| Author | Message | ||
     Drkside79 |
Blake, I am familiar with the story of Abraham although admittedly its been awhile. Also my comment was not made to slight just merely a statement of I'm not sure even in the face of God that i would slay my daughter. Also the child question was due to the bond found between a parent and their child. In most cases it is far stronger than anything else. I try not to speak in absolutes and therefore cannot say what i would do in such a situation. All I know is faith would most likely not be enough. | ||
| Drkside79 |
>>>>It just can't happen by purely naturalistic mechanisms. There's no more proof of that, than that of Gods existence or non-existence. (Message edited by drkside79 on September 15, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
Mark, I'm with you on the mind-blowing nature of the cosmos. I've heard it explained that the way the ever-expanding universe works in the three dimensions of space is akin to buttons glued onto the surface of a balloon that is expanding. The surface of the balloon has no limits (no walls) in its two dimensions, and at any point on that surface, it appears as though you are in the middle of the surface. It's tough to make the leap from two to three spacial dimensions, but the concept works I think. I figure that imagining the universe as a sphere or body of volume of any kind is probably akin to imagining the earth as flat. Space-time is the fourth dimension. | ||
| Tankhead |
@Blake, First, could you stop giving quotes colors? I am using different computers and they are coming up red on this computer but blue on my other computer, it is just a peeve of mine lately. Thanks you lamb of God you... If the creator of the universe, the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of everything and giver of life appeared to you and told you personally to do something, anything, you'd disobey. and this Abraham lived under the old covenant where sacrifice was required. We live under the new covenant and no such literal sacrifice is required. But if it was? You would obey? These are the scariest things I think I have ever read from someone that I was having a conversation with in my lifetime. Well I guess that is my answer about what you believe and I really can't imagine having any further discussion with you Blake. I really feel bad for you amigo enjoy your life. That is in line with Taliban and other scary scary religious fanaticism. WOW  | ||
| Drkside79 |
>>>First, could you stop giving quotes colors? I am using different computers and they are coming up red on this computer but blue on my other computer, it is just a peeve of mine lately. Thanks you lamb of God you... Was that needed? Leading with an insult is the quickest way to not being taken seriously. Please don't take this as a slight just merely a suggestion. | ||
| Tankhead |
It is dumb when the OP asked the question then in responding to answers changed the question entirely to one of "voices in your head" and the like. That was REALLY dumb, not to mention dishonest. You just cannot have a meaningful debate with someone who employs that kind of nonsense. WOW Blinders on much and if he does not believe in God then of course he relates to what all logical thinking men would think, voices in your head. Though I agree that the OP was a lure for you and again it worked very well. Secondly, Hatred filled posts like yours do nothing but pollute the wonderfully happy debate that we were having. A is A my lover and follower of all that god has provided. Silly Goose. Now get back to working on answering the question. Go ahead chop chop..  Fun times indeed. | ||
| Blake |
Andy, >>> No more proof of that then Gods existence or non-existence. Actually there is pretty good evidence. Probabilities analysis is science, it is used all the time to support evolutionism. Evolutionists don't like to use it concerning abiogenesis. Scientists have been trying for decades in labs to show that abiogenesis is possible. You'd think that with all we know, having mapped the genome and deciphered DNA that if it were possible for DNA to arise accidentally, that scientists in a lab could show that. | ||
| Xl1200r |
It just can't happen by purely naturalistic mechanisms. ...but without an objective basis for comparison  Seriously though... show me a couple other galaxies, universes, what have you that are as old or older than we are and are still in the "gook" phase, and I may reconsider. Of course, the point is ultimately offered that we know of none other than ours, which is proof of God's existence. But on the other side of that coin, just as no proof of God's existence doesn't disprove his existence, no proof other life-harboring planets is not proof that they don't exist, either. "I walk through myself and back again..." lol In any event, the position the Earth finds itself - in geological makeup, distance from the sun, salty oceans, even a single moon, are all contributors to the creation of life on this planet. Just as there are laws of nature, there is always an exception to the rule. Perhaps we are the exception. | ||
| Tankhead |
Was that needed? Leading with an insult is the quickest way to not being taken seriously. Please don't take this as a slight just merely a suggestion. Passive aggression was used by the owner of the site. He accused me of the same. He was totally wrong. I was being totally sincere about something and he accused me of not only being passive aggressive but also purposefully giving a cheap shot. Totally uncalled for. He also accused me of being a bad bad person for trying to educate people in one post and then tells others to educate themselves on the next page. I found it necessary or I wouldn't have posted it. Hypocrisy is not something I take lightly. I guess it stems from the catholic school that I attended for 8 years. No problem my man no slight felt at all. | ||
