How are you to know how your god achieved his creation? Were you there? Maybe, but do you remember? No, I really doubt it. You have what the Bible tells you, a “Cliff-Notes” version for the Israelites of the time, because quite frankly, the explanation of Creation would be like explaining nuclear fission to a 5 year-old. It would be beyond their grasp by a long-shot–they were lucky to worship their God more than 50% of the time.

Read the Bible and make up your own mind, rather than what’s force-fed you by your know-it-all pastor. The beauty of Pastafarianism is that we are all free to seek his Noodly Appendage and learn of his vast creation. May you feel the touch of his Noodly Appendage. RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Whoever said that anyone thinks that evolution is the only answer? I don’t think anyone’s saying that. I believe that Evolution is a scientific theory, and that right now it’s the best explanation for the numbers and varieties of life here on Earth. I also believe that Intelligent Design, although it might be a “theory”, it should not be taught as science in schools. If it is to be taught, then why not teach alternate theories, such as FSM? Personally, I like the theory of Intelligent Design, but I don’t believe it is science. It’s religion. Period.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Let Evolution be taught in the home and your own version of Creation (whatever it may be) be taught at home…where parents are parents, of all the strange things.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Since life and death are each other’s companions, why worry about them? All beings are one.” (Chuang-Tzu)

Evolution is just our current scientific state of understanding of how we came to be. Nobody ever said that we would never come up with new theories or ever said that this is our only option.

We all have our belief’s and I don’t see why a god if there is one, would send someone to hell for not believing that god snapped his fingers and created everything. I find it completely illogical to think that a “merciful God” would send someone to hell for not believing in him.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I will stand before FSM and praise his big balls.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

As a devout Christian that believes not only that God does exist, but that He is the Creator of all things, I would like to leave my 4 cents (many of my fellow Bible thumpers would call this my testimony, and just as many would call it Blasphemy):

Cent number one: I believe that God works thru natural laws. I believe that God is bound by the same laws of physics, science, biolgy, etc.. that we are when interacting with this creation. But keep in mind that God is much much more intelligent than us, and many of His doings appear like miracles to us as the science underlying the act would be incomprehensible to us. Hence God’s use of symbolism when explaining the creation in the Bible.

Cent number two: Science is another religion. All attempts decypher the natural laws of the universe are merely another way of understanding God. Einstien said thet he would think If I were God, how would I do it, to help him come up with his theories.

Cent number three: Evolution is the most accurate scientific theory to date to explain how we came to be. It needs to be taught in schools. Creation does not deny God exists. I believe that God established a set of rules/laws in the beginning that would allow our universe to exist the way it is, and would allow intellegint life to come to pass. I believe after establishing these laws, He set the big bang in motion.

Cent number four: Intelligent Design is not really a valid testable scientific theory. I believe it is an amazing philosphy. I believe that it needs to be taught. But not in science class. Teach it in a high school philosphy or religion class. Don’t teach it to my kids in School, as I will teach them about God at home. I need the school system teach my kids about math, english, geograhpy, history, science, etc.

Now some extremely long time period later, we exist. Our existence is a testimony of His existance. Our attempts to decypher the laws He established do not constitute blasphemy, denial of His existance, etc… I believe our attempts to decypher the rules of the universe and our existance thru science allow us to better understand His methods, His reasons, and His magnificance.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You can’t be Christian. You didn’t tell us to go to Hell, or use swears, and you’re far too reasonable, I mean, aren’t you going to tell us you pray down fire and earthquakes? Are you sure you’re not really a “Pastafarian?”

(Thank you for showing us that there are Christians that do know how to use the God given gray matter in their skulls!)

May He Touch you with His Noodly Appendage! Go in Peace! RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Science and Religion are but two bridges to one path, it’s depressing that they can not cooperate”

My own personal belief is that the Earth itself is devine. What surrounds us is devine. Yin and Yang keep it in the balance that the Earth needs to support life.

Anyways that is just a little too deep for replying on a hate mail letter.

But, basically just to repeat what Daniel said, thanks for being a respectful logical thinking human being.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I am currently contemplating on things which are very toubling to me,
I wonder how you view your life in light of the fact that only too soon your life will cease as well as mine, and at that appointed time both our lives will have amounted to absolute nothingness. Contemplating the complete worthlessness of both our lives i struggle to find reason to take in that next breath, for you and me are but a squelch of static about to be tuned out. Our lives both lead up to the our deaths and no more will our influence be felt or or achievments mater. And as the sun about which our planet orbits goes nova all of life on earth will have been reduced to mere nothingness. Complete waste of time is what are lives our. Absolute horror is what it is. Unless of course you have encountered the simple undeniable message of Salvation in Christ Jesus. then every breath matters. And a great deal of people including yourself may shoot me down and mock, scoff, persecute me. Incessantly prodding me to prove my faith’s validity and existence. But my God speaks for himself, but he has said that those with ears may hear and those with eyes may see but their hearts will be cold and hard as stone and your understanding may never grasp the gravity of our situation on this forsaken ball. I break into tears as i consider our fates a waste of life and breath we are for what starts, ends, Unless you know the One who started it…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This sounds a bit like Pascal’s Wager.

But what if every single religion on this earth is incorrect, and the TRUE god happens to be one who punishes people based on whether their favourite number is divisible by 22.564?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

thorkia, wow, good post. You sound more like some sort of semi-agnostic (or is generally religious a religion?).
In the past, I believed Baphomet kept the world in its state, and the universe was a huge living creature.
Religion is good as long as it encourage you, strengthen your spirit, etc. However- when religion becomes lifestyle it becomes dangerous. First you bow down to a higher power and can no longer live as a free man, you take every word written as law. Then, you try to convert others, but only because it worked for you doesnt mean it works for others. Soon you also think that everyone is going to hell who thinks differently. And, then, the illusions can begin in the worst case. You think everyone is a satanist, it is a worldly conspiracy, and end up converting someone to this evil circle, and so it goes on until we are all zombies.
Sargoth-Kuul claims another victim.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

mmmmmmmmmmmmmm… dirtfood

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Odin likes spegetthi and vikings made awesome pirates. As a happy viking to a pirate, Hail the gods!

Oh and my Church of the Zombie Christ friends give a shout to the pirates, “Yarrr!”

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Well, Jose, you have described your own concerns very clearly, but here is the problem: You must not assume that everyone else shares these same fears. I don’t even feel especially important in life; I could give a rat’s a** about being reduced to “mere nothingness” after death. In fact, it sounds quite peaceful to me. On the other hand, the prospect of “everlasting life” in the hereafter would fill me with absolute dread (if I believed in it). Eternity is one h*ll of a long time you know. Some salvation.

If your beliefs are helpful for you, that’s great. But many people are able to contemplate exactly the same questions that so trouble you, without the need to invoke any kind of supernatural solution to bail themselves out.

These are YOUR fears, and your beliefs help YOU deal with them. And they may very well help other people who think like you do. But not everybody has the same fears as you, and your beliefs would be a solution to a problem that they don’t have in the first place. Once you realize this, you will no longer need to worry about people shooting you down, mocking, scoffing, or persecuting you. Perhaps it will give you some peace.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Oh, and Valhalla has beer too- and ale! The eventual Great Plan is to muster up enough warriors to storm the pearly gates and pillage the golden streets of that christian heaven next door. Any pirate souls are welcome to join our longships to sail the seas of the afterlife on the Great Raid!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I wouldn’t want you to be me when I stand before the FSM, God, Eris, etc. What would be the fun in that?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I am happy to have found FSM. I live amongst those untouched by the noodle. Let me tell you, it’s not easy. Day in, day out, always with the Jesus. It really blows my abnormally small head up. My understanding is this: He wanted/needed someone to worship him. He created us. He loves us. If we love him we have eternal bliss. If we reject him we have eternal torture. I am leaning toward the flaming torture currently. See, a burn is a painful sensation. But it’s SENSATIONAL! Hanging with my in-laws hearing about God and Muslims and Heaven and all, that’s tough for lunch, let alone time immemorial. Why would you waste all that liquid-gold-God-time making an A-hole like me. Dammit, you knew you were just gonna cook me anyway! WTF? What’s up with God being a he? Why is that so important? I don’t mean to get too very offensive, but does he come equipped with the full package? And what is the point of a deity with the ‘whole enchilada’? Really, I’ve never heard anyone pass that particular volleyball around. Christians get pissed if you suggest that God might be a woman. Why is it so important that he be he? Who is he trolling around for in Heaven’s Margaritaville? Other than me- to cook. Sizzle.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

i agree! your FSM will only be a a pile of mince when Christianity is finished with him!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOD Rules

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Ah, so it’s a battle of the Gods, huh? Well, here’s hoping you make out better than Baal did against the Israelites.
.
Seriously, what is your “testimony” based on? Your Pastor’s say-so? yeah. That’ll get you into your Heaven.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Matthys
Sep 20th, 2006 at 12:53 am
i agree! your FSM will only be a a pile of mince when Christianity is finished with him!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOD Rules

Thats if Islam doesnt get to you first.
Religion is just a way of keeping humanity in awe
by believing in it we are just fooling ourselves
FSM is not an aggresive religion, its just an alternate belief
How many of you ‘Christians’ attack tom cruise? None i bet.
Anyways
Ive felt his noodly appendages more than once, because I AM LORD CROMDAR! RULER OF THE ALTERNATE DIMENSION! AND AVATAR OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER!
ALL WORSHIP LORD CROMDAR!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I can not believe that the people from the “first nation” believe in stupide ideas like “intelligent design” and “crationism”! In Germany most people think that the USA are the world leading country in relation to natural science … well I think we have to think again!
C

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Claudia,

I’m so ashamed. No, really. Our own founding fathers (and mothers) wanted so desperately to protect freedom of religion. How is it free if ID is being taught in our schools? Yet, I see a lot of religious intolerance going on here. Leave it up to any bunch of people to really screw things up. I’m not going to get all political here, but I think that maybe I nee to move to Canada. Eh? I was born in the USA, and I love my country, but I really wonder, as you do, about some of the people in it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Ezekiel 16, 35 shows us what he really things about people giving themselves in to sexual intercourse.

Peace to the spagetthi monster. I am his faithfull follower until all kreationists are burned by their god´s hellfire.

Adios

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Valkyrie Sep 19th, 2006 at 11:27 pm

Odin likes spegetthi and vikings made awesome pirates. As a happy viking to a pirate, Hail the gods!

Oh and my Church of the Zombie Christ friends give a shout to the pirates, “Yarrr!””

Very interesting parralel here actually.

Vikings and Pirates could be considered one and the same, and Odin’s “Valhalla” is similar to His Heaven except rather than Volcanos of Beer its “Never Ending Mead Horns” and rather than the Striper Factory its ” mead serving wenches and half naked Valkyries”

Very interesting…especially as Vikings were some of the first famous pirates.

Tim the Cabin Boy

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Even if evolution is the answer, can’t God still exist? Does it have to be one or the other, you simple-minded buffoon?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Intelligent Design is the answer….and I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand in front of the FSM. May he touch you with his noodly appendage before it’s too late ;).

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
If you are right, and creationism is the only answer, then we will all just be dirt-food when we die. But if you are wrong, and the Pastafarian people are right and there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster, then you’ll be in a tough spot.

By the way, did you ever read what the Kansas School Board had proposed? It doesn’t sound like it from your letter.

Dread Pirate Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Argueing over who has the better God is like argueing over who has the best imaginary friend.”
.
Personally, I like to believe that God is really lazy, and instead of mearly creating all things one day (or many as the case may be) he set forth a series of events (known as evolution) and just sat back to see what would happen. Personally I think that would be much more entertaining over eternity then making statues bleed or drink milk every couple of days or so. Thus, because I didn’t wanna get sucked up with all them crazy-like folk who run around thumbing their religios text of choice and telling me how I will goto hell I decided the flying spaghetti monster was right. Also because he is scientifically sound and with my theory I can believe he exists and continue on in the sciences! You rule FSM!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yaar te ye, Yankee brethren!

FSM-ism has reached the land of the Scots, and it’s tentacles spread through the highland glens.

Just a brief point about church and state – two-thirds of the founding fathers were either first or second generation Scots, and they were quite specific on the matter – absolute separation of the two, so that the mistakes made by the Church in Britain would not be repeated in the new world; so that America would be spared the hundreds of years of religious conflict already endured in Britain. You have had ample warning!

Ah-har!!!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@California Boy: I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

If you are right, and intelligent design is the only answer, then we will all be in Heaven when we die (except you, of course). But if you are wrong, and the FSM people are right and there is the Flying Spaghetti Monster, then you’ll be in a tough spot.

Then, I guess, you wished evolution-theory to be true (but don’t worry, it is – and the Flying Spaghetti Monster told me, it agrees on this one ;-)

TheHolg

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Personally, I like to believe that God is really lazy, and instead of mearly creating all things one day (or many as the case may be) he set forth a series of events (known as evolution) and just sat back to see what would happen.”

That’s Deism, the original religion of many of the Founding Fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and George Washington. Basically, its like the earth was created like a giant clock that was started off billions of years ago and is now ticking without any interference. It allows for evolution and intelligent design, and is based fully on reason and rationality, not on some centuries old text. Good stuff.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Thank you for this wonderful website and for this wonderfull religion, and also thank you for finally giving me something i can hit back with that will counter the ignorant statergies of your standard religious nut.
It has been wonderful have something able to have an effect on people when common sence is an alien proposition to them. May the great flying spaghetti monster long reign over all.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“That’s Deism, the original religion of many of the Founding Fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and George Washington. Basically, its like the earth was created like a giant clock that was started off billions of years ago and is now ticking without any interference. It allows for evolution and intelligent design, and is based fully on reason and rationality, not on some centuries old text. Good stuff.”

Yes, deism is a religion. But, to characterize a religion as being “based fully on reason and rationality” is unreasonable. Religion is based on faith. Faith is the antithesis of reason.

It is reasonable to accept that there may be a god or gods since we as humans cannot understand the totality of the universe. But, having faith in something that cannot be tested is a symptom of irrationality. Even in the Bible, no human was around for the creation of Earth. So, the theory that a god created everything is a nice idea, but it cannot be shown to be true without faith and irrationality.

1) It is nice to have someone write that Intelligent Design is the same as religion. I know it is true, but many people are disingenous in their promotion of ID.

2) It is a truly Christian sentiment to wish enternal pain on your fellow human? This letter is a sin. Have you asked your god for forgiveness yet?

