schools. This needs to be changed - because this is completely unfair to children and their parents. It hurts the image of teachers - because parents have to tell their children that their teachers don't know any better.
So, not only am I not allowed to talk about science - now I can't talk about anything at all. Wow. For being part of the atheist minority - you sure make an awful lot of noise. Since you're an atheist you of all people - are not qualified to discuss creation. See how silly you sound when it comes right back at you?
I'm pretty much fine with the second part of your paragraph.
I don't have a problem with religion being taught in schools. That's the best idea you've had so far.
They should teach evolution in private schools or seperate classes - and only for the parents who choose to allow their children to hear it. You, an atheist, should have no say in discussing the origins of human beings to children.
Like it or not, evolution is forced on all children in public schools. This needs to be changed - because this is completely unfair to children and their parents. It hurts the image of teachers - because parents have to tell their children that their teachers don't know any better.
[[111]] Like I've been hitting my head against a brick wall. How does it make YOU feel?
About the same.
Now, if you really want to throw me for a loop.....ask me what I do want to talk about. I've completely forgotten now.
birdan,
I'm in shock. Thank you for sorta coming to my defense. Must be the season.
As far as your credentials, I believe you have a bone to pick with Steveo. You're not qualified to discuss Creation/evolution in this forum. Unless of course he's reconsidered the standards.
What about your current knowledge of God - you can know evolution like the back of your hand - but if you haven't studied God - then how can you be qualified to discuss Creation in a Creation/evolution forum? You see how silly this sounds when it comes back at you?
I agree with the basic premise of your statement, your appeal to reason. Creationists do have some very valid arguments - denying this would just be ignorant. Most of science would not need to be rejected, only most of evolution.
Age is open for discussion - at least with me anyway. There's a lot of things that are open for discussion with me. Now, why don't we all be good little boys and girls and show people how well we can get along, heh?
Science and religion need to work together. That's all there is to it. Science has no mechanism for connecting the spiritual with the material. That's why we need to work together. Everyone benefits. 95% of the people in the world believe in God and will be very happy to see this connection made. We're tired of trying to pacify a 5% minority. I'm sorry you're offended - but you offend me. No personal hate intended. Nothing personal.
So science vs. religion is a 5% / 95% split? By saying this you are equating science with atheism, which is absolutely not true, whether you believe it or not. Science and religion can co-exist, unless of course one's religion rejects science, which still does not make all scientists atheists. Some are, but most simply have beliefs different from that extreme viewpoint. Science is neutral on the subject of religion. The supernatural cannot be examined by science (hence the name supernatural), which relies of objective, verifiable, falsifiable evidence.
If you believe that science = atheism, then there is no possibility for "working together". That is a prejudiced, close-minded, untrue view of the world, which is the antithesis of science. If you believe in a literal interpretation of the bible (young earth creationist), then you must by your beliefs reject science. And not just evolution. You must also reject geology, astronomy, bio-chemistry, cosmology, physics, chemistry, archeology, paleantology, biogenesis, etc., since you must falsify the evidence from all these disciplines that support evolution.
You must also reject the basic premise of science: to follow the physical evidence wherever it leads. From the Answers In Genesis Statement of Faith, (D) General, point 6:
Young earth creationism begins with a conclusion, and then ignores, distorts, misinterprets, mis-quotes, misrepresents the physical evidence to fit that conclusion. Which is anathema to anyone who accepts true science. If that's your belief, that's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs. Just don't try to pass it off as science, nor try to foist it on other people.
Young earth creationism begins with a conclusion, and then ignores, distorts, misinterprets, mis-quotes, misrepresents the physical evidence to fit that conclusion. Which is anathema to anyone who accepts true science. If that's your belief, that's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs. Just don't try to pass it off as science, nor try to foist it on other people.
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. In order for their to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god - there must be inclusiveness.
I agree that for there to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god there must be inclusiveness. But the lack of peace among that 95% is not about science. It is mostly sectarian and ethnic violence. I haven't heard of one armed conflict being started over science, nor have I heard of armed scientists starting a war, nor have I heard of an army of atheists starting a war. Wars in the world today are ethnic and religious conflicts. In the words of Steven Colbert, "Religion: a healing force in a world torn apart by ...... religion".
What about your current knowledge of God - you can know evolution like the back of your hand - but if you haven't studied God - then how can you be qualified to discuss Creation in a Creation/evolution forum? You see how silly this sounds when it comes back at you?
I have studied God quite thoroughly, thank you, and that is no impediment to my understanding and acceptance of science. If my God is not the same as your God, which is not the same as Newguy's God, which is not the same as Dadl's God, which is not the same as Bilderback's God, which is not the same as Jerry Duke's God, which is not the same as SoLoved's God, .... that is of no concern to me. None of you that seem to reject the basic tenets of science can seem to agree on who your God is, so how do you expect that to be included in an 'objective' discipline?
Outside the realm of knowledge? How can you think outside the realm of knowledge in science?
In science, there is only current knowledge and future knowledge. BEFORE you have knowledge of something, you cannot call it a scientific theory.
I think Messenger meant 'outside the realm of peer reviewed science books', not outside the realm of knowledge in general.
For the record, I have a bachelor's in math & comp. science, twenty-something years in computer software, and am now semi-retired, remodeling houses and loving the concreteness of it all!
I think more to the point as far as 'credentials' is not what one's pedigree is, but what their current knowledge is on evolutionary theory. I will admit that my reading on evolution (except for an occasional article now and then) went back many years to high school and college, but I have certainly had quite a refresher course in this forum. Thanks all for that.
I have also looked at the various creationists and other religious websites. Science is science, and religion is religion, is all I can say. Religion and science can co-exist, except if one believes the bible is the literal truth, and then of course most of science must be rejected. I personally think this latter case is the path to severe cognitive dissonance, headaches, and medication. Or a general retreat from the modern world into a very insular little bubble of 'personal truth'.
QUOTE
[[1]] Why should I care? I respect other people who respect me, regardless of race, colour or creed, and as long as their 'beliefs' don't translate into 'actions' that infringe on the rights of others. Animals are as animals do...animals lack the wherewithal to REASON IN THE ABSTRACT to 'get out of the box' of instinctive response and feedback mechanisms. If YOU behave such as to display a lack reason, and only operate on 'instinctive' reactions against science and scientific evidence rather than honest debate, then who is behaving like an 'animal', you or I? You are mistaken: science (like evolution) has NO 'intent'; and since we are scientists, we follow the logic and evidence implied/discovered via the OBJECTIVE scientific method procedures...nothing more, nothing less. Any 'intent' on our 'side' is purely imputed by YOU; which means also that any 'intent' is YOURS and NOT 'ours'.
Why should I care about you? I'll respect you when you respect me. You see how silly it sounds when it comes right back at you?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| [[1]] Why should I care? I respect other people who respect me, regardless of race, colour or creed, and as long as their 'beliefs' don't translate into 'actions' that infringe on the rights of others. Animals are as animals do...animals lack the wherewithal to REASON IN THE ABSTRACT to 'get out of the box' of instinctive response and feedback mechanisms. If YOU behave such as to display a lack reason, and only operate on 'instinctive' reactions against science and scientific evidence rather than honest debate, then who is behaving like an 'animal', you or I? You are mistaken: science (like evolution) has NO 'intent'; and since we are scientists, we follow the logic and evidence implied/discovered via the OBJECTIVE scientific method procedures...nothing more, nothing less. Any 'intent' on our 'side' is purely imputed by YOU; which means also that any 'intent' is YOURS and NOT 'ours'. |
Why should I care about you? I'll respect you when you respect me. You see how silly it sounds when it comes right back at you?
[[2]] If you really "don't give a dang", then why are you moved to immediately insult me with that crack about 'banana choir section'? And what have you not understood about "science doesn't have any 'intention' of ANY sort; least of all 'proving' the existence or otherwise of YOUR 'god'. If science is guilty of anything, it is TOTAL INDIFFERENCE to both YOU and your 'god'. So give that particular accusation/challenge a rest, will you Mess? It's 'not a good look' for you when someone has to repeat this now-too-oft-explained and OBVIOUS 'fact of life' to you.
Because I thought it was funny and very clever.
I don't have a problem with science. I have a problem with evolution.
I say that you are not indifferent towards me and my God because you teach that we came from animals. All historical records regarding the Judeo Christian religion point to a special creation of human beings. If I wanted to get along with everybody I could just say 'I don't have a problem with evolution' - like some of the churches someone (birdan?) just mentioned. It's not that I don't want to get along (I certainly don't enjoy the abuse) - I just don't see the similarity between any animals of any kind in relation to humans.
For the life of me I cannot understand why I cannot get this across to you. There is no animal on this planet that displays human qualities.
If I could see a community of primates that displayed anything at all resembling human qualities - I could see some merit in evolution. But there is nothing. While humans have historical human accounts and documents up the ying yang to support the idea of a God and a special creation of human beings (and animals for that matter) - evolutionists have nothing. God said animals were created after 'their kind' - so monkeys have various traits but are of one kind, and so it goes for every animal down the line.
I posted a very interesting article just a few days ago - a peer reviewed science article with an evolution slant. This article stated that humans have about a 20% increase in intelligence over primates. (for the record, I can just as easily put an ID slant on this article). Where did this extra 20% intelligence come from? Not one of you responded to that article.
There's another article about how white people evolved from black people. Many people (including many Christians) believe that Africa is the cradle of civilization and that all human life originated there from one set of DNA. All indications are that the first two human beings were black. As population spread to northern areas, certain information was lost and/or not needed in the colder climates......or something like that. I'm operating from memory on this story. There is not a prejudiced bone in my body - so I have no problem with this. How does this square with your current knowledge of evolution? Can you provide me with a diagram of some sort that would prove this? Maybe there was a time in our history where God mutated the primates and increased their intelligence so they would become more like 'their image'.
I can't wait to see everyone's response to this story. It's not my story - it's a science story - so don't go picking on me now.
QUOTE
[[3]]Whatever 'beliefs' science holds are mere 'working assumptions' until FURTHER objective evidence is forthcoming that will cause that science to correct/refine those working assumptions. Religion has no comparable mechanism; and even in the unlikely event that such a mechanism could be found, such a mechanism would have NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE upon which it could act...either to arrive at 'first' assumptions, or to 'correct' any such assumptions. Religion and superstition are by their very nature 'intractable' for scientific treatment...hence why any attempts to treat such things as 'equal' to 'science' are tragi-comically misplaced, and doomed to both logical and practical FAILURE.
How conveeeeeenient. That's like saying my God changes to suit the times. NOT. My God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. No changes necessary - because He got it right the first time.
Evolution is the one without a mechanism. Spiritual rebirth, or being born again, is the Christian's proof and mechanism. Experienced by billions of people.
Did anyone watch the Barbara Walters - what is heaven special on Tuesday night - the 20th? They actually did a good job with the Christian portion of that program. The Mohammed Muslim viewpoint was quite shocking and direct - and was very similar to how newdud feels about the devilish god he seems to worship.
Science and religion need to work together. That's all there is to it. Science has no mechanism for connecting the spiritual with the material. That's why we need to work together. Everyone benefits. 95% of the people in the world believe in God and will be very happy to see this connection made. We're tired of trying to pacify a 5% minority. I'm sorry you're offended - but you offend me. No personal hate intended. Nothing personal.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| [[3]]Whatever 'beliefs' science holds are mere 'working assumptions' until FURTHER objective evidence is forthcoming that will cause that science to correct/refine those working assumptions. Religion has no comparable mechanism; and even in the unlikely event that such a mechanism could be found, such a mechanism would have NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE upon which it could act...either to arrive at 'first' assumptions, or to 'correct' any such assumptions. Religion and superstition are by their very nature 'intractable' for scientific treatment...hence why any attempts to treat such things as 'equal' to 'science' are tragi-comically misplaced, and doomed to both logical and practical FAILURE. |
How conveeeeeenient. That's like saying my God changes to suit the times. NOT. My God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. No changes necessary - because He got it right the first time.
Evolution is the one without a mechanism. Spiritual rebirth, or being born again, is the Christian's proof and mechanism. Experienced by billions of people.
Did anyone watch the Barbara Walters - what is heaven special on Tuesday night - the 20th? They actually did a good job with the Christian portion of that program. The Mohammed Muslim viewpoint was quite shocking and direct - and was very similar to how newdud feels about the devilish god he seems to worship.
Science and religion need to work together. That's all there is to it. Science has no mechanism for connecting the spiritual with the material. That's why we need to work together. Everyone benefits. 95% of the people in the world believe in God and will be very happy to see this connection made. We're tired of trying to pacify a 5% minority. I'm sorry you're offended - but you offend me. No personal hate intended. Nothing personal.
[[4]] Apparently, your two 'poster boys' (whom you have been moved to praise before now) DO believe in evolution.....dadl in "Super-Duper-Hyper-Evolution"; and S. Bilderback in a "pre-programmed-Evolution". Would they be some of these "atheists" you speak of?
I consider Bilderback a good example of someone who can debate without taking things too personally. I don't know about Dad1 - seems to me you have been talking to him a great deal more than I have. He has his beliefs and that's fine - I have no desire to discuss it with him - because I don't agree with him.
I don't have a problem with what people choose to believe in, really. But I would like the opportunity to debate it in a civilized manner. I don't want to be attacked because of what I believe. If I am, I'm just telling you, you'll just get it right back.
QUOTE
[[5]] No 'proof' of any kind have you posted; but rather 'wishes' and thoughts and ideas as to how the world SHOULD be rather than what the reality shows it to be. Just because YOU aren't comfortable with YOUR perception of reality doesn't mean others can't handle the OBJECTIVE truth that is all around anyone who bothers to look and REALLY 'understand' instead of trying to 'superstitiously rationalise it away' as you and others of your bent seem to want to do at all costs to reason and enlightenment for others not of your bent. Closed minds? If you have the courage, look at yourself in the mirror when next you accuse others here of being closed-minded. That is all that needs to be said on that score, I think, Mess.
This may be a science forum - but it is not school. I'm just here to have what I hope will be friendly conversations about new ideas. Maybe I'm looking for a scientific slant on certain ideas that I have. Thus far, you haven't been very helpful.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| [[5]] No 'proof' of any kind have you posted; but rather 'wishes' and thoughts and ideas as to how the world SHOULD be rather than what the reality shows it to be. Just because YOU aren't comfortable with YOUR perception of reality doesn't mean others can't handle the OBJECTIVE truth that is all around anyone who bothers to look and REALLY 'understand' instead of trying to 'superstitiously rationalise it away' as you and others of your bent seem to want to do at all costs to reason and enlightenment for others not of your bent. Closed minds? If you have the courage, look at yourself in the mirror when next you accuse others here of being closed-minded. That is all that needs to be said on that score, I think, Mess. |
This may be a science forum - but it is not school. I'm just here to have what I hope will be friendly conversations about new ideas. Maybe I'm looking for a scientific slant on certain ideas that I have. Thus far, you haven't been very helpful.
[[6]] Believe it or not, I have read all that you, SoLoved, dadl & S. Bilderback have posted...which is why I know that what you have put forward are in no way 'legitimate in a 'scientifically tenable' sense. And that such was pointed out in the reasoned rebuttals to same from MANY here. Such an exercise as you wish me to undertake now would serve no good purpose...it would merely be 'rubbing salt into your wounds', and I'm not the sadistic-dadl type who enjoys such things. Besides, it has been shown that both reason and repetition is lost on you and your type....and futility is not my bag, either.
Well, I'm flattered that you honored my posts with your eyeballs - perhaps you could engage your brain next, heh? Like I said, this is not school. I see this as an area to discuss ideas that relate to Creation (Creation/evoluion forum). If you want to post new theories and such, I'm happy to listen and respond. If you're just going to copy and paste - then what's the point? I'm not saying you shouldn't copy and paste pertinent information - but what I'm really looking for here is personal commentary. UNLIKE YOU GUYS (Not all you guys) - I do value your personal commentary. I just don't value name calling and personal attacks. I consider such behavior utterly abhorrent. What bothers me even more is how I could stoop to your level. Me bad.
QUOTE
[[7]]I disagree VEHEMENTLY with newguy as a RELIGIONIST PER SE; HOWEVER, I RESPECT newguy as a PERSON PER SE who displays integrity AT ALL COSTS to himself. Like evolution and religion, the 'Religionist and the Person' are two MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE areas of respect/interaction. I know it is difficult for you to understand this, mainly because you have demonstrated that you also find it difficult to understand that evolution and religion are also mutually exclusive areas of human affairs. And since I began to truly think for myself at age nine, I can safely say that 'fear' is conquered by 'knowledge'...so I can assure YOU that neither you NOR newguy hold any terrors for yours truly...I am afraid of NOTHING except leaving my work unfinished....but what will you?...one must play as best as one can the cards that reality deals out to one...musn't one? I am moved to wonder if YOU are playing your cards as best you can, given the 'intellectual handicap' that is 'superstitious habit'.
Hear that newdud - he vehemently disagrees with your stuff. But then you go all goofy on me RC - by inserting the word integrity. What is integrous about name calling, not answering direct questions, 'rebuking' his wife, calling people (not just me) liars, teaching that his god will make you burn in hell for your disbelief, etc?
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. In order for their to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god - there must be inclusiveness.
I am not superstitious. I'm not the one who still believes in demons, remember? I'm the one who's calling for a change in the church, remember? I'm the one who thinks we have a God who loves all His creation, remember? I'm the one who believes in a God of love, not a god of eternal conscious punishment. Why do you hate this message so?
This post is getting way too long.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| [[7]]I disagree VEHEMENTLY with newguy as a RELIGIONIST PER SE; HOWEVER, I RESPECT newguy as a PERSON PER SE who displays integrity AT ALL COSTS to himself. Like evolution and religion, the 'Religionist and the Person' are two MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE areas of respect/interaction. I know it is difficult for you to understand this, mainly because you have demonstrated that you also find it difficult to understand that evolution and religion are also mutually exclusive areas of human affairs. And since I began to truly think for myself at age nine, I can safely say that 'fear' is conquered by 'knowledge'...so I can assure YOU that neither you NOR newguy hold any terrors for yours truly...I am afraid of NOTHING except leaving my work unfinished....but what will you?...one must play as best as one can the cards that reality deals out to one...musn't one? I am moved to wonder if YOU are playing your cards as best you can, given the 'intellectual handicap' that is 'superstitious habit'. |
Hear that newdud - he vehemently disagrees with your stuff. But then you go all goofy on me RC - by inserting the word integrity. What is integrous about name calling, not answering direct questions, 'rebuking' his wife, calling people (not just me) liars, teaching that his god will make you burn in hell for your disbelief, etc?
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. In order for their to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god - there must be inclusiveness.
I am not superstitious. I'm not the one who still believes in demons, remember? I'm the one who's calling for a change in the church, remember? I'm the one who thinks we have a God who loves all His creation, remember? I'm the one who believes in a God of love, not a god of eternal conscious punishment. Why do you hate this message so?
This post is getting way too long.
[[8]]Have you considered the possibility that less science than would be desirable is being discussed in such forums because YOU BRING NO SCIENCE TO IT YOURSELF? Meaning that the scope of what science arguments WE can put in reply must perforce be greatly circumscribed by the limitations put on such input when it is called upon to address 'non-science' arguments.
Everytime I bring science, what I consider good stuff, no one responds to it. I sit here and wonder what the heck is wrong with you guys. Then I come to the conclusion that you just don't know, can't think for yourself, so you don't respond to the issues - you start with the personal attacks. Go back and look - see for yourself.
You guys have been going back and forth with Dad1 for quite a while now. What in his hypothesis (?) do you consider science? Or are you just playing with him? Which is pretty much what I figure you're doing.
QUOTE
[[9 & 10]] So, it's completely up to YOU to say what is taught about 'god' in our schools, is it? We who have just as much, if not more, comprehension than yourself of the religion that we grew up with (and many still maintain, in (heretofore) 'peaceful co-existence with science) DO have a say in HOW it is taught...ie., it should be taught as what it IS: Religion...and NOT science. Has THAT penetrated the ivory dome? Any one so blinkered as you and your type have NO BUSINESS TELLING ANYONE WHAT TO DO ABOUT ANYTHING AT ALL, let alone what happens in secular schools.
These schools are designed to produce 'objective thinkers' capable of eventually fitting into a society whose aim is to ensure the running of essential services to ALL. This is why we pay taxes: because the people who will keep the society functioning at all levels from sewage to medicine, from communications to transport, from personal development to social cohesion etc, etc, will come from such a system of education. So as long as your toilets work, your transportation works, your TV/Computer works etc, you are SHARING in the benefits we ALL pay for whether you 'utilise' them 'to the hilt' or just rarely...in any event, AS LONG AS THEY ARE MAINTAINED TO BE THERE WHEN YOU NEED THEM, we all benefit sooner or later from such 'secular' institutional education. Like newguy and many others say, anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL to 'modify' his/her interaction with society's institutional systems/benefits.
These schools are designed to produce 'objective thinkers' capable of eventually fitting into a society whose aim is to ensure the running of essential services to ALL. This is why we pay taxes: because the people who will keep the society functioning at all levels from sewage to medicine, from communications to transport, from personal development to social cohesion etc, etc, will come from such a system of education. So as long as your toilets work, your transportation works, your TV/Computer works etc, you are SHARING in the benefits we ALL pay for whether you 'utilise' them 'to the hilt' or just rarely...in any event, AS LONG AS THEY ARE MAINTAINED TO BE THERE WHEN YOU NEED THEM, we all benefit sooner or later from such 'secular' institutional education. Like newguy and many others say, anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL to 'modify' his/her interaction with society's institutional systems/benefits.
So, not only am I not allowed to talk about science - now I can't talk about anything at all. Wow. For being part of the atheist minority - you sure make an awful lot of noise. Since you're an atheist you of all people - are not qualified to discuss creation. See how silly you sound when it comes right back at you?
I'm pretty much fine with the second part of your paragraph.
I don't have a problem with religion being taught in schools. That's the best idea you've had so far.
They should teach evolution in private schools or seperate classes - and only for the parents who choose to allow their children to hear it. You, an atheist, should have no say in discussing the origins of human beings to children.
Like it or not, evolution is forced on all children in public schools. This needs to be changed - because this is completely unfair to children and their parents. It hurts the image of teachers - because parents have to tell their children that their teachers don't know any better.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| [[9 & 10]] So, it's completely up to YOU to say what is taught about 'god' in our schools, is it? We who have just as much, if not more, comprehension than yourself of the religion that we grew up with (and many still maintain, in (heretofore) 'peaceful co-existence with science) DO have a say in HOW it is taught...ie., it should be taught as what it IS: Religion...and NOT science. Has THAT penetrated the ivory dome? Any one so blinkered as you and your type have NO BUSINESS TELLING ANYONE WHAT TO DO ABOUT ANYTHING AT ALL, let alone what happens in secular schools. These schools are designed to produce 'objective thinkers' capable of eventually fitting into a society whose aim is to ensure the running of essential services to ALL. This is why we pay taxes: because the people who will keep the society functioning at all levels from sewage to medicine, from communications to transport, from personal development to social cohesion etc, etc, will come from such a system of education. So as long as your toilets work, your transportation works, your TV/Computer works etc, you are SHARING in the benefits we ALL pay for whether you 'utilise' them 'to the hilt' or just rarely...in any event, AS LONG AS THEY ARE MAINTAINED TO BE THERE WHEN YOU NEED THEM, we all benefit sooner or later from such 'secular' institutional education. Like newguy and many others say, anything else is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL to 'modify' his/her interaction with society's institutional systems/benefits. |
So, not only am I not allowed to talk about science - now I can't talk about anything at all. Wow. For being part of the atheist minority - you sure make an awful lot of noise. Since you're an atheist you of all people - are not qualified to discuss creation. See how silly you sound when it comes right back at you?
I'm pretty much fine with the second part of your paragraph.
I don't have a problem with religion being taught in schools. That's the best idea you've had so far.
They should teach evolution in private schools or seperate classes - and only for the parents who choose to allow their children to hear it. You, an atheist, should have no say in discussing the origins of human beings to children.
Like it or not, evolution is forced on all children in public schools. This needs to be changed - because this is completely unfair to children and their parents. It hurts the image of teachers - because parents have to tell their children that their teachers don't know any better.
[[111]] Like I've been hitting my head against a brick wall. How does it make YOU feel?
About the same.
Now, if you really want to throw me for a loop.....ask me what I do want to talk about. I've completely forgotten now.
birdan,
I'm in shock. Thank you for sorta coming to my defense. Must be the season.
As far as your credentials, I believe you have a bone to pick with Steveo. You're not qualified to discuss Creation/evolution in this forum. Unless of course he's reconsidered the standards.
What about your current knowledge of God - you can know evolution like the back of your hand - but if you haven't studied God - then how can you be qualified to discuss Creation in a Creation/evolution forum? You see how silly this sounds when it comes back at you?
QUOTE
have also looked at the various creationists and other religious websites. Science is science, and religion is religion, is all I can say. Religion and science can co-exist, except if one believes the bible is the literal truth, and then of course most of science must be rejected. I personally think this latter case is the path to severe cognitive dissonance, headaches, and medication. Or a general retreat from the modern world into a very insular little bubble of 'personal truth'.
I agree with the basic premise of your statement, your appeal to reason. Creationists do have some very valid arguments - denying this would just be ignorant. Most of science would not need to be rejected, only most of evolution.
Age is open for discussion - at least with me anyway. There's a lot of things that are open for discussion with me. Now, why don't we all be good little boys and girls and show people how well we can get along, heh?