| Blake |
Tank, You've lost standing. Take a time out and try to recover your dignity. Then feel free to come back and debate honestly. All this personal stuff is goofy. If I spurred it, my bad. | ||
| Tankhead |
I think you should also. I accept your apology. I have been debating honestly. For the record the debate I mentioned in another post was between Hitchins and Craig not Dawkins sorry bout that | ||
| Sifo |
Sifo, I think the reason you're not getting an answer to your question about DNA is because this is a collection of gearheads and motorcycle riders. I'm not sure if there are any geneticists on BadWeB. I can't answer your question but I can hopefully ask some relevant questions. Wouldn't the noise you speak of be manifest by the diversity of species but filtered by evolution? Differences in DNA cause differences between reptiles, mammals, birds, plants, insects, bacteria, ect. But the noise and thus the closer links between them are filtered out by evolution. Can RNA connect in any kind of random pattern to form noisy DNA? Or is it more like puzzle pieces where only certain pieces can fit and thus there are certain limits to what can be formed? I haven't studied genetics or DNA in any real depth so I'm just guessing here. Curtis(Notpurples2), I've certainly on scratched the surface on DNA studies. Still what I'm asking to be considered is more about the compilation of information. That's something that "normal" people should be more familiar with. DNA is just the media that stores the information in this case. Any noise, or junk DNA that was there from the beginning would need a mechanism to be filtered out, and there should be tons of it if it were assembled randomly. Certainly there are ways that DNA can mutate. Known methods don't add or subtract data, they just make small changes. It's very easy to corrupt good data with random changes. It is very unusual to create meaningful data from random data with random changes though. So I guess the question would be how would evolution (which has had only a short time to work BTW) manage to somehow edit out or create meaningful information from the junk? RNA has been theorized to be an more primitive form of DNA that may have supported early life. It's just a simpler molecular model that allows for storage of the same sort of genetic information. It requires less proteins to build so it seems appealing to think that it may have been simpler to base simple life forms on RNA in the early stages. There is little scientific support for this though simply because there is no known mechanism for RNA to replicate itself. RNA is used in the replication process of DNA however. It is one more piece of a very complex puzzle that is what we call life. There are many more chicken/egg situations that are unexplained in how life came to originate. As was pointed out before, DNA is not completely random. On the parts that work are allowed to carry forward. Parts that don't are ditched. This means you aren't starting over everytime to give it another shot - you're starting one step ahead of the last time you tried. Mark(Xl1200r), Actually you are starting over every time. Every single time that the universe randomly fails to create life, it has to start over. Without life there is no chance for evolution to happen. Only when life has originated can the process of natural selection begin. There is one exception to this rule that I'm aware of. It comes from an intelligent entity performing experiments, knowing what they are looking for, and fine tuning the methods used to keep the good parts, while weeding out the bad. | ||
| Blake |
Almost missed responding to my friend Charlotte. Char, These people that you say believe in cause and effect and are doing fine. are they free? Does their nation affirm recognition of certain unalienable rights. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness etc. as endowed by god? Objective morality as affirmed by our nation's founders. Cool eh?  Hippocrates was Buddhist? Huh? "Do no harm" is good. "Treat others as you would be treated" is even better, yes? I find it particualarly harmful (ie destructive) to myself to believe in "a god" that is shaming, punishing, vengeful, judgemental, controlling, narrow minded, bullying, threatening and otherwise downright terrifying. What if he's right? Sometimes children see their parents as you have characterized god. Is it because they know better, or because they are upset that their parent disapprove of their behavior? FYI, god says you're wrong about him. I think you are too. Funny you mention the ant deal. I used to try to revere all life to the point of carrying the spiders and roaches outside instead of killing them. Then I got lazy and also discovered that the spiders were Brown Recluses. As far as life on earth, I can't say that I need a belief in god, or ever have. It has been a comfort in some cases, but I'd still get by. I'm definitely a better person for my beliefs, absolutely no doubt on that. But I came to faith through education, not seeking comfort. What you read as "condemnation" is I believe a warning to folks who refuse to follow god's law. In the end, we condemn ourselves. I appreciate you taking time to share. At some point if you ever have questions, don't hesitate. | ||
| Xodot |