3) The Kansas School Board claimed that by adding the ID information they were promoting critical thinking. But, it was the opposite. If you want to promote critical thinking, then you introduce ID and state that there is no scientific proof nor has this theory had an experiement devised to test it. So, ID does not deserve the same weight in science classes as other TESTABLE theories do.

If Kansas had taken this route, then there would not have been the outrage in science community. But, they chose to try to give equal weight to a nonsense theory and one that has been tested repeatedly. This is not what science does. And, it would be a disservice to the Kansas students to perpetrate such a poorly thought out curriculm. It would have reduced the critical thinking skills that it claimed to support.

If you wish to believe in a religion that is cool. But, the US freedom of religion works both ways. I don’t have the right to force my lack of religion down your throat, and you don’t have the right to force your religion down mine. Because the people of the US have a mix of religions, the simplest answer is to keep all religions out of the government. This is not an attack on Christians; it is a way to maintain a measure of unity for the American people no matter our other ideas.

But, it is patently unpatriotic not to question the government at all times. It is unpatriotic to promote one religion over all others by putting “god” onto money or into the Pledge of Allegiance. We have a secular soceity. And, this is what the religious fanatics fear whether they are Islamic terrorists or homegrown Christian terrorists. Religion is all about control. And, religious figures will not give up their power without a fight.

Anywho, have a nice day. :)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Quote:
“If you are right, and evolution is the only answer, then we will all just be dirt-food when we die. But if you are wrong, and the intelligent design people are right and there is a God, then you’ll be in a tough spot.”

If you are right, you go to paradise when your dead.
But if you are wrong, than you have wasted a part of the only live that you had.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

And if you’re so bound up in what other people tell you instead of deciding what’s true between yourself and God (or FSM if you so desire), then you’re wrong to. The Bible says “If any of ye lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to _all_ men liberally and upbraideth (chastiseth) not, and it shall be given him.” (James 1:5 (KJV) emphasis added)
.
Rather than listen to a pastor who’s paid to tell you what to think, read your holy book and make up your mind yourself. How are you better than the suicide bomber who will only listen to their Imam? Islam _means_ peace, not al-Qaeda. The point is, if you don’t make up your own mind, someone will make it up for you and thus control you, and you become a pawn to them. Make up your own mind, that’s why God/FSM gave it to you!
.
_That_ is why ID should not be taught, or it should be taught with Pastafarianism and any other idea. Science and Religion _are_not_ Mutually Exclusive!
.
Vas en paix, may His Noodly Appendage Touch your Mind. RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Oh, all of you put down your verbal weapons and remind that for minced mead thou art, and unto digested mead shalt thou return. Peace on you all !!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

On one hand, we have Genesis, blah blah, don’t eat the fruit, the most boring read ever.

On the noodle, we have midgits, pirates, and beer for everyone.

Now tell me which out of the three I’m going to believe. Hint: I have an eyepatch.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I have finally found the God that is right for me. I am spiritually reaching out right now to caress his Noodly Appendage.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

All these christians touting the old testement. The god of the old testement was vengeful and angry. The god of the new testement was a bit more loving. According to the bible christ came to teach everyone a new way of living and throw out the old rules. The followers of christ became known as christians. Now if you follow christ and his path that is ment to replace the old path I think you see where I am going with this. The old school of thought said the world was created in 7 days. Christ never said that. As a follower of christ should you not follow the teachings of christ and not the older school of thought found in the old testement. Jesus stated in no uncertain terms love thy neighbor as thy self and judge not lest the be judged. So when you say “I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before God.” You are being judgemental (about something only god can judge) and you are not being loving. Hence you are not following the teaching of christ and are taking unchristian actions. So at the very best you are a crappy christian but mayhap not even christian at all.

I like christ. I do not like christians. They are so unlike christ.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“The most preposterous notion that H. sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all history. ”

-Lazarus Long

Like or Dislike: 0  0

After ages of Christian dogmas and fakes, finally some believes that make sense.
PRAISE THE FSM!! His mighty majesty touched me, and i’m feeling enlightened.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’d hate to be you if the Jew’s or Muslims are right.

Your opinion is already flawed, before you even thought of it, California boy.

For a religious debator to debate, he must have arguements that can’t be used for any religion.

I find it ironic that intelligent design has the word intelligent in it.

It’s wretchedly farfetched the way that people look towards others who base their beliefs off of facts and logic (rather than speculation) as the dumb or crazy ones.

-sever

Money is God.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

ZONA. homo sapiens might have just dreamed it up. but okay, why do you care and what is your motive to change what we think. i dont really pray anymore except for forgiveness because it has gotten me nowhere, but in my own opinion, i dont deserve anything from God. in general, im probably what God would consider a bad person. least productive industry in all history? are you speaking of the church cuz back in the day the church was FILTHY RICH.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Stop that. You’re making us Californians look bad.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Uhm… has anyone else ever considered the possibility that God created everything, but that both he and his vessels (Moses, Jesus, Mohommad, etc.) aren’t quite sure how it was done themselves? I mean, what if “God” was sorta like the user of a brand new computer… he learned how to use it, but had no idea how it actually worked? I mean, where in the Bible (or the Qu’ran, etc.) does it say that God knew from the beginning how everything worked?

Maybe he just clicked the “Create Planet” button, then the “Create Life” button the day after (or five days later, whatever). How can anyone be certain that “God” actually knows what’s he’s doing?

Maybe God is just a really good gamer, you know? Maybe He didn’t create the game, but He’s learned how to use it very well. Think of The Sims– who else here loves that game but lacks the ability to create it?

Perhaps the designer of this “game” we call reality is content to sit back, out of the limelight, and provide the occasional patch download or expansion pack. Maybe he (or she) just likes watching how his program will be used.

John

Like or Dislike: 0  0

We from Germany can’t understand what you are doing in Kansas – are you really serious about that? Everybody of course is free to believe in whatever he wants, but teaching children stuff like this is dangerous. I’m not talking about the Spaghettimonster or what ever, I’m talking about telling the kids God createt everything and sciense is nothing! That’s so stupid, we can’t even find the right words!
It’s a shame that modern people still do think like that – I’m glad to live in germany, where things like this never could happen!!!

Friedrich Nietzsche: “Gott ist tot” (die fröhliche Wissenschaft) Diesen Satz brauche ich nicht zu übersetzen, denn jemand, der so aufgeklärt ist und sich für Nietzsche interessiert, ist auch so europäisiert, dass er diesen kurzen deutschen Satz verstehen wird!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“I believe that God is bound by the same laws of physics, science, biolgy, etc.. that we are” -Thorkia

Then there is no god, because god, or God, if you wish, is by definition a SUPERnatural being. Get that? It means ‘outside nature.’ And nature is, by definition, all that exists. You can’t have both.

“Don’t teach it to my kids in School, as I will teach them about God at home. I need the school system teach my kids about math, english, geograhpy, history, science, etc. ”
-Thorkia

While you’re at it, teach your kids to capitalize English, not just He and God.

Sorry for the harsh tone, I get so weary of people trying to rationalize their mythology.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This new forum isn’t good. More difficult to use, hard to see the big overview. And this form doesn’t let you format your post into paragraphs. Unless I’m doing something wrong.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Personally, I like to believe that God is really lazy

When i do think of a god (not often, FSM rules =D) i tend to think of a small child, sitting on an anthill, with a magnifying glass in his hand…guess who we are?

Ramen
=D

Like or Dislike: 0  0

God might be dead – the FSM is not!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

penis.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I am a Roman Catholic, and I personally think things like ID belong in church, not school. Like it has been said before, Science is the “how,” and religion is the “why.” They don’t need to clash with one another at all. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I must partake in his noodly body and blood. When I die, I want a spot reserved for me on the banks of the beer volcano. Go forth and be touched by His Noodly Appandage, RAmen!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I am surprised by your connection between evolution and lack of an afterlife. We strongly believe in an afterlife, hence the beer volcano and the stripper factory but I am digressing. I am sorry to break it to you but if you truly fear “becoming worm food”, you really can not stop decomposition despite your belief system.

May you be blessed by his noodly appendage!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Should I believe in a god ‘cos if I don’t then I’ll be in a “tight spot” when I die? Leave aside what happens to my corporeal remains (which will provide nutrient in the soil, thus – I hope – helping to grow the wheat, which shall then be milled into flour, before becoming pasta), and also which god I should be scared of (a muslim god, a catholic one, a smiting one, a nurturing one, an elephant-headed one ?), and even whether this god would be impressed by someone who gives into threats. The only immortality I aspire to is that conferred by having children and having had an influence (positive, I hope) on others around me.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Why is so much emphasis put on the afterlife? God has been a part of my life for 15 years now (He was always a part of it, I didn’t recognize that until 15 years ago). Since then, life has been good. I have been good, not perfect, but good. Our faith is not just about the afterlife, but life more abundant here and now. I’m sure glad no one ever told me, “worship God…. or else!” I would have NEVER done it for that reason and I don’t blame anyone here for feeling the same way.

Also, God is not a man, but rather masculine. There’s no denying that throughout history (until recently thankfully) women were not really in charge of much. Men were leaders and for the most part they were stronger. God leads us. He is stronger than us. He takes care of us. He loves us. That is why God is a he.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You know, I’m getting pretty sick of these so-called “Creationist Scientists” picking and choosing the bits of science that seem to collaborate their theory, and dismissing all others, for example, the fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed from one form to another. Some (such as Dr. Gish, head of the creationist science institute (or whatever it’s called, I don’t really care)), misquote or mangle other bits of science to make it seem like it supports their theories (Dr. Gish misquoting the 2nd law of Thermodynamics (he is over eighty though, bless his blasphemous little heart). He quotes it as “All things tend towards entropy.”, when it is in-fact “IN A CLOSED SYSTEM, all things tend toward entropy”. What’s the big deal, you ask? It’s only three words, right? But there is a big difference: In Dr. Gish’s quote, creationism is possible, but in the true law, it is not). As energy cannot be created or destroyed, then ‘God’, in the act of creating the Universe (or Multiverse, as is the theory held be some, which explains Dark Matter), must have either destroyed, or severely diminished itself in the process. But anyway, to come back from my rant to the original point I was trying to make, what’s so strange about the idea of a Flying Spaghetti Monster creating everything? I can see how some people would find it ridiculous to think that an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent being could create everything, whereas the Christian theory of ‘God’ creating everything is perfectly correct, I mean, God is omniscient, omnipotent… and omnipresent…(Uh oh! Major logic flaw alert!!!) Until someone can show me indisputable evidence that God created the Universe and not the FSM, I think I’ll stick with the latter (at least then I can enjoy myself, and eat delicious pasta, of course). Come to think of it, I’ll probably stick with the FSM anyway, and then when I go to hell, I can smack Satan in the face; nick (steal) his pitchfork; and rule hell the way it should be ruled (competently, and with a vast-ranging scheme of public-works (put out that damn fire, for a start, and possibly build several lakeside condos, thereby increasing the economic stability of hell and establishing a tourism trade, bringing more wealth and power to me!!!!). But that will never happen, of course, for the FSM is the one true path to salvation (methinks I have heard that elsewhere…oh well).
All praise Him, and His Noodly Appendages!
RAmen!!!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I believe in the monkeys. It is so clear they are our cousins, that when I was 7 I thought if Darwin had not figured it out first, I would have.
For how long are we going to be caught in 4,000 year old myths of Sumerian-Egyptian origin? It is just silly.
One more thing: show me an “agnostic American” and I’ll show you a “coward American atheist”… Civilized people of the world are laughing at us.
Long live Darwin!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

To Pastor Disaster:
You should try reading some pre-history.
Most societies were not patriarchal, but lead by females. It is not until empires emerge through violence that men become the rulers. This happened recently in the 99K years of homo sapien sapien existence.
You are surrounded by a current world that only seeks and teaches history based on patriarchies.
Women are the creators of human life. WOMAN = CREATION.
God (if she exists) is female.
Too bad I’m an atheist.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

If you are right, and God is the only answer, then you will be saved and we will all burn in hell. But if you are wrong, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster people are right and there isn’t a God, then you’ll be in a tough spot, a verry tough spot indeed.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

And on the outskirts of all this, The Church of the Subgenious shall continue to eat popcorn and fart obnoxiously.

-LOVE!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

HAha, this is funny People are fighting over their beliefs. They all give their own good views except for some people and the people who think their atheist (they don’t realize that atheism, the belief in not beliving is a paradox in itself, if they would I’m sure it would make their heads implode) For all the different religions fighting you guys have to realize that either there is 1 god… 1 universial god that you all belive in. There are multiple gods that all work togeather. Or look to science to give a theory.

Religion is funny in that all religions say their religion is the correct one. Who’s to say who is right and wrong? You can never know unless you have actually seen this 1 god. Or the multiple gods. (Which with the 1 god, the certian people like Christians, and Mormon, and those other door-to-door-converters, belive in the same god, yet for some reason say that their god is more correct than the other god which just happens to be the EXACT SAME PERSON, except interpreted by some guy)

Which brings me to the cult that lives around me.. They are called the Ramah Cult. 20 somthing years ago, a islamic man named somthing Ramah came to a town which is like 10 miles away from the city of which I live. He claimed to be a Reincarnation of Jesus. And thus converted a bunch of families into beliving him. Thus making it possible to sleep with which ever woman he wanted to, the belivers of this allowed it because they thought that this islamic man who was obviously muslem (even states it at one point in the documents he wrote on his now known as a religion) He now owns part of the town, because family that own certian stores are in his religion and have vowed to allow use of what ever building he wants. You can kind of call it a syndicate. The Rama Syndicate.

Now I used to be a Christian and when I heard of this man I thought. How can people be so stupid to be tricked into one mans scheme to get power? How can people be so ignorant that they can belive in somthing that is so obviously a lie? I pondered that, then realized that the religion that I belived in was nothing better than that. One or more people thinking they can create power by making a book and selling it as the words of the “Ultimate creator”.