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 22 2005, 04:38 AM)
Science and religion need to work together. That's all there is to it. Science has no mechanism for connecting the spiritual with the material. That's why we need to work together. Everyone benefits. 95% of the people in the world believe in God and will be very happy to see this connection made. We're tired of trying to pacify a 5% minority. I'm sorry you're offended - but you offend me. No personal hate intended. Nothing personal.
So science vs. religion is a 5% / 95% split? By saying this you are equating science with atheism, which is absolutely not true, whether you believe it or not. Science and religion can co-exist, unless of course one's religion rejects science, which still does not make all scientists atheists. Some are, but most simply have beliefs different from that extreme viewpoint. Science is neutral on the subject of religion. The supernatural cannot be examined by science (hence the name supernatural), which relies of objective, verifiable, falsifiable evidence.
If you believe that science = atheism, then there is no possibility for "working together". That is a prejudiced, close-minded, untrue view of the world, which is the antithesis of science. If you believe in a literal interpretation of the bible (young earth creationist), then you must by your beliefs reject science. And not just evolution. You must also reject geology, astronomy, bio-chemistry, cosmology, physics, chemistry, archeology, paleantology, biogenesis, etc., since you must falsify the evidence from all these disciplines that support evolution.
You must also reject the basic premise of science: to follow the physical evidence wherever it leads. From the Answers In Genesis Statement of Faith, (D) General, point 6:
QUOTE
By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.
Young earth creationism begins with a conclusion, and then ignores, distorts, misinterprets, mis-quotes, misrepresents the physical evidence to fit that conclusion. Which is anathema to anyone who accepts true science. If that's your belief, that's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs. Just don't try to pass it off as science, nor try to foist it on other people.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record. |
Young earth creationism begins with a conclusion, and then ignores, distorts, misinterprets, mis-quotes, misrepresents the physical evidence to fit that conclusion. Which is anathema to anyone who accepts true science. If that's your belief, that's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs. Just don't try to pass it off as science, nor try to foist it on other people.
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. In order for their to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god - there must be inclusiveness.
I agree that for there to be peace among the 95% of the world who believes in a god there must be inclusiveness. But the lack of peace among that 95% is not about science. It is mostly sectarian and ethnic violence. I haven't heard of one armed conflict being started over science, nor have I heard of armed scientists starting a war, nor have I heard of an army of atheists starting a war. Wars in the world today are ethnic and religious conflicts. In the words of Steven Colbert, "Religion: a healing force in a world torn apart by ...... religion".
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 22 2005, 04:38 AM)
What about your current knowledge of God - you can know evolution like the back of your hand - but if you haven't studied God - then how can you be qualified to discuss Creation in a Creation/evolution forum? You see how silly this sounds when it comes back at you?
I have studied God quite thoroughly, thank you, and that is no impediment to my understanding and acceptance of science. If my God is not the same as your God, which is not the same as Newguy's God, which is not the same as Dadl's God, which is not the same as Bilderback's God, which is not the same as Jerry Duke's God, which is not the same as SoLoved's God, .... that is of no concern to me. None of you that seem to reject the basic tenets of science can seem to agree on who your God is, so how do you expect that to be included in an 'objective' discipline?
A good quote from Ned Flanders of the Simpsons:
"Science is like the blabber-mouth that ruins the end of a movie. There are things we don't want to know! Important things!"
--Ned Flanders
"Science is like the blabber-mouth that ruins the end of a movie. There are things we don't want to know! Important things!"
--Ned Flanders
QUOTE (Messenger+Dec 22 2005, 04:38 AM)
You see how silly it sounds when it comes right back at you?
Mess,
I choose first to comment on the above 'motif' "question" running through your post.
"Consider the 'source'" is my answer to your question in each instance you put it. Meaning that it is not I who lied; it is not I who insists that 'wishful thinking' is equated with 'scientific evidence'; it is not I who thinks with a closed mind; it is not I who is determined to destroy objective evidence to appease 'religious' tenets; etc etc etc. In short: when "it" comes from ME, "it" is based on testable evidence; but when "it" comes from YOU, "it" is based on wilful ignorance. Where is the valid comparison implied in your use of your 'motif' "question"?
The rest of your post is just more of the same that has been covered by myself and others more than once. There is nothing original in your assertions/wishes...it is tiresome and dreary to survey the same 'landscape' traversed so unsteadily by SoLoved and now yourself. The phrase Ad nauseam just about covers all such 'debates' as these, predicated as they are on your optimistic delusion that WE WILL (by god's help; joke SoLoved) eventually 'see the light' and conform to what YOU say, and hang the evidence. The real world doesn't work that way, Mess; so you may as well call it a day. Good luck with your "god, here I am, use me" messiah complex; and your 'preterism' re-write of the bible.
Sincerely and without hate; yours,
RealityCheck.
.
Mess,
I choose first to comment on the above 'motif' "question" running through your post.
"Consider the 'source'" is my answer to your question in each instance you put it. Meaning that it is not I who lied; it is not I who insists that 'wishful thinking' is equated with 'scientific evidence'; it is not I who thinks with a closed mind; it is not I who is determined to destroy objective evidence to appease 'religious' tenets; etc etc etc. In short: when "it" comes from ME, "it" is based on testable evidence; but when "it" comes from YOU, "it" is based on wilful ignorance. Where is the valid comparison implied in your use of your 'motif' "question"?
The rest of your post is just more of the same that has been covered by myself and others more than once. There is nothing original in your assertions/wishes...it is tiresome and dreary to survey the same 'landscape' traversed so unsteadily by SoLoved and now yourself. The phrase Ad nauseam just about covers all such 'debates' as these, predicated as they are on your optimistic delusion that WE WILL (by god's help; joke SoLoved) eventually 'see the light' and conform to what YOU say, and hang the evidence. The real world doesn't work that way, Mess; so you may as well call it a day. Good luck with your "god, here I am, use me" messiah complex; and your 'preterism' re-write of the bible.
Sincerely and without hate; yours,
RealityCheck.
.
Sorry if these have been addressed. I’m playing catch-up in this forum.
Last time I checked, it was the laws of the “human government” that was relied upon rather than your religion. As far as inferiority, I think a set of laws that recognize rights inherent due to the fact you exist rather than original sin and no inherent right is superior to the xian mythos and related “laws”.
Last time I checked, it was the laws of the “human government” that was relied upon rather than your religion. As far as inferiority, I think a set of laws that recognize rights inherent due to the fact you exist rather than original sin and no inherent right is superior to the xian mythos and related “laws”.
Messenger
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you are filled with religious and/or Christian hatred.
Typical. They call you to task when you state fact and when you show that what you stated is fact and does not support heir claims or that their claims are in error, you are possessed of hatred for them, their religion, their race or whatever. This type of mentality serves no one, especially those with the mindset in question.
Public prayer by our politicians is a pandering move. Judging by their actions and how they live their lives, most politicians are anything but xian. As far as the 10 Commandments go(should be capitalized, funny as to why it was not), this is a typical comment of xians, but they fail to mention the other documents placed beside the 10 Commandments some of which are religious and all of which are historical and related to laws, hence why they are there.
GS,
I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore.
It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody.
I'm not avoiding the issue - I just don't know what else to say. So, we come to an impasse and have to just agree to disagree.
Ask me a direct question and I'll try to respond though.
GS,
I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore.
It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody.
I'm not avoiding the issue - I just don't know what else to say. So, we come to an impasse and have to just agree to disagree.
Ask me a direct question and I'll try to respond though.
Public prayer by our politicians is a pandering move. Judging by their actions and how they live their lives, most politicians are anything but xian. As far as the 10 Commandments go(should be capitalized, funny as to why it was not), this is a typical comment of xians, but they fail to mention the other documents placed beside the 10 Commandments some of which are religious and all of which are historical and related to laws, hence why they are there.
Well, they've been praying for over 200 years now, and it's a good thing, too.
I'm fine with the other documents. The point, that you obviously missed, is simply that it was there. It's part of the fabric of our society.
RC,
Thank you. There is a couple of errors in your quote though:
1. No re-write of the Bible is necessary. That's the whole point. For 1700 years now, some people in the church have been misinterpreting the Bible. Not everyone, there have been many well know church leaders/founders that have held a Preterism view. The Bible means what it says. Some of those in the church - insofar as it relates to Revelation - have had to twist the words of the Bible to get it to fit to their beliefs. I do not have to twist anything - I just have to read it.
2. I don't have a messiah complex. There is only one Messiah and His name is Jesus Christ. I'm just willingly making myself available, that's all.
Jesus is the reason for the season. Season's Greetings. HoHoHo
The point was that you went off topic and claimed a personal bias rather than an analytical approach. By design, intent and law, this country is not xian. The founders may have been xian or derivatives, but they had the wisdom to create a country where no religion was tied to the government.
Xian heritage is one thing, xian foundation is another. Our laws are not based in the xian religion, our form of government is not xian and our legal system is not xian. So where exactly do you find the xian faith in our government?
The point was that you went off topic and claimed a personal bias rather than an analytical approach. By design, intent and law, this country is not xian. The founders may have been xian or derivatives, but they had the wisdom to create a country where no religion was tied to the government.
Xian heritage is one thing, xian foundation is another. Our laws are not based in the xian religion, our form of government is not xian and our legal system is not xian. So where exactly do you find the xian faith in our government?
I'm not avoiding the issue - I just don't know what else to say. So, we come to an impasse and have to just agree to disagree.
No you did not. Agreeing to disagree is one thing. Claiming that the opposition has a hatred for what you represent is being intellectually dishonest and a cop-out.
No point. I know what you believe.
No point. I know what you believe.
I'm fine with the other documents. The point, that you obviously missed, is simply that it was there. It's part of the fabric of our society.
And the point you missed and keep missing is the reason it is there among other historical documents dealing with law.
SOme are more qualified than others. Debating is fine, which I noticed I used in my last post also, so this may be pretty convoluted. If the debating consists of thinking of an apparent problem, and asking the question, and then having it answered, sure, anyone can do that. But to not be an expert, and claim something is wrong without knowing about it is not debating. Thats irresponsible, and in my opinion, idiotic. I do not claim to know the bible to be wrong. I have asked questions about things that I think are inconsistent, and had them answered. I do not believe in the genisis story, and I know science shows it to be incorrect. When claiming evolution to be wrong, you better be an expert on it, or else the real experts will make you look stupid. And that has happened in these forums by people who try to shoot evolution down. This is what I mean by 'not qualified to debate'. The type of debating where you come into it thinking you know everything, but in reality know very little about the subject.
Hope that clarifies.
QUOTE
Jerry Duke
So what? Human government is an inferior alternative to the direct rule of Christ. Nevertheless, God still governs the nations
So what? Human government is an inferior alternative to the direct rule of Christ. Nevertheless, God still governs the nations
Last time I checked, it was the laws of the “human government” that was relied upon rather than your religion. As far as inferiority, I think a set of laws that recognize rights inherent due to the fact you exist rather than original sin and no inherent right is superior to the xian mythos and related “laws”.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Jerry Duke So what? Human government is an inferior alternative to the direct rule of Christ. Nevertheless, God still governs the nations |
Last time I checked, it was the laws of the “human government” that was relied upon rather than your religion. As far as inferiority, I think a set of laws that recognize rights inherent due to the fact you exist rather than original sin and no inherent right is superior to the xian mythos and related “laws”.
Messenger
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you are filled with religious and/or Christian hatred.
Typical. They call you to task when you state fact and when you show that what you stated is fact and does not support heir claims or that their claims are in error, you are possessed of hatred for them, their religion, their race or whatever. This type of mentality serves no one, especially those with the mindset in question.
QUOTE
Messenger
Secular goverments do not ask for God's blessings, do not start political doings with prayers, do not start the court sessions with prayers, do not have the 10 commandments plastered on the Supreme Court building.
Secular goverments do not ask for God's blessings, do not start political doings with prayers, do not start the court sessions with prayers, do not have the 10 commandments plastered on the Supreme Court building.
Public prayer by our politicians is a pandering move. Judging by their actions and how they live their lives, most politicians are anything but xian. As far as the 10 Commandments go(should be capitalized, funny as to why it was not), this is a typical comment of xians, but they fail to mention the other documents placed beside the 10 Commandments some of which are religious and all of which are historical and related to laws, hence why they are there.
QUOTE
QUOTE
Messenger
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you are filled with religious and/or Christian hatred.
Typical. They call you to task when you state fact and when you show that what you stated is fact and does not support heir claims or that their claims are in error, you are possessed of hatred for them, their religion, their race or whatever. This type of mentality serves no one, especially those with the mindset in question
Messenger
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you are filled with religious and/or Christian hatred.
Typical. They call you to task when you state fact and when you show that what you stated is fact and does not support heir claims or that their claims are in error, you are possessed of hatred for them, their religion, their race or whatever. This type of mentality serves no one, especially those with the mindset in question
GS,
I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore.
It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody.
I'm not avoiding the issue - I just don't know what else to say. So, we come to an impasse and have to just agree to disagree.
Ask me a direct question and I'll try to respond though.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| QUOTE Messenger We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's obvious that you are filled with religious and/or Christian hatred. Typical. They call you to task when you state fact and when you show that what you stated is fact and does not support heir claims or that their claims are in error, you are possessed of hatred for them, their religion, their race or whatever. This type of mentality serves no one, especially those with the mindset in question |
GS,
I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore.
It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody.
I'm not avoiding the issue - I just don't know what else to say. So, we come to an impasse and have to just agree to disagree.
Ask me a direct question and I'll try to respond though.
Public prayer by our politicians is a pandering move. Judging by their actions and how they live their lives, most politicians are anything but xian. As far as the 10 Commandments go(should be capitalized, funny as to why it was not), this is a typical comment of xians, but they fail to mention the other documents placed beside the 10 Commandments some of which are religious and all of which are historical and related to laws, hence why they are there.
Well, they've been praying for over 200 years now, and it's a good thing, too.
I'm fine with the other documents. The point, that you obviously missed, is simply that it was there. It's part of the fabric of our society.
QUOTE
Good luck with your "god, here I am, use me" messiah complex; and your 'preterism' re-write of the bible.
RC,
Thank you. There is a couple of errors in your quote though:
1. No re-write of the Bible is necessary. That's the whole point. For 1700 years now, some people in the church have been misinterpreting the Bible. Not everyone, there have been many well know church leaders/founders that have held a Preterism view. The Bible means what it says. Some of those in the church - insofar as it relates to Revelation - have had to twist the words of the Bible to get it to fit to their beliefs. I do not have to twist anything - I just have to read it.
2. I don't have a messiah complex. There is only one Messiah and His name is Jesus Christ. I'm just willingly making myself available, that's all.
Jesus is the reason for the season. Season's Greetings. HoHoHo
QUOTE
GS,
I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore.
It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody.
I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore.
It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody.
The point was that you went off topic and claimed a personal bias rather than an analytical approach. By design, intent and law, this country is not xian. The founders may have been xian or derivatives, but they had the wisdom to create a country where no religion was tied to the government.
Xian heritage is one thing, xian foundation is another. Our laws are not based in the xian religion, our form of government is not xian and our legal system is not xian. So where exactly do you find the xian faith in our government?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| GS, I don't know how to respond really. I have posted plenty of documents to rebut whatever comes up regarding this country's (US) Christian heritage. It gets to the point where you don't know who to believe anymore. It's kinda like my 12 point science class deal. Pretty soon we can't trust anybody. |
The point was that you went off topic and claimed a personal bias rather than an analytical approach. By design, intent and law, this country is not xian. The founders may have been xian or derivatives, but they had the wisdom to create a country where no religion was tied to the government.
Xian heritage is one thing, xian foundation is another. Our laws are not based in the xian religion, our form of government is not xian and our legal system is not xian. So where exactly do you find the xian faith in our government?
I'm not avoiding the issue - I just don't know what else to say. So, we come to an impasse and have to just agree to disagree.
No you did not. Agreeing to disagree is one thing. Claiming that the opposition has a hatred for what you represent is being intellectually dishonest and a cop-out.
QUOTE
Ask me a direct question and I'll try to respond though.
No point. I know what you believe.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Ask me a direct question and I'll try to respond though. |
No point. I know what you believe.
I'm fine with the other documents. The point, that you obviously missed, is simply that it was there. It's part of the fabric of our society.
And the point you missed and keep missing is the reason it is there among other historical documents dealing with law.
all people did not come frome cave men or neanderthals, that comment must not
be based on actual research and fact, because a little over 6,000 years ago it was
only a certain people living in caves on all fours and had to be recivilized by the
original inhabitants of the earth. there are some people on this plaent that has been
here since the earth has been here and scientist has not yet found their beginning.
it is true that the bible has many errors and contradictions in it, thats due to the
truth of its text falling into the hands of some people who seek to hide the truth
and cover themselves from consequences. so for this book called"holy" bible to
be properly understood we must know math,science,botany,astronomy and so on.
all of these subjects tie into answers people search for containing ID and EVOLUTION. it seems we are alway discussing the effect of something but not wise
enough with all that we know to find out the true cause of these things.prove to me
that every nation or race of people evolved from some cavy.
be based on actual research and fact, because a little over 6,000 years ago it was
only a certain people living in caves on all fours and had to be recivilized by the
original inhabitants of the earth. there are some people on this plaent that has been
here since the earth has been here and scientist has not yet found their beginning.
it is true that the bible has many errors and contradictions in it, thats due to the
truth of its text falling into the hands of some people who seek to hide the truth
and cover themselves from consequences. so for this book called"holy" bible to
be properly understood we must know math,science,botany,astronomy and so on.
all of these subjects tie into answers people search for containing ID and EVOLUTION. it seems we are alway discussing the effect of something but not wise
enough with all that we know to find out the true cause of these things.prove to me
that every nation or race of people evolved from some cavy.
Messenger, yuo clearly missed my entire point about creditentials. Firstly, if you noticed, I said I was not qualified for this debate, and not even qualified to be in a real physics debate. You missed that. Also, another point is that NONE of use are experts, so trying to destroy a theory that clearly none of understands fully is a waste of time. You can't do it, and I couldn't do it if I wanted to. But this was missed. Thankfully everyone else, who you said I claimed couldn't debate and had to leave did get the point. Please stop slandering me. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you truly did not understand my point, and even that it was probably my fault with poor communication, but I am letting you know now, in clear english what my point was, so do not continue to slander me in the future, thank you.
Steveo,
It sounded to me like you thought that others on this forum were more qualified to discuss Creation (or evolution) than the rest of us.
If we were at Harvard University conducting a professional debate - I would not be 'qualified' and neither would you.
If they let me up there though - I would certainly put on a pretty good show.
Apparently you're trying to say that we 'should not' be discussing it since we 'might not' be qualified to do so?
I don't think I'm wasting my time by debating items of interest to me (and others) here. I think it's fun and interesting (and nerve wracking sometimes).
Nuff said?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Guest_Wallace F,
Welcome and Merry Christmas!
Got milk, er, ah I mean tough skin? You will need that to debate here.
It sounded to me like you thought that others on this forum were more qualified to discuss Creation (or evolution) than the rest of us.
If we were at Harvard University conducting a professional debate - I would not be 'qualified' and neither would you.
If they let me up there though - I would certainly put on a pretty good show.
Apparently you're trying to say that we 'should not' be discussing it since we 'might not' be qualified to do so?
I don't think I'm wasting my time by debating items of interest to me (and others) here. I think it's fun and interesting (and nerve wracking sometimes).
Nuff said?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Guest_Wallace F,
Welcome and Merry Christmas!
Got milk, er, ah I mean tough skin? You will need that to debate here.
QUOTE
It sounded to me like you thought that others on this forum were more qualified to discuss Creation (or evolution) than the rest of us.
If we were at Harvard University conducting a professional debate - I would not be 'qualified' and neither would you.
If they let me up there though - I would certainly put on a pretty good show.
Apparently you're trying to say that we 'should not' be discussing it since we 'might not' be qualified to do so?
I don't think I'm wasting my time by debating items of interest to me (and others) here. I think it's fun and interesting (and nerve wracking sometimes).
Nuff said?
If we were at Harvard University conducting a professional debate - I would not be 'qualified' and neither would you.
If they let me up there though - I would certainly put on a pretty good show.
Apparently you're trying to say that we 'should not' be discussing it since we 'might not' be qualified to do so?
I don't think I'm wasting my time by debating items of interest to me (and others) here. I think it's fun and interesting (and nerve wracking sometimes).
Nuff said?
SOme are more qualified than others. Debating is fine, which I noticed I used in my last post also, so this may be pretty convoluted. If the debating consists of thinking of an apparent problem, and asking the question, and then having it answered, sure, anyone can do that. But to not be an expert, and claim something is wrong without knowing about it is not debating. Thats irresponsible, and in my opinion, idiotic. I do not claim to know the bible to be wrong. I have asked questions about things that I think are inconsistent, and had them answered. I do not believe in the genisis story, and I know science shows it to be incorrect. When claiming evolution to be wrong, you better be an expert on it, or else the real experts will make you look stupid. And that has happened in these forums by people who try to shoot evolution down. This is what I mean by 'not qualified to debate'. The type of debating where you come into it thinking you know everything, but in reality know very little about the subject.
Hope that clarifies.
QUOTE (Messenger+)
1. No re-write of the Bible is necessary. That's the whole point. For 1700 years now, some people in the church have been misinterpreting the Bible. Not everyone, there have been many well know church leaders/founders that have held a Preterism view. The Bible means what it says. Some of those in the church - insofar as it relates to Revelation - have had to twist the words of the Bible to get it to fit to their beliefs. I do not have to twist anything - I just have to read it.
So you are saying that there have been and are still 'twisters' involved in the profession/interpretation of the 'bible' and attendant "god/christianity' religion(s). Surprise surprise! Who would-a-thunk-it? Then what is ANYONE to make of ANYTHING in relation to ANY RELIGION except to 'believe' NOT the 'bible/koran' etc., but rather, for one to 'follow' and 'believe', one MUST ONLY 'believe' SOMEONE or OTHERS' INTERPRETATION/PROMULGATION of it? Not a very 'perfect' god/religious text, if you ask me. Thanks but no thanks; I shall leave these arguments on "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" to you christian/religious "scholars" (note I did NOT say "scientists").
Like I said to SoLoved, I know you MEAN WELL (and I applaud your 'good intentions' if not your methods). HOWEVER, as the saying goes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Don't you see the irony in promulgating a way of thinking based only on 'belief'? It is but a short step and a jump from 'religion' to 'superstition', 'cultism' and other mass-manipulating mind-memes used by unscrupulous people to sway gullible/uncritical populaces (steeped in 'religious' instead of 'scientific' thought processes) to do the most unspeakable things. And don't think it won't happen now or in the future, because (as those individuals who come here with their wilful ignorance demonstrate only too well) "there's one born every minute"...and unless those "ones" are given the 'critical/skeptical' wherewithall to 'think for themselves' instead of just 'believing in things', then there's no telling what unspeakble horrors lie in wait for future generations on this planet. Do you see? Good intentions aren't enough; for without critical thought and reasoned action, those good intentions may actually BRING ABOUT that which those same good intentions were meant to avoid. That's as plainly as I can put the dire warning against the present ID/CS tactics to diminish the capacity of science to be ready for the challenges that will face humanity in the testing times to come. I hope you realise from my words that "hate" is NOT my motivator, but LOVE for the future of a noble and worthy life form that evolved from the humblest of beginnings to become one of the (or perhaps the only) product(s) of the universe that brings 'intelligence' and 'appreciation' into an existence/universe that would otherwise have remained 'brutish' and 'unappreciated'. That's it on this aspect, Mess. Now you know exactly where I'm coming from. Nothing personal; no hard feelings on my end. I hope it's the same from yours.
And for an example of this all one needs to do is look at the war on terror lead by the United States. The intentions are good (hopefully - to end terrorism), but the methods being employed are more likely then not going to lead to a new, larger generations of terrorists that became angry because of American actions. I won't call it a fact, but I will predict that American actions are creating more terrorists than they are destroying.
"Sun" worshipper. Disgrace.
http://www.zenzibar.com/Articles/christmas.asp
The Pagan Origins of Christmas
By Royce Carlson
This article was first printed at Zenzibar on December 17, 2000.
Many of our modern Christmas traditions began hundreds of years before Christ was born. Some of these traditions date back more than 4000 years. The addition of Christ to the celebration of the winter solstice did not occur until 300 years after Christ died and as late as 1800, some devout Christian sects, like the Puritans, forbade their members from celebrating Christmas because it was considered a pagan holiday. So what is the history behind these traditions?
The Christmas tree is derived from several solstice traditions. The Romans decked their halls with garlands of laurel and placed candles in live trees to decorate for the celebration of Saturnalia. In Scandinavia, they hung apples from evergreen trees at the winder solstice to remind themselves that spring and summer will come again. The evergreen tree was the special plant of their sun god, Baldor.
The practice of exchanging gifts at a winter celebration is also pre-Christian and is from the Roman Saturnalia. They would exchange good-luck gifts called Stenae (lucky fruits). They also would have a big feast just like we do today.
Mistletoe is from an ancient Druid custom at the winter solstice. Mistletoe was considered a divine plant and it symbolized love and peace. The tradition of kissing under the mistletoe is Druid in origin.
The Scandinavian solstice traditions had a lot of influences on our celebration besides the hanging of ornaments on evergreen trees. Their ancient festival was called Yuletide and celebrated the return of the sun. One of their traditions was the Yule log. The log was the center of the trunk of a tree that was dragged to a large fireplace where it was supposed to burn for twelve days. From this comes the twelve days of Christmas.