PLease realize that God loves you if you believe in Him or not. That is His nature. He will not tell you to do something you are not capable of. If you think of yourself asking your own child to do something beyond their capacity, you would probably cringe at giving them a task that was impossible or beyond them. Watching them try in vain would hurt you. God is the same. He knows us as individuals and He cares for us. That is why He has given us commandments. If we obey Him willingly, our lives are made better. So it seems to me God would not be capable of telling me to kill my child because God can not love me and hurt me too. If God hated me He would cease to be God, which of course He can not do. Maybe the confusion and sharp discussion about that question could have come from presenting a situation for discussion that can not exist. Just a thought. | ||
| Notpurples2 |
Blake, So the old covenant would have made it ok for a person to kill their child as a sacrifice to God? Personally I can't see the morality in that kind of sacrifice, whether it be a heap of grains, a goat, or a child. What is the morality behind self-inflicted punishment in honor of God when no one, not even the God, benefits? I can understand sacrifice in the form of servitude and helping others but burning offerings helps no one. It's a form of primitive superstition that is meant to release the burnt offering from the earth and is delivered to the god. But this is getting a little off the subject. So anyway, yes, you're right, the proposition from the OP is dumb.... and so is the story of Abraham and Isaac. There is absolutely no reason that a benevolent and omnipotent God would ask person to kill a child or anyone else for that matter. The idea of a parent having to sacrifice his/her child is horrible... and yes that includes God. The idea that God had to sacrifice his only son is so messed up it ruins christianity for me completely.... God sacrifices his only son Jesus who is actually also God, but Jesus doesn't really die, I mean he rises from the dead, so is that really death? Plus, he is God so he knows that his suffering, though great, is only for a short time and that he's not really loosing anything cause he gets to return to heaven... so is that really a sacrifice? And what does the sacrifice serve anyway. It's suppose to cleanse mankind of their sins. But how exactly? Jesus died for your sin so that you can be forgiven and have everlasting life in heaven... but Jesus is God and he's the one giving the forgiveness... Maybe the death and rising from the dead thing is just his way of proving that he's real... but then that didn't really work did it? Cause there are still many other religions and many people that don't believe. Ok..... I think I need to step away from the computer and go tinker with my bike. At least it makes sense and is one thing I know was formed by intelligent design. | ||
| Tankhead |
Bravo, Bravo. Great questions and well stated. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Religion makes cartoon characters out of their gods. | ||
| Kenm123t |
The point of Abraham and Issac was unlike Baal and the other false gods God would not demand human sacrifices. The point of Abraham taking Issac to the altar was to show God didnt demand human sacrifices. Most of the Local Deities that were worshiped did demand human sacrifices. Reading the bible with out understanding It all leads to Jesus will lead one to false assumptions. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The point of Abraham and Issac was unlike Baal and the other false gods God would not demand human sacrifices. The point of Abraham taking Issac to the altar was to show God didnt demand human sacrifices. Most of the Local Deities that were worshiped did demand human sacrifices. Reading the bible with out understanding It all leads to Jesus will lead one to false assumptions. I don't think this was the point at all. The point was that Isaac was the first and only son of Abraham. He was EVERYTHING to Abraham. Isaac was the fulfillment of the covenant between God and Abraham. Abraham ans Sarah were old when Isaac was born. Both were "beyond child bearing years". In fact, Abraham jumped the gun, became impatient with God's plan, and had a child by Sarah's maidservant, Hagar. Her son, Ishmael, shared in Abraham's promise. Descendants of Ishmael are current day Arabs. Isaac was critical to the fulfillment of God making Abraham "a great Nation". For Abraham, the risk was that he would place his faith in the fulfillment of God's covenant in Isaac instead of keeping his faith upon God. God's request for Abraham to sacrifice the embodiment of the covenant was to test Abraham's faith. God ultimately rewarded Abraham's faith by providing a surrogate sacrifice. THIS was a foreshadowing of the position Christ would serve as a surrogate sacrifice for mankind. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Ft I was refering only to the walk to the Altar. Your explanation is a better illustration of the point. | ||
| Blake |
>>> So the old covenant would have made it ok for a person to kill their child as a sacrifice to God? No. Not if god didn't command it. I kinda figure that whatever the creator of the universe and life says is okay. But no, my point is that ritual sacrifice, burnt offerings, were a way of life and required. Human sacrifices no, but the norm of the day under the old covenant was ritual sacrifice. God gave Abraham a ram to use in place of his son. My point was that today under the new covenant, there is no requirement for such ritual sacrifice, so the idea is even more bizarre than it would seem under the old covenant. That's all. It seems that your dim view of the old testament history and burnt offerings is based on limited understanding of the issue. I'm not up to teaching a lesson on it, but if you really are interested in learning, there are likely any number of Jewish and Christian sources on the internet that explain the relevance and rationale for all the old covenant laws. You cannot take the story of Jesus in a vacuum. If you do, it does indeed seem quite bizarre. To better appreciate the sacrifice, give Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ a careful watch. You think Jesus was nonchalant about departing his life on earth via brutal torture, humiliation, and crucifixion? The night before, he sweat blood dealing with what confronted him. You cannot fathom a parent harming his/her child, but brush off that scenario as no big deal for the creator of the universe subjecting himself to human form then inhuman torture, humiliation, and death by crucifixion? Which is it? | ||