I would like to know if anyone would be able to answer this. Or if anyone would like to show their views to me. Email me at Killer008r@hotmail.com or Killer008r@gmail.com

Like or Dislike: 0  0

i think all you “super christians” should leave this guy alone. hes entitled to his opinion no matter what you whack jobs say. why dont you stop being christians and start becoming americans, and give the man his 1st amendment. which i think is freedom of speech and if its not then let the man speak his word. if you dont like it dont read it. if you cant handle what he says, dont read it. if your too much of a baby to let someone criticize what you believe in then dont read this and stop whining about it cuz hes just gonna leave more posts and piss you guys off even more. so leave the flying spaghetti monster guy do his work and go back to yours. tornadov15@hotmail.com

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I love how the religious types keep changing their explanations after each new SCIENTIFIC discovery!

Only the FSM explains it all.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Popping in regardless of context:

I find it highly amusing that at the top of my browser it says this:

“I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before God at Church oof the Flying Spaghetti Monster”

XD

Like or Dislike: 0  0

In the 13th century scientists were being ex-communicated from the church for saying there could be other planets out in space. It was heresy, because the Earth is special, it is where “God created us”. In the 13th century, ex-communication was a big deal, since everyone was christian. you were basically shunned by society. Anyway, now we know that there are countless planets throughout the universe.

In the 17th century, Galileo said that the Earth revolves around the sun. He was placed under house arrest for the rest of his life by the church (thankfully the church doesn’t have that power today). The accepted view at the time was that all things revolved around the Earth, since “God created us” here on Earth. Today, we know that Galileo was correct, and even the church accepts this. In 1996, the Pope issued an apology and pardon for Galileo. Too bad it was 300+ years too late.

Today, we see a repeating cycle. Evolution is being cast as the spawn of Satan, and yet there are books coming out by christians like this one: “http://www.amazon.com/Language-God-Scientist-Presents- Evidence/dp/0743286391/sr=8-1/qid=1158901596/ref=pd_bbs_1/ 002-3017616-5175261?ie=UTF8&s=books”. It at least shows that some christians are starting to support evolution. The repeating cycle is in the 13th century the issue was “other planets”, which the church eventually came to accept the science. In the 17th century the issue was “the earth revolving around the sun”, and the church eventually came to accept the science. The issue now is evolution. It is only a matter of time before the church accepts the science supporting evolution. FYI, Pope John Paul supported evolution over ID (smart man!).

To speed this process along, I’m handing the above book out to all my christian friends, and even offering to buy another copy of the book to donate to their church’s library. At least then the christians will get their science right.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

FSM is like a Chinese Buffet for the mind! I mean, you wouldn’t want to eat it every day, but when you do it’s something you really enjoy!
>>They’ve got the different entrees that are identical except for the sauce. The zealous cursing Christian could be the General Tso’s Chicken. The sincere and polite Christian could be the Honey Chicken. And the guy concerned enough about your immortal soul to chime in but not concerned enough to go beyond a web posting could be the Sesame Chicken.
>>They’ve got the exotic food that you don’t get anywhere else. FSM could be the sushi you don’t eat regularly but it’s fun to look at. The Viking Guy could be the fried chicken that doesn’t really fit in to the whole “Chinese” buffet concept, but it’s there anyway. The arm-chair theologians on both sides could be the food that’s not the main course, but is intrinsic to the whole Chinese Buffet experience (like the pork fried rice).
>>They’ve even got the foods that you simply can’t pass up. The t-shirts and jewelry could be the almond & fortune cookies you have at the end of the meal to finish things off.
What would we call this place? How ’bout the “WHY THE HELL CAN’T THEY UNDERSTAND IT’S A FRIGGN JOKE PAGODA”? After all, you can’t spell ‘pagoda’ without God.

I’m getting hungry, I’m gonna go eat.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Seriously, I am speechless to the ignorant. This God guy/girl whatever is a real reality killer. Who has seen him. People say they talk to him, but ironically this only happens when they are alone. Well I have the answer. For all those that have spoken with god, I hate to disappoint you but it is just the voice in your head.
When the time comes you will feel the wrath of the all powerful Spaghetti Monster and you can confess your “sins” to him. Until then keep your Bible loving shit to yourself and stop trying to tell other people how they have to live and filling their heads with a false sense of hope. Miracles can only exist in the presence of luck!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

All hail my fellow pastafarians! I was wondering if anyone could answer this question: Does the beer volcano have subsidaries, such as vodka springs or pina colada geysers? I am hoping the answer is yes, because while i have not yet drunk beer,(underage) it doesn’t smell very nice. All hail the Noodly One! Yarg!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Religion is funny” -Messiah

Yeah, I’ll go with that! If you don’t think so, you should read “Under The Banner of Heaven” by Jon Krakauer, which details the founding of the Church of Latter Day Saints (Mormons), among other things. Well, it would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic and. . . stupid. Or maybe it was supposed to be a big goof, just got out of hand. . .I mean, magic rocks in a hat? Ph-leez.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I could personally go for a Margarita Spring.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

As the world lay into keneticism, His Flying Pasta Divine Self floated invisibly before the world. He passed in and out of normal matter, but with nothing more than ease. He saw the rise and decline of the Pirate, as well as the rise of Christianity. To counter this, he made a prophet his own, named Robert, and set Bobby forth to spread his word. Bobby spoke to the FSM, “My Lord, what is it that these Christians need?” The FSM thought for a moment, then spake, “Bobby, what these Christians need, is exactly what they do not understand. They must be let alone, as to carry out their purpose, which is to be misguided, as an example for Pastifarians everywhere.” Bobby nodded his head in enlightenment, and ate a Communion of Spaghetti and Meatballs. Afterwhich, the Spaghediety Himself disclosed the centuries-long hiding place of the Arc of the 10-I’d-Rather-Wish-You-Didn’ts.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

DIRT DOESNT EAT WHAT A NOOB

Like or Dislike: 0  0

To the OP – “I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before God,” begs a number of questions. For example, I always imagined myself reclining on a giant manicotti before Him, rather than standing. Either way, I think you make a very good point. It’s best that I be me, and you be you when the time comes.

You said “If you are right, and evolution is the only answer …”

I suspect that evolution is the only answer to a number of questions – for example, What word is spelled E-V-O-L … oh you get the point. But I’m not sure what question you have in mind, to which it ain’t the answer.

Evolution is just a word used by scientists to describe what we observe about the nature of living things … species change over time (for various reasons) and sometimes they become other species. It’s not the Evolution part that bothers your Intelligent Design gurus …. it’s the “for various reasons.”

When you do finally stand before Him, ask him about the various reasons. I don’t think He will be offended, in fact I think He would be delighted to know that one of His children is capable of thinking for itself. You’ll probably get yourself brownie points.

Btw – if by “dirt-food” you mean that my body will be decomposed and digested by worms, fungi, and soil-dwelling bacteria or other microorganisms, and then recycled into the environment to provide nutrients for say … a giant redwood tree, and thus to all the living creatures which depend on that tree, then I must say cheers for the happy thought. I really can’t imagine a better after-life, short of the beer volcano.

Arrr, may ye be touched by his noodly appendage,
RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

AN OBJECTIVE COMPARISON BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND FSM-

I think that the only way to settle these arguments is to objectively compare the two religions. Firstly; Christianity has one God. FSM; also has one deity. The All Powerful Holy Be Thy Name Flying Spaghetti Monster. In this sense both churches are monotheistic. (Well, except in Christianity God has a kid who gets some attention also.) Therefore we have to analyze both claims, in deciding which one of these two deities are authentic, or to put it scientifically “for real”.

The basis touted by the school of ID is that creation itself is so intelligent and intricate that an intelligent being MUST have created it. And therefore this intelligent being MUST have been the God described in the Bible.

FSM has a different reasoning however. IT IS INDISPUTABLE YOU FOOLS! HIS NOODLY POWERS CREATED THIS UNIVERSE! SHIVER IN HIS AWESOME PASTATIOUS PRESENCE!

Christianity is a religion that calls upon mankind to do good deeds. If man does not perform these good deeds he will be roasted alive for eternity. Good deeds include refraining from pre-marital sexual intercourse, masturbation and eating rabbits. (Refer to text in Bible)

FSM does not have a whole bunch of rules that confuse you. One has to only wear pirate regalia and have faith in HIS CARBIC GOODNESS. Which sounds entirely logical and acceptable to me.

In essence the only logical conclusion is that a Flying Spaghetti Monster did indeed create the universe, and if you do not agree with me I will poke you in the eye. Or bite your toe off.

Ramen.

p/s: to the Christians that are taking this forum seriously, thank you. It is highly entertaining, and it feels good to know that there are still a whole bunch of idiots out there to make fun of when I am bored.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This makes sense:
FSM is made from two meatballs and pasta. He is good for you, contains vitamins.
God is everything (according to some) and some say he is a guy with beard. Everything is not good for you. Guys with beard are absolutely not good for you.
The noodlier the better. RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

What problems do all of these people have with the FSM, i mean, think about it whts the difference, the oly real one is that they image of god had a beard, and ours is pasta and meatballs, thats the onli fundamental difference, of all the religons they could have picked on its us, stupid naive christans.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

eh hehehehheheheh sorry I was too busy laughing at how much this guy cares about random people hehehehe

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Praise noodles! RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

As the poet and philosopher Mark Knopfler said, in his treatise “Industrial Disease”, “Two men say they’re Jesus; one of them must be wrong.” To each his own philosophy and belief, I say.

The esteemed Sister Mary Margaret, God or Whoever rest her soul, was quizzed by her seventh-grade class about the nature of belief, to wit, “What if you die and there’s nothing, no afterlife?”, she replied, “Well, then the joke’s on me, isn’t it?”

The realms of faith and reason may cooexist on this plane, but never (current evidence or lack thereof withstanding) shall the twain meet.

Peace. Shalom. Pax. Paz. May the Word be spread and heard.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You guys are perhaps the most intelligent people I’ve had the pleasure to happen upon on the internet.

I do hope this is taught in schools someday…which is quite plausable.

I see the light and smell the truth…keep the faith!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

There seem to be roughly two types of people in the world with two different attitudes toward ambiguity and the unknown. When confronted with great mysteries like 1) where did we come from? 2)what is the “right” way to act/behave? 3) what is the “meaning” of life? there are those who follow pre-established thinking and there are those who create and explore for themselves. Clearly, the creators and explorers are the minority and have been througout history. The questioning minority seem to be a good argument against evolution. Wouldn’t conformance trump questioning individuality? The herd imparts protection and comfort – you get your beliefs and take your marching orders from your parents, friends, your political party, your pastor, or king, and you are much less likely to be ridiculed, become an outcast, or be burned at the stake. What kind of chance of survival does a creature that leaves the herd have versus one that stays within the fold? And yet these black sheep still persist throughout the history of mankind. How is this so? Why doesn’t this penchant for risk-taking and self-elimination wipe out the independent thinkers? How do you become popular and pass along your genetics if you are in jail, stoned to death, or excommunicated? Where is Darwin’s theory now? Obviously, there is a divine hand at work. God, or at least God’s favor exists. Could there be anything but Godly approval of the free-thinker and challenger of the status quo for such rebels to persist? Can it be that those who suffer the distress of distance from the herd move closer to Godliness with every departing step? Could you be closest to God when you ask things most likely to blaspheme and disturb the majority? How do we know the earth is really flat? Why are pigs bad – what makes their meat really unclean – aren’t goats kind of dirty too? If God is good and likes goodness why would God make Ghandi burn in hell and send Pat Robertson to heaven? Why is God afraid of/ashamed of women showing their faces, arms, or other body parts – are women defective – (kind of like unclean pig flesh)? Why should I pay such great attention to a holy book that’s been modified extensively by the hand of man and ignore God’s direct creations – nature, the heavens and earth? What is up with this carbon-dating thing – didn’t mommy and daddy tell me the holy book says the earth is only a few thousand years old? What would Mohammed look like and why would any decent person want to kill someone if they drew a picture of him? Why can only those with a penis become holy leaders – if God is a male, is he gay?

Ask questions like this and you are in deep trouble with society but far closer to whatever truly is Godliness. Religion, our attempt to put the universe into a tin can, has consistently gone stale century upon century. Might as well call whats in the can today “spaghetti.” May the rebel spirit of the FSM protect you all from the “righteous” herd – RAmen

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I am a Christian. To reply to people who say that if God was a merciful god he wouldn’t send them to hell just for not beleiving he exists, I say that God is merciful to those who believe in him. For judgement is without mercy. He is a just god.
Before people start to call me a hating Christian I would like to say that I can’t stand it when other Christians ruin it for the rest of us when they judge others and condemn others to eternal damnation. It puts a bad light on a belief that is not about judging others at all. It is completely the opposite. Jesus accepted people inspite of their faults. Most of the people that he hung out with were thieves, adulterers, and tax collectors.
BTW I think FSM is the funniest thing in a long time I frequent venganza.org often.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Is God Really There?
A Look into the Traditional Arguments for God’s Existence
Nicholas E. Craig

There isn’t a Bible verse that explicitly argues for God’s existence. The Bible assumes that God exists. The following arguments, then, are not primarily exegetical, but rather philosophical in nature. However, the Bible is amazingly accurate when it touches historty and the sciences, both natural and behavioral, and that argues strongly for it’s validity and God’s existence.
I will now put forth four of the five traditional arguments for God’s existence. I have omitted the ontological argument. While it has appealed to some of the finest minds in Western history, usually mathematicians like Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz, it fails to persuade me. This, however, is probably more indacitive of my simplicity than the potentency of the argument.
· Cosmological argument – Something has existed forever.

Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” (KJV)

Millard Erickson wrote, “In the realm of our experience, everything we know is caused by something else. There cannot, however, be an infinite regress of causes, for if that were the case, the whole series of causes would never have begun.” Therefore, there must be a sufficient original cause or an “uncaused cause.” Epicurus showed an understanding of this when he stated, “Something obviously exists now, and something never sprang from nothing.” No matter if you’re a theist, atheist, or agnostic, you must admit that something has always existed. A.J. Hoover wrote, “The choice is simple: one chooses either a self-existent God or a self-existent universe – and the universe is not behaving as if it is self existent. In fact, according to the second law of thermo dynamics, the universe is running down like a clock or, better, cooling off like a giant stove. If the cosmos is running down or cooling off, then it could not have been running and cooling forever. It must have had a beginning.”

Virtually all scientists believe that the universe began to exist at a finite point in the past. Virtual particle fluctuation has been used to explain the spontaneous appearance of matter; however, those virtual particles still need a place to fluctuate and thus space itself still needs its origin explained. Further, as B. DeYoung has pointed out, virtual particles, if real, form as matter and antimatter in equal amounts. However, our universe appears to consist almost entirely of ordinary matter. Antimatter is distinctly rare.