Even the date of Christmas, December 25, was borrowed from another religion. At the time Christmas was created in AD 320, Mithraism was very popular. The early Christian church had gotten tired of their futile efforts to stop people celebrating the solstice and the birthday of Mithras, the Persian sun god. Mithras’ birthday was December 25. So the pope at the time decided to make Jesus’ official birthday coincide with Mithras’ birthday. No one knows what time of year Jesus was actually born but there is evidence to suggest that it was in midsummer.
So, if you are celebrating any of the western traditions of Christmas this year, remember that you are actually enjoying the rituals and activities of several ancient religions whose traditions have been borrowed by the Christians over the years for the celebration of the birth of Christ.
JerryDuke: You want more?!? Some "Christian" you are. Why don't you try defending truth, for a change?!?
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
So you are saying that there have been and are still 'twisters' involved in the profession/interpretation of the 'bible' and attendant "god/christianity' religion(s). Surprise surprise! Who would-a-thunk-it? Then what is ANYONE to make of ANYTHING in relation to ANY RELIGION except to 'believe' NOT the 'bible/koran' etc., but rather, for one to 'follow' and 'believe', one MUST ONLY 'believe' SOMEONE or OTHERS' INTERPRETATION/PROMULGATION of it? Not a very 'perfect' god/religious text, if you ask me. Thanks but no thanks; I shall leave these arguments on "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" to you christian/religious "scholars" (note I did NOT say "scientists").
Like I said to SoLoved, I know you MEAN WELL (and I applaud your 'good intentions' if not your methods). HOWEVER, as the saying goes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Don't you see the irony in promulgating a way of thinking based only on 'belief'? It is but a short step and a jump from 'religion' to 'superstition', 'cultism' and other mass-manipulating mind-memes used by unscrupulous people to sway gullible/uncritical populaces (steeped in 'religious' instead of 'scientific' thought processes) to do the most unspeakable things. And don't think it won't happen now or in the future, because (as those individuals who come here with their wilful ignorance demonstrate only too well) "there's one born every minute"...and unless those "ones" are given the 'critical/skeptical' wherewithall to 'think for themselves' instead of just 'believing in things', then there's no telling what unspeakble horrors lie in wait for future generations on this planet. Do you see? Good intentions aren't enough; for without critical thought and reasoned action, those good intentions may actually BRING ABOUT that which those same good intentions were meant to avoid. That's as plainly as I can put the dire warning against the present ID/CS tactics to diminish the capacity of science to be ready for the challenges that will face humanity in the testing times to come. I hope you realise from my words that "hate" is NOT my motivator, but LOVE for the future of a noble and worthy life form that evolved from the humblest of beginnings to become one of the (or perhaps the only) product(s) of the universe that brings 'intelligence' and 'appreciation' into an existence/universe that would otherwise have remained 'brutish' and 'unappreciated'. That's it on this aspect, Mess. Now you know exactly where I'm coming from. Nothing personal; no hard feelings on my end. I hope it's the same from yours.
QUOTE (Messenger+)
2. I don't have a messiah complex. There is only one Messiah and His name is Jesus Christ. I'm just willingly making myself available, that's all.
.
On a lighter note: Has 'he' taken you up on your 'offer' yet?...or HAS 'he', and THAT is what you are doing here! And if not, what is the delay? I'm only teasing, Mess! (to judge from your posts, I know you go in for that sort of thing, hehehe).
To whom it may concern: Merry Xmas/Holidays/etc.! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
.
On a lighter note: Has 'he' taken you up on your 'offer' yet?...or HAS 'he', and THAT is what you are doing here! And if not, what is the delay? I'm only teasing, Mess! (to judge from your posts, I know you go in for that sort of thing, hehehe).
To whom it may concern: Merry Xmas/Holidays/etc.! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE
Like I said to SoLoved, I know you MEAN WELL (and I applaud your 'good intentions' if not your methods). HOWEVER, as the saying goes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Don't you see the irony in promulgating a way of thinking based only on 'belief'? It is but a short step and a jump from 'religion' to 'superstition', 'cultism' and other mass-manipulating mind-memes used by unscrupulous people to sway gullible/uncritical populaces (steeped in 'religious' instead of 'scientific' thought processes) to do the most unspeakable things. And don't think it won't happen now or in the future, because (as those individuals who come here with their wilful ignorance demonstrate only too well) "there's one born every minute"...and unless those "ones" are given the 'critical/skeptical' wherewithall to 'think for themselves' instead of just 'believing in things', then there's no telling what unspeakble horrors lie in wait for future generations on this planet. Do you see? Good intentions aren't enough; for without critical thought and reasoned action, those good intentions may actually BRING ABOUT that which those same good intentions were meant to avoid. That's as plainly as I can put the dire warning against the present ID/CS tactics to diminish the capacity of science to be ready for the challenges that will face humanity in the testing times to come. I hope you realise from my words that "hate" is NOT my motivator, but LOVE for the future of a noble and worthy life form that evolved from the humblest of beginnings to become one of the (or perhaps the only) product(s) of the universe that brings 'intelligence' and 'appreciation' into an existence/universe that would otherwise have remained 'brutish' and 'unappreciated'. That's it on this aspect, Mess. Now you know exactly where I'm coming from. Nothing personal; no hard feelings on my end. I hope it's the same from yours.
And for an example of this all one needs to do is look at the war on terror lead by the United States. The intentions are good (hopefully - to end terrorism), but the methods being employed are more likely then not going to lead to a new, larger generations of terrorists that became angry because of American actions. I won't call it a fact, but I will predict that American actions are creating more terrorists than they are destroying.
QUOTE (jduke+Dec 23 2005, 05:47 PM)
"Sun" worshipper. Disgrace.
QUOTE (jduke+Dec 23 2005, 05:47 PM)
http://www.zenzibar.com/Articles/christmas.asp
The Pagan Origins of Christmas
By Royce Carlson
This article was first printed at Zenzibar on December 17, 2000.
Many of our modern Christmas traditions began hundreds of years before Christ was born. Some of these traditions date back more than 4000 years. The addition of Christ to the celebration of the winter solstice did not occur until 300 years after Christ died and as late as 1800, some devout Christian sects, like the Puritans, forbade their members from celebrating Christmas because it was considered a pagan holiday. So what is the history behind these traditions?
The Christmas tree is derived from several solstice traditions. The Romans decked their halls with garlands of laurel and placed candles in live trees to decorate for the celebration of Saturnalia. In Scandinavia, they hung apples from evergreen trees at the winder solstice to remind themselves that spring and summer will come again. The evergreen tree was the special plant of their sun god, Baldor.
The practice of exchanging gifts at a winter celebration is also pre-Christian and is from the Roman Saturnalia. They would exchange good-luck gifts called Stenae (lucky fruits). They also would have a big feast just like we do today.
Mistletoe is from an ancient Druid custom at the winter solstice. Mistletoe was considered a divine plant and it symbolized love and peace. The tradition of kissing under the mistletoe is Druid in origin.
The Scandinavian solstice traditions had a lot of influences on our celebration besides the hanging of ornaments on evergreen trees. Their ancient festival was called Yuletide and celebrated the return of the sun. One of their traditions was the Yule log. The log was the center of the trunk of a tree that was dragged to a large fireplace where it was supposed to burn for twelve days. From this comes the twelve days of Christmas.
Even the date of Christmas, December 25, was borrowed from another religion. At the time Christmas was created in AD 320, Mithraism was very popular. The early Christian church had gotten tired of their futile efforts to stop people celebrating the solstice and the birthday of Mithras, the Persian sun god. Mithras’ birthday was December 25. So the pope at the time decided to make Jesus’ official birthday coincide with Mithras’ birthday. No one knows what time of year Jesus was actually born but there is evidence to suggest that it was in midsummer.
So, if you are celebrating any of the western traditions of Christmas this year, remember that you are actually enjoying the rituals and activities of several ancient religions whose traditions have been borrowed by the Christians over the years for the celebration of the birth of Christ.
JerryDuke: You want more?!? Some "Christian" you are. Why don't you try defending truth, for a change?!?
P.S. Your "partner in crime" is gone for a few days, so you'll have to fend for yourself until then. Disgrace.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Guest_wallace f+Dec 22 2005, 06:24 PM)
... the bible has many errors and contradictions in it, ...
The Bible contradicts the opinions of skeptics!
So what? Suppose there were evidence of verifiably false statements in the Bible. The existence of even one such statement would cast doubt on those statements that remain to be verified. The Bible has actually been subjected to this kind of testing and has prevailed. In the book That Lawsuit Against the Bible¹, the author Harry Rimmer tells the story of just such a scientific test. The representatives of the world's atheists, Free Thinkers, modernists, humanists and liberals took Harry to court and attempted to persuade a New York judge that the Bible contained scientific errors. Plaintiffs failed on two occasions, ten years apart, to prove their cases.
Harry Rimmer, Sc. D, D. D. was the president of the Research Science Bureau which broadcast "an offer of one hundred dollars to any person who would establish a scientific mistake in the Bible" in magazines, newspapers in 27 countries and on radio programs in the USA over a period of 15 years. The first lawsuit was filed against Harry Rimmer in 1929 based on a private interpretation of Numbers 11:31-32 in which plaintiff, one Colonel Nichols, claimed that the Bible described a scene of 4,569 square miles of quail piled 44 inches deep at 64 quail per cubic foot which would require each of 2,500,000 Hebrew wanderers to eat 12,266,171 quail after having gathered 97 birds per second for 36 straight hours. The judge decided that Colonel Nichols did not prove an error in the Bible by his fantastic calculations and that since he was not present to witness the distribution of the quail, the testimony of Moses who was there would be allowed to stand.
In 1939 the offer made by the RSB Corporation was increased to $1,000 and a strict set of requirements were put in writing. The same argument about the quail was presented again in a lawsuit with a slightly smaller mass of quail being assumed, but the same conclusion of impossibility. In this case the New York judge, Hon. Justice Benjamin Shalleck in dismissing the suit said to the plaintiff, "You have wasted the time of this court for a day and a half, and you have failed to prove one single item!"
_____________________
¹ Rimmer, Harry. That Lawsuit Against the Bible. Eerdmans, 1956 (source for all quotes and details about Dr. Rimmer, the Research Science Bureau and the lawsuit filed against him.)
If the scientific method were applied to the so-called theory of Evolution, it would be discarded by science. Evolution contradicts the laws of science, such as the laws of probability; even so, it continues to be taught as fact by those who should know that it is not. Evolution remains the opinion of those who believe in it, and nothing more. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to be the most treasured book in the history of mankind, because its statements are veriafiably true.
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (Romans 3:3-4)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
The Bible contradicts the opinions of skeptics!
So what? Suppose there were evidence of verifiably false statements in the Bible. The existence of even one such statement would cast doubt on those statements that remain to be verified. The Bible has actually been subjected to this kind of testing and has prevailed. In the book That Lawsuit Against the Bible¹, the author Harry Rimmer tells the story of just such a scientific test. The representatives of the world's atheists, Free Thinkers, modernists, humanists and liberals took Harry to court and attempted to persuade a New York judge that the Bible contained scientific errors. Plaintiffs failed on two occasions, ten years apart, to prove their cases.
Harry Rimmer, Sc. D, D. D. was the president of the Research Science Bureau which broadcast "an offer of one hundred dollars to any person who would establish a scientific mistake in the Bible" in magazines, newspapers in 27 countries and on radio programs in the USA over a period of 15 years. The first lawsuit was filed against Harry Rimmer in 1929 based on a private interpretation of Numbers 11:31-32 in which plaintiff, one Colonel Nichols, claimed that the Bible described a scene of 4,569 square miles of quail piled 44 inches deep at 64 quail per cubic foot which would require each of 2,500,000 Hebrew wanderers to eat 12,266,171 quail after having gathered 97 birds per second for 36 straight hours. The judge decided that Colonel Nichols did not prove an error in the Bible by his fantastic calculations and that since he was not present to witness the distribution of the quail, the testimony of Moses who was there would be allowed to stand.
In 1939 the offer made by the RSB Corporation was increased to $1,000 and a strict set of requirements were put in writing. The same argument about the quail was presented again in a lawsuit with a slightly smaller mass of quail being assumed, but the same conclusion of impossibility. In this case the New York judge, Hon. Justice Benjamin Shalleck in dismissing the suit said to the plaintiff, "You have wasted the time of this court for a day and a half, and you have failed to prove one single item!"
_____________________
¹ Rimmer, Harry. That Lawsuit Against the Bible. Eerdmans, 1956 (source for all quotes and details about Dr. Rimmer, the Research Science Bureau and the lawsuit filed against him.)
If the scientific method were applied to the so-called theory of Evolution, it would be discarded by science. Evolution contradicts the laws of science, such as the laws of probability; even so, it continues to be taught as fact by those who should know that it is not. Evolution remains the opinion of those who believe in it, and nothing more. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to be the most treasured book in the history of mankind, because its statements are veriafiably true.
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (Romans 3:3-4)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE (jduke+Dec 23 2005, 07:28 PM)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Guest_wallace f+Dec 22 2005, 06:24 PM)
... the bible has many errors and contradictions in it, ...
The Bible contradicts the opinions of skeptics!
So what? Suppose there were evidence of verifiably false statements in the Bible. The existence of even one such statement would cast doubt on those statements that remain to be verified. The Bible has actually been subjected to this kind of testing and has prevailed. In the book That Lawsuit Against the Bible¹, the author Harry Rimmer tells the story of just such a scientific test. The representatives of the world's atheists, Free Thinkers, modernists, humanists and liberals took Harry to court and attempted to persuade a New York judge that the Bible contained scientific errors. Plaintiffs failed on two occasions, ten years apart, to prove their cases.
Harry Rimmer, Sc. D, D. D. was the president of the Research Science Bureau which broadcast "an offer of one hundred dollars to any person who would establish a scientific mistake in the Bible" in magazines, newspapers in 27 countries and on radio programs in the USA over a period of 15 years. The first lawsuit was filed against Harry Rimmer in 1929 based on a private interpretation of Numbers 11:31-32 in which plaintiff, one Colonel Nichols, claimed that the Bible described a scene of 4,569 square miles of quail piled 44 inches deep at 64 quail per cubic foot which would require each of 2,500,000 Hebrew wanderers to eat 12,266,171 quail after having gathered 97 birds per second for 36 straight hours. The judge decided that Colonel Nichols did not prove an error in the Bible by his fantastic calculations and that since he was not present to witness the distribution of the quail, the testimony of Moses who was there would be allowed to stand.
In 1939 the offer made by the RSB Corporation was increased to $1,000 and a strict set of requirements were put in writing. The same argument about the quail was presented again in a lawsuit with a slightly smaller mass of quail being assumed, but the same conclusion of impossibility. In this case the New York judge, Hon. Justice Benjamin Shalleck in dismissing the suit said to the plaintiff, "You have wasted the time of this court for a day and a half, and you have failed to prove one single item!"
_____________________
¹ Rimmer, Harry. That Lawsuit Against the Bible. Eerdmans, 1956 (source for all quotes and details about Dr. Rimmer, the Research Science Bureau and the lawsuit filed against him.)
If the scientific method were applied to the so-called theory of Evolution, it would be discarded by science. Evolution contradicts the laws of science, such as the laws of probability; even so, it continues to be taught as fact by those who should know that it is not. Evolution remains the opinion of those who believe in it, and nothing more. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to be the most treasured book in the history of mankind, because its statements are veriafiably true.
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (Romans 3:3-4)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Hey Jerry Duke, did you get booted from the website?
Why the new name?
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
The Bible contradicts the opinions of skeptics!
So what? Suppose there were evidence of verifiably false statements in the Bible. The existence of even one such statement would cast doubt on those statements that remain to be verified. The Bible has actually been subjected to this kind of testing and has prevailed. In the book That Lawsuit Against the Bible¹, the author Harry Rimmer tells the story of just such a scientific test. The representatives of the world's atheists, Free Thinkers, modernists, humanists and liberals took Harry to court and attempted to persuade a New York judge that the Bible contained scientific errors. Plaintiffs failed on two occasions, ten years apart, to prove their cases.
Harry Rimmer, Sc. D, D. D. was the president of the Research Science Bureau which broadcast "an offer of one hundred dollars to any person who would establish a scientific mistake in the Bible" in magazines, newspapers in 27 countries and on radio programs in the USA over a period of 15 years. The first lawsuit was filed against Harry Rimmer in 1929 based on a private interpretation of Numbers 11:31-32 in which plaintiff, one Colonel Nichols, claimed that the Bible described a scene of 4,569 square miles of quail piled 44 inches deep at 64 quail per cubic foot which would require each of 2,500,000 Hebrew wanderers to eat 12,266,171 quail after having gathered 97 birds per second for 36 straight hours. The judge decided that Colonel Nichols did not prove an error in the Bible by his fantastic calculations and that since he was not present to witness the distribution of the quail, the testimony of Moses who was there would be allowed to stand.
In 1939 the offer made by the RSB Corporation was increased to $1,000 and a strict set of requirements were put in writing. The same argument about the quail was presented again in a lawsuit with a slightly smaller mass of quail being assumed, but the same conclusion of impossibility. In this case the New York judge, Hon. Justice Benjamin Shalleck in dismissing the suit said to the plaintiff, "You have wasted the time of this court for a day and a half, and you have failed to prove one single item!"
_____________________
¹ Rimmer, Harry. That Lawsuit Against the Bible. Eerdmans, 1956 (source for all quotes and details about Dr. Rimmer, the Research Science Bureau and the lawsuit filed against him.)
If the scientific method were applied to the so-called theory of Evolution, it would be discarded by science. Evolution contradicts the laws of science, such as the laws of probability; even so, it continues to be taught as fact by those who should know that it is not. Evolution remains the opinion of those who believe in it, and nothing more. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to be the most treasured book in the history of mankind, because its statements are veriafiably true.
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (Romans 3:3-4)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof Hey Jerry Duke, did you get booted from the website?
Why the new name?
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (MXWordNerd+Dec 23 2005, 07:48 PM)
Why the new name?
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. (Matthew 10:23)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. (Matthew 10:23)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 23 2005, 08:11 PM)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (MXWordNerd+Dec 23 2005, 07:48 PM)
Why the new name?
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. (Matthew 10:23)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Do you talk like this in bed with your wife? Just quoting the bible all the time?
Do you have words of your own?
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. (Matthew 10:23)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof Do you talk like this in bed with your wife? Just quoting the bible all the time?
Do you have words of your own?
MXWordNerd: Imagine meeting him on the street. It would probably go something like this:
QUOTE (MXWordNerd+)
Hello, Jerry.
QUOTE (JerryDuke+)
Hell...
"And in hell he lift up his eyes being in torments..."(Luke 16:23)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
"And in hell he lift up his eyes being in torments..."(Luke 16:23)
QUOTE (JerryDuke+)
...err...
"Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God."(Matthew 22:29)
Unbelievable.
"Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God."(Matthew 22:29)
Unbelievable.
Pretty much, yeah. It would make a good SNL skit, though.
QUOTE (JerryDuke+)
Hi folks!
Since it is 'topical' at the moment, I thought I may as well insert here observations resulting from some ORIGINAL research I carried out into the possible basis for 'sun worship' in hight latitude places around the world where WINTER seasons are especially severe/long. If anyone here is at all familiar with the 'manic depressive' thread running through most Russians and their literature, they will know what I mean when I say that both INDIVIDUAL AND MASS DEPRESSION as a 'state of mind' CAN exist in such climes.
Anyhow, my own reading/researches into all the 'otherwise-separate' areas of the biological sciences led me to surmise that the common factor in many cases of 'clinical depression' could be traced back to 'malnutrition' (whether caused by genetic/hereditary inefficiencies in the asssimilation of nutrients; or whether caused by seasonal UNavailability of same...especially during necessary-food non-productive winters). Of course, I did not ignore purely 'physical' aspects such as malformed brain-structure/chemistry systems that will lead to similar clinical depression situations.
To remove that last (physical) 'cause', I experimented on myself some years ago during a particularly cold and long winter (as cold and long as they CAN get where I live, hehehe). I purposely kept everything else 'equal', and just concentrated on eating an INADEQUATE diet of 'preserved' foods such as would have been the 'staple diet' of the average Russians etc. (before modern transportation/refrigeration/supplements etc) during their long cold winters when fresh fruit, vegetables and other high-vitamin/mineral foodstuffs were in extremely short supply, if available at all.
Sure enough, I soon became 'morose' and had frequent bouts of 'hopelessness' and 'what the heck' episodes in my thinking and acting towards myself and others. I analysed my behaviour/feelings as I went according to a pre-prepared WARNING-SIGNS CHART which I could refer to so as to keep some OBJECTIVITY running as an undercurrent to my 'experiment' (this was a 'safeguard' against 'runaway' effect due to any 'clinical depression' effects...lucky I did, too...cos I wouldn't wish some of that hopelessness I felt on my worst enemy!).
After enough 'data/experience/insight', I resumed a normal nutritious diet and, VOILA!...immediate return to normalcy (ahem...as normal as any human CAN be; given the human condition AS SUCH, hehehe).
My conclusions were that Neuro-transmitter 'absence/imbalance' and general nervous system 'activity-depression' due to nervous-system-malnutrition resulted in the overall chemically 'haywire' reactions that caused consequential failures in BOTH:
- the INITIATING chemical-signalling mechanisms and feedback-loops in the brain structures involved with maintaining a 'balanced/positive' outlook on the 'state-of-play' within the mind-brain complex; AS WELL as
- the INHIBITING chemical-signalling mechanisms etc etc in the same brain-mind complex.
And since obviously the ONGOING RESULTANT 'net output' from the ongoing INTERPLAY BETWEEN those INITIATING/INHIBITING processes/structures (as also affected by purely 'physical' and/or 'memetic' factors) are the crucial DECIDER whether one feels 'up' or 'equable' or 'down', it was only logical for me to attribute such SUN WORSHIP rituals to societies DESPERATE to keep individual/collective morale/hopes alive in their populace long enough to compensate for these winter/malnutrition-induced general feelings of hopelessness and reckless feelings/behaviours which might otherwise cause havoc in that society due to the 'irrationl-depressive' ignoring of established social laws/norms etc.
In other words, in such climes and conditions conducive to malnutrition-and-COLD induced LETHARGY/DESPONDENCY (especially for brain-mind 'health' and TEMEPRATURE-SENSITIVE brain-neurochemistry CHEMICAL/NEUROTRANSMITTER REACTIONS/ACTIVITY), IT WAS IMPERATIVE that ritualistic/habitual collective 'brainwashing/reminders' were given to the populace, to the effect/assurance that 'winter will end soon' because their 'worship' will 'bring back the sun' etc., and there is 'no reason to give in' to your 'dark moods' and hopelessness etc (things which would otherwise surely lead to lawlessness and depravity et.).
Anyhow, that's my 'perspective' on the reason for olde-time superstitious sunworship rituals/traditions (in wintry climes, at least...I have not yet got around to working on sun-worhip rituals in equatorial/warm-temperate climes...which I have strong reasons to suspect has more to do with APPEASING that Sun NOT to cause drought and burn the crops!...so instead of as in northern climes, where one is effectively CALLING FOR THE SUN TO 'COME OUT', it's the opposite in equatorial etc climes, where the Sun is being asked, as it were, to NOT COME OUT SO MUCH AND SO STRONG! hehehe. As they say, "one man's meat is another man's poison", heh?).
But all that is only MY view, not established mainstream theory (as yet!, hehehe). Merry Sun-worshipping, everyone! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
Since it is 'topical' at the moment, I thought I may as well insert here observations resulting from some ORIGINAL research I carried out into the possible basis for 'sun worship' in hight latitude places around the world where WINTER seasons are especially severe/long. If anyone here is at all familiar with the 'manic depressive' thread running through most Russians and their literature, they will know what I mean when I say that both INDIVIDUAL AND MASS DEPRESSION as a 'state of mind' CAN exist in such climes.
Anyhow, my own reading/researches into all the 'otherwise-separate' areas of the biological sciences led me to surmise that the common factor in many cases of 'clinical depression' could be traced back to 'malnutrition' (whether caused by genetic/hereditary inefficiencies in the asssimilation of nutrients; or whether caused by seasonal UNavailability of same...especially during necessary-food non-productive winters). Of course, I did not ignore purely 'physical' aspects such as malformed brain-structure/chemistry systems that will lead to similar clinical depression situations.
To remove that last (physical) 'cause', I experimented on myself some years ago during a particularly cold and long winter (as cold and long as they CAN get where I live, hehehe). I purposely kept everything else 'equal', and just concentrated on eating an INADEQUATE diet of 'preserved' foods such as would have been the 'staple diet' of the average Russians etc. (before modern transportation/refrigeration/supplements etc) during their long cold winters when fresh fruit, vegetables and other high-vitamin/mineral foodstuffs were in extremely short supply, if available at all.
Sure enough, I soon became 'morose' and had frequent bouts of 'hopelessness' and 'what the heck' episodes in my thinking and acting towards myself and others. I analysed my behaviour/feelings as I went according to a pre-prepared WARNING-SIGNS CHART which I could refer to so as to keep some OBJECTIVITY running as an undercurrent to my 'experiment' (this was a 'safeguard' against 'runaway' effect due to any 'clinical depression' effects...lucky I did, too...cos I wouldn't wish some of that hopelessness I felt on my worst enemy!).