| Superdavetfft |
Well howdy-do folks this didn't take long. Again we see Blake making threats when he's backed into a corner: "Go do as you like Dave, but if you ever spout that ignorant malicious blasphemy on my web site again, you'll be shown the door. " This is why it's so difficult to have a real discussion with 'true believers'. Once they feel their cozy security blanket (aka 'god') is being threatened they react with fear and anger. This is the building block of how religious wars start. One group says their sky god is best, the other says that your sky god doesn't exist and ours is the true god etc and sooner or later the swords and AK47s come out etc etc... This is just another example of how religious indoctrination of children harms society. It creates adults that think like Blake. Blake then joins groups of like minded indoctrinated folks. This happens with all religions, not just christianity. These adults can't think for themselves, they lack the skills necessary for critical thinking. I don't mean this to be insulting, it's not pleasant I'll admit but that doesn't make it untrue. Some of you might think I'm engaging in trollish behavior and I'm honestly NOT trying to do that. If I can get ONE person to think for themselves, whether they agree with me or not, then it's worth whatever time I have to put into this rant. If people thought for themselves it would impact other things as well. We wouldn't be so easy to receive the BS the gov't spews. We wouldn't be so easy to ramrod legislation over. We wouldn't be so easy to tax to death. We wouldn't be so easy to BS into thinking we're the best in the world when study after study shows the US falling behind in pretty much everything, especially education. If we all think for ourselves and then act as thinking individuals we could turn this country around in a blink. HOWEVER if we continue to go down the road with blinders on and flock to prayer meetings like dipsh*t Rick Perry did in Texas we'll just keep heading down that dead end path until we burn out and the rest of the world passes us by. Think people... just think... BTW I do NOT 'hate' anyone, I do not hate christians, muslims, etc etc... I despise religion and the harm it's caused yes. I regret the pain and suffering it's inflicted on millions of people for no reason. I regret the millions of brave soldiers dying in BS religious wars over the centuries. I cringe at the sight of these massive cathedrals and mega churches. While the architecture is sometimes astonishing the simple fact that the resources that went into that silly building could have fed thousands of hungry people, cured thousands of ill people, well it just makes me sick. And they have the GALL to say church is CHARITABLE??? WTF? If they were TRULY charitable they would have services in a tin building and donate every penny they scraped together to feed local homeless folks or maybe habitat for humanity, something that actually helps people. But no I hate no person, they are merely the victim of indoctrination and childhood brainwashing, it's that simple. I don't even harbor any malice toward Blake, his reactions are quite expected. It's unfortunate yes, but not surprising. | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
| ||
| Sifo |
I had no idea that wars came from people being shown the door from a MC website. Those who would respond to being shown the door in such a manner certainly do sound scary! | ||
| Guell |
Dave, why would you think Blake couldnt think for himself? Has he not made the choice to believe? why dont you stop trolling | ||
| Xodot |
SuperDave : Think people... just think... Thoughts are only as strong as the individual and they can change with life experiences. You can recall in your life your thoughts now are not the same as they used to be right? Your feelings for what you know is true however never change. Remember your feeling's of your mother's love (or lack of love if that is the case). No matter what happens you will never deny you felt her love (or lack thereof). Same with God. Once you feel He loves you, you can not deny it. It's not brainwashing. It's a personal experience you can not deny. Of course if you have felt His love, you know He is real. By reading this thread I think some of us have experienced this and some have not. Thoughts are too changeable, too fleeting to be the ONLY thing to base your life on }when you have a heart you can trust too. | ||
| Xodot |
Blake: What you read as "condemnation" is I believe a warning to folks who refuse to follow god's law. In the end, we condemn ourselves. I agree with you. We damn ourselves from progressing further when we rebel. Conversely, we benefit from keeping God's counsel. | ||
| Blake |