· Teleological argument – Design declares a Designer.

Psalm 19:1-3, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse proclaims His handiwork. Day by day they pour forth speech, and night-to-night reveals knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words where their voice is not heard. (MKJV)

The universe as we know it is extremely complex; it possesses highly organized and integrated order. The teleological argument declares that such magnificent complexity must have been designed. For example, when you see a painting you assume there was a painter, and when you see a building you assume there was a builder. Likewise, when you see the spectacular design of our universe you assume that there is a designer.

Some one once said that the world, with all its complexity, having begun from a chaotic explosion, is like a tornado ripping through a junkyard and assembling a Boeing 747 in mid-flight!

Murray Eden, a statistician at MIT once used high-speed computers to ask a question: Beginning with chaos at any acceptable amount of time up to eight billion years ago, could the present complexity come by chance? The answer was and is absolutely No!

“Could I convince you that I dropped 50 oranges onto the ground and they, by chance, fell into ten rows of five oranges? The odds that ten oranges would fall by accident into a straight line are mind-boggling; let alone ten rows of five.

Maybe you’ve heard William Paley’s famous illustration. It goes something like this: imagine you’re walking along and you find a watch. You pick it up, pry it open and see all the various parts moving around inside. Would you say to yourself, “This watch has been here forever.” Or would you assume that the watch is the result of an explosion? No, you would assume that some watchmaker made it.

In fact, when you think of an explosion, what comes to your mind? – Destruction. The Big Bang Theory assumes that all the order in the universe arrived from an explosion; that’s like some one setting off a bomb in Home Depot and the explosion creating a neighborhood of homes.

God’s creation is incredibly complex, and evidence for its intelligent design is everywhere.

“I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity.” – George Gallup, statistician

Give your neighbor a high five… when you struck hands, through a complicated process, the neurons in your hand sent a message to your brain, which returned a message to your hand telling it what it felt! All that occurred in the instant you struck hands!

Socrates once argued for the intelligent design of the universe by citing the eye as evidence.

Consider the eye:
1. It has 40 million nerve endings.
2. Its focusing muscles move an estimated 100 thousand times a day.
3. The retina contains 137 million light sensitive cells.

“To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” – Charles Darwin

If man cannot make the human eye, how could anyone in his right mind think that eyes formed by mere chance?

Maybe you’re thinking, “Natural selection isn’t really about chance (except for the random mutations of genes), and in his book Origin of Species, Charles Darwin argued and proved that natural selection was quite capable of creating the intensely complex structures of the human body.”

Okay, let’s assume that natural selection occurs, and I believe it does. (Of course, as a progressive creationist, I believe that natural selection is the means by which God has providentially equipped His original creations or “kinds” to survive and adapt in a fallen world – a world, which is now separated from God because of the original sin of mankind. This separation has been observed and is commonly known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The universe is now subject to the uniformity of causes in a closed system. The system is not sealed shut, however. It is open to the hand of God, and thankfully God often reaches into our system. With His perfect will and wisdom, God is providentially guiding our system to His desired end.). However, even if Darwin’s natural selection, as opposed to the progressive creationist interpretation of natural selection mentioned above, were proven to be correct, mankind would still be lacking an ultimate explanation. Oxford philosopher Richard Swinburne observed that the laws of Darwin’s evolution are “consequences of the laws of chemistry governing the organic matter of which animals are made. And the laws of chemistry hold because the fundamental laws of physics hold.” Swinburne then asks, “But why just those fundamental laws of physics rather than any others?” To really see the brilliance behind Swinburnes question one needs to have an understanding of what some have called “the cosmic coincidences” or “the anthropic principle.” This concept will be briefly discussed in what follows, but at this point it will suffice to say that if the basic laws of physics were slightly different life could not exist. Darwin’s natural selection might be capable of explaining intensely complex structures, but it cannot provide an answer for why the perfect conditions for it (natural selection) exist. Hoover explains it this way, “Proving that watches came from a completely automated factory with no human intervention would not make us give up interest in a designer, for if we thought a watch was wonderful, what must we think of a factory that produces watches? Would it not suggest a designer just as forcefully? Religious people have been overly frightened by the theory of evolution.”

· Cosmic Coincidences & Anthropic Principle – Life requires specifics.

The anthropic principle states that the age, size, positioning, and a list of other particulars about our earth and universe must be exactly as they are in order for life and more specifically, conscious observers to exist. In other words, Earth is not only perfectly suited for human safety, but the universe is also curiously well suited for viewing and analyzing.

Job 38:4-6, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone.” (NKJV)

No one can deny that our universe is perfect for the production of life. Acclaimed scientist Richard Morris, although he remains agnostic, admits, “Our universe does seem to be fine-tuned for the production of life. The existence of life in our universe seems to depend upon a number of improbable coincidences.” Further, he admits that life could not exist “if the laws of physics or constants of nature (for example, the speed of light and the strength of the force of gravity) were just slightly different….”

Hoover observes, “The earth must be just the right size, its rotation must be just right, its distance from the sun must be within certain limits, its tilt must be correct to cause the seasons, its land-water ratio must be a delicate balance. Our biological structure is very fragile. A little too much heat or cold we die. We need light, but not too much infrared. We live just beneath an air screen shielding us from millions of missiles everyday. We live just ten miles above a rock screen that shields us from the terrible heat under our feet.” He then asks the pertinent question, “Who created all these screens and shields that make our earthly existence possible?”

“Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe – a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble.” – Albert Einstein

We will need to examine a few short Scriptures to feel the full force of the last argument:

Romans 1:20-21 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (NKJV)

Paul is saying that people sense God is there, but they reject this knowledge.

Romans 2:13-15 For not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness…). (NKJV)

Paul is saying that knowing the law is not what justifies people. The law proves to us that we are guilty and points us to Christ (Galatians 3:23-24). People without the law also know that they are guilty because they have the internal law. Which leads us to the last traditional argument:

· Anthropological Argument – An absolute moral standard requires God’s existence.

C.S. Lewis wrote, “Human beings, all over the earth, have this curios idea that they ought to behave in a certain way.”

Lewis called this “the Law of Human Nature.” All people inherently believe that some things are absolutely wrong and some things are right. Inside of the human psyche are two buckets. In one bucket we put the things, which we consider good, and the things, which we consider bad we place in the other bucket. The question pertinent here is not what goes into these buckets, but rather, where did these buckets come from?

Some will say that these “buckets” have been learned. They will argue that people learn right and wrong, good and bad from their parents, school, and so forth. This would mean that there is really no such thing as evil; and morals are relative to each situation and person. However, if you ask, “Is murdering innocent people wrong?” will anyone respond, “Depends on the situation.”? This is an extreme example, but it proves that there is an absolute moral standard. And if there is an absolute moral standard, there has to be a God. Why? Matter and energy are silent; matter and energy do not care if someone is murdered.

Maybe you’re thinking, “We as people establish the absolute moral standard. We as highly evolved beings have learned and taught ourselves that we should do what’s best for the masses and the preservation of life. We as morally conscious beings not only are capable of and have established that standard, but by the wisdom of the majority, we will continue to do so.”

Sounds good, but lots of innocent people have been murdered for what was deemed best for the masses. In fact, if there is no God, and we, as people want to do what’s best for the masses and the preservation of life, we should kill innocent people. The guy who came up with the phrase “survival of the fittest” was named Herbert Spencer. He once wrote, “The poverty of the incapable…starvation of the idle and those shoulderings aside of the weak by the strong…are the decrees of a large far seeing benevolence.” His ideas, which have their roots in Darwin’s natural selection, eventually played a huge role in the rise of National Socialism in Nazi Germany. Francis Schaeffer has pointed out that to the Nazis some people “were an unwanted burden on society – parasites who consumed more than they gave.” Considering the rising population and the inevitable depletion of our natural resources, wouldn’t it be best for masses and the preservation of life if we kill the elderly, handicap, mentally ill, and anyone one else who isn’t making a strong contribution to the whole?

Obviously, that type of thinking is purely evil. However, it has been thought. People who considered humanity capable of deciding what’s best for humanity have thought it. My reason for mentioning this type of thinking is to illustrate that just because the majority says a thing is good or bad doesn’t make it so. The majority is incapable of inventing the absolute moral standard because our standard will always be relative and arbitrary; it will be anything but absolute. Some will say that humanity is constantly learning, and making improvements in the area of morals. However, this only serves to further substantiate the point: If we are improving, we are getting closer to perfection. Perfection is the absolute moral standard, which proves God’s existence.

“The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard…you are, in fact, comparing them both with some Real Morality.” – C.S. Lewis

Is murdering innocent people wrong? Yes. How do we know that it’s wrong? How do we know that it’s absolutely wrong? We know because there is an absolute moral standard, and if there is an absolute moral standard, God must exist.

Not only do we know that there is an absolute moral standard, but we also know that we’re guilty of transgressing it.

Romans 2:1 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.

Imagine we are born with a tape recorder around our necks, which records our every word. Now imagine that when we die God will play the tape for us. Throughout the tape there will be places where we said that a person did a particular thing, which was wrong. However, there would be times in our own lives when we did the same type of thing. Thus, we will be guilty by our own standards. Not to mention God’s perfect standard.

Ask anyone and they will tell you that they are not perfect. We know we have done things that are wrong. We know that we are guilty. And the Bible confirms what we know in our hearts…

Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Conclusion:
Those are four of the five traditional arguments for God’s existence. Based on these arguments for God’s existence, all people everywhere can be sure of two things: (1) There is a God. (2) We are guilty of transgressing His Character. At this point, it is important to note that sin is not the transgression of an arbitrary law established by God. No, sin is that which is contrary to the person, character, and nature of God. God is holy. In other words, God is, as Millard Erickson has put it, “allergic to sin”.
Thankfully, God doesn’t just give us natural revelation, which proves our guilt. He also gives us special revelation, which instructs us in the way to a full pardon from that guilt. That is what Jesus’ death on the cross (as elucidated in the Scriptures) was all about.

Resources:
Evangelical Dictionary of Theology – A.J. Hoover
Introducing Christian Doctrine – Millard J. Erickson
RE 331 Notes – Dale Younce
Evolution: The Evidence For and Against – Ray Comfort
The Big Questions – Richard Morris
Mere Christianity – C.S. Lewis
How Should We Then Live? – Francis Schaeffer
Creation and Quantum Mechanics – B. DeYoung

I am certain that I have articulated ideas in the course of this sermon, which are not original to me. If I have presented any authors ideas without documentation it is simply due to a lapse of memory. As I read, I often assimilate ideas and unfortunately I cannot recall where I discovered certain concepts. It is not my intention to publish this work or receive any credit for the ideas here proposed.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

‘all people everywhere can be sure of two things: (1) There is a God. (2) We are guilty of transgressing His Character.’

Funny, I read the whole thing and I’m still not sure of that. Huh. Go figure. By the way, huge-ass posts like yours’ll be read by about point two percent of anyone who visits a site like this……the only reason I read it is ’cause I’m extremly bored right now.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Reply to Nic the verbose; Can’t believe I am actually doing this, but reading these tired old sophisms really pisses me off. Migawd!, what a performance! Damn near every discredited cliche ever propounded, from Plato’s “first cause” to the misunderstood Second Law of Dynamics to the impossibility of the eye! Stupifying!! While I can’t and wouldn’t want to match you in quantity, that is really not necessary to roll this crapola up like…like…A STRAND OF SPAGHETTI! So;
Cosmological argument; Why can’t there be an “infinite series of causes”? Who sez? And if there was a definite beginning point, why not the Big Bang, huh? That is where all the evidence points. And if you just Have to believe a “creation story” in an old book, why not Gilgamesh or the “hero twins” in the Popul Vuh? Or Corn Woman? Or…
teleological argument; fails. The existence of an “intelligent designer” implies the existence of a designer of the intelligent designer, and that implies…. Like, infinite progression. duh.
(If you are seriously interested in a refutation of the “irreducable complexity/intelligent design” argument, see Dawkins’ “The Blind Watchmaker” or “Climbing Mount Improbable”. Given aeons in which to operate, random mutation and natural selection are perfectly capable of evolving eyes and have, in fact, done so over forty times!)
Anthropic principle; Well, OUR particular form of carbon-based life originated under OUR particular conditions, and requires them to go on existing. It seems entirely plausible, however, that there may be silicone-based life or life based on other compounds elsewhere in the universe(s?). (I believe that this argument would be called “begging the question”)
Anthropological argument; Oh, come on! Absolute, inate, universal moral standards? You can’t be serious. How about Amerind tribes whose greatest compliment to an enemy and offering to their God(s) was to eat all or part of that enemy? How about the “people of faith” all over this globe who are busily engaged in killing, torturing and raping each other ( and each other’s children) to the extent of their abilities to do so? Universal absolute moral standards? Gimme a break!