After enough 'data/experience/insight', I resumed a normal nutritious diet and, VOILA!...immediate return to normalcy (ahem...as normal as any human CAN be; given the human condition AS SUCH, hehehe).
My conclusions were that Neuro-transmitter 'absence/imbalance' and general nervous system 'activity-depression' due to nervous-system-malnutrition resulted in the overall chemically 'haywire' reactions that caused consequential failures in BOTH:
- the INITIATING chemical-signalling mechanisms and feedback-loops in the brain structures involved with maintaining a 'balanced/positive' outlook on the 'state-of-play' within the mind-brain complex; AS WELL as
- the INHIBITING chemical-signalling mechanisms etc etc in the same brain-mind complex.
And since obviously the ONGOING RESULTANT 'net output' from the ongoing INTERPLAY BETWEEN those INITIATING/INHIBITING processes/structures (as also affected by purely 'physical' and/or 'memetic' factors) are the crucial DECIDER whether one feels 'up' or 'equable' or 'down', it was only logical for me to attribute such SUN WORSHIP rituals to societies DESPERATE to keep individual/collective morale/hopes alive in their populace long enough to compensate for these winter/malnutrition-induced general feelings of hopelessness and reckless feelings/behaviours which might otherwise cause havoc in that society due to the 'irrationl-depressive' ignoring of established social laws/norms etc.
In other words, in such climes and conditions conducive to malnutrition-and-COLD induced LETHARGY/DESPONDENCY (especially for brain-mind 'health' and TEMEPRATURE-SENSITIVE brain-neurochemistry CHEMICAL/NEUROTRANSMITTER REACTIONS/ACTIVITY), IT WAS IMPERATIVE that ritualistic/habitual collective 'brainwashing/reminders' were given to the populace, to the effect/assurance that 'winter will end soon' because their 'worship' will 'bring back the sun' etc., and there is 'no reason to give in' to your 'dark moods' and hopelessness etc (things which would otherwise surely lead to lawlessness and depravity et.).
Anyhow, that's my 'perspective' on the reason for olde-time superstitious sunworship rituals/traditions (in wintry climes, at least...I have not yet got around to working on sun-worhip rituals in equatorial/warm-temperate climes...which I have strong reasons to suspect has more to do with APPEASING that Sun NOT to cause drought and burn the crops!...so instead of as in northern climes, where one is effectively CALLING FOR THE SUN TO 'COME OUT', it's the opposite in equatorial etc climes, where the Sun is being asked, as it were, to NOT COME OUT SO MUCH AND SO STRONG! hehehe. As they say, "one man's meat is another man's poison", heh?).
But all that is only MY view, not established mainstream theory (as yet!, hehehe). Merry Sun-worshipping, everyone! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
jduke Posted on Dec 23 2005, 07:28 PM:
"If the scientific method were applied to the so-called theory of Evolution, it would be discarded by science. Evolution contradicts the laws of science, such as the laws of probability; even so, it continues to be taught as fact by those who should know that it is not. Evolution remains the opinion of those who believe in it, and nothing more. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to be the most treasured book in the history of mankind, because its statements are veriafiably true."
The Theory of Eolution was derived via scientific methods; the study of physical data and the development of a hypothesis to explain what was observed.
The laws of probability are a part of mathematics and it seems really doubtful that you have studied any real science and are merely parroting things that you have read or been told by dubious sources.
How is evolution supposed to contradict the laws of probability? Are sure that your not thinking about the origin of life which is NOT a part of evolution as has been stated in these forums many times.
Why don't you try spouting your nonsense at TalkOrigins.org?
So far as the Bible's statements being "veriafiably true"? NONSENSE! It certainly contains some historical and cultural material that is valid and theology for believers. However, your nonsensical sounding statements about quail and court judgements do not pass muster as verification "proof".
Go look at fossils in your area if any are known. There are books available which describe areas where fossils have been found. It you see fossils, figure out a better theory than evolution to decribe what they show. No, a worldwide flood which magially sorted all fossils in graded layers does not qualify as a reasonable theory. Study books on fossils before your start trying to slough off evolution as a viable theory.
"If the scientific method were applied to the so-called theory of Evolution, it would be discarded by science. Evolution contradicts the laws of science, such as the laws of probability; even so, it continues to be taught as fact by those who should know that it is not. Evolution remains the opinion of those who believe in it, and nothing more. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to be the most treasured book in the history of mankind, because its statements are veriafiably true."
The Theory of Eolution was derived via scientific methods; the study of physical data and the development of a hypothesis to explain what was observed.
The laws of probability are a part of mathematics and it seems really doubtful that you have studied any real science and are merely parroting things that you have read or been told by dubious sources.
How is evolution supposed to contradict the laws of probability? Are sure that your not thinking about the origin of life which is NOT a part of evolution as has been stated in these forums many times.
Why don't you try spouting your nonsense at TalkOrigins.org?
So far as the Bible's statements being "veriafiably true"? NONSENSE! It certainly contains some historical and cultural material that is valid and theology for believers. However, your nonsensical sounding statements about quail and court judgements do not pass muster as verification "proof".
Go look at fossils in your area if any are known. There are books available which describe areas where fossils have been found. It you see fossils, figure out a better theory than evolution to decribe what they show. No, a worldwide flood which magially sorted all fossils in graded layers does not qualify as a reasonable theory. Study books on fossils before your start trying to slough off evolution as a viable theory.
Jerry probably has a new username because I (and probably others) have reported him for spamming the forums with his boilerplate religious gaff despite numerous requests to stop. The lesson doesn't seem to have sunk in after his first banning, so I plan on continuing to report him as long as he continues to pollute the forums with the *** that accompanies his every post until he desists and debates like a normal person.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Anon+Dec 27 2005, 12:16 AM)
... the *** ...
You can prevent PhysOrgForums from replacing your words with asterisks by asking the Lord Jesus Christ to give you a clean heart.
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. (Matthew 15:18)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
You can prevent PhysOrgForums from replacing your words with asterisks by asking the Lord Jesus Christ to give you a clean heart.
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. (Matthew 15:18)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (CactusCritter+Dec 24 2005, 06:37 AM)
... The Theory of Eolution was derived via scientific methods; the study of physical data and the development of a hypothesis to explain what was observed. ...
Please share the details of any scientific experiment that proves the theory of Evolution is true.
QUOTE (CactusCritter+Dec 24 2005, 06:37 AM)
... Why don't you try spouting your nonsense at TalkOrigins.org? ...
QUOTE (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html+ January 22, 1993)
That is why we see some leading anti-evolutionists admitting to the fact of "microevolution"--they know that evolution can be demonstrated. These readers will not be convinced of the "facthood" of (macro)evolution by any logical argument and it is a waste of time to make the attempt.
If the moderators of talkorigins.org are not willing to share "any logical argument" demonstrating the "facthood" of Evolution, why should I waste my time reading their propaganda?
QUOTE (CactusCritter+Dec 24 2005, 06:37 AM)
... nonsensical sounding statements about quail and court judgements do not pass muster as verification "proof". ...
I agree that the statements of the representatives of the world's atheists, Free Thinkers, modernists, humanists and liberals about the mass of quail are "nonsensical sounding", but I consider the opinion of the New York judge in the case to be very sensible. "You have wasted the time of this court for a day and a half, and you have failed to prove one single item!" (Rimmer, Harry. That Lawsuit Against the Bible. Eerdmans, 1956)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
QUOTE (CactusCritter+Dec 24 2005, 06:37 AM)
... Go look at fossils...
I'm very satisfied that fossil remains demonstrate the reality of the world-wide flood that occurred about 5,000 years ago. If there is evidence that proves Evolution is true, evolutionists should publish it. It would be foolish for me to spend time trying to prove that Evolution is true when the evolutionists have failed to do so.
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. (Isaiah 1:18)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. (Isaiah 1:18)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 23 2005, 11:27 PM)
... 'sun worship' ... Merry Sun-worshipping, everyone! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
RealityCheck.
.
You may want to consider the destiny of those who worship the su
n.
At that time, saith the LORD, they shall bring out the bones of the kings of Judah, and the bones of his princes, and the bones of the priests, and the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves: And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth. And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family, which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the LORD of hosts. (Jeremiah 8:1-3)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
n.At that time, saith the LORD, they shall bring out the bones of the kings of Judah, and the bones of his princes, and the bones of the priests, and the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves: And they shall spread them before the su
n, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth. And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family, which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the LORD of hosts. (Jeremiah 8:1-3)The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
JerryDuke: That last post "took the cake". It's been pointed out to you by Christian and atheist alike that "Christmas/Christ Mass" finds it origins in pagan Roman sun worship. You, knowing this, continue to defend the practice and then you warn RealityCheck about sun worship?!? You've got to be kidding us, right Jerry?!? RealityCheck's admonition to worship the sun was obviously a playful response to all of my recent posts about the pagan origins of "Christ Mass" which you faithfully observe and defend. I don't know what's happened to you of late, but I retract any previous posts in which I offered any support of you. You're a disgrace.
jduke
Where is the truck that you are going to use to carry the thousands of books already published and peer reviewed that show that evolution on Earth is a fact??? Evolutionists have validated the theory of evolution time and time again and, since you already know this your above quote is bearing false witness(lying), but you know that too, don't you???
Grumpy
QUOTE
I'm very satisfied that fossil remains demonstrate the reality of the world-wide flood that occurred about 5,000 years ago. If there is evidence that proves Evolution is true, evolutionists should publish it. It would be foolish for me to spend time trying to prove that Evolution is true when the evolutionists have failed to do so.
Where is the truck that you are going to use to carry the thousands of books already published and peer reviewed that show that evolution on Earth is a fact??? Evolutionists have validated the theory of evolution time and time again and, since you already know this your above quote is bearing false witness(lying), but you know that too, don't you???
Grumpy
That last post by "guest" was me. For some reason, I wasn't automatically logged in.
newguy
newguy
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Guest+Dec 27 2005, 08:43 PM)
JerryDuke: That last post "took the cake". It's been pointed out to you by Christian and atheist alike that "Christmas/Christ Mass" finds it origins in pagan ... You're a disgrace.
If there is anything wrong with saying, "Merry Christmas," I trust the Lord will correct me. Jesus Christ is Lord!
But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. (I Corinthians 4:3-4)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
If there is anything wrong with saying, "Merry Christmas," I trust the Lord will correct me. Jesus Christ is Lord!
But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. (I Corinthians 4:3-4)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 27 2005, 08:18 PM)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 23 2005, 11:27 PM)
... 'sun worship' ... Merry Sun-worshipping, everyone! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
RealityCheck.
.
You may want to consider the destiny of those who worship the sun
.
Jerry,
And YOU may want to consider what happens to those who worship the darkness of ignorance, and shun the Sun...they get Rickets, Osteo-Porosis and other Vitamin-D deficiency-related afflictions. Enjoy the darkness, Jerry!
RealityCheck.
PS: Hi NEWGUY!....How's 'newgal' et al coming along? All safe and well, I hope. RC.
.
Jerry,
And YOU may want to consider what happens to those who worship the darkness of ignorance, and shun the Sun...they get Rickets, Osteo-Porosis and other Vitamin-D deficiency-related afflictions. Enjoy the darkness, Jerry!
RealityCheck.
PS: Hi NEWGUY!....How's 'newgal' et al coming along? All safe and well, I hope. RC.
RealityCheck: My family is well. Thanks. I trust you know that my last response to JerryDuke was by no means an advocation of "sun worship". I was merely addressing the hypocrisy of JerryDuke for defending a "holy day" that finds it origins in the "veneration of the sun" while at the same time admonishing you against sun worship. I know that the sun is an integral part of our ability to exist on planet earth. I also know that one of the reasons that so many people get "depressed" in the winter and on "dreary" days is because it reminds them of death whereas spring tends to remind one of new life. Regardless, there have been, and still are, many whose appreciation for the sun goes beyond appreciation and becomes "worship". Roman Catholicism is founded upon "sun worship". I'll be happy to provide ample proof of this for anyone who is but interested. The reason that I keep mentioning Roman Catholicism is because it is a force that will rise to prominence again soon. In fact, it already has gained quite a large extent of prominence in the world. It is the very antichrist power of scripture. If you think they were capable of atrocities in the past, then let me be the first to tell you that "you aint seen nothing yet". Have a good one.
newguy
Understood, on all counts.
I practice 'sun-safe' measures but still 'seek' those health-giving rays whenever needed!...but I stop short of 'worshipping', hehehe...merely 'appreciating', heh?
I don't think it's only Catholicism/Islam etc; I have a gut feeling that it is ALL superstition/religion EN MASSE and 'organised' that will be (tried to be) exploited by (as you put it) 'anti-christ' forces/'cult' leaders etc...for wherever there is worldly ignorance, there is potential for great evil of ALL 'persuasions'. Ultimately, the only real protection against such things is mass science/education AND individual spirituality/self-awareness...anything else is RIPE territory for abuse by unscrupulous/mercenary b*stards of all types (as the history of ignorance has proved over and over again). Anyhow, that's my view of these things.
Take care on those icy roads! Ciao.
RealityCheck.
.
Understood, on all counts.
I practice 'sun-safe' measures but still 'seek' those health-giving rays whenever needed!...but I stop short of 'worshipping', hehehe...merely 'appreciating', heh?
I don't think it's only Catholicism/Islam etc; I have a gut feeling that it is ALL superstition/religion EN MASSE and 'organised' that will be (tried to be) exploited by (as you put it) 'anti-christ' forces/'cult' leaders etc...for wherever there is worldly ignorance, there is potential for great evil of ALL 'persuasions'. Ultimately, the only real protection against such things is mass science/education AND individual spirituality/self-awareness...anything else is RIPE territory for abuse by unscrupulous/mercenary b*stards of all types (as the history of ignorance has proved over and over again). Anyhow, that's my view of these things.
Take care on those icy roads! Ciao.
RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 27 2005, 08:18 PM)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 23 2005, 11:27 PM)
... 'sun worship' ... Merry Sun-worshipping, everyone! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
spirituallydead1: How is this attained??? You've got to be kidding me. Didn't you read the post that you responded to??? What "glory"??? The "glory" of worshipping the Sun??? Just another deaf, dumb(we wish) and blind "Christian". Say "hello" to JerryDuke and MessengerofSatan for me, will you?
3 blind mice,
3 blind mice.
See how they run,
See how they run...
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
RealityCheck.
.
You may want to consider the destiny of those who worship the sun.
At that time, saith the LORD, they shall bring out the bones of the kings of Judah, and the bones of his princes, and the bones of the priests, and the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves: And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth. And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family, which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the LORD of hosts. (Jeremiah 8:1-3)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
JerryDuke: While we're on the topic of the sun, the moon and the host of heaven, consider the following in regards to our calendar.
http://www.answers.com/topic/wednesday?gwp=19
Wednes·day (wĕnz'dç, -dâ')
n. (Abbr. Wed. or W)
The fourth day of the week.
[Middle English, from Old English Wôdnesd¿g, Woden's day : Wôdnes, genitive sing. of Wôden, Woden + d¿, day; see day.]
Wednes'days adv.
WORD HISTORY Days and years are natural divisions of time based on the astronomical relation of the earth and the sun, but weeks and the names for the days of the week have their source in astrology. The practice of dividing the year into seven-day units is based on the ancient astrological notion that the seven celestial bodies (the sun, the moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn) influence what happens on earth and that each controls the first hour of the day named for it. This system was brought into Hellenistic Egypt from Mesopotamia, where astrology had been practiced for millennia and where seven had always been a propitious number. The ancient Romans did not divide their calendar into weeks; they named all the days of the month in relation to the ides, calends, and nones. In A.D. 321 Constantine the Great grafted the Hellenistic astrological system onto the Roman calendar, making the first day of the week a day of rest and worship and imposing the following sequence of names on the days: Diçs Sôlis, “Sun's Day”; Diçs Lûnae, “Moon's Day”; Diçs Martis, “Mars's Day”; Diçs Mercuriî, “Mercury's Day”; Diçs Jovis, “Jove's Day” or “Jupiter's Day”; Diçs Veneris, “Venus's Day”; and Diçs Saturnî, “Saturn's Day.” This new Roman system was adopted with modifications throughout most of western Europe. In the Germanic languages, such as Old English, the names of four of the Roman gods were converted into those of the corresponding Germanic gods. Therefore in Old English we have the following names (with their Modern English developments): Sunnandaeg, Sunday; Mônandaeg, Monday; Tîwesdaeg, Tuesday (Tiu, like Mars, was a god of war); Wôdnesdaeg, Wednesday (Woden, like Mercury, was quick and eloquent); Thunresdaeg, Thursday (Thunor in Old English or Thor in Old Norse, like Jupiter, was lord of the sky; Old Norse Thôrsdagr influenced the English form); Frîgedaeg, Friday (Frigg, like Venus, was the goddess of love); and Saeternesdaeg, Saturday.
Sunday = "Sun" day
Monday = "Moon" day("lunes" in Spanish like "lunar" in English)
Tuesday = "Mars" day("Tiu", like "Mars", was a god of war; "Martes" in Spanish)
Wednesday = "Mercury" day("Woden", like "Mercury", was quick and eloquent; "Miercoles" in Spanish)
Thursday = "Jupiter" day("Thor", like "Jupiter", was lord of the sky)
Friday = "Venus" day("Frigg", like "Venus", was the goddess of love; "Viernes" in Spanish)
Saturday = "Saturn" day
Be careful not to worship the host of heaven yourself. Just another pagan influence from our "friends" over in Rome. Oh, by the way, you can thank them for changing the sabbath from the seventh day to the first day("Sun" day) because of their veneration of the Sun.
That was Pope Benedict(Arnold) adoring the wafer in his monstrance in the shape of a sun.
That's the world's largest "solar wheel" at St. Peter's at the Vatican. An obelisk, used by the ancient Egyptians to worship the sun god, Ra, stands at its center. Oh, by the way, your defense of the Roman catholic, counter-Reformation doctrine of the pre-tribulation "rapture", might just qualify you as a "sun worshipper" in God's eyes.
n.At that time, saith the LORD, they shall bring out the bones of the kings of Judah, and the bones of his princes, and the bones of the priests, and the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves: And they shall spread them before the su
n, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth. And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family, which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the LORD of hosts. (Jeremiah 8:1-3)The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation ProofJerryDuke: While we're on the topic of the sun, the moon and the host of heaven, consider the following in regards to our calendar.
http://www.answers.com/topic/wednesday?gwp=19
Wednes·day (wĕnz'dç, -dâ')
n. (Abbr. Wed. or W)
The fourth day of the week.
[Middle English, from Old English Wôdnesd¿g, Woden's day : Wôdnes, genitive sing. of Wôden, Woden + d¿, day; see day.]
Wednes'days adv.
WORD HISTORY Days and years are natural divisions of time based on the astronomical relation of the earth and the sun, but weeks and the names for the days of the week have their source in astrology. The practice of dividing the year into seven-day units is based on the ancient astrological notion that the seven celestial bodies (the sun, the moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn) influence what happens on earth and that each controls the first hour of the day named for it. This system was brought into Hellenistic Egypt from Mesopotamia, where astrology had been practiced for millennia and where seven had always been a propitious number. The ancient Romans did not divide their calendar into weeks; they named all the days of the month in relation to the ides, calends, and nones. In A.D. 321 Constantine the Great grafted the Hellenistic astrological system onto the Roman calendar, making the first day of the week a day of rest and worship and imposing the following sequence of names on the days: Diçs Sôlis, “Sun's Day”; Diçs Lûnae, “Moon's Day”; Diçs Martis, “Mars's Day”; Diçs Mercuriî, “Mercury's Day”; Diçs Jovis, “Jove's Day” or “Jupiter's Day”; Diçs Veneris, “Venus's Day”; and Diçs Saturnî, “Saturn's Day.” This new Roman system was adopted with modifications throughout most of western Europe. In the Germanic languages, such as Old English, the names of four of the Roman gods were converted into those of the corresponding Germanic gods. Therefore in Old English we have the following names (with their Modern English developments): Sunnandaeg, Sunday; Mônandaeg, Monday; Tîwesdaeg, Tuesday (Tiu, like Mars, was a god of war); Wôdnesdaeg, Wednesday (Woden, like Mercury, was quick and eloquent); Thunresdaeg, Thursday (Thunor in Old English or Thor in Old Norse, like Jupiter, was lord of the sky; Old Norse Thôrsdagr influenced the English form); Frîgedaeg, Friday (Frigg, like Venus, was the goddess of love); and Saeternesdaeg, Saturday.
Sunday = "Sun" day
Monday = "Moon" day("lunes" in Spanish like "lunar" in English)
Tuesday = "Mars" day("Tiu", like "Mars", was a god of war; "Martes" in Spanish)
Wednesday = "Mercury" day("Woden", like "Mercury", was quick and eloquent; "Miercoles" in Spanish)
Thursday = "Jupiter" day("Thor", like "Jupiter", was lord of the sky)
Friday = "Venus" day("Frigg", like "Venus", was the goddess of love; "Viernes" in Spanish)
Saturday = "Saturn" day
Be careful not to worship the host of heaven yourself. Just another pagan influence from our "friends" over in Rome. Oh, by the way, you can thank them for changing the sabbath from the seventh day to the first day("Sun" day) because of their veneration of the Sun.
That was Pope Benedict(Arnold) adoring the wafer in his monstrance in the shape of a sun.
That's the world's largest "solar wheel" at St. Peter's at the Vatican. An obelisk, used by the ancient Egyptians to worship the sun god, Ra, stands at its center. Oh, by the way, your defense of the Roman catholic, counter-Reformation doctrine of the pre-tribulation "rapture", might just qualify you as a "sun worshipper" in God's eyes.
JerryDuke: Some other things to ponder.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
QUOTE
The numeric value of Satan's name is 359...
How is this attained? What about the devil, the serpent, and some of the other names used? You see to be on the wrong tangent, trying to give the glory for everything to the evil one.
QUOTE (dad1+Dec 28 2005, 06:59 AM)
QUOTE
The numeric value of Satan's name is 359...
How is this attained? What about the devil, the serpent, and some of the other names used? You see to be on the wrong tangent, trying to give the glory for everything to the evil one.spirituallydead1: How is this attained??? You've got to be kidding me. Didn't you read the post that you responded to??? What "glory"??? The "glory" of worshipping the Sun??? Just another deaf, dumb(we wish) and blind "Christian". Say "hello" to JerryDuke and MessengerofSatan for me, will you?
3 blind mice,
3 blind mice.
See how they run,
See how they run...
QUOTE (newguy+Dec 27 2005, 08:29 PM)
The practice of dividing the year into seven-day units is based on the ancient astrological notion that the seven celestial bodies (the sun, the moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn) influence what happens on earth and that each controls the first hour of the day named for it.
Wow! And all my life I've been told it came from Genesis.
Say, you don't think there's a connection do you?
Wow! And all my life I've been told it came from Genesis.
Say, you don't think there's a connection do you?
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 27 2005, 09:16 PM)
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 27 2005, 08:18 PM)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 23 2005, 11:27 PM)
... 'sun worship' ... Merry Sun-worshipping, everyone! Stay safe.
RealityCheck.
.
RealityCheck.
.
You may want to consider the destiny of those who worship the sun
.
Jerry,
And YOU may want to consider what happens to those who ... shun the Sun...they get Rickets, Osteo-Porosis and other Vitamin-D deficiency-related afflictions.
The sun is necessary only for physical wellbeing, but it is not meant to be worshipped. When our work in this world is finished, it will not be needed at all. Christians have a source of Light and Life of which the world knows not.
And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. (Revelation 21:22-27)
This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. (I John 1:5-7)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
.
Jerry,
And YOU may want to consider what happens to those who ... shun the Sun...they get Rickets, Osteo-Porosis and other Vitamin-D deficiency-related afflictions.
The su
n is necessary only for physical wellbeing, but it is not meant to be worshipped. When our work in this world is finished, it will not be needed at all. Christians have a source of Light and Life of which the world knows not.And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the su
n, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. (Revelation 21:22-27)This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. (I John 1:5-7)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (newguy+Dec 27 2005, 09:51 PM)
RealityCheck: ... I was merely addressing the hypocrisy of JerryDuke for defending a "holy day" ...
It is never wrong to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. If the greatest celebration occurs on a day that was once associated with a pagan celebration thousands of years ago, praise God! And so much the better if hardly anyone even remembers the pagan associations. The purpose of Christ's coming into the world is to destroy the works of the devil. Christmas is a time of doing good and showing love to our friends and our enemies in the name of Jesus Christ.
If you want to help decommercialize the celebration of Christmas feel free to start an anti-marketeering campaign. Bottom line: Christmas is a beautiful time of the year and no one, has any right whatsoever to condemn the children of the living God for worshipping our Lord and Saviour on any day of the year. With God's help we will continue to worship and serve our Creator God until every day and every thing is HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD!
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17)
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. (I John 3:7-10)
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. (Matthew 7:1-5)
In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD'S house shall be like the bowls before the altar. Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts. (Zechariah 14:20-21)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
It is never wrong to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. If the greatest celebration occurs on a day that was once associated with a pagan celebration thousands of years ago, praise God! And so much the better if hardly anyone even remembers the pagan associations. The purpose of Christ's coming into the world is to destroy the works of the devil. Christmas is a time of doing good and showing love to our friends and our enemies in the name of Jesus Christ.
If you want to help decommercialize the celebration of Christmas feel free to start an anti-marketeering campaign. Bottom line: Christmas is a beautiful time of the year and no one, has any right whatsoever to condemn the children of the living God for worshipping our Lord and Saviour on any day of the year. With God's help we will continue to worship and serve our Creator God until every day and every thing is HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD!