SDave, I'm backed into a corner? By demonstrable falsehood? I just don't care to tolerate the malicious deception that you embrace (out of ignorance I assume, but also out of really wanting what you state to be true) being promoted here on BadWeB. You are wildly ignorant of scripture and Christiantiy, and have chosen to embrace wildly deceptive views, some outright lies about it) and have displayed zero inclination toward true understanding. Your mind is obviously closed. "I despise religion" you say. You see only bad in the history of Christianity. Given the history of this nation and its origins, that's quite bizarre. You accuse others of being close-minded, brainwashed, indoctrinated, and not thinking for themselves. Dave, you're among the most close-minded, brainwashed, indoctrinated persons who appears unable to think for himself that I've had the misfortune to encounter here. It's clear that you have been thoroughly indoctrinated by atheist deceivers. Evil bible dot com is the truth according to you, Dave.  I once offered to debate you Dave point by point on the exact type of incredibly malicious and misleading (I'm being kind) accusations you once again see fit to post on BadWeB. You refused. Seemed awfully cowardly to me at the time. You ask me a simple question in this thread. I answer. I ask you a simple question in this thread. You dodge and ignore. One who reveres thinking and open-mindedness doesn't behave as you have here. You seem to imagine that all those who believe in god have been brainwashed or indoctrinated. How do you explain all the atheists who have converted to believers in god? Is everyone who disagrees with atheism brainwashed or indoctrinated? Open-mindedness is pretty much the opposite of how you behave. You are an incredibly bad ambassador for atheism. Seems pretty clear you are just an anti-god Christianity-hater, an anti-religion bigot. What a bigot does is to take some situation or commentary and distort it, misrepresent it to malign others. Bigots also hold up the poor behavior of a few as representative an entire group or class of folks; their aim is to demonize the entire group. They are hateful, dishonest, divisive. Recall Hitler? He wasn't Catholic as you like to pretend. He hated religion and was an atheist. Bigots like you like to say things like "Hitler never renounced his Catholic faith." It is exactly such misleading garbage that a bigot will use to malign his intended target, in your case Christians. I tried to debate the issue with you before. You apparently preferr to just post your malicious bigoted garbage, then cry victim when I respond. That is why you've earned the above admonition to cease or be shown the door. (Message edited by blake on September 16, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
Anyone care to list the hospitals, Universities, libraries of ancient texts, that exist thanks to Christian churches? How many folks have been fed, clothed, provided medical care, shelter, education thanks to Christian organizations? Love one another and treat others as you would have others treat you. The horror! Love your enemies. Turn the other cheek. Don't bear false witness against others. Don't murder. Honor your mother and father. Don't covet. Be faithful to your spouse; do not be adulterous. Don't steal. God exists and he loves you; love him back. You have an eternal soul; look after it by honoring the above and the teachings of Jesus. Honor life and people over materialism. Learn history and consider what happened to the Isrealites when they followed god's will for them versus when they did not. Despise the above? Despise the corruption of religion by evil men? Absolutely! Right along with the corruption of government, charity, the news media, education, science, medicine, etc... Despise bigots! (Message edited by blake on September 16, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
SDave says... Oh and regarding morals, here are a few morals the bible endorses; 1. religious persecution 2. murder 3. slavery 4. misogyny 5. child abuse I could go on, I could quote scripture etc but I did that once, it's all there in the bible, just read it thoroughly. Religious persecution? Kinda like saying the Democrats ought to allow Republicans help run their organization. No, that is prohibited. According to SDave and the way he reads the bible, that would be political persecution. Does Christianity endorse any kind of persecution today? No. Murder? "Though shalt not murder." Just one of the big ten commandments. Does Christianity endorse murder today? No, it forbids it. Slavery? This misrepresentation is understandable. Dave doesn't understand that "slaves" as referred to in the bible were NOTHING like what we know as "slaves" today, meaning like we knew in America before the Civil War. What the Israelites mean when they talk about slaves are really just servants. If we used the same meaning today, anyone who works for another person would be a "slave." Does Christianity endorse slavery as we know it today? No, it forbids it. Mysogyny? He's not read the book of Esther, only taken a very biased view lacking any thoughtful understanding of historical context. Does Christianity endorse misogyny today? No. Child abuse? I'm not sure what he's talking about here. You'd probably find it on evil bible dot com, the apparent fount of knowledge for anti-christian bigots everywhere. Does Christianity endorse child abuse? No it abhors it. Truth: If someone were to read their Buell Service Manual the way that SDave reads the Bible, they'd be alarmed to learn that Buell is trying to murder them and that Buell endorses death and serious injury. All you have to do is read it; it's all there; I could list more.  Though we've already established that what SDave asserts above is all false, even if it somehow had some kind of tenuous basis, then in order to discredit the religion(s), he'd also have to also show that Christians and Jews agree with his interpretation of scripture. Since they absolutely don't agree with his interpretation, SDave has done nothing but concoct his own straw-men versions of Judaism and Christianity. Again, it's the kind of thing that bigots do to generate hatred against a group of people. It's evil. |