Coupla other points; Pascal’s “gambler’s reason” for believing in God is 100% hollow, as is the whole idea of “redemption through belief”, because they assert the idiotic idea that one can choose to believe or disbelieve in something. To think about this proposition is to see the hole in it. One can choose to PRETEND to believe, so as to get on well with his neighbors, but not to actually believe. Either you believe something or either you don’t. As to the question of how anyone can go on with life believing that it is no more than a temporary visit to consciousness, well, Hell, it is the only game in town and it can be real fun sometimes, if you don’t let theology get in the way. And incidentally, I am personlly a devout Bokonanist, so I can’t be accused of prejudice in favor of the FSM. (Frisbeetarianism has a lot to recommend it, too.)

a

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It truly is sad to see that people ACTUALLY believe in a flying spaghetti monster…if anyone actually does believe in it. However, what is even more dismaying to me is the fact that Christians who are taught to love their brothers and their sisters would come here and do exactly the opposite. People say I will laugh when you try to get into heaven and get sent to hell, or you will burn in hell, or curse at them with obvious hate. With this attitude and complete disobeyal of our christian teachings and morals it is easy to understand why people turn away from the christian faith…it is because of the self-righteous, arrogant present-day christians…Ghandi said, “If all Christians lived and loved as they were taught, there would be no more Hindu’s in India.” Some of you will probably start hate-mailing me now and that is fine, for what I said, I believe…Stop hating, pointing out people’s flaws and JUST LOVE…share God’s word…do what he commanded…Live as God wants…Stop aiding in the destruction of the Christian faith. PLEASE LOVE.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Jon, I like your message about people loving each other, but you lost me at “share God’s word…do what he commanded…Live as God wants.” Was that directed at me or the not-so-truly-Christian commenters spewing frothy hate in response to this silly and genius idea? If it is directed at other Christians, great! If it’s directed at me, you’re barking up the wrong tree. I don’t want to share your God’s word. I see nothing wrong with living the life Jesus taught, but I take strong exception to anyone’s assumption that I’m doing it because their deity is commanding it. If you want to love me, that’s ok, but love me as I am, not as you want me to be.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I just thought i should point out that captain intelligent design should rethink his terms, based on the fact (as farfetched as it may be) that if aliens created us, this would fall under ‘intelligent design’.

keep thinking and stop bitching :)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I am Zook the keeper of the spaghetti sauce. I am here to testify on behalf of the great Noodler himself. He has told me through a message in my alphabet soup that he is angry for the continual attempts to disprove him most obvious omnipresence and demands a monument be erected so those that are truly faithful may travel to this new Mecca of homage. I have begun the great task of building this accolade to our great creator. Other must also fulfill the edict of the great noodle and build shrines in their own towns until our scientific enlightenment is spread to everyone worthy of the great un-kept secret of the pirates and the spaghetti monster.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

1. Cosmological argument: First of all, you misunderstand the second law of thermodynamics (as noted). Secondly, scientists have posited numerous theories which would give our current universe a starting point, such as cyclical expansion/contraction or the “Big Bang” theory, whose extrapolated consequences at the very least are supported by observational data… which is more than can be said for God. As for matter/antimatter discrepancies, look up “CP violation”.
2. Teleological argument – You devoted a hell of a lot of text to this section, including disproven and oft-repeated arguments like a tornado creating a 747, the irreducible complexity of the eye, etc. What proponents of these arguments often fail to realize is that IMPROBABILITY does not imply IMPOSSIBILITY. The fact that these events are unlikely to occur is the reason that there is no life on Mars (or any other planet in our solar system), very few Earthlike planets in our observational range, and as of yet, no known extraterrestrial life. There is no point at which the existence of an all-powerful being becomes more likely than the tiniest possibility of chance. Look at some of the websites Duns mentioned for a more thorough debunking. Darwin himself may have not known the mechanisms through which the eye could be evolved, but then again, he wasn’t infallible (his idea of inheritance through pangenesis, for example, was completely inaccurate).
3. The argument that Earth is “uniquely suited” to human life is logically flawed: it assumes that our current form was mandated before the Earth was created (or given its current climate); thus it assumes intelligent design in an argument for intelligent design. There are life forms on Earth that thrive at 40 degrees below zero and above the boiling point of water; if, for example, humans were amphibious and Earth was covered by vast swamps, the same argument could be made. It depends on nothing unique to our current form, and is equally well explained by the evolutionary principle that species will adapt to their environment. Furthermore, several of the quotes are dubious in the portrayal of their source. Albert Einstein saw god as “an impersonal mind or force”, definately not the Christian god; he was not an adherent of any major religion. Richard Morris argued that although our particular form of life may not exist should “physical constants” change, there is no way of knowing what *other* life forms would have arisen in our place.
4. The “Anthropological Argument” and the existence of an absolute moral standard is one of the poorest arguments I’ve ever heard. Human beings have evolved as social creatures, and it is an evolutionary benefit (and thus more likely to be passed on to one’s offspring, and be better represented in future generations) to get on well with one’s peers, by living as peacefully as possible among others. And, frankly, there is no absolute moral standard. An example of an “absolute” standard would be, for example, “it is wrong to kill”. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Yet our government, and many others, endorse the death penalty. The entire legal system exists because there is no absolute standards! Humans realize, and have realized since long before the time of Jesus, that the punishment for a crime must depend on the circumstances surrounding it. When is murder “less wrong”? Is stealing food to feed your family just as bad as stealing an old woman’s purse? There are no absolutes. Oh, of course you could take the easy path and say “it’s all just as wrong in the eyes of God”, but that’s assuming that you have the ability to judge as God does. What would be the greater sin, stealing food or allowing your family to starve? Or if the Nazis came to your door and asked if there were any Jews hiding on your property, would it be more wrong to lie, or to have them killed? Absolute morality creates so many catch-22s that it’s not even worth discussing. Using an “extreme example” to try and prove that there is no moral relativity is just wrong. Asking people “was Hitler bad?” will give very one-sided responses, but does that mean all people are innately “drawn” to judge character in a certain way? Will everyone answer the same if you ask “was Reagan bad?”
Furthermore, the Nazis were a prime example of the self-correcting nature of human morality; from time to time, there will obviously arise groups or individuals whose morals put them at odds with the rest of society; human society removed them from the gene pool. Your “absolute morality” is just what evolution has determined to be best for society; the Nazis espoused a view that contradicted this, and were brought down. Survival of the fittest.
As for comparing to some “Real Morality”, Lewis doesn’t make a solid case for his viewpoint. When I look at two cars and decide which one I like better, is there some “Real Car” to which I’m comparing them? If there is, it’s only in my mind; in addition, it would be the result of my experiences and preferences in life, not God’s car.

Bah, it’s too late for me to be arguing this.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Y’all certainly going to hell, all of you, starting with Christians and ending with the Noodlies for blasphemy.
You don’t realize (or pretend that you don’t!) that FSM was itself created be the King of all kings (and queens, and jacks), namely the King of Spades.
Grab a card with His image and start praying at once. Maybe there is still time. If you don’t have a proper playing card just grab a spade, it will work.
Blessing to y’all!
PP

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Oh, I am sure the God will thank Bobby for his service and, perhaps, even greatly appreciate for his enlightning letter.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Well Bobby, I can say this much for you. Remember the movie Perfect Storm and Bobby tells Christina, it’s never goodbye, it’s only love…say no more. It is goodbye too. Some people think they are so friggin smart. Smart asses is more like it.
And when you skip over the ocean like a stone Bobby, some day you are going to sink. Think about it. Nothing lasts forever. There are many songs sung and to be sung Bobby and I am sure I put in my fair share of lyrics that will never get sung to the right one. So much for love and lyrics just plenty of laughter. So you can say I won’t let you leave my love behind and when you look behind, see what an ass you are. Find out the phone number of Roxanne or someone who gives a damn. Find your animal house and make it a caddy shack and par for course and no interruptions some where some how and scream out FOUR in holy power of awesomeness.
GOOD FOR YOU and don’t start with me, you will not win. The woman has a mouth on her. Dang, and she doesn’t let you have the last word either.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Love is when you say tha that that’s all folks.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Will the
Antibiotic resistant bacteria have to stand before God too?
or how about the opposable thumb?
or the whales pelvis?
OMFSM
I’m doing it again
bashing my head against a brick wall
I gotta go and call my sponsor–as I am in the 12 step program to stop bashing my head against a brick wall
I stopped bashing my head against a brick wall about 2 years ago…
OH take the words bashing my head against a brick wall and replace them with debating evolution and then you’ll get where I am coming from.
Some one get me a marinara IV stat!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

People just dont understand that the concept of evolution is also constantly under evolution….which means if you are attacking the theory today, you’ll have to change your attack! MWUAHAHAhAHAHA!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Wow! I didn’t expect to elicit such great responses! Thanks.

First, I would like to apologize. My previous post was a bit lengthy.

Dear Duns & Think,

How have I misunderstood and consequently misapplied the second law of thermodynamics?

Does all the evidence really point to the big bang? Or does all the evidence subjectively interpreted point to the big bang?

Why not the big bang theory? – According to the big bang theory the distribution of galaxies in the universe should be essentially uniform. However, recent research has revealed massive superclusters of galaxies and vast voids in space. We exist in a very “clumpy” universe. Further, if the big bang theory is true the background radiation left over from the big bang, should not be smooth (because the universe is clumpy), but should be more intense in certain directions than in others, indicating inhomogeneities at the very start of the universe, immediately following the initial moments of the Big Bang. However, the background radiation is smooth. (See http://www.icr.org/article/343/)

I think it would be worth your while to read this article, also. It is extremely hostile toward Christianity and the concept of special revelation; however, it does a good job of establishing the existence of Something. (http://www.yoism.org/?q=node/27)

I think you both dodged the anthropic principle argument. We aren’t just talking about a complex environment inhabited with life; we are talking about an environment, which houses conscious observers who not only gather info and interpret it, but also develop intense epistemologies about the gathering process.

The point of the anthropological argument is not to say that everyone everywhere has a similar moral standard. The point is to prove that everyone feels certain things are out of bounds. A glance around the globe will reveal that the standard is existentially relative. But what is right or wrong is not the point. The point is we all feel certain things are absolutely wrong.

Think wrote, “Human beings have evolved as social creatures, and it is an evolutionary benefit (and thus more likely to be passed on to one’s offspring, and be better represented in future generations) to get on well with one’s peers, by living as peacefully as possible among others. And, frankly, there is no absolute moral standard.”

I said that the murdering an INNOCENT person is absolutely wrong. Do you disagree Think? What if that person was a loved one? According to you logic it’s not really wrong, and your interpreting it as wrong is just your inability to deal with the real (Remember that matter and energy are amoral; they could care less about morals. Further, you must refrain from personifying natural selection.). You say getting along with your peers is a “benefit”. What if the majority evolved into a position where they felt that murdering innocent people was a benefit (It really isn’t hard to imagine. Our natural resources are running low, and the average life span is ever increasing.)? Then what?

Can you prove that getting along with other is a benefit? I agree; however, my conclusions are logically consistent with my presuppositions. I’m afraid yours are not.

Thanks for the responses. I truly appreciate your opinions. I also appreciate your pointing me to new topics and websites. I like to learn.

I hope I have not come across as a jerk. I really do respect your perspectives.

Sorry for my verbosity,
nic

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yum, this religion is so enlightening. Maybe it is incredibly outlandish, but I find Christianity(which I’m a part of) and other religions like Mormonism and Hinduism equally illogical.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“The point is to prove that everyone feels certain things are out of bounds. A glance around the globe will reveal that the standard is existentially relative. But what is right or wrong is not the point. The point is we all feel certain things are absolutely wrong.”—wrong. Hitler had no problem killing millions of people. You and I would say that’s horrible, he would say it’s perfectly a-ok. Whether he or us is right is ultimatly a matter for god/whatever to decide, I would say.
“
“What if the majority evolved into a position where they felt that murdering innocent people was a benefit (It really isn’t hard to imagine. Our natural resources are running low, and the average life span is ever increasing.)? Then what?

Can you prove that getting along with other is a benefit?”–yes, because getting along with others leads to less chaos and more order, which benfits society, no matter the resource situation.

It’s nice to come across someone who knows the difference between debating and ranting.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If “intelligent design” is correct, then there are equal odds that the intelligent creator of the universe is actually a Flying Spaghetti Monster, since the nature of the intelligent designer is a question that is never even remotely approached in the intelligent design “theory”.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If ID is to be taught in schools then teach it as religeon or philosophy, but science? come on…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

i have no clue what u people are talking about

Like or Dislike: 0  0

what are u people talking about?!?!?!?!?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear Laurie,

I want to reply to some of the things you wrote in your post on Sep 20th, 2006 at 12:19 am. I am an extremely open-minded Christian. Many consider me a liberal. I ask questions. I expect answers. I refuse to close my eyes and leap!

Warning!!! I am quickly developing a reputation on this site as a rather verbose individual. I hope you will take the time to read what follows. If you are unwilling please at least the last few paragraphs, beginning with the student: “GOD DOES NOT SEND ANYONE TO HELL!” I think you will some very key and possibly surprising ideas if you skip down, but please at least read that section. Oh, I also answered the question about God having a penis.

The truth about God, Hell, and Humanity:
Nicholas E. Craig

The Bible states very clearly that everyone will spend eternity somewhere. Matthew 25:31-46 is a good example. However, when reading this passage it should be kept in mind that “good works” are a consequence of salvation and not the means by which a person can be saved (Ephesians 2:8-9/James 2:17-18/Matthew 24:46). Salvation comes through faith alone. Placing their trust in Jesus Christ’s vicarious death on the cross saves a person. A person must admit that they are a sinner, and in need of salvation. A person must believe that God loves them so much that He died in their place and took their punishment for sin. After a person places faith in Christ they enter into relationship with the Triune God and they can begin to uncover life.

Both heaven and hell are eternal. – They will last forever.
Matthew 25:46 “And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” (NKJV)

Heaven (the kingdom) was prepared for Laurie and the rest of humanity. God never intended for Humans to go to hell. Matthew 25:34, “Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” (NKJV)

Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels. Matthew 25:41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” (NKJV) The everlasting fire is not a literal fire; it is symbolic for eternal death, or more specifically, eternal separation from God. Fire would be horrible, but separation and solitude will be worse.

God created us to be in fellowship with Him.
Ephesians 1:5, “His unchanging plan has always been to adopt us into His own family by bringing us to Himself through Jesus Christ And this gave Him great pleasure.” (NLT)

Our sins separate us from God.
Isaiah 59:2, “But your iniquities have separated you from your God. And your sins have hidden His face from you….” (NKJV)

God is holy and cannot tolerate the presence of sin.
Leviticus 10:1-3, “Then Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in it, put incense on it, and offered profane fire before the LORD, which He had not commanded them. So fire went out from the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD. And Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD spoke, saying: ‘By those who come near Me I must be regarded as holy….” (NKJV)

God didn’t want to break out against those guys. But He had to, as Millard J. Erickson put it, “God is, as it were, allergic to sin and evil.”

God practices perfect justice.
Deuteronomy 32:4, “The Rock, His work is perfect, for all His ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is He.” (ESV)

Imagine someone commits a crime. Imagine they get caught red-handed and then brought before the judge. If the judge is a good judge will he let the criminal go unpunished? No, if the judge is a good judge, he will punish the criminal for his crime. God is the perfect judge.

The Penalty must be paid.
Look what the Bible says about the punishment for sin:

Romans 6:23a, “For the wages of sin is death ….” (NKJV)

Hell is death. Our sin puts us on death row. We are facing the ultimate death penalty. Only death can pay the death penalty. Thankfully, the penalty has been paid.

Romans 6:23b, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (NKJV)

I’m a momma’s boy. My mom loves me. My siblings say I’m her favorite. I don’t know about that, but here’s what I do know: If my mom could she would go before God and say, “God, I understand that Nic has a death penalty to pay, and I’m here to pay it. Take my life in place of his. God’s reply might be something like this, “Rhonda that is admirable, but you can’t pay Nic’s death penalty because you have your own to pay.”