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17)
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. (I John 3:7-10)
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. (Matthew 7:1-5)
In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD'S house shall be like the bowls before the altar. Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts. (Zechariah 14:20-21)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
I'm back! The family Winter Solstice celebration is over and was a great success! Now to sit back with some fantastic oak aged ale that Sinter Klass brought me, watch the World Junior Hockey Championships and await the New Year!
Be careful there, NewGuy: you're getting dangerously close to emulating some of Iesous's ridiculous numerology garbage!
Jerry Duke:
I would like to implore you nicely one more time: please remove your boilerplate regarding your theological views from your posts. It is childish and offensive, and is completely out of place on a forum where we have many differing viewpoints that are attempting to have respectful dialog on issues of science (even in the creation/evolution section). You would not be pleased if I (or others) began placing headers on every single post with statements like "God is fake", or listing instructions on how to "Be rid of Jesus forever". There are others who have asked you to remove your headers. Please respect our viewpoints and post without all the garbage. We are interested in your thoughts and what you have to say, but you are obscuring your discussions with the unnecessary additions to everything you place here.
If you do not wish to remove your boilerplate, then please expound in detail upon your reasons as to why you feel it is acceptable and necessary for you to act in a manner offensive to the others on this forum. Thank you.
QUOTE
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
Be careful there, NewGuy: you're getting dangerously close to emulating some of Iesous's ridiculous numerology garbage!
Jerry Duke:
I would like to implore you nicely one more time: please remove your boilerplate regarding your theological views from your posts. It is childish and offensive, and is completely out of place on a forum where we have many differing viewpoints that are attempting to have respectful dialog on issues of science (even in the creation/evolution section). You would not be pleased if I (or others) began placing headers on every single post with statements like "God is fake", or listing instructions on how to "Be rid of Jesus forever". There are others who have asked you to remove your headers. Please respect our viewpoints and post without all the garbage. We are interested in your thoughts and what you have to say, but you are obscuring your discussions with the unnecessary additions to everything you place here.
If you do not wish to remove your boilerplate, then please expound in detail upon your reasons as to why you feel it is acceptable and necessary for you to act in a manner offensive to the others on this forum. Thank you.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 28 2005, 05:21 PM)
QUOTE (newguy+Dec 27 2005, 09:51 PM)
RealityCheck: ... I was merely addressing the hypocrisy of JerryDuke for defending a "holy day" ...
It is never wrong to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. If the greatest celebration occurs on a day that was once associated with a pagan celebration thousands of years ago, praise God! And so much the better if hardly anyone even remembers the pagan associations. The purpose of Christ's coming into the world is to destroy the works of the devil. Christmas is a time of doing good and showing love to our friends and our enemies in the name of Jesus Christ.
.
To hear YOU and your disreputable ID/CS buddies talk, ALL KNOWLEDGE except that which your 'book' gives you IS "works of the devil"...which possibly explains your propensity for 'hiding/bending the truth' at all costs, heh? Let's face it, Jerry; what you're REALLY saying is: the more people are MADE ignorant about EVERYTHING (including the real knowledge of 'pagan' origins of Xmas traditions etc) the BETTER people like US (ie, your kind) can CONTROL them. Your religion would, if given the chance, destroy learning and knowledge, and once again bring a terrible dark ages. You can lurk in the dark, mate; but give me the light, any day. Ciao.
RC.
.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
I quite agree, its very humorous reading your web page.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
It is never wrong to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. If the greatest celebration occurs on a day that was once associated with a pagan celebration thousands of years ago, praise God! And so much the better if hardly anyone even remembers the pagan associations. The purpose of Christ's coming into the world is to destroy the works of the devil. Christmas is a time of doing good and showing love to our friends and our enemies in the name of Jesus Christ.
.
To hear YOU and your disreputable ID/CS buddies talk, ALL KNOWLEDGE except that which your 'book' gives you IS "works of the devil"...which possibly explains your propensity for 'hiding/bending the truth' at all costs, heh? Let's face it, Jerry; what you're REALLY saying is: the more people are MADE ignorant about EVERYTHING (including the real knowledge of 'pagan' origins of Xmas traditions etc) the BETTER people like US (ie, your kind) can CONTROL them. Your religion would, if given the chance, destroy learning and knowledge, and once again bring a terrible dark ages. You can lurk in the dark, mate; but give me the light, any day. Ciao.
RC.
.
QUOTE (sinned34+Dec 28 2005, 01:48 PM)
We are interested in your thoughts and what you have to say, but you are obscuring your discussions with the unnecessary additions to everything you place here.
Yup JD,
I have to say, I see that cross at the top and I usually page down to the next post. I'm not sorting through all that crap to find the one line that may be of relevance to the conversation.
Yup JD,
I have to say, I see that cross at the top and I usually page down to the next post. I'm not sorting through all that crap to find the one line that may be of relevance to the conversation.
QUOTE (sinned34+)
Be careful there, NewGuy: you're getting dangerously close to emulating some of Iesous's ridiculous numerology garbage!
sinned34: Like it or not, gematria or numerology has been around for quite a long time. In fact, it has been around longer than you or me. Unlike Iesous, I have simply supplied cogent evidence as to the pagan origins of Christmas/Christ Mass. The Romans were into gematria, sun worship and Satan worship, just as I stated. This heavily influenced our modern calendar, as I clearly showed for anyone with eyes to see. This is reality. Burying our heads in the sand won't make this any less of a reality. For JerryDuke, or any professing Christian, to defend such a pagan "holy day", is simply reprehensible. That is my point and I stick with it. No apologies at all at my end.
RealityCheck: You hit the nail right on the head. Jerry and his type prey on the ignorant.
JerryDuke: If you want everything to be "HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD", then why not start with yourself. God's Word repeatedly tells us not to learn the ways of the heathen. You not only learn them, you defend them. Hypocrite.
sinned34: Like it or not, gematria or numerology has been around for quite a long time. In fact, it has been around longer than you or me. Unlike Iesous, I have simply supplied cogent evidence as to the pagan origins of Christmas/Christ Mass. The Romans were into gematria, sun worship and Satan worship, just as I stated. This heavily influenced our modern calendar, as I clearly showed for anyone with eyes to see. This is reality. Burying our heads in the sand won't make this any less of a reality. For JerryDuke, or any professing Christian, to defend such a pagan "holy day", is simply reprehensible. That is my point and I stick with it. No apologies at all at my end.
RealityCheck: You hit the nail right on the head. Jerry and his type prey on the ignorant.
JerryDuke: If you want everything to be "HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD", then why not start with yourself. God's Word repeatedly tells us not to learn the ways of the heathen. You not only learn them, you defend them. Hypocrite.
QUOTE (rekabis+Aug 9 2005, 10:30 PM)
http://www.physorg.com/news5716.html
A half a millenium ago, we were “debating” whether the world was round or flat. Since then, the voice of Science has prevailed over the voice of Religion, and we all know now that the world is round. Anyone still claiming the world is flat is usually visited by the big men in white jackets and hauled away to a nicely padded cell.
A few hundred years later, another “debate” arose as to whether the Earth revolved around the Sun, or whether the Sun revolved around the Earth. Once again, Science beat out Religion.
And a hundred or so years after that “debate”, another one tried to determine whether the Earth was the center of the universe or not. Once again, Science triumphed over Religious dogma, and we now know that the Earth is but a tiny, insignificant planet circling an ordinary, slightly below-average star sitting way out on the spiral arms of a rather average galaxy that itself is but one member of a group of galaxies, which themselves are just a rather underpopulated example of the kinds of “galactic clusters” of galaxies that span and fill our universe.
Now we have another “debate” between the voice of Science (evolution) and the voice of Religion (intelligent design). But is there really any need for such a “debate” to occur again? Not really.
If anyone were to take some basic, college-level or university-level science and biology classes, especially those dealing in genetics, palentology, geology and evolution, they would come to the overwhelmingly inescapable conclusion that there is no “debate”. Only (yet) another attempt by the well-educated scientific community to inform the ill-educated and religiously fanatical zealots out there that they’ve got their collective heads in the sand.
With virtually every single religion-vs-science “debate” in humanity’s history, science has always prevailed in the end. Yes, there are still a few “debates” still to play out (is there a God? Is there an afterlife?), but no-one has been able to come up with a proper, reproducable, verifiable, double-blind experiment to test these theories with yet.
The beauty of Science is that it is testable, verifiable, reproducable and largely resistant to falsehood. How? Many people think that the whole premise of Science is to PROVE something. WRONG. Being a Scientist is all about DISPROVING something. Create a theory, and then try to disprove it. You might have all the proof in the world, but it takes only one example of disproof to make that theory useless, worthless and utterly wrong; and this is Science’s greatest strength, its ultimate error-correcting mechanism. After all, do we really believe anymore, as it is taught in the Bible, that the world is flat? Heck, it’s in the Bible, so it must be right, no? WRONG.
You can destroy every book about Science in the world, wipe the mind of every person on the planet, and Science would be rebuilt with the exact same structure (although maybe not in the same sequence of discoveries). It has its own error-correcting mechanism built right into it, that ensures that only the truth endures.
Too bad you can"t say the same of Religion.
Everything is at the mercy of "Time" if it is to exist!
Having said this, no-thing must be alway just that, change it, and it too! is subject to some evolving from some-thing over time, that suggests a change from one thing to something else, which suggests an evolving!.
Lets address where an intelligent designer is to accomplish claims of creation.
To do this we must now establish how this speculated INTELLIGENT entity is to exist and more importantly how it came to exist? and what was responsible for that and so on and so on blah blah blah~
OK lets amuse simpletons and go with an Intelligent entity evolved somehow
.. No-thing else but this entity?
So what constructs define its intelligence?
NO-THING exists to facilitate constructs of ordered data that can be changed to a new order of constructs! let alone the materials to facilitate said changes.
The only way to describe what this INTELLIGENT thought would have been confronted with, is to ask you invent something that does not exist yet and more importantly by NOT using Ideas or Constructs or pre-existing concerns based on pre-existing observations and or sensations that helped to facilitate your own intelligence.
The problem is Intelligence first needs to observe and understand an existing environment, so data collection takes time in itself of the current status, but here is another problem NO-THING exists to facilitate this for the sole entity!
So how and what defined this Intelligence?
No-thing?
A half a millenium ago, we were “debating” whether the world was round or flat. Since then, the voice of Science has prevailed over the voice of Religion, and we all know now that the world is round. Anyone still claiming the world is flat is usually visited by the big men in white jackets and hauled away to a nicely padded cell.
A few hundred years later, another “debate” arose as to whether the Earth revolved around the Sun, or whether the Sun revolved around the Earth. Once again, Science beat out Religion.
And a hundred or so years after that “debate”, another one tried to determine whether the Earth was the center of the universe or not. Once again, Science triumphed over Religious dogma, and we now know that the Earth is but a tiny, insignificant planet circling an ordinary, slightly below-average star sitting way out on the spiral arms of a rather average galaxy that itself is but one member of a group of galaxies, which themselves are just a rather underpopulated example of the kinds of “galactic clusters” of galaxies that span and fill our universe.
Now we have another “debate” between the voice of Science (evolution) and the voice of Religion (intelligent design). But is there really any need for such a “debate” to occur again? Not really.
If anyone were to take some basic, college-level or university-level science and biology classes, especially those dealing in genetics, palentology, geology and evolution, they would come to the overwhelmingly inescapable conclusion that there is no “debate”. Only (yet) another attempt by the well-educated scientific community to inform the ill-educated and religiously fanatical zealots out there that they’ve got their collective heads in the sand.
With virtually every single religion-vs-science “debate” in humanity’s history, science has always prevailed in the end. Yes, there are still a few “debates” still to play out (is there a God? Is there an afterlife?), but no-one has been able to come up with a proper, reproducable, verifiable, double-blind experiment to test these theories with yet.
The beauty of Science is that it is testable, verifiable, reproducable and largely resistant to falsehood. How? Many people think that the whole premise of Science is to PROVE something. WRONG. Being a Scientist is all about DISPROVING something. Create a theory, and then try to disprove it. You might have all the proof in the world, but it takes only one example of disproof to make that theory useless, worthless and utterly wrong; and this is Science’s greatest strength, its ultimate error-correcting mechanism. After all, do we really believe anymore, as it is taught in the Bible, that the world is flat? Heck, it’s in the Bible, so it must be right, no? WRONG.
You can destroy every book about Science in the world, wipe the mind of every person on the planet, and Science would be rebuilt with the exact same structure (although maybe not in the same sequence of discoveries). It has its own error-correcting mechanism built right into it, that ensures that only the truth endures.
Too bad you can"t say the same of Religion.
Everything is at the mercy of "Time" if it is to exist!
Having said this, no-thing must be alway just that, change it, and it too! is subject to some evolving from some-thing over time, that suggests a change from one thing to something else, which suggests an evolving!.
Lets address where an intelligent designer is to accomplish claims of creation.
To do this we must now establish how this speculated INTELLIGENT entity is to exist and more importantly how it came to exist? and what was responsible for that and so on and so on blah blah blah~
OK lets amuse simpletons and go with an Intelligent entity evolved somehow
.. No-thing else but this entity?So what constructs define its intelligence?
NO-THING exists to facilitate constructs of ordered data that can be changed to a new order of constructs! let alone the materials to facilitate said changes.
The only way to describe what this INTELLIGENT thought would have been confronted with, is to ask you invent something that does not exist yet and more importantly by NOT using Ideas or Constructs or pre-existing concerns based on pre-existing observations and or sensations that helped to facilitate your own intelligence.
The problem is Intelligence first needs to observe and understand an existing environment, so data collection takes time in itself of the current status, but here is another problem NO-THING exists to facilitate this for the sole entity!
So how and what defined this Intelligence?
No-thing?
QUOTE (Tim+Aug 10 2005, 11:59 AM)
Why does no one suggest that God created evolution?
Is not evolution itself evidence of intelligent design? As
a species, we seem incapable of recognizing two sides
of a coin as a single object. Did it take a week or billions
of years? Were each of us born in an instant, or was it
the culmination of a thousand years journey? This seems
like a distinction without any meaning.
Evolution is a result of changes to a species which has been more than likely response from a change of environment so on and so on and so on, if changes are not favorable said species ceases to exist! if the changes are favorable it thrives!
Is not evolution itself evidence of intelligent design? As
a species, we seem incapable of recognizing two sides
of a coin as a single object. Did it take a week or billions
of years? Were each of us born in an instant, or was it
the culmination of a thousand years journey? This seems
like a distinction without any meaning.
Evolution is a result of changes to a species which has been more than likely response from a change of environment so on and so on and so on, if changes are not favorable said species ceases to exist! if the changes are favorable it thrives!
QUOTE (emilper+Aug 10 2005, 01:05 PM)
well, the debate is not about Creation, but about Intelligent Design ... i.e.: "the E.T. did it". I would not be surprised to find out that the guys that support Intelligent Design are scientologists in disguise.
A creationist would have nothing against evolution, since in the Bible there are no exact details on how did God create the humans ... maybe the monkeys are version 0.9 and Homo Sapiens is version 1.0 ... the design of H.Sapiens clearly descends from the design for the primates.
peace,
emil per.
And I would further suggest if evolution is hog wash! so then is Noahs tale a load of rubbish and the native Australians must be Damn good swimmers!
A creationist would have nothing against evolution, since in the Bible there are no exact details on how did God create the humans ... maybe the monkeys are version 0.9 and Homo Sapiens is version 1.0 ... the design of H.Sapiens clearly descends from the design for the primates.
peace,
emil per.
And I would further suggest if evolution is hog wash! so then is Noahs tale a load of rubbish and the native Australians must be Damn good swimmers!
In conclusion I would like to add this thought!
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (sinned34+Dec 28 2005, 07:48 PM)
...
Jerry Duke:
I would like to implore you nicely one more time: please remove your boilerplate regarding your theological views from your posts. It is childish and offensive, and is completely out of place on a forum where we have many differing viewpoints that are attempting to have respectful dialog on issues of science (even in the creation/evolution section). You would not be pleased if I (or others) began placing headers on every single post with statements like "God is fake", or listing instructions on how to "Be rid of Jesus forever". There are others who have asked you to remove your headers. Please respect our viewpoints and post without all the garbage. We are interested in your thoughts and what you have to say, but you are obscuring your discussions with the unnecessary additions to everything you place here.
If you do not wish to remove your boilerplate, then please expound in detail upon your reasons as to why you feel it is acceptable and necessary for you to act in a manner offensive to the others on this forum. Thank you.
The dialog about Creation science and Evolution mythology is incidental to my first purpose which is to serve my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. (Colossians 3:17)
Should I obey you or should I obey Jesus Christ? I think I should obey Jesus Christ; therefore, if I post in PhysOrgForums, I need to do it "in the name of the Lord Jesus". I have made a solemn covenant with God "to live to win souls and make their salvation the first purpose of my life." Salvation requires faith, and faith comes to people when they hear the word of God; therefore, if I am to work for the salvation of souls in PhysOrgForums, I must share scripture with you. I make every effort to ensure that the scripture I share is relevant to the subject that prompted the post, whatever it might be.
The banner at the top of most of my posts says, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." This informs everyone that what follows is being done in the name of Jesus Christ, as distinct from in the name of "PhysOrgForums" which name is displayed in the banner at the top of every page. Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; therefore, as a follower of Jesus Christ, I also must be about the work of saving sinners.
The plan of salvation is presented in the "boiler plate" signature section of the post which PhysOrgForums makes available to every member. Content in this section appears the same in every one of my posts because this is the way PhysOrgForums has designed it. Other members have posted blasphemous and/or antichristian messages in the signature seciton. I prefer to post a wholesome message of hope for those who are slaves of sin. Anyone who is already saved should not be offended by this. Anyone who is not saved needs to hear this message as often as possible, even if it offends them.
When I was possessed with the devil for three days in 1975, a man came to my door and asked me, "Do you know Jesus Christ?" I was offended by his question, but he persisted. I invited him and his friend into my living room. I looked back at them as they followed me through the kitchen and wondered, "Why am I doing this?" I did not know either of them, but I could sense there was something "clean" about them and I trusted them. After a couple of hours of hearing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I had acquired enough faith to accept Jesus Christ as my Saviour. When I accepted Jesus Christ, God set me free from the devil, gave me a clean new heart and liberated me from being a slave to sin. Suppose those men had left my house so as not to offend me with their speaking about Jesus Christ. I hope God would have given me another opportunity to hear the Gospel, but if I had shooed every one of his messengers away, would I ever have been saved?
Three URL links are provided in most of my posts to give anyone who needs it ready access to the Bible, a more detailed plan of salvation, and my online book. These links take up minimal space and provide a useful service.
Bottom line: If you take away my freedom of speech, I can't participate in PhysOrgForums.
Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:9-11)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Jerry Duke:
I would like to implore you nicely one more time: please remove your boilerplate regarding your theological views from your posts. It is childish and offensive, and is completely out of place on a forum where we have many differing viewpoints that are attempting to have respectful dialog on issues of science (even in the creation/evolution section). You would not be pleased if I (or others) began placing headers on every single post with statements like "God is fake", or listing instructions on how to "Be rid of Jesus forever". There are others who have asked you to remove your headers. Please respect our viewpoints and post without all the garbage. We are interested in your thoughts and what you have to say, but you are obscuring your discussions with the unnecessary additions to everything you place here.
If you do not wish to remove your boilerplate, then please expound in detail upon your reasons as to why you feel it is acceptable and necessary for you to act in a manner offensive to the others on this forum. Thank you.
The dialog about Creation science and Evolution mythology is incidental to my first purpose which is to serve my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. (Colossians 3:17)
Should I obey you or should I obey Jesus Christ? I think I should obey Jesus Christ; therefore, if I post in PhysOrgForums, I need to do it "in the name of the Lord Jesus". I have made a solemn covenant with God "to live to win souls and make their salvation the first purpose of my life." Salvation requires faith, and faith comes to people when they hear the word of God; therefore, if I am to work for the salvation of souls in PhysOrgForums, I must share scripture with you. I make every effort to ensure that the scripture I share is relevant to the subject that prompted the post, whatever it might be.
The banner at the top of most of my posts says, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." This informs everyone that what follows is being done in the name of Jesus Christ, as distinct from in the name of "PhysOrgForums" which name is displayed in the banner at the top of every page. Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; therefore, as a follower of Jesus Christ, I also must be about the work of saving sinners.
The plan of salvation is presented in the "boiler plate" signature section of the post which PhysOrgForums makes available to every member. Content in this section appears the same in every one of my posts because this is the way PhysOrgForums has designed it. Other members have posted blasphemous and/or antichristian messages in the signature seciton. I prefer to post a wholesome message of hope for those who are slaves of sin. Anyone who is already saved should not be offended by this. Anyone who is not saved needs to hear this message as often as possible, even if it offends them.
When I was possessed with the devil for three days in 1975, a man came to my door and asked me, "Do you know Jesus Christ?" I was offended by his question, but he persisted. I invited him and his friend into my living room. I looked back at them as they followed me through the kitchen and wondered, "Why am I doing this?" I did not know either of them, but I could sense there was something "clean" about them and I trusted them. After a couple of hours of hearing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I had acquired enough faith to accept Jesus Christ as my Saviour. When I accepted Jesus Christ, God set me free from the devil, gave me a clean new heart and liberated me from being a slave to sin. Suppose those men had left my house so as not to offend me with their speaking about Jesus Christ. I hope God would have given me another opportunity to hear the Gospel, but if I had shooed every one of his messengers away, would I ever have been saved?
Three URL links are provided in most of my posts to give anyone who needs it ready access to the Bible, a more detailed plan of salvation, and my online book. These links take up minimal space and provide a useful service.
Bottom line: If you take away my freedom of speech, I can't participate in PhysOrgForums.
Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:9-11)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE
Three URL links are provided in most of my posts to give anyone who needs it ready access to the Bible, a more detailed plan of salvation, and my online book. These links take up minimal space and provide a useful service.
I quite agree, its very humorous reading your web page.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Laidback+Dec 30 2005, 01:14 AM)
In conclusion I would like to add this thought!
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
A similar question was asked thousands of years ago. These are two of God's replies:
Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. (Psalm 84:8-11)
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:9-12)
Before coming to conclusions about things of which you have no knowledge, perhaps you should check your assumptions. They might be faulty.
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
A similar question was asked thousands of years ago. These are two of God's replies:
Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. (Psalm 84:8-11)
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:9-12)
Before coming to conclusions about things of which you have no knowledge, perhaps you should check your assumptions. They might be faulty.
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 28 2005, 09:25 PM)
... To hear YOU and your disreputable ID/CS buddies talk, ALL KNOWLEDGE except that which your 'book' gives you IS "works of the devil" ... Let's face it, Jerry; what you're REALLY saying is: the more people are MADE ignorant about EVERYTHING (including the real knowledge of 'pagan' origins of ... traditions etc) the BETTER people like US (ie, your kind) can CONTROL them. Your religion would, if given the chance, destroy learning and knowledge, and once again bring a terrible dark ages. You can lurk in the dark, mate; but give me the light, any day. Ciao.
RC.
.
You might like to check your assumptions before your conclusions land you in hell, especially if you are teaching things to others that are based on those conclusions.
And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (Mark 9:42-48)
If you will cite sources for your accusations against me, I will be happy to address them. The truth is, I love science. I would not be participating in this forum if I did not love mathematics and other sciences, but I do not love them more than I love the Lord. I oppose those who impose their false beliefs on others and try to force them to accept the myth of Evolution as an indisputable fact. If you value the scientific method, you should be willing to apply it to the false assertions of evolutionists and skeptics. If you really want to live in the light, you have a true friend in Jesus Christ.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:16-21)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
RC.
.
You might like to check your assumptions before your conclusions land you in hell, especially if you are teaching things to others that are based on those conclusions.
And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. (Mark 9:42-48)
If you will cite sources for your accusations against me, I will be happy to address them. The truth is, I love science. I would not be participating in this forum if I did not love mathematics and other sciences, but I do not love them more than I love the Lord. I oppose those who impose their false beliefs on others and try to force them to accept the myth of Evolution as an indisputable fact. If you value the scientific method, you should be willing to apply it to the false assertions of evolutionists and skeptics. If you really want to live in the light, you have a true friend in Jesus Christ.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:16-21)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 30 2005, 06:55 PM)
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 28 2005, 09:25 PM)
... To hear YOU and your disreputable ID/CS buddies talk, ALL KNOWLEDGE except that which your 'book' gives you IS "works of the devil" ... Let's face it, Jerry; what you're REALLY saying is: the more people are MADE ignorant about EVERYTHING (including the real knowledge of 'pagan' origins of ... traditions etc) the BETTER people like US (ie, your kind) can CONTROL them. Your religion would, if given the chance, destroy learning and knowledge, and once again bring a terrible dark ages. You can lurk in the dark, mate; but give me the light, any day. Ciao.
RC.
.
You might like to check your assumptions before your conclusions land you in hell, especially if you are teaching things to others that are based on those conclusions.
.
Jerry,
By your own boast at the top of every post you make here, you are chief among sinners. You have also variously been possessed by the devil etc.. You support those perjurious ID/CS types (unlike newguy, an honest religious man). So, Jerry, what makes you think I have anything to learn from you?....unless it is how to be chief among sinners, like you; or how to become possessed of the devil etc., like you; or how to support perjury, like you...etc..etc...etc.
Let's face it, MANY of us HERE are WAY ahead of you when it comes to spirituality, honesty, integrity, wisdom, self-respect/control etc...so why would we listen to you?....which no-one apparently does anyway, I might add. If you are the poster boy for your 'religion', it must be a desperate 'religion' indeed. Wise up and get some real honesty and integrity in time for New Year's, mate. Then perhaps you can start over, and WITHOUT the "commercials" for your self-evidently faulty 'religion', heh?
Happy New Year, Jerry!
RC.
.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
RC.
.
You might like to check your assumptions before your conclusions land you in hell, especially if you are teaching things to others that are based on those conclusions.
.
Jerry,
By your own boast at the top of every post you make here, you are chief among sinners. You have also variously been possessed by the devil etc.. You support those perjurious ID/CS types (unlike newguy, an honest religious man). So, Jerry, what makes you think I have anything to learn from you?....unless it is how to be chief among sinners, like you; or how to become possessed of the devil etc., like you; or how to support perjury, like you...etc..etc...etc.
Let's face it, MANY of us HERE are WAY ahead of you when it comes to spirituality, honesty, integrity, wisdom, self-respect/control etc...so why would we listen to you?....which no-one apparently does anyway, I might add. If you are the poster boy for your 'religion', it must be a desperate 'religion' indeed. Wise up and get some real honesty and integrity in time for New Year's, mate. Then perhaps you can start over, and WITHOUT the "commercials" for your self-evidently faulty 'religion', heh?
Happy New Year, Jerry!
RC.
.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 30 2005, 06:04 PM)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Laidback+Dec 30 2005, 01:14 AM)
In conclusion I would like to add this thought!
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
A similar question was asked thousands of years ago. These are two of God's replies:
Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. (Psalm 84:8-11)
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:9-12)
Before coming to conclusions about things of which you have no knowledge, perhaps you should check your assumptions. They might be faulty.
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Isn't it a sin to make a fool of your self as you just done?
Better make out like Eve and take a bite of the forbidden fruit so that you can become a sinner and take a bite of the forbidden fruit that facilitates one to be able to sin against god.
Or why don't you get Jesus to sodomize another virgin so that he can seed her like Mary was seeded so that he can father himself!
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
A similar question was asked thousands of years ago. These are two of God's replies:
Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. (Psalm 84:8-11)
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:9-12)
Before coming to conclusions about things of which you have no knowledge, perhaps you should check your assumptions. They might be faulty.
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof Isn't it a sin to make a fool of your self as you just done?
Better make out like Eve and take a bite of the forbidden fruit so that you can become a sinner and take a bite of the forbidden fruit that facilitates one to be able to sin against god.
Or why don't you get Jesus to sodomize another virgin so that he can seed her like Mary was seeded so that he can father himself!
QUOTE (Laidback+)
Or why don't you get Jesus to sodomize another virgin so that he can seed her like Mary was seeded so that he can father himself!
sodomy
One entry found for sodomy.
Main Entry: sod·omy
Pronunciation: 'sä-d&-mE
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1-11
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex
- sod·om·it·ic /"sä-d&-'mi-tik/ or sod·om·it·i·cal /-ti-k&l/ adjective
Laidback: You don't understand "sodomy" too well, do you? Why don't you be a good little boy and go learn about "the birds and the bees" and come back after you've hit puberty, okay?
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
For JerryDuke, or any professing Christian, to defend such a pagan "holy day", is simply reprehensible. That is my point and I stick with it. No apologies at all at my end.
I also don't see why its reprehensible to defend something with pagan origins that has been changed to have christian meaning. You connected numerology with sun worship and satan worship. But why does what other people do have any effect on your faith? I know you don't celebrate christmas, but if you did, you would be celebrating god, and Jesus christ, like your supposed to do on any other day. If any christian is celebrating god, and Jesus on a day that others happened to 'worship the sun' what does it matter? If in their heart they are worshipping god, would it bother him that it happened to be on a day that 'heathens' worshipped the sun? Or are people not supposed to worship god on days that others have worshipped satan, or the sun? I think that would make worshipping god something one could not do anyday of the year then.
sodomy
One entry found for sodomy.
Main Entry: sod·omy
Pronunciation: 'sä-d&-mE
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1-11
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex
- sod·om·it·ic /"sä-d&-'mi-tik/ or sod·om·it·i·cal /-ti-k&l/ adjective
Laidback: You don't understand "sodomy" too well, do you? Why don't you be a good little boy and go learn about "the birds and the bees" and come back after you've hit puberty, okay?
QUOTE (Laidback+)
Isn't it a sin to make a fool of your self as you just done?
Where you speaking to Jerry or yourself? Feel stupid, yet?
Where you speaking to Jerry or yourself? Feel stupid, yet?
QUOTE
JerryDuke: Some other things to ponder.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| JerryDuke: Some other things to ponder. ï è ù = 359 50 9 300 NUN TETH SHIN S T N S A T A N In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following: Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month. Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month. Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month. Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month. Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month). The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry. |
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
For JerryDuke, or any professing Christian, to defend such a pagan "holy day", is simply reprehensible. That is my point and I stick with it. No apologies at all at my end.
I also don't see why its reprehensible to defend something with pagan origins that has been changed to have christian meaning. You connected numerology with sun worship and satan worship. But why does what other people do have any effect on your faith? I know you don't celebrate christmas, but if you did, you would be celebrating god, and Jesus christ, like your supposed to do on any other day. If any christian is celebrating god, and Jesus on a day that others happened to 'worship the sun' what does it matter? If in their heart they are worshipping god, would it bother him that it happened to be on a day that 'heathens' worshipped the sun? Or are people not supposed to worship god on days that others have worshipped satan, or the sun? I think that would make worshipping god something one could not do anyday of the year then.
QUOTE (newguy+Dec 31 2005, 12:38 PM)
QUOTE (Laidback+)
Or why don't you get Jesus to sodomize another virgin so that he can seed her like Mary was seeded so that he can father himself!
sodomy
One entry found for sodomy.
Main Entry: sod·omy
Pronunciation: 'sä-d&-mE
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1-11
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex
- sod·om·it·ic /"sä-d&-'mi-tik/ or sod·om·it·i·cal /-ti-k&l/ adjective
Laidback: You don't understand "sodomy" too well, do you? Why don't you be a good little boy and go learn about "the birds and the bees" and come back after you've hit puberty, okay?
sodomy
One entry found for sodomy.
Main Entry: sod·omy
Pronunciation: 'sä-d&-mE
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1-11
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex
- sod·om·it·ic /"sä-d&-'mi-tik/ or sod·om·it·i·cal /-ti-k&l/ adjective
Laidback: You don't understand "sodomy" too well, do you? Why don't you be a good little boy and go learn about "the birds and the bees" and come back after you've hit puberty, okay?
QUOTE (Laidback+)
Isn't it a sin to make a fool of your self as you just done?
Where you speaking to Jerry or yourself? Feel stupid, yet?
Oh sheet yeah! may I say I laughed at myself to no end!
Puberty!? Mwah? Errr~ OK I could go for a second round of Puberty, Gosh! it's been well over three decades ago since my first term of puberty but I think I should enjoy it as much as I did back then!
You're right sodomy is the act of penetrating the anus!
May I retract sodomized and replace it with RAPE seeing no consent was given
Thanks for the heads oop! on my poop!
BTW is it OK if I study human sexual behavior instead? <slurp> As I cant get the birds and the bees to copulate errr~ cooperate
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
For JerryDuke, or any professing Christian, to defend such a pagan "holy day", is simply reprehensible. That is my point and I stick with it. No apologies at all at my end.
I also don't see why its reprehensible to defend something with pagan origins that has been changed to have christian meaning. You connected numerology with sun worship and satan worship. But why does what other people do have any effect on your faith? I know you don't celebrate christmas, but if you did, you would be celebrating god, and Jesus christ, like your supposed to do on any other day. If any christian is celebrating god, and Jesus on a day that others happened to 'worship the sun' what does it matter? If in their heart they are worshipping god, would it bother him that it happened to be on a day that 'heathens' worshipped the sun? Or are people not supposed to worship god on days that others have worshipped satan, or the sun? I think that would make worshipping god something one could not do anyday of the year then.
Steveo: I used Hebrew for this numerology because Satan's name first appears in scripture in the Old Testament which was written in Hebrew. Had the Old Testament been originally written in Latin, then we could look for the corresponding numeric value of his name in Latin. Here are some examples of where the sun and the serpent(Satan) were linked in past civilizations:
http://www.textile-art.com/feath/sun.html
Eight-Rayed Sun and Two-Headed Serpent Tunic
Wari culture, south coast of Peru
c. 800-1100 AD
http://www.swedenborgdigitallibrary.org/egypt/eg7.htm
Ra, the Spiritual Sun
Very closely connected with Amen, and almost undistinguishable from him as to general attributes, is the great and ancient deity known as Ra, who, like Amen, is generally represented in the human form, with the heavily bearded face of a man, though he is often seen with the head of hawk. His one distinctive emblem is the large, red solar disk above his head, with a royal serpent entwined about the sun; the body itself of Ra is usually painted red. The centre of his worship was the ancient city of an, the Hebrew on, a few miles to the northeast of Cairo. The Egyptians also called it Pa Ra, the "city of the Sun," which the Hebrews translated into Bethshemech and the Greeks into Heliopolis. Here was the greatest university and theological school in all Egypt, and here was kept the bull Mnevis, sacred to Ra; this place, also, was the supposed birthplace of the mythical bird Phoenix, which represented the daily death and re-birth of the sun.
Someone actually wrote a book about the cult of Ra.
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/05000510...SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
Another reason why Satan(Lucifer) worship and Sun worship were linked to each other can be found in the meaning of the name Lucifer.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Lucifer
Lucifer
O.E. Lucifer "Satan," also "morning star," from L. Lucifer "morning star," lit. "light-bringing," from lux (gen. lucis) + ferre "carry" (see infer). Belief that it was the proper name of Satan began with its used in Bible to translate Gk. Phosphoros, which translates Heb. Helel ben Shahar in Isaiah xiv.12 -- "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" [K.J.V.] The verse was interpreted by Christians as a reference to "Satan," because of the mention of a fall from Heaven, even though it is literally a reference to the King of Babylon (cf. Isaiah xiv.4).
There are several reasons why I find the worshipping of Christ's birth on December 25th to be reprehensible. One reason, which I've already described, is the totally pagan origin of sun worship/satan worship on that particular day on the calendar. Like it or not, the Romans changed our calendar for at least some of the reasons that I described previously. Just for the record, yesterday was NOT "New Year's day". The "new year" starts in Spring...NOT 9 or 10 days into Winter. "Leap year" doesn't occur at the end of the second month. It occurs at the end of the 12th month. Another reason is that we can tell when Christ was born by simply searching the scriptures. He was NOT born in December. Several things point to this fact. I'll be happy to share some of them with you, if you'd like. Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths. Christians are supposed to be defenders of spiritual truth...NOT defenders of lies and myths. Why do you think that the Romans changed our calendar to make the Feast of Saturnalia fall on the 359th day of the year if not for Satanic reasons? Why couldn't they have just left the calendar alone? Answer that for me, if you will.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Where you speaking to Jerry or yourself? Feel stupid, yet?
Oh sheet yeah! may I say I laughed at myself to no end!
Puberty!? Mwah? Errr~ OK I could go for a second round of Puberty, Gosh! it's been well over three decades ago since my first term of puberty but I think I should enjoy it as much as I did back then!
You're right sodomy is the act of penetrating the anus! May I retract sodomized and replace it with RAPE seeing no consent was given
Thanks for the heads oop! on my poop!
BTW is it OK if I study human sexual behavior instead?
<slurp> As I cant get the birds and the bees to copulate errr~ cooperate
Just for the record,....here's Rush on Intelligent Design:
From the 12/23/05 broadcast and in response to the Dover decision of 12/22/05.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...tute.guest.html
RUSH: This is Michael in Charlotte, Michigan. Nice to have you with us.
CALLER: Hello, Rush.
RUSH: Hello, sir.
CALLER: Yes. My axiom, which can be applied to all liberals, is: The God you make is the God you must defend. The God that made you needs no defense. With that said, I was wanting to know your opinion on the court rejecting the ability for high school teachers to mention intelligent design as an alternative viewpoint for how man came into being.
RUSH: Well, you know, I have mixed emotions about this on multiple levels. For one thing, it doesn't surprise me at all, just in the context of judicial activism. I think it's another great example of how we need different kinds of judges. I mean, I know the case ended up before the guy, but these are the kinds of cases that the school board had authorized and a bunch of parents sued and it ends up before this judge and this judge just discounts it on behalf of the district that he rules in, just discounts it. On the other hand, I do think this: I think that the people -- and I know why they're doing it, but I still think that it's a little bit disingenuous. Let's make no mistake. The people pushing intelligent design believe in the biblical version of creation. Intelligent design is a way, I think, to sneak it into the curriculum and make it less offensive to the liberals because it ostensibly does not involve religious overtones, that there is just some intelligent being far greater than anything any of us can even imagine that's responsible for all this, and of course I don't have any doubt of that. But I think that they're sort of pussyfooting around when they call it intelligent design.
Call it what it is. You believe God created the world, and you think that it's warranted that this kind of theory for the explanation for all that is be taught. On the other hand, I understand why they went with intelligent design, because they knew that calling it what I just called it gave it no chance. They wanted to sneak it in and at least have it exposed. Well, they realized they're dealing with liberals here, and liberals are intolerant when it comes to this. You can find all kinds of reasons to explain this, be it radical egalitarianism or self-loathing or what have you. And I think there are equal amounts of both that go into explaining this. But at the root of it is you have fear. The liberal cannot stand to be confronted with anything that would challenge the cocoon-like existence he or she has, so anything that does bounces off the cocoon in which they live. It's like a boundary that just doesn't permeate. Fact or not, it doesn't permeate. They will not even consider it. And when it threatens them -- see, I think if they were firm in their belief, if they were confident in their belief that evolution explains everything, they wouldn't mind a competing point of view because they could knock it down. They would relish the opportunity to defeat it. But they are threatened by it precisely because they fear it and they fear it because deep within themselves, they know that they're probably not right about this. But they don't have the guts or the temerity, the courage to admit that.
You got to understand who we're dealing with here, and they have now structured things such as this: when 95% of the people of the country agree with something, 5% of the country disagrees, the liberal will say the 5% must win because we can't hurt their feelings, we mustn't offend them. They already feel left out. We are excluding them from our society and our country. We are excluding their views, and we can't do that. And so the only fair thing to do is present nobody's views, except we will present our views, which don't threaten anybody because our views are the ones that everybody knows are right. And these are the 5 to 10% of the people that win the day on these kinds of arguments. Everybody is susceptible to the egalitarian argument and the egalitarian argument goes sort of like this: That perfection is possible in every human being, and that when a human being comes along who is not perfect, that person deserves our sympathy because that person who is not perfect is going to be shunned or made fun of or denied rights or what have you. So the liberal will take those people, whoever they are, whatever their so-called affliction or their behavior or existence that does not fit within the confines of what we define as normal, and champion them. And will make them heroes and will turn them into fearless crusaders against a tyrannical majority. And this is where I think the Christians in this country are suffering. They're viewed as a tyrannical majority, forcing their way on people, demanding that their way be believed and followed and heard when it's just the exact opposite.
The Christian majority in this country is the majority because it's the majority. It's the majority because of numbers. This is a democracy, a representative republic, and yet when any of the -- I don't care if it's a religious view or an environmental view or a political view, if it offends liberals who believe that nobody should go through life offended, with hurt feelings, then whatever is going on to cause that has got to be stopped. And they end up making these arguments and they are based in emotion and they're rooted at trying to permeate people's hearts. "Oh, yes it's unfortunate they feel bad. Well, okay." But it's gone on and on and on for so long now that it's become apparent what it really is. The effort that is underway here is to redefine the traditions and institutions that made the country great, and to say that those very traditions and institutions that made the country great actually led to a bad country. We are not a fair country, we're an unjust country. We are mean-spirited. We are extremist. We are environmentalist destructors. We destroyed a once pristine place that the great Native Americans protected with all of their being. We've come along, we've introduced racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, all these things, in society. This is what the majority has done. America's not a just country. America's not good, and any value that defines American traditions and institutions is good. Therefore, it becomes subject of attack and assault on the part and by people who are simply feeling left out, like they're a little odd, a little weird, and the people who sympathize with them. And that is why you will find various types and groups of people championed and embraced by the egalitarian left because they're the true crusaders, they're the ones that have courage, they're living in a place they don't like.
Read the Background Material...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-1...htm?POE=NEWISVA
(USAToday: 'Intelligent design' ruling may have ripples)
END TRANSCRIPT
I have no point to make - just thought it was an interesting piece and appropriate to post here as an FYI.
From the 12/23/05 broadcast and in response to the Dover decision of 12/22/05.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...tute.guest.html
RUSH: This is Michael in Charlotte, Michigan. Nice to have you with us.
CALLER: Hello, Rush.
RUSH: Hello, sir.
CALLER: Yes. My axiom, which can be applied to all liberals, is: The God you make is the God you must defend. The God that made you needs no defense. With that said, I was wanting to know your opinion on the court rejecting the ability for high school teachers to mention intelligent design as an alternative viewpoint for how man came into being.
RUSH: Well, you know, I have mixed emotions about this on multiple levels. For one thing, it doesn't surprise me at all, just in the context of judicial activism. I think it's another great example of how we need different kinds of judges. I mean, I know the case ended up before the guy, but these are the kinds of cases that the school board had authorized and a bunch of parents sued and it ends up before this judge and this judge just discounts it on behalf of the district that he rules in, just discounts it. On the other hand, I do think this: I think that the people -- and I know why they're doing it, but I still think that it's a little bit disingenuous. Let's make no mistake. The people pushing intelligent design believe in the biblical version of creation. Intelligent design is a way, I think, to sneak it into the curriculum and make it less offensive to the liberals because it ostensibly does not involve religious overtones, that there is just some intelligent being far greater than anything any of us can even imagine that's responsible for all this, and of course I don't have any doubt of that. But I think that they're sort of pussyfooting around when they call it intelligent design.
Call it what it is. You believe God created the world, and you think that it's warranted that this kind of theory for the explanation for all that is be taught. On the other hand, I understand why they went with intelligent design, because they knew that calling it what I just called it gave it no chance. They wanted to sneak it in and at least have it exposed. Well, they realized they're dealing with liberals here, and liberals are intolerant when it comes to this. You can find all kinds of reasons to explain this, be it radical egalitarianism or self-loathing or what have you. And I think there are equal amounts of both that go into explaining this. But at the root of it is you have fear. The liberal cannot stand to be confronted with anything that would challenge the cocoon-like existence he or she has, so anything that does bounces off the cocoon in which they live. It's like a boundary that just doesn't permeate. Fact or not, it doesn't permeate. They will not even consider it. And when it threatens them -- see, I think if they were firm in their belief, if they were confident in their belief that evolution explains everything, they wouldn't mind a competing point of view because they could knock it down. They would relish the opportunity to defeat it. But they are threatened by it precisely because they fear it and they fear it because deep within themselves, they know that they're probably not right about this. But they don't have the guts or the temerity, the courage to admit that.
You got to understand who we're dealing with here, and they have now structured things such as this: when 95% of the people of the country agree with something, 5% of the country disagrees, the liberal will say the 5% must win because we can't hurt their feelings, we mustn't offend them. They already feel left out. We are excluding them from our society and our country. We are excluding their views, and we can't do that. And so the only fair thing to do is present nobody's views, except we will present our views, which don't threaten anybody because our views are the ones that everybody knows are right. And these are the 5 to 10% of the people that win the day on these kinds of arguments. Everybody is susceptible to the egalitarian argument and the egalitarian argument goes sort of like this: That perfection is possible in every human being, and that when a human being comes along who is not perfect, that person deserves our sympathy because that person who is not perfect is going to be shunned or made fun of or denied rights or what have you. So the liberal will take those people, whoever they are, whatever their so-called affliction or their behavior or existence that does not fit within the confines of what we define as normal, and champion them. And will make them heroes and will turn them into fearless crusaders against a tyrannical majority. And this is where I think the Christians in this country are suffering. They're viewed as a tyrannical majority, forcing their way on people, demanding that their way be believed and followed and heard when it's just the exact opposite.
The Christian majority in this country is the majority because it's the majority. It's the majority because of numbers. This is a democracy, a representative republic, and yet when any of the -- I don't care if it's a religious view or an environmental view or a political view, if it offends liberals who believe that nobody should go through life offended, with hurt feelings, then whatever is going on to cause that has got to be stopped. And they end up making these arguments and they are based in emotion and they're rooted at trying to permeate people's hearts. "Oh, yes it's unfortunate they feel bad. Well, okay." But it's gone on and on and on for so long now that it's become apparent what it really is. The effort that is underway here is to redefine the traditions and institutions that made the country great, and to say that those very traditions and institutions that made the country great actually led to a bad country. We are not a fair country, we're an unjust country. We are mean-spirited. We are extremist. We are environmentalist destructors. We destroyed a once pristine place that the great Native Americans protected with all of their being. We've come along, we've introduced racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, all these things, in society. This is what the majority has done. America's not a just country. America's not good, and any value that defines American traditions and institutions is good. Therefore, it becomes subject of attack and assault on the part and by people who are simply feeling left out, like they're a little odd, a little weird, and the people who sympathize with them. And that is why you will find various types and groups of people championed and embraced by the egalitarian left because they're the true crusaders, they're the ones that have courage, they're living in a place they don't like.
Read the Background Material...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-1...htm?POE=NEWISVA
(USAToday: 'Intelligent design' ruling may have ripples)
END TRANSCRIPT
I have no point to make - just thought it was an interesting piece and appropriate to post here as an FYI.
Oh, and I just have to post this one - a comment on a Hannity forum from an evolution supporter?: (no I don't post there, today is the first time I have checked it out. posting the Rush thing made me wonder if Hannity had anything interesting). Just a funny, that's all.
"Life's complicated! Molecules are complicated! Too complicated in fact! How those little things... they form structures! Living structures! Too complicated for me to study them! Am I supposed to believe the Darwinian belief that these fell into place somehow? That's perposterous! Since I lack the resources to figure it out, God---I mean, some intelligent designer made it! There's my proof for Intelligent Design! Darwinism sucks, therefore ID is a valid science! Why not root for God for a change --damnit I mean ID?"
Somedays, I feel like I can agree with this guy.
"Life's complicated! Molecules are complicated! Too complicated in fact! How those little things... they form structures! Living structures! Too complicated for me to study them! Am I supposed to believe the Darwinian belief that these fell into place somehow? That's perposterous! Since I lack the resources to figure it out, God---I mean, some intelligent designer made it! There's my proof for Intelligent Design! Darwinism sucks, therefore ID is a valid science! Why not root for God for a change --damnit I mean ID?"
Somedays, I feel like I can agree with this guy.
QUOTE (Messenger+Jan 2 2006, 08:54 PM)
Just for the record,....here's Rush on Intelligent Design:
From the 12/23/05 broadcast and in response to the Dover decision of 12/22/05.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...tute.guest.html
RUSH: This is Michael in Charlotte, Michigan. Nice to have you with us.
blah, blah, blah ......
END TRANSCRIPT
I have no point to make - just thought it was an interesting piece and appropriate to post here as an FYI.
Wow, that's a great scientific argument against the science of evolution. At least he makes it clear ID is creationism, and that ID is a political agenda masquerading as science.
From the 12/23/05 broadcast and in response to the Dover decision of 12/22/05.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...tute.guest.html
RUSH: This is Michael in Charlotte, Michigan. Nice to have you with us.
blah, blah, blah ......
END TRANSCRIPT
I have no point to make - just thought it was an interesting piece and appropriate to post here as an FYI.
Wow, that's a great scientific argument against the science of evolution. At least he makes it clear ID is creationism, and that ID is a political agenda masquerading as science.
QUOTE (Steveo+Dec 31 2005, 10:39 PM)
QUOTE
JerryDuke: Some other things to ponder.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| JerryDuke: Some other things to ponder. ï è ù = 359 50 9 300 NUN TETH SHIN S T N S A T A N In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following: Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month. Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month. Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month. Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month. Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month). The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry. |
Newguy, the problem here is that you are using Hebrew for this numerology, and the Roman Empire did not use Hebrew, but used Latin. I have done a little bit of reading (not a lot) and have not seen any thing to justify the assumption that you can translate hebrew numerology to mean anything in a latin based society. So I would say that it is a coincidence unless you can find some justification. And I find it very offensive that because a culture worships the sun, that they worship satan. I remember that anyone who doesn't worship God is worshipping a false god, or a demon, but I thought satan was only one angel. And that there are other demons and false gods besides satan. My understanding does not even allow the connection from sun worship (not God) to satan worship. And whether or not there is biblical justification, I find it an offensive connection to keep on drawing.
For JerryDuke, or any professing Christian, to defend such a pagan "holy day", is simply reprehensible. That is my point and I stick with it. No apologies at all at my end.
I also don't see why its reprehensible to defend something with pagan origins that has been changed to have christian meaning. You connected numerology with sun worship and satan worship. But why does what other people do have any effect on your faith? I know you don't celebrate christmas, but if you did, you would be celebrating god, and Jesus christ, like your supposed to do on any other day. If any christian is celebrating god, and Jesus on a day that others happened to 'worship the sun' what does it matter? If in their heart they are worshipping god, would it bother him that it happened to be on a day that 'heathens' worshipped the sun? Or are people not supposed to worship god on days that others have worshipped satan, or the sun? I think that would make worshipping god something one could not do anyday of the year then.