Jesus was sinless and is thus the only acceptable substitute for the sins of an individual. Jesus had no death penalty to pay and because of His great love He paid ours.

1Peter 3:18, “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit.” (NKJV)

God is holy so he must judge sin; however, he is also merciful and in order to maintain both His perfect justice and mercy, He died in our place. He suffered a horrible death. He took our punishment. He did it because He is a loving God.

GOD DOES NOT SEND ANYONE TO HELL!
1Timothy 2:3b-6a, “…God our Savior…desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all….” (NKJV)

I love my wife. I hope that she never leaves me, but I don’t want to chain her up in our home so that she can’t leave. I want her to love me with an authentic love, and be with me because she desires to do so. It’s the same with God. God is a gentleman. He did not want robots that were forced to love Him so He created men with freewill.

Think about this: It grieves God for His creations to perish. However, He was willing to endure that kind of heartache just to enjoy authentic fellowship with the ones who would allow Him to save them. Imagine a man who knows that in order for him to experience the joys of having children his wife will have to endure horrible pain and they will have to lose many children. Imagine that somehow he knew those children that would be lost, and I mean really knew them intimately. Know this: God desires all men to be saved, and He was willing to endure the heartache of losing some for the joys of having the others.

God doesn’t want anyone to perish. People choose to go to hell, because they choose to remain separated from God. The person who experiences hell has rejected God’s way to escape their punishment. Sin is a person going through life saying, “Go away God.” Hell is God finally granting their wish. As C.S. Lewis has put it, “The doors of hell are locked on the inside.”

Finally, God is not a man. God transcends gender. God came to earth as a man, and yes He had the full package. If you study the Scripture you will see that God created men and women in His image (Gen 1:27). Lots of Christians misunderstand what the Bible teaches about men and women and their differences. Men and women are equal. They have different roles, but they are equal. Their equality is much the same as the equality shared by the Triune Godhead. The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are equal. Their roles are different; nevertheless, they are equal.

Thanks for reading this post. If anyone wants to write a very long post, in which they make fun of me and hate on my perspective, I promise I will read it all. Thanks again.

Nic the Verbose
Check out my previous post: “Is God Really There?”.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Well you won’t be him when he stands before God. So worry about your own self and leave the spaghetti man alone. I can think of many worse sins than believing in a flying spaghetti monster. If indeed that is a sin. Geez.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

My, nic, you really are verbose. I do appreciate that your message is not violent or openly condescending, but, really, I am unwilling to read whatever it was you were trying to say. I have no hate for you in my heart, and I’m not going to try to argue with your beliefs. My purpose in responding to your post is to tell you that I don’t care what the Bible says. Period. Thank you very much.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Salvation comes through faith alone. Placing their trust in Jesus Christ’s vicarious death on the cross saves a person. A person must admit that they are a sinner, and in need of salvation. A person must believe that God loves them so much that He died in their place and took their punishment for sin. After a person places faith in Christ they enter into relationship with the Triune God and they can begin to uncover life. “—that in a nutshell is why I have such issues with your religion, you realize. Because the entire idea of one group of people going to heaven while EVERYONE ELSE goes to hell sounds to me like a load of bullshit. I believe in a god who cares more about actions then what time they pray and what prayers they say.
-
” If my mom could she would go before God and say, “God, I understand that Nic has a death penalty to pay, and I’m here to pay it. Take my life in place of his. God’s reply might be something like this, “Rhonda that is admirable, but you can’t pay Nic’s death penalty because you have your own to pay.” —Ok. Here’s the thing. If I’ve sinned–which I have–then, hell, I WANT to be the one to pay the price. Why should Jesus–or anyone else–pay for MY sins? I’m not so weak that I can’t take what I’m due.
-
your quoting from the bible really meant nothing to me. I don’t think god wrote the bible, so it’s like you taking some random book and quoting from it. It sounds good, but what makes it right?
-
No offence, but after hearing what you had to say on Chrisitanity, I think I’d rather stay a christless heathen and go to hell. Sounds like the people down there’re more fun to hang with.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I wouldn’t want to be you standing before the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Here’s the real problem when trying to think objectively about science and religion. The fact, and yes it is a fact, that one day we are going to die and from then on will cease to exist forever, is a very hard thing to accept. Unfortunately it’s the truth. What you have to realize and understand is that humans are no more significant in the Universe than ants or dogs. We are simply naturally occurring beings on this rock, like moss. We serve no purpose and are only here for whatever natural occurrences brought us about. The sad thing is that we realize we are going to die, that’s the only difference between the animals and us. We’re sentient. Just because we can cry doesn’t mean anyone in the sky should care. Our lives are pointless and to fight your death is futile. Just because we’re atheists doesn’t mean we don’t care that we’re going to die, we just choose to live a life of truth instead of ignorance. I even find myself wondering sometimes if I’d be happier believing in a religion of some sort because either way, it won’t make any difference to in the end. Your body will still rot away and you will not exist any longer. For all of you religious folks out there, I don’t blame you. It takes a very strong person live their life without any sort of “afterlife insurance”. But you just have to ask yourself, “blue pill or red pill?”.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Also, I strongly suggest everyone check out http://www.godisimaginary.com It explains everything simply. Nothing more to say from what’s there.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yes, that makes lots of sense, because we should all believe in Jesus just in case. I mean, what’s wrong with living your entire life under the guilt of original sin, as long as you’re ensuring that you don’t spend your non-existent eternal life in Hell.

I love Christians that are Christians only because they’re not sure and would rather not go to Hell, rather than Christians that believe in Christ because he’s a cool dude.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dearest Erick V,

I am impressed. You actually understand the logical conclusions of atheism. If there is no God, if life began from an impersonal explosion, then all is pointless. And humans are particularly sad because they can’t deal with the real. I’m not just referring to theist at this point, no I mean ALL people. All humans pretend human life is worth something. All humans pretend life in general is worth something. However, that’s just a cruel joke evolution has played on us. (Ironically, Hitler and other insane and inhumane individuals turn out to be absolute geniuses.)

If some of the implications of quantum mechanics are correct, and the Arminian perspective is correct, and I believe they are, we have free will. So, I respect your decision to remain an atheist. Please respect my decision to remain a Christian. If it turns out that everything is rigid and deterministic like Newtonian physics and Calvin have implied, then neither of us can help being what we are. Lets let each other be.

However, I think we should live locigiclly consistent with our presuppositions. So, I’ll go on loving people and trying to preserve our planet. You should begin to care less. You should start taking what you want. If we are indeed just animals shouldn’t we live that way? I suggest you model yourself after the behavior patterns of the hyena; they are probably about as amoral as you can get.

I wish atheist would stop living in a fantasy world. If there is no God, there is no point; there are no aesthetics; there is no such thing as love; there is no value of any sort.

Here is the real decision we should be making: Revolt or Revolution. Revolt against the system and everything that hinders the satisfaction of your every desire. Or start a revolution and get back to an active existence relating to the Most High. (I don’t participate in religion. I relate to God and experience life.)

Keep it logical…
Peace

p.s. Please read my above post titled: “Is God Really There?”. The section detailing the Anthropological Argument is particularly relevant to your post.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dearest Gill,

I don’t think God wrote the Bible either. I think 40 plus men over a 1500-year period wrote the Bible. In my usual verbose fashion, I have set forth five reasons you should respect the Bible and it’s message. I hope you’ll take time to read them.

1. Jews.
-What is a Jew? Is it a faith, or race; what is it?
The supreme court of Israel once said that you’re a Jew if your mother was a Jew.

-Deuteronomy 28– God created the Jews. He said that their disobedience would cause them to be persecuted, hated, and scattered into every nation, but that they would never perish or lose their identity. God also promised to bring them back to Israel. The Jews have been scattered, persecuted, and hated just like it was prophesied.
· In the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70) over two million Jews were killed in two weeks.
· In Germany 6 million were murdered during the Holocaust.

-The Philistines, Hittites, Jebusites, Philistines, and all the other “ites” except the Termites are gone. Ever heard of an American Hittite, Russian Jebusite, or French Philistine?

-Ever heard of an American Jew? Russian Jew? German Jew? There are even Mexican Jews. The Jews have been hated and heavily afflicted but they have never ceased to exist or lost their identity. God has kept His promise! They had no king, no land and still they existed and thrived.

-Before the Battle of Water Lou, Napoleon was with his generals and asked his chief of staff for one piece of evidence that proved revealed religion was true. One of his officials pointed to a Jewish general.

-The fact that the Jews still exist argues strongly for the validity of the Biblical account.

2.The Bible.
-The Bible is unique, different from all others, no equal or like.
· Written over a period of over 1,500 years.
· Written by more than 40 authors from every walk of life: kings, peasants, poets, doctor, and fishermen, etc.
· Written at different times, some in peace, and some in war.
· Written in different moods, some from the heights of joy, others from the depth of sorrow.
· Written from a variety of geographic locations (3 Continents: Africa, Asia, & Europe).
· Written in 3 languages, most of the O.T in Hebrew, some of the O.T. in Aramaic, and the N.T. in Koine Greek.
· Written on hundreds of controversial topics. Yet, even with all its diversity the Bible contains one unfolding story! From the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, the Bible is the story of God’s redemption of humanity through the coming of the Messiah. Considering all the diversity in which it was written the harmony and continuity it possesses is nothing short of miraculous.

-If you were to assemble 10 of histories greatest authors, not 40 just 10, all from one walk of life, one continent, writing in one place at one time, in one mood, in one language, on just one controversial subject you would not have a unified book, but rather a conglomeration. The product would certainly not contain a unified message; it would prove to be quite conflicting.

-The Bible was not written with the purpose of answering historical or scientific questions; however, this does not mean that nothing of historic or scientific value can be learned from it.

-The Hittite nation provides one of many examples where the Bible has been proven historically accurate. For years people harshly criticized the Bible because it mentioned a race of people called the Hittites, which Scholars believed never existed. However, archeologist later uncovered an entire Hittite civilization. Today, you can go to Harvard and study the Hittite language. They made a Hittite dictionary.

-The Bible is unique. The Bible is true.

3.Historic Prophecy.
-When the Bible was written 25% of it was prophetic.

-Tyre was a powerful seaport in 600 B.C. It was located along the Mediterranean coast. The people where called Phoenicians, not Tyrants.

-The Bible (Ezekiel 26) made predictions about Tyre:
· Nebuchadnezzar would destroy it.
· Many nations would participate in its ultimate destruction.
· It would be laid waist like a bare rock. And all the city’s debris would be scraped into the Mediterranean Sea. It would be a place for fishermen to spread their nets and it would never be rebuilt again.

-In 586 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre for 13 years. Finally he broke through a section of the wall only to find no one was there. The Phoenicians had traveled with all their wealth to a little village called Insular, which was on a small Island exactly a half-mile off the coast. They had already begun to rebuild their fortification. Nebuchadnezzar was extremely angered by this because he had no ships. Also, his troop’s salary was supposed to be the wealth of Tyre, and now He would have to pay them himself. So he totally leveled the city and for over 200 years it was leveled. But the prophecy said other nations would participate, the cities debris would be scraped into the Mediterranean Sea, it would be like a bare rock and never rebuilt again.

-In 332 B.C. Alexander the Great conquered and combined the nation states around him and attacked Tyre “the island”, but his ships sank. The Phoenicians had placed huge tree trunks with pointed ends just under the water. So he had his army and the other nations rake the debris left by Nebuchadnezzar into the sea; it formed a roadway a half-mile long and 200 feet wide. His armies walked out and destroyed Tyre. In an article by National Geographic they had a picture of the roadway with fishing nets spread over it. The prophecy was fulfilled down to the smallest detail.

-There is a Tyre today, but it’s 40 miles north. It’s not the original site or city.

4.Saul of Tarsus.
-He was a great Jewish leader. He studied under Gamaliel, the grandson of the greatest of all Jewish scholars, Hillel.

-Saul was referred to as a Pharisee’s Pharisee, which was the highest order you could be given. He was brilliant in His language. He studied in Tarsus, which is like Harvard cubed.

-Saul hated Jesus and Christians. He thought Jesus was an anti-Christ. He persecuted Christians, and they feared him.

-He was converted (Acts 9:3-6). The greatest hater became the greatest lover, and the greatest murderer became the greatest missionary.

-What happened? History confirms that something happened to cause Saul of Tarsus to become Paul the missionary. One scholar said that he had an epileptic fit; another said he was struck by lightening. Secular historians can’t explain what happened to cause Saul of Tarsus to become Paul the missionary. But I can; He met Jesus!

-You’ve got to explain away the conversion of Saul of tarsus. During a debate, an atheist explained it by saying that psychology has proven that you can be so against something that you eventually become an adherent. The Christian with whom he was debating spoke up immediately and said, “Sir, you better be careful or you will become a Christian.”

-Oxford professors, Dr. Benjamin Gilbert West and Dr, Sir George Littleton wanted to destroy the Christian faith. They knew that they had to prove two things to be false: (1) the resurrection of Christ, and (2) the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. So they took a year to do individual research and then came back together to review their findings for the purpose of writing a book to refute Christianity. When the two returned each had found that they were wrong. Dr. Benjamin Gilbert West wrote a book on the resurrection and said it’s one of the most established events in history. Dr. Sir George Littleton said that the conversion of Saul of Tarsus is reality. And they both became Christians.

5.Jesus is unique.
-He forces you to decide; you cannot remain neutral. You can study the life of George Washington and remain neutral. You can study the life of Mohammed and remain neutral. You don’t have to make a choice. However, Jesus forces you to decide

-He claimed to be God (John 10:30). Jehovah’s Witness’ say, “I am one with the father in spirit, meaning, and purpose.” But Jesus used a construction in the Greek that means one in essence and nature. And that’s how His audience understood Him, and that’s why they picked up rocks to stone Him (John 10:33). Jesus claimed to be God and this presents two alternatives: (1) His claims are false, or (2) His claims are true.

-If false He knew He was a liar and died for a lie. Or He did not know His claims were false, and He was a lunatic.

-If His claims are true, He is Lord. If He is Lord there are two alternatives: (1) accept it or (2) reject it.

-He did not afford the opportunity to say, “He was a good teacher.”

-He is either: a Liar, Lunatic, or Lord.