Steveo: I used Hebrew for this numerology because Satan's name first appears in scripture in the Old Testament which was written in Hebrew. Had the Old Testament been originally written in Latin, then we could look for the corresponding numeric value of his name in Latin. Here are some examples of where the sun and the serpent(Satan) were linked in past civilizations:
http://www.textile-art.com/feath/sun.html
Eight-Rayed Sun and Two-Headed Serpent Tunic
Wari culture, south coast of Peru
c. 800-1100 AD
http://www.swedenborgdigitallibrary.org/egypt/eg7.htm
Ra, the Spiritual Sun
Very closely connected with Amen, and almost undistinguishable from him as to general attributes, is the great and ancient deity known as Ra, who, like Amen, is generally represented in the human form, with the heavily bearded face of a man, though he is often seen with the head of hawk. His one distinctive emblem is the large, red solar disk above his head, with a royal serpent entwined about the sun; the body itself of Ra is usually painted red. The centre of his worship was the ancient city of an, the Hebrew on, a few miles to the northeast of Cairo. The Egyptians also called it Pa Ra, the "city of the Sun," which the Hebrews translated into Bethshemech and the Greeks into Heliopolis. Here was the greatest university and theological school in all Egypt, and here was kept the bull Mnevis, sacred to Ra; this place, also, was the supposed birthplace of the mythical bird Phoenix, which represented the daily death and re-birth of the sun.
Someone actually wrote a book about the cult of Ra.
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/05000510...SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
Another reason why Satan(Lucifer) worship and Sun worship were linked to each other can be found in the meaning of the name Lucifer.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Lucifer
Lucifer
O.E. Lucifer "Satan," also "morning star," from L. Lucifer "morning star," lit. "light-bringing," from lux (gen. lucis) + ferre "carry" (see infer). Belief that it was the proper name of Satan began with its used in Bible to translate Gk. Phosphoros, which translates Heb. Helel ben Shahar in Isaiah xiv.12 -- "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" [K.J.V.] The verse was interpreted by Christians as a reference to "Satan," because of the mention of a fall from Heaven, even though it is literally a reference to the King of Babylon (cf. Isaiah xiv.4).
There are several reasons why I find the worshipping of Christ's birth on December 25th to be reprehensible. One reason, which I've already described, is the totally pagan origin of sun worship/satan worship on that particular day on the calendar. Like it or not, the Romans changed our calendar for at least some of the reasons that I described previously. Just for the record, yesterday was NOT "New Year's day". The "new year" starts in Spring...NOT 9 or 10 days into Winter. "Leap year" doesn't occur at the end of the second month. It occurs at the end of the 12th month. Another reason is that we can tell when Christ was born by simply searching the scriptures. He was NOT born in December. Several things point to this fact. I'll be happy to share some of them with you, if you'd like. Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths. Christians are supposed to be defenders of spiritual truth...NOT defenders of lies and myths. Why do you think that the Romans changed our calendar to make the Feast of Saturnalia fall on the 359th day of the year if not for Satanic reasons? Why couldn't they have just left the calendar alone? Answer that for me, if you will.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Dec 30 2005, 06:04 PM)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (Laidback+Dec 30 2005, 01:14 AM)
In conclusion I would like to add this thought!
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
A similar question was asked thousands of years ago. These are two of God's replies:
Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. (Psalm 84:8-11)
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:9-12)
Before coming to conclusions about things of which you have no knowledge, perhaps you should check your assumptions. They might be faulty.
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Before your so called God created! Nothing existed! no planets! no universe! Just some intelligence based on NO-THING!
So tell me, why would there be limbs for your god, when there is NO-THING for them to be usefull for?..
What forces are involved with your gods reasoning, I am talking about thought processes that uses energy, Memory which facilitates Intelligence, MEMORY of what I ask? there is NO-THING else until your so called gawd created something from NO-THING!.. to which I say IMPOSSIBLE! and its up to you now to prove otherwise!
But first you need to define how and what facilitated the creation of your Gawd.
The next step would then be to speculate how nothing can facilitate some intelligent constructs and thought processes with out any energy available to facilitate these thought processes so that some intelligence can build or evolve ideas based on existing environment, OH WAIT! there is no environment!
Hmmm I wonder why gawd had lungs a voice and ears to hear? when there is nothing to facilitate their use?
What an absolute joke!
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Statements from the same source of an Intelligent designer advocates states.
Humans are created unto the image of said creator!
yeah OK lets go back to where said creator began to create, you know where nothing else exists other than said so called INTELLIGENT Creator..
Hmmm? What use would Limbs and all the other bodily functions we have, have some use for said creator, when NO-THING else exists for said creator to interact with
A similar question was asked thousands of years ago. These are two of God's replies:
Understand, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. (Psalm 84:8-11)
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth? Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:9-12)
Before coming to conclusions about things of which you have no knowledge, perhaps you should check your assumptions. They might be faulty.
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation ProofBefore your so called God created! Nothing existed! no planets! no universe! Just some intelligence based on NO-THING!
So tell me, why would there be limbs for your god, when there is NO-THING for them to be usefull for?..
What forces are involved with your gods reasoning, I am talking about thought processes that uses energy, Memory which facilitates Intelligence, MEMORY of what I ask? there is NO-THING else until your so called gawd created something from NO-THING!.. to which I say IMPOSSIBLE! and its up to you now to prove otherwise!
But first you need to define how and what facilitated the creation of your Gawd.
The next step would then be to speculate how nothing can facilitate some intelligent constructs and thought processes with out any energy available to facilitate these thought processes so that some intelligence can build or evolve ideas based on existing environment, OH WAIT! there is no environment!
Hmmm I wonder why gawd had lungs a voice and ears to hear? when there is nothing to facilitate their use?
What an absolute joke!
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (RealityCheck+Dec 31 2005, 01:41 AM)
...
Jerry,
By your own boast at the top of every post you make here, you are chief among sinners. You have also variously been possessed by the devil etc.. You support those perjurious ID/CS types (unlike newguy, an honest religious man). So, Jerry, what makes you think I have anything to learn from you?....unless it is how to be chief among sinners, like you; or how to become possessed of the devil etc., like you; or how to support perjury, like you...etc..etc...etc.
Let's face it, MANY of us HERE are WAY ahead of you when it comes to spirituality, honesty, integrity, wisdom, self-respect/control etc...so why would we listen to you?....which no-one apparently does anyway, I might add. If you are the poster boy for your 'religion', it must be a desperate 'religion' indeed. Wise up and get some real honesty and integrity in time for New Year's, mate. Then perhaps you can start over, and WITHOUT the "commercials" for your self-evidently faulty 'religion', heh?
Happy New Year, Jerry!
RC.
.
The "boast", as you call it, at the top of my posts is the testimony of the Apostle Paul. He felt that he was the least of the apostles and chief of sinners because he persecuted the Church before he got saved, yet God used him to write most of the books of the New Testament. By his obedience to God, he was able to write letters that have helped many people to find Salvation in Jesus Christ. I follow what God inspired Paul to write because it squares with reality. I eschew what "newguy" writes because he practices a form of divination (Kabbalah numerology) which is forbidden by God.
I became possessed with the devil because I consulted a medium (one who has a familiar spirit) and believed something that she told me. I had a sense that it was dangerous to consult mediums before I did it, but I trusted her anyway; therefore, I had to find out the hard way that God's word is true. I deserved to die because of my sin of consulting a medium, but God had mercy on me and allowed me to be saved through his Son Jesus Christ. If you were to learn something from me, it should be how not to become possessed by the devil by not accepting lies, and how to be saved by accepting Jesus Christ.
When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God. For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do. (Deuteronomy 18:9-14)
So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire of it; And inquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse. (I Chronicles 10:13-14)
Jesus Christ is the only Saviour of mankind. You are not required to follow anything I say, said, do or did, but if you do not follow Jesus Christ in the straight and narrow way of holiness that leads to everlasting life with God in heaven, you are automatically on the broad way that leads to hell. Skepticism will not justify your sins when you stand before God at the judgment.
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. (Psalm 2:2-4)
It matters not what you think of me. Your relationship with Jesus Christ is all that counts, because only he can save you from your sins and subsequent damnation in hell.
But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. (II Corinthians 4:3-7)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
Jerry,
By your own boast at the top of every post you make here, you are chief among sinners. You have also variously been possessed by the devil etc.. You support those perjurious ID/CS types (unlike newguy, an honest religious man). So, Jerry, what makes you think I have anything to learn from you?....unless it is how to be chief among sinners, like you; or how to become possessed of the devil etc., like you; or how to support perjury, like you...etc..etc...etc.
Let's face it, MANY of us HERE are WAY ahead of you when it comes to spirituality, honesty, integrity, wisdom, self-respect/control etc...so why would we listen to you?....which no-one apparently does anyway, I might add. If you are the poster boy for your 'religion', it must be a desperate 'religion' indeed. Wise up and get some real honesty and integrity in time for New Year's, mate. Then perhaps you can start over, and WITHOUT the "commercials" for your self-evidently faulty 'religion', heh?
Happy New Year, Jerry!
RC.
.
The "boast", as you call it, at the top of my posts is the testimony of the Apostle Paul. He felt that he was the least of the apostles and chief of sinners because he persecuted the Church before he got saved, yet God used him to write most of the books of the New Testament. By his obedience to God, he was able to write letters that have helped many people to find Salvation in Jesus Christ. I follow what God inspired Paul to write because it squares with reality. I eschew what "newguy" writes because he practices a form of divination (Kabbalah numerology) which is forbidden by God.
I became possessed with the devil because I consulted a medium (one who has a familiar spirit) and believed something that she told me. I had a sense that it was dangerous to consult mediums before I did it, but I trusted her anyway; therefore, I had to find out the hard way that God's word is true. I deserved to die because of my sin of consulting a medium, but God had mercy on me and allowed me to be saved through his Son Jesus Christ. If you were to learn something from me, it should be how not to become possessed by the devil by not accepting lies, and how to be saved by accepting Jesus Christ.
When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God. For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do. (Deuteronomy 18:9-14)
So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire of it; And inquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse. (I Chronicles 10:13-14)
Jesus Christ is the only Saviour of mankind. You are not required to follow anything I say, said, do or did, but if you do not follow Jesus Christ in the straight and narrow way of holiness that leads to everlasting life with God in heaven, you are automatically on the broad way that leads to hell. Skepticism will not justify your sins when you stand before God at the judgment.
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. (Psalm 2:2-4)
It matters not what you think of me. Your relationship with Jesus Christ is all that counts, because only he can save you from your sins and subsequent damnation in hell.
But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. (II Corinthians 4:3-7)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE (PattyDuke+)
I eschew what "newguy" writes because he practices a form of divination (Kabbalah numerology) which is forbidden by God.
"Little Patty Duke is wonderfully truthful and touching as Helen...[she] is altogether superb."
--Brooks Atkinson, New York Times
PattyDuke(you're more blind than Helen Keller ever was): Are you really this stupid?!? You're joking, right?!? I don't practice numerology. The pagan Romans that YOU defend and follow did. Got it?!? No? Didn't think so. "Eschew" yourself, YOU HYPOCRITE!!!
"Little Patty Duke is wonderfully truthful and touching as Helen...[she] is altogether superb."
--Brooks Atkinson, New York Times
PattyDuke(you're more blind than Helen Keller ever was): Are you really this stupid?!? You're joking, right?!? I don't practice numerology. The pagan Romans that YOU defend and follow did. Got it?!? No? Didn't think so. "Eschew" yourself, YOU HYPOCRITE!!!
QUOTE (Laidback+Dec 30 2005, 12:50 AM)
... Everything is at the mercy of "Time" if it is to exist! ...
Except God.
And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. (Revelation 10:5-7)
Except God.
And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. (Revelation 10:5-7)
PattyDuke: Great news!!! Pope Benedict(Arnold) just called. He said you've been doing a great job defending pagan Roman Catholic doctrines. He's got a gift for you!!!
He said that you can throw away your old tin cup and start using this new one right away!!! He said you'd understand why he chose Spiderman. Something about "What a tangled web we weave..." He said to remind you to send 100% of the monies that you collect to the Vatican. It's not easy being the antichrist without donations, you know.
GIMME FIVE!!! Five thousand dollars, that is.
Merry "Christ Mass", Patty. HYPOCRITE!
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."(Matthew 15:14)
He said that you can throw away your old tin cup and start using this new one right away!!! He said you'd understand why he chose Spiderman. Something about "What a tangled web we weave..." He said to remind you to send 100% of the monies that you collect to the Vatican. It's not easy being the antichrist without donations, you know.
GIMME FIVE!!! Five thousand dollars, that is.
Merry "Christ Mass", Patty. HYPOCRITE!
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."(Matthew 15:14)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (newguy+Jan 3 2006, 05:39 PM)
... I don't practice numerology. ...
I agree that having the New Year on January first is pretty arbitrary. Although having the new year in the spring is also pretty arbitrary also. I understand how the 'new life' in the spring makes sense. But when you look at it from a 'cosmic' perspective our orbit is fairly circular and the new year is pretty arbitrary no matter when it is. And the extra day for the leap year does occur at the end of the second month, because this is the calendar we currently use. It should also be noted that we have the most accurate calender ever right now. The order of the months is really unimportant now. At least we are not losing days right?
I agree that having the New Year on January first is pretty arbitrary. Although having the new year in the spring is also pretty arbitrary also. I understand how the 'new life' in the spring makes sense. But when you look at it from a 'cosmic' perspective our orbit is fairly circular and the new year is pretty arbitrary no matter when it is. And the extra day for the leap year does occur at the end of the second month, because this is the calendar we currently use. It should also be noted that we have the most accurate calender ever right now. The order of the months is really unimportant now. At least we are not losing days right?
Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths.
This is a good reason, and the only one that should be needed. So I concede defeat here, because that is a good reason I think.
However I still think the numerology is unimportant. I understand how the first mention of Satan was in Hebrew, but Pagans did not use the bible as their holy book right? And they spoke Latin, so what does hebrew from an unimportant book to them have any significance? I don't think it does. From what I can remember from the history I know the reason Christmas was assigned to the same day as the pagan holiday was because which ever emperor of the Roman Empire who assigned Christ's Celebration to Dec 25 did it for politcal reasons because the majority of the population still celebrated the pagan holiday. I was trying to look this up, but my internet doesn't want to go very fast, so I will either have to look it up later, or have someone else find the info on this to either correct me, or support my statement.
JerryDuke, you are clueless. Newguy brought up that numerology to try and convince me of the 'satanic origins' of Christmas. He does not practice numerology, but he is aware that the Romans did. I guess now in Jerry Duke's eyes just knowing something is a sin, and thats why he is free from sin......hehe
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
QUOTE (newguy+Jan 2 2006, 10:41 PM)
... Steveo: I used Hebrew for this numerology because ...
Tell it to the Judge, "newguy". I am not the one to whom you must answer.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (Matthew 12:37)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (Matthew 12:37)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation Proof
QUOTE
There are several reasons why I find the worshipping of Christ's birth on December 25th to be reprehensible. One reason, which I've already described, is the totally pagan origin of sun worship/satan worship on that particular day on the calendar. Like it or not, the Romans changed our calendar for at least some of the reasons that I described previously. Just for the record, yesterday was NOT "New Year's day". The "new year" starts in Spring...NOT 9 or 10 days into Winter. "Leap year" doesn't occur at the end of the second month. It occurs at the end of the 12th month. Another reason is that we can tell when Christ was born by simply searching the scriptures. He was NOT born in December. Several things point to this fact. I'll be happy to share some of them with you, if you'd like. Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths. Christians are supposed to be defenders of spiritual truth...NOT defenders of lies and myths. Why do you think that the Romans changed our calendar to make the Feast of Saturnalia fall on the 359th day of the year if not for Satanic reasons? Why couldn't they have just left the calendar alone? Answer that for me, if you will.
I agree that having the New Year on January first is pretty arbitrary. Although having the new year in the spring is also pretty arbitrary also. I understand how the 'new life' in the spring makes sense. But when you look at it from a 'cosmic' perspective our orbit is fairly circular and the new year is pretty arbitrary no matter when it is. And the extra day for the leap year does occur at the end of the second month, because this is the calendar we currently use. It should also be noted that we have the most accurate calender ever right now. The order of the months is really unimportant now. At least we are not losing days right?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| There are several reasons why I find the worshipping of Christ's birth on December 25th to be reprehensible. One reason, which I've already described, is the totally pagan origin of sun worship/satan worship on that particular day on the calendar. Like it or not, the Romans changed our calendar for at least some of the reasons that I described previously. Just for the record, yesterday was NOT "New Year's day". The "new year" starts in Spring...NOT 9 or 10 days into Winter. "Leap year" doesn't occur at the end of the second month. It occurs at the end of the 12th month. Another reason is that we can tell when Christ was born by simply searching the scriptures. He was NOT born in December. Several things point to this fact. I'll be happy to share some of them with you, if you'd like. Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths. Christians are supposed to be defenders of spiritual truth...NOT defenders of lies and myths. Why do you think that the Romans changed our calendar to make the Feast of Saturnalia fall on the 359th day of the year if not for Satanic reasons? Why couldn't they have just left the calendar alone? Answer that for me, if you will. |
I agree that having the New Year on January first is pretty arbitrary. Although having the new year in the spring is also pretty arbitrary also. I understand how the 'new life' in the spring makes sense. But when you look at it from a 'cosmic' perspective our orbit is fairly circular and the new year is pretty arbitrary no matter when it is. And the extra day for the leap year does occur at the end of the second month, because this is the calendar we currently use. It should also be noted that we have the most accurate calender ever right now. The order of the months is really unimportant now. At least we are not losing days right?
Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths.
This is a good reason, and the only one that should be needed. So I concede defeat here, because that is a good reason I think.
However I still think the numerology is unimportant. I understand how the first mention of Satan was in Hebrew, but Pagans did not use the bible as their holy book right? And they spoke Latin, so what does hebrew from an unimportant book to them have any significance? I don't think it does. From what I can remember from the history I know the reason Christmas was assigned to the same day as the pagan holiday was because which ever emperor of the Roman Empire who assigned Christ's Celebration to Dec 25 did it for politcal reasons because the majority of the population still celebrated the pagan holiday. I was trying to look this up, but my internet doesn't want to go very fast, so I will either have to look it up later, or have someone else find the info on this to either correct me, or support my statement.
JerryDuke, you are clueless. Newguy brought up that numerology to try and convince me of the 'satanic origins' of Christmas. He does not practice numerology, but he is aware that the Romans did. I guess now in Jerry Duke's eyes just knowing something is a sin, and thats why he is free from sin......hehe
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Jan 3 2006, 06:41 PM)
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.QUOTE (newguy+Jan 3 2006, 05:39 PM)
... I don't practice numerology. ...
QUOTE (newguy+Jan 2 2006, 10:41 PM)
... Steveo: I used Hebrew for this numerology because ...
Tell it to the Judge, "newguy". I am not the one to whom you must answer.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (Matthew 12:37)
The Holy BibleHow to be SavedCreation Proof
PattyDuke: Great misrepresentation of me, Patty. Let me help straighten things out so others aren't misled by your misrepresentations(lies), okay? Let's take a little stroll down "memory lane", shall we?
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (Matthew 12:37)
The Holy Bible
How to be SavedCreation ProofPattyDuke: Great misrepresentation of me, Patty. Let me help straighten things out so others aren't misled by your misrepresentations(lies), okay? Let's take a little stroll down "memory lane", shall we?
QUOTE (sinned34+ ID and squaring the circle Nov 17, 2005 03:47 PM)
Although it's amusing that the reason Xmas is actually on the date that we find it is due to the fact that the Holy Roman Church ages ago were attempting to find a way to co-opt pagan rituals, like the winter solstice, turning them into celebrations "worthy" of the Christian church. I suppose they felt it would be easier to convert people that way (without having to slay as many of them). From what I've read, the belief is that Haysoos (mis-spelling, o well ) was most likely born some time in the spring.
Neat numbers game, but if you're celebrating Jesus' birth a few months early (or a number of months late) then doesn't it really make any point you are trying to display moot?
That was sinned34's response to a post by Iesous. Here is what I added:
Neat numbers game, but if you're celebrating Jesus' birth a few months early (or a number of months late) then doesn't it really make any point you are trying to display moot?
That was sinned34's response to a post by Iesous. Here is what I added:
QUOTE (newguy+ ID and squaring the circle Nov 17, 2005 09:09 PM)
Since the topic of Christmas came up, I might as well throw in my two cents worth. If you do a little research on our current calendar here in the West, you will find that it has been changed over the course of history. Some of the changes took place in the time of Julius Caesar, hence what is known as the Julian calendar. Did you ever wonder why leap year occurs at the end of February which is currently our second month instead of at the end of the year? Did you ever wonder why the year begins about 10 days into winter instead of in the spring? Check this out:
September is currently our 9th month, yet sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets.
October is currently our 10th month, yet oct has to do with 8, as in octopus and octave.
November is currently our 11th month, yet nov has to do with 9, as in novena.
December is currently our 12th month, yet dec has to do with 10, as in decade and decimal.
September used to be the 7th month, October used to be the 8th month, November used to be the 9th month, and December used to be the 10th month. This would also make February the 12th month which would explain why "leap year" takes place at this time. In addition, March would then become the first month which would mean the calendar year began in the spring, instead of about 10 days into winter. A little research will show you that July(named after Julius Caesar), which is now the 7th month, used to be the 5th month and it used to be called quintillius as in quintuplets which has to do with 5 and August(named after Augustus Caesar), which is now the 8th month, used to be the 6th month and it used to be called sextillious as in sextuplets which has to do with 6. Why did the Romans rearrange the calendar? Well, the Romans were not only sun worshippers but they were also into numerology and the worship of Satan. In the Hebrew language, where Satan's name first appears in scripture, each letter of the alphabet also has a corresponding numerical value as do certain letters in Latin(remember your Roman numerals?). Satan's name is made up of three letters in the Hebrew which have the following numeric values:
9
50
300
Add them together and you come up with the number 359. What is normally the 359th day of our present calendar? Christmas. The "Christ" of the early Romans, and might I add, of the Roman Catholic church is none other that Satan himself. As sinned34 said, the Roman Catholic church just "Christianized" this totally pagan day and they continue in their worship of the sun and Satan until this very day. Just thought I'd throw that in. Needless to say, I won't be expecting any Christmas cards from anyone on this forum. Later...
And again, I added:
September is currently our 9th month, yet sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets.
October is currently our 10th month, yet oct has to do with 8, as in octopus and octave.
November is currently our 11th month, yet nov has to do with 9, as in novena.
December is currently our 12th month, yet dec has to do with 10, as in decade and decimal.
September used to be the 7th month, October used to be the 8th month, November used to be the 9th month, and December used to be the 10th month. This would also make February the 12th month which would explain why "leap year" takes place at this time. In addition, March would then become the first month which would mean the calendar year began in the spring, instead of about 10 days into winter. A little research will show you that July(named after Julius Caesar), which is now the 7th month, used to be the 5th month and it used to be called quintillius as in quintuplets which has to do with 5 and August(named after Augustus Caesar), which is now the 8th month, used to be the 6th month and it used to be called sextillious as in sextuplets which has to do with 6. Why did the Romans rearrange the calendar? Well, the Romans were not only sun worshippers but they were also into numerology and the worship of Satan. In the Hebrew language, where Satan's name first appears in scripture, each letter of the alphabet also has a corresponding numerical value as do certain letters in Latin(remember your Roman numerals?). Satan's name is made up of three letters in the Hebrew which have the following numeric values:
9
50
300
Add them together and you come up with the number 359. What is normally the 359th day of our present calendar? Christmas. The "Christ" of the early Romans, and might I add, of the Roman Catholic church is none other that Satan himself. As sinned34 said, the Roman Catholic church just "Christianized" this totally pagan day and they continue in their worship of the sun and Satan until this very day. Just thought I'd throw that in. Needless to say, I won't be expecting any Christmas cards from anyone on this forum. Later...
And again, I added:
QUOTE (newguy+ ID and squaring the circle Nov 17, 2005 09:18 PM)
Ooops. In my rush, I forgot to specify about the sun worship part. The winter solstice, the day when the Sun apparently shines the least, occurs around December 22nd. The Romans used to hold a "festival unto the Sun" known as "the feast of Saturnalia" at this time each year. When the Sun appeared to be returning in its full strength or to be experiencing a "rebirth" about 3 days later, the Romans would celebrate by, among other things, exchanging gifts(can anyone say "Christmas presents"?). A Roman bishop sometime around 300 something(I don't have the date in front of me presently or the name of the bishop) A.D. incorporated this pagan custom of celebrating "the birth of the Sun" into what is now known as "Christmas" which supposedly celebrates "the birth of the Son". Most of what is presently known as Roman Catholicism is totally pagan in origin. Add this info to my last post and you have a pretty good picture of the true origins of "Christmas", which, by the way, neither I nor my family celebrate. Later...
And here's one that I addressed directly to you:
And here's one that I addressed directly to you:
QUOTE (newguy+ Intelligent Design = Creation Mythology Dec 28, 2005 02:55 AM)
JerryDuke: Some other things to ponder.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
I won't bother listing any more relevant posts, Patty. The fact is that I was pointing out that the Romans were into numerology and they changed our calendar to make the Feast of Saturnalia fall on the 359th day of the year to join their Satan worship with their Sun worship. This is what YOU defend and follow...NOT ME! Spin it all you'd like, HYPOCRITE! The truth is still the truth, no matter how much you attempt to butcher it. The statement of mine that you quoted in my response to Steveo takes on a whole new meaning when we read it "in the light" of these other quotes, now doesn't it, Patty? You ought to be ashamed of yourself, but we wouldn't expect that from a HYPOCRITE, now would we, Patty? Merry "Christ Mass", Patty.
ï è ù = 359
50 9 300
NUN TETH SHIN
S T N
S A T A N
In the Hebrew alphabet, each letter has a corresponding numeric value. The numeric value of Satan's name is 359. Satan's name also first appears in I Chronicles 21:1 which just so happens to be the 359th chapter of the Bible. Coincidence? What is the 359th day on our current calendar? Christ Mass. Having fun, yet? The Romans, who were sun worshippers, Satan worshippers and were into gematria or numerology, changed our calendar. Consider the following:
Sept has to do with 7, as in septuplets, yet September is NOT our 7th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 9th month.
Oct has to do with 8, as in octopus or octave, yet October is NOT our 8th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 10th month.
Nov has to do with 9, as in a novena, yet November is NOT our 9th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 11th month.
Dec has to do with 10, as in decade, yet December is NOT our 10th month(IT USED TO BE!), it is our 12th month.
Leap year comes at the end of February which is currently our second month(it used to be the 12th month).
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan. Merry Christ Mass, Jerry.
I won't bother listing any more relevant posts, Patty. The fact is that I was pointing out that the Romans were into numerology and they changed our calendar to make the Feast of Saturnalia fall on the 359th day of the year to join their Satan worship with their Sun worship. This is what YOU defend and follow...NOT ME! Spin it all you'd like, HYPOCRITE! The truth is still the truth, no matter how much you attempt to butcher it. The statement of mine that you quoted in my response to Steveo takes on a whole new meaning when we read it "in the light" of these other quotes, now doesn't it, Patty? You ought to be ashamed of yourself, but we wouldn't expect that from a HYPOCRITE, now would we, Patty? Merry "Christ Mass", Patty.
QUOTE (newguy+)
Another reason is that celebrating on that particular day gives credence to the false claim that Christianity is just a myth that borrowed from other myths.
QUOTE (Steveo+)
This is a good reason, and the only one that should be needed. So I concede defeat here, because that is a good reason I think.
Steveo: That's my first "goal" of the season. Did it go in "clean" or was it off someone's skate, eh?
Steveo: That's my first "goal" of the season.
Did it go in "clean" or was it off someone's skate, eh?QUOTE (Steveo+)
However I still think the numerology is unimportant. I understand how the first mention of Satan was in Hebrew, but Pagans did not use the bible as their holy book right? And they spoke Latin, so what does hebrew from an unimportant book to them have any significance? I don't think it does. From what I can remember from the history I know the reason Christmas was assigned to the same day as the pagan holiday was because which ever emperor of the Roman Empire who assigned Christ's Celebration to Dec 25 did it for politcal reasons because the majority of the population still celebrated the pagan holiday. I was trying to look this up, but my internet doesn't want to go very fast, so I will either have to look it up later, or have someone else find the info on this to either correct me, or support my statement.
It is important to remember that the "pagans" of which I am referring were/are the Roman Catholic CHURCH. They are familiar with the Bible although they notoriously "twist it" for their own gain and the enslavement of others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church
So the calendar was changed before Jesus was born, and Catholism did not become the state religion of the Roman Empire until 380AD. The Julian Calender came into effect well before there was such thing as a Christian.
These historical facts support my initial conclusion that the numerolgy was only a coincidence.
Also, the Pagan Society of the Roman Empire was around before there was such a thing as Christianity. They were pagan long before they converted to christianity, and probably did not have extensive knowledge of the bible until christianity became widespread over the Roman Empire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church
So the calendar was changed before Jesus was born, and Catholism did not become the state religion of the Roman Empire until 380AD. The Julian Calender came into effect well before there was such thing as a Christian.
These historical facts support my initial conclusion that the numerolgy was only a coincidence.
Also, the Pagan Society of the Roman Empire was around before there was such a thing as Christianity. They were pagan long before they converted to christianity, and probably did not have extensive knowledge of the bible until christianity became widespread over the Roman Empire.
Steveo: That's my first "goal" of the season. smile.gif Did it go in "clean" or was it off someone's skate, eh?
Clean yes, pretty goal no....it was on a rebound....second chance scramble infront. Was no clear break away, and you did not pick the top corner lol.
Isn't it amazing that the agnostics and atheists can discern truth whereas the "Christians"(oh yeah, in quotes deliberately) cannot? Sad. Have a good one.
Its not amazing. Anyone who can think for themselves can discern truth. Unfortunately its been my experience that many religious people give up this ability and just blindly believe others. And this is how anyone can twist the bible for their own gains and have people follow them. People don't like to think for themselves...it hurts the brain! Or at least thats what history might suggest.
It is important to remember that the "pagans" of which I am referring were/are the Roman Catholic CHURCH. They are familiar with the Bible although they notoriously "twist it" for their own gain and the enslavement of others.
QUOTE (Steveo+)
JerryDuke, you are clueless. Newguy brought up that numerology to try and convince me of the 'satanic origins' of Christmas. He does not practice numerology, but he is aware that the Romans did. I guess now in Jerry Duke's eyes just knowing something is a sin, and thats why he is free from sin......hehe
Isn't it amazing that the agnostics and atheists can discern truth whereas the "Christians"(oh yeah, in quotes deliberately) cannot? Sad. Have a good one.
Isn't it amazing that the agnostics and atheists can discern truth whereas the "Christians"(oh yeah, in quotes deliberately) cannot? Sad. Have a good one.
QUOTE (newguy+Dec 27 2005, 08:55 PM)
The Romans changed our whole calendar just to have the Feast of Saturnalia(the festival to the "rebirth" of the Sun) fall on the 359th day of the year in honor of Satan.
But wasn't the Julian calendar with January 1 as the beginning of the year adopted in 46BC?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar
QUOTE
It is important to remember that the "pagans" of which I am referring were/are the Roman Catholic CHURCH.
But wasn't the Julian calendar with January 1 as the beginning of the year adopted in 46BC?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar
QUOTE
The Roman Catholic Church traces its origins to Saint Peter, apostle to Rome. It rose to prominence with the Constantinian shift in the late Roman Empire (4th century), under Constantine I. Christianity was the Roman state religion from 380. See History of the Roman Catholic Church for details.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church
So the calendar was changed before Jesus was born, and Catholism did not become the state religion of the Roman Empire until 380AD. The Julian Calender came into effect well before there was such thing as a Christian.
These historical facts support my initial conclusion that the numerolgy was only a coincidence.
Also, the Pagan Society of the Roman Empire was around before there was such a thing as Christianity. They were pagan long before they converted to christianity, and probably did not have extensive knowledge of the bible until christianity became widespread over the Roman Empire.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The Roman Catholic Church traces its origins to Saint Peter, apostle to Rome. It rose to prominence with the Constantinian shift in the late Roman Empire (4th century), under Constantine I. Christianity was the Roman state religion from 380. See History of the Roman Catholic Church for details. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church
So the calendar was changed before Jesus was born, and Catholism did not become the state religion of the Roman Empire until 380AD. The Julian Calender came into effect well before there was such thing as a Christian.
These historical facts support my initial conclusion that the numerolgy was only a coincidence.
Also, the Pagan Society of the Roman Empire was around before there was such a thing as Christianity. They were pagan long before they converted to christianity, and probably did not have extensive knowledge of the bible until christianity became widespread over the Roman Empire.
Steveo: That's my first "goal" of the season. smile.gif Did it go in "clean" or was it off someone's skate, eh?
Clean yes, pretty goal no....it was on a rebound....second chance scramble infront. Was no clear break away, and you did not pick the top corner lol.
QUOTE
Isn't it amazing that the agnostics and atheists can discern truth whereas the "Christians"(oh yeah, in quotes deliberately) cannot? Sad. Have a good one.
Its not amazing. Anyone who can think for themselves can discern truth. Unfortunately its been my experience that many religious people give up this ability and just blindly believe others. And this is how anyone can twist the bible for their own gains and have people follow them. People don't like to think for themselves...it hurts the brain! Or at least thats what history might suggest.
And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Genesis 3:11-19)
Interesting link I found here
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_hise.htm
Being Pagan became outlawed in the Roman Empire. And was punishable by death. So the Roman Catholic Church is not pagan, even though some customs might have been adopted by the RCC.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_hise.htm
Being Pagan became outlawed in the Roman Empire. And was punishable by death. So the Roman Catholic Church is not pagan, even though some customs might have been adopted by the RCC.
It is interesting to note that the Julian Calendar had some problems. They hadn't quite mastered leap years. They put them at every 4 years, which is not quite right. So the vernal equinox was slowly moving to earlier in the year. In the 1500's it was revised into the Gregorian calendar (yes - named after a pope). But the goal was to put the vernal equinox back on March 21 where it originally "belonged".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar
(Sorry - I used to write Time and Attendance software. Combine that with the Y2K bug, I learned more about calendars than I ever wanted to know.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar
(Sorry - I used to write Time and Attendance software. Combine that with the Y2K bug, I learned more about calendars than I ever wanted to know.)
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Jan 3 2006, 06:07 PM)
QUOTE (Laidback+Dec 30 2005, 12:50 AM)
... Everything is at the mercy of "Time" if it is to exist! ...
Except God.
Wrong! everything that exists is symbiotic to time.
Of course if you can prove otherwise you are more than welcome to..
But let me point out your religion is dependent on a book called the bible where 99% of it is pure utter crap and childish gibberish written by humans with extremely low intellect, this book can only entice individuals who holds a lower intellect than the writers!
Let me suggest you acquire some REAL knowledge about our environment and then read the garbage called the bible objectively.
Think about how at the Poles of our Earth the oceans freeze over when the suns energy is lacking and then turn to your precious bible and ask how could a creator describe water when said water was not exposed to energy of a sun.
we can further ask what on earth were the solar Planets orbiting before the sun was created? NOTHING? yeah right! children with very little knowledge may believe the tripe! but an adult should know better!.
~ Messenger ~
The Seven Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love.
You and/or whoever came up with the listing in that 'signature' has left out the most important one; without which all the rest are illusion/delusion.....namely: 1. TO REASON.
Except God.
Wrong! everything that exists is symbiotic to time.
Of course if you can prove otherwise you are more than welcome to..
But let me point out your religion is dependent on a book called the bible where 99% of it is pure utter crap and childish gibberish written by humans with extremely low intellect, this book can only entice individuals who holds a lower intellect than the writers!
Let me suggest you acquire some REAL knowledge about our environment and then read the garbage called the bible objectively.
Think about how at the Poles of our Earth the oceans freeze over when the suns energy is lacking and then turn to your precious bible and ask how could a creator describe water when said water was not exposed to energy of a sun.
we can further ask what on earth were the solar Planets orbiting before the sun was created? NOTHING? yeah right! children with very little knowledge may believe the tripe! but an adult should know better!.
QUOTE (Messenger+)
~ Messenger ~
The Seven Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love.
You and/or whoever came up with the listing in that 'signature' has left out the most important one; without which all the rest are illusion/delusion.....namely: 1. TO REASON.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Jan 3 2006, 05:22 PM)
.......which is forbidden by God.
.
So many "forbiddens"! Where is all this "free will" I've heard so much about? Do I have permission to "think" and "reason", do you think, Jerry?...or are those things "forbidden" by your 'god', also?
.
So many "forbiddens"! Where is all this "free will" I've heard so much about? Do I have permission to "think" and "reason", do you think, Jerry?...or are those things "forbidden" by your 'god', also?
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Jan 3 2006, 05:22 PM)
I became possessed with the devil because I consulted a medium (one who has a familiar spirit) and believed something that she told me. I had a sense that it was dangerous to consult mediums before I did it, but I trusted her anyway; therefore, I had to find out the hard way that God's word is true. I deserved to die because of my sin of consulting a medium, but God had mercy on me and allowed me to be saved through his Son Jesus Christ. If you were to learn something from me, it should be how not to become possessed by the devil by not accepting lies, and how to be saved by accepting Jesus Christ.
Do you see the 'pattern/disposition' in what you have just described of your character/behaviour? All I see is a man who is ORIGINALLY SUPERSTITIOUSLY INCLINED due to a Failure to REASON (see above: where I pointed out that this is PARAMOUNT) to seek the services of a "medium"; and then merely replaced ONE superstitious 'product' with what 'seems' like a better one....but which in reality merely ENTRENCHES Blind Superstion and Failure to Reason. You are 'saved' in your own mind...and that's enough-----AS LONG AS YOU DON'T ANNOY EVERY MAN AND HID DOG ABOUT HOW YOU ARE 'SAVED'. People can be 'saved' in many ways, but the only REAL way is through BOTH reason AND spirituality... and NOT through Blind Superstition AND Failure to Reason.
Not surprising that you, RC, would replace #7 And to Love,
with 'To Reason'.
My signature was written by a young child (10 years old I think) when her teacher asked the class to list the Seven Wonders of the World. She hadn't been paying attention, apparently, and these were the things she thought were the Seven Wonders of the World. I prefer hers.
Not surprising that you, RC, would replace #7 And to Love,
with 'To Reason'.
My signature was written by a young child (10 years old I think) when her teacher asked the class to list the Seven Wonders of the World. She hadn't been paying attention, apparently, and these were the things she thought were the Seven Wonders of the World. I prefer hers.
.
Mess.
You have given a perfect demonstration of why you are a clueless twister and evader. You not only harp on an obviously (to everyone but you) inadvertent typographical error (now corrected to read "1"...as in "paramount" or "top" of the list etc); you also 'twist' it to say something not implied/meant by me, and in so doing you also conveniently evade having to face the REAL fact I DID imply/mean...namely: that without Reason, all else is illusion/delusion.
With this latest in a long string of outstandingly clueless efforts, you have just earned the "Cartoon Character Award" for LEAST DIMENSIONALITY OF CHARACTER POSSESSED BY A SUPPOSEDLY SENTIENT HUMAN BEING. Well deserved and well done, Mess!
RC.
.
Like I said, most often these stories are false. It is always a story told by someone for a motivational purpose, or a story to evoke an emotional response. I'm sure the teacher meant well.
Could have heard a pin drop in a classroom? full of 10 year olds? I doubt an average 10 year old can understand the ramifications of the formentioned feel-good quote.
It is usually such idealistic blather as this that makes me pity people.
- Amok
Do you see the 'pattern/disposition' in what you have just described of your character/behaviour? All I see is a man who is ORIGINALLY SUPERSTITIOUSLY INCLINED due to a Failure to REASON (see above: where I pointed out that this is PARAMOUNT) to seek the services of a "medium"; and then merely replaced ONE superstitious 'product' with what 'seems' like a better one....but which in reality merely ENTRENCHES Blind Superstion and Failure to Reason. You are 'saved' in your own mind...and that's enough-----AS LONG AS YOU DON'T ANNOY EVERY MAN AND HID DOG ABOUT HOW YOU ARE 'SAVED'. People can be 'saved' in many ways, but the only REAL way is through BOTH reason AND spirituality... and NOT through Blind Superstition AND Failure to Reason.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Jan 3 2006, 05:22 PM)
It matters not what you think of me. Your relationship with Jesus Christ is all that counts, because only he can save you from your sins and subsequent damnation in hell.
No-one really gives that much of a hoot about you other than that you're annoying and obviously counter-productive to whatever "quota" or "ends" you may be working towards. And NO EXTERNAL "celebrity" or "cartoon character" is necessary for salvation (i.e., NO "FAN CLUBS" required)....all that is required is Personal Spirituality and Reason working in concert and in their own way, to produce a BALANCED INDIVIDUAL capable of good AND reasoned things for the common welfare of LIFE and SENTIENCE in our universe.
RealityCheck.
.
No-one really gives that much of a hoot about you other than that you're annoying and obviously counter-productive to whatever "quota" or "ends" you may be working towards. And NO EXTERNAL "celebrity" or "cartoon character" is necessary for salvation (i.e., NO "FAN CLUBS" required)....all that is required is Personal Spirituality and Reason working in concert and in their own way, to produce a BALANCED INDIVIDUAL capable of good AND reasoned things for the common welfare of LIFE and SENTIENCE in our universe.
RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE (Jerry Duke+Jan 3 2006, 08:57 PM)
And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Genesis 3:11-19)
.
AND THIS is 'god's' idea of forgiveness. Nuff said.
.
AND THIS is 'god's' idea of forgiveness. Nuff said.
He is one spiteful God.
Not only does he curse the two who committed the act, but all their descendents as well.
Isn't it weird that these believers consider SIN something that can be INHERITED
but apparently don't think genetic differences can be.
Arthur
Not only does he curse the two who committed the act, but all their descendents as well.
Isn't it weird that these believers consider SIN something that can be INHERITED
but apparently don't think genetic differences can be.
Arthur
QUOTE
QUOTE (Messenger)
~ Messenger ~
The Seven Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love.
quote by RC:
You and/or whoever came up with the listing in that 'signature' has left out the most important one; without which all the rest are illusion/delusion.....namely: 7. TO REASON.
~ Messenger ~
The Seven Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love.
quote by RC:
You and/or whoever came up with the listing in that 'signature' has left out the most important one; without which all the rest are illusion/delusion.....namely: 7. TO REASON.
Not surprising that you, RC, would replace #7 And to Love,
with 'To Reason'.
My signature was written by a young child (10 years old I think) when her teacher asked the class to list the Seven Wonders of the World. She hadn't been paying attention, apparently, and these were the things she thought were the Seven Wonders of the World. I prefer hers.
Not to be the pessimist of the group, but i agree about the signature being wrong. A large majority of the time the stories with such 'cute sayings' are completely false and created by someone who wants to feel all warm and fuzzy.
so instead of listing 7, or 8 as it may be, list 1
1: to be
But that's just my opinion after all
- Amok
so instead of listing 7, or 8 as it may be, list 1
1: to be
But that's just my opinion after all
- Amok
QUOTE (Messenger+Jan 4 2006, 03:41 AM)
QUOTE
QUOTE (Messenger)
~ Messenger ~
The Seven Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love.
quote by RC:
You and/or whoever came up with the listing in that 'signature' has left out the most important one; without which all the rest are illusion/delusion.....namely: 7.[typo correction...should read "1" not "7"] TO REASON.
~ Messenger ~
The Seven Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love.
quote by RC:
You and/or whoever came up with the listing in that 'signature' has left out the most important one; without which all the rest are illusion/delusion.....namely: 7.[typo correction...should read "1" not "7"] TO REASON.
Not surprising that you, RC, would replace #7 And to Love,
with 'To Reason'.
My signature was written by a young child (10 years old I think) when her teacher asked the class to list the Seven Wonders of the World. She hadn't been paying attention, apparently, and these were the things she thought were the Seven Wonders of the World. I prefer hers.
.
Mess.
You have given a perfect demonstration of why you are a clueless twister and evader. You not only harp on an obviously (to everyone but you) inadvertent typographical error (now corrected to read "1"...as in "paramount" or "top" of the list etc); you also 'twist' it to say something not implied/meant by me, and in so doing you also conveniently evade having to face the REAL fact I DID imply/mean...namely: that without Reason, all else is illusion/delusion.
With this latest in a long string of outstandingly clueless efforts, you have just earned the "Cartoon Character Award" for LEAST DIMENSIONALITY OF CHARACTER POSSESSED BY A SUPPOSEDLY SENTIENT HUMAN BEING. Well deserved and well done, Mess!
RC.
.
Sorry RC,
Well alrighty then. You would rather 'reason' than see. I see. I think you just like to pick on people for sport.
Why don't you just make it number eight? The list is in no particular order. Surely there are more than seven wonders in the world, no?
RC's Seven...er...Eight.... Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love. 8. To Reason
I didn't realize you were asking me a question. I thought you were just making a statement. I have no problem with reasoning - and neither does God:
Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together,"
says the LORD.
Amok,
By the way - this is a true story. I'm in a writing workshop group and one of the teachers in my group told us how this happened. When the student read her list, the teacher said you could have heard a pin drop in the classroom.
To be nice, or not to be nice...ah..that is the question.
Well alrighty then. You would rather 'reason' than see. I see. I think you just like to pick on people for sport.
Why don't you just make it number eight? The list is in no particular order. Surely there are more than seven wonders in the world, no?
RC's Seven...er...Eight.... Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love. 8. To Reason
I didn't realize you were asking me a question. I thought you were just making a statement. I have no problem with reasoning - and neither does God:
Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together,"
says the LORD.
Amok,
By the way - this is a true story. I'm in a writing workshop group and one of the teachers in my group told us how this happened. When the student read her list, the teacher said you could have heard a pin drop in the classroom.
To be nice, or not to be nice...ah..that is the question.
QUOTE
By the way - this is a true story. I'm in a writing workshop group and one of the teachers in my group told us how this happened. When the student read her list, the teacher said you could have heard a pin drop in the classroom.
Like I said, most often these stories are false. It is always a story told by someone for a motivational purpose, or a story to evoke an emotional response. I'm sure the teacher meant well.
Could have heard a pin drop in a classroom? full of 10 year olds? I doubt an average 10 year old can understand the ramifications of the formentioned feel-good quote.
It is usually such idealistic blather as this that makes me pity people.
- Amok
QUOTE (Messenger+Jan 4 2006, 05:56 AM)
Sorry RC,
Well alrighty then. You would rather 'reason' than see. I see. I think you just like to pick on people for sport.
Why don't you just make it number eight? The list is in no particular order. Surely there are more than seven wonders in the world, no?
RC's Seven...er...Eight.... Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love. 8. To Reason
I didn't realize you were asking me a question. I thought you were just making a statement. I have no problem with reasoning - and neither does God:
Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together,"
says the LORD.
Amok,
By the way - this is a true story. I'm in a writing workshop group and one of the teachers in my group told us how this happened. When the student read her list, the teacher said you could have heard a pin drop in the classroom.
To be nice, or not to be nice...ah..that is the question.
.
Hi Mess.
At no time did I say TO REASON was to be considered "in lieu of" any thing else on that list. And I DID say "the most important" (and this is irrespective of HOW MANY OTHER 'wonders' you care to add to that list)...hence its intended 'placement' at the top of any such list. And as for your quoting:
Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together,"
says the LORD.
You have no problem with it as a 'concept', perhaps; but you SHOULD try sometime to follow THAT injunction as a 'practice'; in conjunction with the one about HONESTY in thought and deed in all things.
And I don't "pick on people"...I do my duty in fighting 'counter-productive' "MEMES" which reproduce in the minds of the superstitious well-meaning but DANGEROUS individuals. Ask yourself: "If my 'god' is so 'obvious' and 'good' for society, why after 6000yrs of this 'god' propaganda have not ALL PEOPLES come to the same 'adoring' view of your 'god'? Does EVERY 'unbeliever' in 'your' god' "pick on people for sport"?
And moreover, let's not forget, Mess, that WE were here happily doing/discussing science when YOU insisted on foisting your non-science on US...so it is not WE who 'picked' on you...but rather YOU who 'picked' on us.
RealityCheck.
PS: AMOK:...True, very true, mate! However, "TO BE" is a 'given', I think. Whereas, as you can see, "TO REASON" will take a 'miracle' for SOME to come round to doing, heh? RC.
.
Well alrighty then. You would rather 'reason' than see. I see. I think you just like to pick on people for sport.
Why don't you just make it number eight? The list is in no particular order. Surely there are more than seven wonders in the world, no?
RC's Seven...er...Eight.... Wonders of the World:
1. To See 2. To Hear 3. To Touch 4. To Taste 5. To Feel 6. To Laugh 7. And to Love. 8. To Reason
I didn't realize you were asking me a question. I thought you were just making a statement. I have no problem with reasoning - and neither does God:
Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together,"
says the LORD.
Amok,
By the way - this is a true story. I'm in a writing workshop group and one of the teachers in my group told us how this happened. When the student read her list, the teacher said you could have heard a pin drop in the classroom.
To be nice, or not to be nice...ah..that is the question.
.
Hi Mess.
At no time did I say TO REASON was to be considered "in lieu of" any thing else on that list. And I DID say "the most important" (and this is irrespective of HOW MANY OTHER 'wonders' you care to add to that list)...hence its intended 'placement' at the top of any such list. And as for your quoting:
Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together,"
says the LORD.
You have no problem with it as a 'concept', perhaps; but you SHOULD try sometime to follow THAT injunction as a 'practice'; in conjunction with the one about HONESTY in thought and deed in all things.
And I don't "pick on people"...I do my duty in fighting 'counter-productive' "MEMES" which reproduce in the minds of the superstitious well-meaning but DANGEROUS individuals. Ask yourself: "If my 'god' is so 'obvious' and 'good' for society, why after 6000yrs of this 'god' propaganda have not ALL PEOPLES come to the same 'adoring' view of your 'god'? Does EVERY 'unbeliever' in 'your' god' "pick on people for sport"?
And moreover, let's not forget, Mess, that WE were here happily doing/discussing science when YOU insisted on foisting your non-science on US...so it is not WE who 'picked' on you...but rather YOU who 'picked' on us.
RealityCheck.
PS: AMOK:...True, very true, mate! However, "TO BE" is a 'given', I think. Whereas, as you can see, "TO REASON" will take a 'miracle' for SOME to come round to doing, heh? RC.
.
Hey, i stated the obvious because honestly, some people need to be told the obvious
I think messenger finds offence to 'to reason' because maybe their version is 'to perceive'?
- Amok
I think messenger finds offence to 'to reason' because maybe their version is 'to perceive'?
- Amok
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.