-Luke 24:25-27 Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory? “And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

-The great Jewish Scholars agree that there are 333 Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament, which was written over a period of hundreds of years and completed over 500 years before Jesus was born.

-Dr. Peter Stoner wrote a book called Science Speaks. He used the modern science of probability to determine the probability of one person fulfilling just 8 of these prophecies. The American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) examined his findings and they affirmed that his statistics were accurate. He concluded that the probability of one person fulfilling just 8 of these prophecies is 1 in a quadrillion (1 x 1017). That’s 1 in 1000000000000000000. Dr Stoner said it’s equivalent to filling the state of Texas 2 feet deep with silver dollars, marking one silver dollar with a red check, then throwing it in the pile, mixing the pile with bulldozers, blindfolding yourself, walking the state and then picking the silver dollar with the red check from the pile.

-The probability of one person fulfilling just 48 of these 333 prophecies is
1 x 10157.
That’s 1 in 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

-To count the electrons in an inch line of electrons lined up one after another, counting them at a rate of 250 electrons a minute, would only take you 19 million years. Now take a cubic inch of electrons, count them at a rate of 250 electrons a minute, and it will take you a mere 19 million years times 19 million years times 19 million years. Now blind fold your self, distinctively mark an electron throw it in, shake all the electrons up, take a pair of tweezers and pick out the distinctively marked electron. The possibility of this happening is the same probability that someone could fulfill just 48 of the 333 Messianic prophecies.

-But Jesus didn’t fulfill 8 or 48 of these prophecies; He fulfilled all 333. The facts are in: Jesus is Lord!

God went through all the trouble of fulfilling these various prophecies, and all these things because He is passionate about His relationship with you. (Exodus 34:14) He has confirmed that His Scriptures are true. He has protected them in such away that we can open them and He will speak to us.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Life has value to the induvidual. Regardless of any deity. I dont need a god to be happy and for my life to have meaning to me. Whats the difference between dedicating your life to finding happiness in the hereafter or happiness here on earth. The difference is we know we exist. We know the earth exists. Nobody knows for sure that there is a hereafter. Lots of people think they do but nobody really does.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Sure, life has value to the individual, but it’s an existential illusion according to atheistic logic.

I am simply requesting that people live logically consistent with the conclusions of their world-view.

If life is void of purpose, live that way. However, if you cannot, as no one really can, admit your hypocrisy. Don’t call Christians hypocrites; after all, we are attempting to live logically consistent with the conclusions of our Christian worldview.

Peace.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

this is a great site, lol. i am a follower of YHWH (God, Jesus) and refuse to call myself Christian. Why? (you may ask) Because alot of ‘christians’ are so closed minded and unlearned that they come into a site like this and leave retarted comments such as ‘I wouldn’t want to be you when you stand before God.’ If you don’t read the word of God and if you don’t try to understand it, then keep your comments to yourself. I feel that the study of science and the bible can go hand in hand. try looking at the evolutionary theory and ask yourself, “how awesome would a creator be to place this into action?” I fall into the category of intentional design and not intelligent design. Point one of this is intelligent design in redundant (if someone designs something there is intelligents) and second it was intentional that God set the processes into action. I’m sorry to all of you who do not call yourselves ‘christians’ for all the rediculous comments made by them.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The problem is, most of the christians I know aren’t living consistently with their conclusions. Sunday service pays for all. Carry on again on monday. Also, if life is void of pre-defined purpose, I am free to choose my own.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You said:
“If you are right, and evolution is the only answer, then we will all just be dirt-food when we die. But if you are wrong, and the intelligent design people are right and there is a God, then you’ll be in a tough spot.”

Son, you have just sentenced yourself to eternal hellfire according to your religion. You believe in god because of fear, not faith. Fear created religion in most cultures by requiring weak minded people to have something to believe they were working for, but hypo-chistianity (hypocrisy – Chistianity) requires faith of which you have none. Get your heathen ass to church.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Just because I am an atheist and believe there is no purpose to our lives does not mean I should live like an animal. I believe we have surpassed animals by becoming sentient beings therefore creating a single purpose in our lives, to discover immortality. It may sound a little strange but it’s the only logical conclusion and the closest thing to a purpose, at least in our case. If we could all live forever our lives could have purpose; we would be breaking the animalistic and natural mold of life, thereby bringing ourselves to a new level of life, a level that Christians and the like believe we are already at. Also worth mentioning is that fact that there is such a thing as love just as there is such a thing as friendship. Although it has nothing to do with a spirit or soul our brain can still form relationships. The problem with religion, besides the other obvious reasons, is that is tries to fill in “the gaps” in life. Just because we don’t understand something doesn’t mean it was because of God. What you must try to do is comprehend the Universe, the size and magnitude of it all, because the more you think about it and the more you learn the more you realize just how little you know. Our inability to truly understand the world around us leads us to assume. We assume things about how life and the world work because we want a sense of meaning in our lives. You could call the world, life, unfair but you would be wrong. An opinion is something that you can compare to something else but with life it’s all there is. You must take it for what it is. The reason I refuse to live in ignorance, as blissful as it may be, I want, like all of us do, to have a feeling of meaning in my life. I want to be a logical person and I just cannot do that by being a hypocrite. In response to you, dearest Nic, you are the one being illogical. You look towards the Bible for guidance and yet you fail to observe what it really is, a story. Can I prove that the Bible is false? Certainly not, but being a logical person it is the only thing to assume. I cannot look at the moon and assume it’s made of cheese, just because, despite what I have learned in school. Thinking logically will dissolve every sense of religious thought from you, unless you only believe you are being logical and your ignorance is blinding you from true thought.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You are all wrong. I created everything.
And the Earth is shaped like a burrito.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

My good friend Eric V,

Thanks for the reply. Obviously, I do not really want you to act like an animal. I was being sarcastic. Perhaps the reality of my point will be more apparent if I give you this illustration and ask you these questions: Imagine someone chooses to act like an animal; they come to your home, steal you stuff, rape your wife, kill you kids, and on top of all that leave your home a complete mess; what right do you have to say their actions were wrong? To what standard will you appeal? Every code of law developed by mankind is arbitrary. That is, if the opinion of the majority changes, so will the law. If there is no God there is no absolute moral standard. What is is always right. Who are you and your government to impose your arbitrary standards on anyone? Your atheistic system begins the impersonal. Matter and energy are amoral. They don’t care about you family. However, you do. I do. Everyone should. Why? Your family is intrinsically valuable.

BUT, according to your atheist presuppositions, the only logical conclusion is that our perceiving them as valuable is an illusion.

DENOUNCE IT OR DEAL WITH IT!

As far as my being illogical, if you take the time to read my post to Laurie, you will see five very logical reasons for believing the Bible (The ideas are not original to me; they come from Josh McDowell’s book, Evidence That Demands A Verdict.). The Bible is a book of stories; however, they are unified and historically accurate. The historicity of the Bible is not dubious in the mind of any real scholar.

Coincidently, you said the ” purpose in our lives” is “to discover immortality”. I thought you might be interested to know that Ecclesiastes 3:11 teaches us that God has placed the desire for immortality in your heart so that you will seek Him. Further, it teaches that your quest will reveal how small you really are, or as you put it, “just how little you know”. Looks like your better at proving the Bible than I am.

Thank you for thinking. Too many people just follow the herd, Christians and atheists alike.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear Howthehelldidthatparrotgetinhere,

I agree. It is a problem that we Christians do not live consistently with our world-view. That is why I was careful to say that we are attempting to be consistent. Unfortunately, we often don’t even attempt consistency. Thankfully, a relationship with God is not based on our performance. Lastly, the purpose you choose is only an illusion. In the end, once entropy has increased to its maximum intensity, all will be silent, and you chosen purpose will be forgotten, yet no more meaningless than it was the moment you choose it.

Atheism: DENOUNCE IT OR DEAL WITH IT!

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

For all the atheist out there:

I want it to be quite clear what I am talking about. For some reason people are having a hard time understanding this very simple and FACTUAL concept:

God created world = purpose, meaning, love, aesthetics, etc.

The world happened accidentally = adapt or die

God created world = be nice to people

The world happened accidentally = do what you want just don’t get caught by the theist who think they have a standard by which to judge your behavior or by the hypocrite atheists who want to impose their self-righteous arbitrary standards on you.

Hug Somebody.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You’re all cordially invited to my playhouse for a dirt-food luncheon.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

And here I thought I was going to be WORM food. What, exactly, does dirt eat?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“I wish atheist would stop living in a fantasy world. If there is no God, there is no point…”–can’t agree with you there. I know plenty of people who don’t believe in god. They act as good people because they want to help others to make a difference for the future. If anything, they’re more admirerable, because they don’t think they’ll get a reward out of what they do. And, surprise surprise, they have morals and they love. They just don’t love something they can’t see/hear/accept.
-
I actually find it funny that you mentioned so much about Judaism…..as I happen to be a Jew myself. Just a very weird one.
“-Written over a period of over 1,500 years.
· Written by more than 40 authors from every walk of life: kings, peasants, poets, doctor, and fishermen, etc.
· Written at different times, some in peace, and some in war.
· Written in different moods, some from the heights of joy, others from the depth of sorrow.
· Written from a variety of geographic locations (3 Continents: Africa, Asia, & Europe).
· Written in 3 languages, most of the O.T in Hebrew, some of the O.T. in Aramaic, and the N.T. in Koine Greek.”—which means there are bound to be mistakes made, as humans are inclined to make mistakes. How do you know the bible didn’t start OFF saying ‘homosexuals are fine’ and then just got changed along the way by people who felt otherwise?
-
“The Bible is true.”—I don’t think so. I don’t believe in Christ as the messiah, obviously….plus the bible says it’s fine to own slaves. Is this ‘true’ then? I’m not saying parts of it can’t be true. I’m sure a man named Jesus lived and preached and died thousands of years ago. But as a whole it leaves a lot to be desired.
-
I have issues with Paul as I understand him. Anyone who kills based on religion should not be forgiven, by Christ or anyone else. As for him becoming chrisitain–hell, I don’t know, I wasn’t there. Were you? Maybe he did meet Christ. Either way, I know that I wouldn’t switch religions if I met Jesus, for one. (Paul, in my opinion, was not a true Jew, either, because I don’t believe my god wants his followers to kill people. But I suppose that’s a matter of opinion, eh?)
-
“Jesus claimed to be God and this presents two alternatives: (1) His claims are false, or (2) His claims are true.

-If false He knew He was a liar and died for a lie. Or He did not know His claims were false, and He was a lunatic.”—Maybe he is. No offence, just saying. Do you know for sure? If you have faith in him, great, I’m glad you’ve found something that works for you. But I don’t have that faith, so I–and others like me–can’t trust in Jesus the way you do. As for those prophecies….the bible says Jesus fufilled all of them, yes? Well, I say someone along the way switched things around to make it look better (lied, if you want to put it that way, because let’s face it…us humans have issues with telling things as they are.) Maybe I’m wrong. If you don’t agree with me, fine. But that’s what I say.
-
Once again, you are dead wrong when it comes to aithests. Obviously I can’t speak for all of them, but the ones I know–and the one I was for a while–are not amoral and were not bad people. They simply believe that they want to help others to make the future as best as possible. Does that take faith? Sure. Not all athiests, because they don’t accept god, don’t accept faith in other things. (Also, I believe there’s a chemical reaction type thing in the brain that can account for love, but I’m no scientist so I won’t try to argue that, hahah.)
-
Let me make it clear, just in case you misunderstood–I have no problems with religion. Maybe when I die it’ll be that Wiccans were the ones who got it right, or Hindus, or Jews, or Christians. Whoever. Point is, I (me, myself alone) could not be as good a person if I personally was Hindu/Wiccan/whatever because those paths don’t speak to me. Same probably goes for you with your Chrisitanity. That’s my problem—if it helps you, fine, but don’t assume the rest of us find our answers where you found yours. Let god himself tell me–and not through some book that may or may not be filled with errors–what to follow and how to live. Until then, I’ll go with what feels right for me. (Was this too long an answer?)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Try this, Nic. http://www.godisimaginary.com Tell me what you think. You see, the Bible is quite clever, this is true. Although it is a collection of false stories it is hypocritical and contradicts itself many times all in the name of getting as many people to believe in it as possible and to do this it must appeal to everyone. You can’t give “evidence” from passages in the Bible to prove it or its theories correct. Using your own logic you can easily determine that the Bible is completely absurd and false. God is obviously a creation of people’s fear for death. Religion is a crutch for the weak-minded.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Gill,

No, I like long answers.

Thanks for reading my post. God knows it took patience on your part.

I must be a really bad writer. I have made a very simple point over and over, and people keep misunderstanding me.

I am not saying atheists are bad people. I believe all people are good, yet stained with bad. Faith is what differentiates between Christians and atheists. However, faith is not believing that God exists. Faith is reliance upon Jesus of Nazareth and His work on the cross, as opposed to your own good works for salvation. It’s coming to God empty handed and saying, “I need forgiveness will you give it to me?” and from that point on faith is trying to live in light of the truth.

Here is what I am saying:
Morals cannot be produced by time + chance. If the universe came into being without a personal Creator, as atheists believe, then there can be no such thing as right or wrong.

I am certain that no one can live consistently with the conclusions that an impersonal beginning (Big Bang, etc.) necessitates. At this point, I refer you to the extreme illustration and questions I presented to my good friend Eric V: Imagine someone comes to your home, steals your stuff, rapes your wife, kills you kids, and on top of all that, they leave your home a complete mess; what right do you have to say their actions were wrong? To what standard will you appeal? Every code of law developed by mankind is arbitrary. That is, if the opinion of the majority changes, so will the law. If there is no God there is no absolute moral standard. What is…is always right. Who are you or who is your government to impose arbitrary standards on anyone? Your atheistic system begins with the impersonal. Matter and energy are amoral. They don’t care about your family. However, you do. I do. Everyone should. Why? Your family is intrinsically valuable.

BUT, according to your atheist presuppositions, the only logical conclusion is that our perceiving them as valuable is an illusion.

Atheism: DENOUNCE IT OR DEAL WITH IT!

Now for you questions…
You wrote, “How do you know the bible didn’t start OFF saying ‘homosexuals are fine’ and then just got changed along the way by people who felt otherwise?”

The answer to this question is simple. Have you ever read any of the great works (literature) from antiquity? Do you think they are still in their original state? Aristotle wrote his poetics around 343 B.C., and the earliest copy we have is dated A.D. 1100, nearly a 1,400 year gap, and only five manuscripts are in existence. Caesar composed his history of the Gallic Wars between 58 and 50 B.C., and it’s manuscript authority rests on ten copies dating one thousand years after his death.

When it comes to the manuscript authority of the New Testament, the abundance of material is almost embracing in contrast. Over twenty thousand copies of the New Testament manuscripts are in existence today, the earliest of which is only twenty-five years older than the original. The Iliad has six hundred forty-three manuscripts and is second to the New Testament in manuscript authority. The earliest copy we have today of the Iliad was written about five hundred years after the original. Yet, no one doubts that we have what Homer actually wrote.

Sir Frederic Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian at the British Museum and second to none in authority in issuing statements about manuscripts, concludes: “The interval then between dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.” No one who knows anything about textual criticism and ancient manuscripts will disagree.

You wrote, “The bible says it’s fine to own slaves.”
That’s not true! As a Jew you should know that. YHWH gave the Jews instruction on how to treat the slaves they had, but he never said, “Thou shalt posses slaves.” Further, most slaves sold themselves into that slavery. And lastly, look up “Jubilee”. I think you’ll get a good idea of how God views slavery. For the New Testament position on slavery read Paul’s letter to Philemon.

Concerning Paul, you wrote, “Anyone who kills based on religion should not be forgiven.” – Good thing you’re not God.

You also wrote, “Paul, in my opinion, was not a true Jew….” – Yeah, that’s a new concept for me…and every historian in the world for that matter.

About Jesus being a lunatic or a liar:
Friends, who dies for a lie? Who would endure what he endured for a lie? He had chance to recant, to say that he was just kidding, but he didn’t He gave up His life for His claim. Or maybe He did not know His claims were false, and He was a lunatic. He only thought He was God. This would mean that the greatest contributor to the world as we know it was a crazy man. A crazy man has had a greater affect on the world than all the philosophers, psychologist, and doctors the world has ever known. That’s just not logical, and since everyone on this site to trying prove that his or her position is the most logical I shouldn’t have to answer this one again.

About the Messianic prophecies:
I refer you back the section of this post, which established the authenticity and the integrity of the New Testament manuscripts as we have them today. If that is not sufficient for you check out Evidence That Demands A Verdict, by Josh McDowell (Read the chapter titled: The Reliability of the Bible.).

Lastly, I’m all about letting God speak to you. But don’t be so petty as to ask for a sign, and most importantly sincerely ask Him to speak to you.

You’re awesome.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dammit! I had this whole long thing and it got erased….ergh.
-
You make a good point. Why IS murder wrong if man’s rules ARE all arbitray? And I’ll be honest, I don’t have a direct answer for you. To me, murder is wrong because it’s taking something (a life) that isn’t yours to take. But WHY is this wrong? Some say god, some say it just is. The point is that people who don’t accept god still accept morals because they don’t believe that they came from god. They act the way they act because that’s what feels right to them. (You might want to ask an actual athiest about this, they could describe it better then I can.)
-
The reason no one doubts what Homer wrote is because, simply….Homer didn’t write the bible. He wrote a book which has been translated a thousand times over, no doubt changes were made….but few care too terribly much about that because Homer’s book isn’t telling them how to live. Any book that basically tells people how to act and where their immortal soul is going is gonna be looked at really hard….because why would anyone listen to it if they weren’t sure it was right?
-
As for it being changed, I still say it’s likly that in, over the many years and translations, something somewhere was changed, left out, switched around. Plus, assuming that it WASN’T–assuming it’s the exact same, word for word, as it was to start with, I still have issues with it. It’s a BOOK. It’s frankly, kinda outdated. The views on women and on slaves, for one. While its ideas are good, I really do think it needs to be looked at as a piece of literature, not the end all of rules.
-
“YHWH gave the Jews instruction on how to treat the slaves they had, but he never said, “Thou shalt posses slaves.” Further, most slaves sold themselves into that slavery.”– He might never have said he liked slavery…..but he didn’t say outright DO NOT OWN, which meant….leagally, (or whatever term you wanna use) he was ok with it. It’s the same thing with the American constitution: the framers were extremly careful to add an amendment stating that any power not listed outright could not be stolen by the national goverment. Otherwise, as any lawyer would tell you, there’s a loophole the size of a planet. ‘You didn’t say I couldn’t, so I can!’
-
Yeah, it is a good thing. I’m far too opinionated….not to mention I think giving me the power to send people up or down is just waaay too risky, hahah. But, I stand by what I said–I try not to judge anyone, but–call it human weakness?–I cannot stand the idea of someone who thinks he has the right to hold life in his hands. Which is why I would never accept any god who preached mass murder, even if that’s what god came to me and preached.
-
“Yeah, that’s a new concept for me…and every historian in the world for that matter.”–I’m actually not sure if that’s sarcasm or not, heh. Either way, that’s just how I feel…because to me murder is disgusting. I’m sure many people would disagree with me. (Hell, many orthodox Jews wouldn’t consider me a Jew to begin with.)
-
I’m not saying I actually think Jesus was out-of-his-mind crazy. I’m sure he really did believe what he preached….and that’s not being crazy! Millions of people have died for their religion out of their faith, which is nothing to scorn over. What I’m saying is that while many people believe he was correct, many others don’t…..and there really is no REAL way to prove either side right or wrong. It all boils down to faith…which cannot be forced by someone else telling you they’re right and you’re wrong. (Also, as to ‘who dies for a lie’….many Nazis died happily believing they were saving the world from the ’subhuman races.’)
-
Oh, I’ve found god…my god, anyway. I’m not gonna say my faith never wavered, ’cause it did…but I’m satisfied with my religion and the answers it gives me. But I can see why someone else wouldn’t be, and I can see why someone else would find their faith elsewhere.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m waiting for a response =(

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dearest Eric V,

I saw that site in one of your previous posts and I checked it out earlier. Thanks for pointing it out to me. I’ve only read one article so far, but the logic was bad. I mean really mad. It was the article about Jesus being a hypocritical jerk. For an answer to that article read my post to Laurie about Hell. Here are a few quick quotes from it:

God doesn’t want anyone to perish. People choose to go to hell, because they choose to remain separated from God. The person who experiences hell has rejected God’s way to escape their punishment. Sin is a person going through life saying, “Go away God.” Hell is God finally granting their wish. As C.S. Lewis has put it, “The doors of hell are locked on the inside.”

Jesus does love His enemies. He has done everything He can, without over-riding your free will to keep you from eternal death.

You said, “You can’t give “evidence” from passages in the Bible to prove it or its theories correct.”

I agree. That is called circular reasoning. Here are some logical reasons to accept the Bible’s Testimony:

I want you to give me your mind for a minute; I’m going to get a little philosophical. What if when I look at an object that is the color blue I see what you see when you look at something the color green, and when you look at an object the color green you see what I see when I look at something the color red. Could you ever know which hue a thing actually was? I don’t think so! Because there is no way for you to see with my eyes and brain, thus we could never see it differently than we already do. But, if somehow the thing could speak to us and tell us about its color we could know the hue. However, we would have to hope that the thing actually knew something about itself. It would be wise if we asked a few questions to see if the thing’s description of itself was in harmony with the things we could be sure of about it.
You’re probably wondering where I’m going with this. I’m trying to illustrate what it’s like for us when we try to define God. We can’t do it. We need God to define God. That’s where the Bible comes in. The Bible is God’s revelation of Himself to man. The Bible tells us who God is and how He has redeemed us.
You might be asking how do we know for sure that God knows anything about Himself. We can read the Bible and see if God’s revelation harmonizes with the things of which we can be sure.
Let me give you an illustration (I got this illustration from Francis Schaeffer and conformed it to fit my own life).
When I was growing up my family moved around A LOT. Once I moved from West Memphis to New Market, Alabama. It’s a place in north Alabama and when I moved there as a kid I hated it. In West Memphis I was a stones throw away from downtown Memphis. I rode my skateboard everywhere I went, but now I lived in New Market, Alabama. I couldn’t even ride my skateboard on my street because it wasn’t even paved. I lived between two mountains and they called the valley “Lick-Skillet-Holla.” I hated that place when I first moved there. Something I noticed about New Market was that there were certain families (the Campbells, etc.) who had lived there for generations. Those people knew the mountains like the back of their hands.
Now imagine you’re hiking those mountains in the winter and you decide to climb a rock wall on the mountain and walk out on it for the view. Further suppose that when you get to the top of the wall and begin to walk out on it a dense fog comes about you, and ice begins to form. The fog is so thick that you can’t see where you are, much less any way down. The temperature is so low that you will certainly freeze if you have to stay there all night. Now suppose that you hear a voice call out to you from beyond the fog saying, “Hey, I see you and I can help you.” The voice continues, “Walk five feet straight forward and jump.” Would you do it?
Surely you would ask some questions first. You might ask, “If you can see me; what am I wearing and what am I doing?” Or you might ask, “Who are you?” You should surely ask, “Why should I jump and how do you know I’ll be safe!”
If the man answers incorrectly to those questions you may not want to listen to what he says. However, suppose the man says, “My name is Dewayne Campbell I’ve lived on this mountain all my life. I used to sit for hours right where you’re standing.” He describes what you’re wearing and doing perfectly. He then describes the cliff to you and tells you that there is a ledge five feet below you. He tells you that you’ll be safe if you jump because from the ledge he can get to you and help you down the mountain. You should listen to him and trust him because he obviously knows what he is talking about.
This is like the Bible. The Bible is so accurate when it describes the human condition, history, and the cosmos that we can be sure that God knows what He is talking about.

Here’s another illustration:

Imagine you find half of a book. You read it, but of course you only get half of the story. Suppose you find another half of a book sometime later. You take the two pieces and notice that they fit together perfectly. You now can read the entire story.

That’s like the Bible. As an existential observers you can know certain things about the human condition, history, and the cosmos, but you can’t make enough connections to develop a viable metanarrative, But if you bring the Bible along side your existentially observed data with an open mind, you’ll see that they fit together perfectly. You can know get a pretty good understanding of the story.

There are so many reasons to believe the Bible is accurate. I challenge you to seek out the opinion of qualified archeologists and historians. There are plenty of good books on the market. Here’s a website for those of you who would rather watch a video than read: http://www.leestrobel.com/index.html

I gots to go. You guys are great. Thanks for the conversation today.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear Eric and Gill,

I really do have to go for now, but i will reply to your posts sometime this weekend. I hope you come back to read my verbose posts.

I hope you all have a good night. It is truly refreshing to find individuals who will think about the big questions.

Thanks

‘Till next time…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Considering that your insolent god does not appricate hubris, I REALLY don’t want to be you standing before YOUR god. FSM will keep us in Noodly Heaven while you suffer the torments of failing to heed your god.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Heh, I’m not going anywhere…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

To be honest, I am a strong believer in God. However I do not agree with radical followers. As someone rightfully said ,previously on this site, you have to keep faith out of science. Not to say your life but you can’t just rely on the phrase “because he made it so..” When we do we might as well bury science. once more before I close, I am a believer in god and a supporter of this sight because i find they have a valid point. What i’m trying to say is You shouldn’t be sending hate mail like this it holds no value, no arguement, or point. So why fall to name calling and “i’m glad im not you”s. For the site and “believers” of the FSM will not burn in hell. no more or likely they will in end up sitting right next to the big man upstairs.
– The Saul

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I do not need you or anybody else to worry about what may happen to me after my life, because my GOD will certainly good care of it. You may need to worry about your after life if YOUR GOD is a bigot, for sure.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic, you misunderstand atheism completely for somethone that has given such deep though to other things. When we die, that is it. We die. Never to have any sort of consciousness again. So we make the most of what we have here. We love our spouse. We don’t cheat on our spouse. We love our kids. We have fun with our kids. I don’t need any God in order to love my wife or have fun with my kids. I don’t need any God to have morals. I am a good person. I plan on being a good person for the rest of my existence.

please keep your response to 200 words or less (just kidding) :-P

Like or Dislike: 0  0

btw, Nic, read my post on Sep 21st at 10:18 and tell me what you think. I’m interested to know.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like mother dear departed grandmother used to say…

There are only two things to worry about. Either you are well or you are sick. If you are well, then there is nothing to worry about. But if you are sick, there are two things to worry about. Either you get well or you will die. If you get well, there is nothing to worry about. If you die, there are only two things to worry about. Either you will go to heaven or hell. If you go to heaven there is nothing to worry about. But if you go to hell, you’ll be so damn busy shaking hands with friends you won’t have time to worry!

pastafari and pass the marinara, ya scurvy dog

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Ok now my children, it’s time to go home and look after this planet I gave you. I must confess it was so long ago I can’t quite remeber myself how I created everything so it doesn’t matter anyway.

Go in peace, be good to yourself…. & each other. xXx

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic,

One little thing bothering me:
“Concerning Paul, you wrote, “Anyone who kills based on religion should not be forgiven.” – Good thing you’re not God.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but to me that says that you’re okay with murder based on religion. Isn’t murder one of those things that’s supposed to be intrinsically wrong?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hi Nic.
Science has been wrong before. As men of science critisize the devout for their inability to adapt, so should they too learn to adapt and realize that everything they believe is based on observation, and observation is fallible. For all we know, the universe may be eternal. A couple of hundred years of observation is not enough to predict a couple of billion. I believe that science will have progressed to the point that human beings trancend our current 3 dimensional existance long before the death of the universe, if such a thing actually occurs. Therefore, man is eternal. My actions today will have an effect for eternity. However diminished over time. Even without considering my direct affect, what about that of my children. A small part if me will live forever.
As for the moral implications of atheism, human judgement is learnt behaviour. We are taught our morals in childhood, as are we taught our god. What would the world be like if we were taught to be good for the sake of others and god was never even mentioned. No more holy war. Still war, no doubt. Just not for the sake of meaningless belief. Equally poinless. Equally brutal. The mind is different but the actions are the same. People generally stay with the religeon they were taught from birth. Why. Because it agrees with their moral standard, taught to them by the same people. In short. Morals dont come from god. They come from our parents.
As far as the athiest world view goes, it is fluid. Constantly being changed and updated. Whenever he acts it is according to his world view at that moment. According to the bible, only jesus was sin free. Since sin can be described as a deviation between what we do and what we believe, athiests are perfect and the devout are blemished. As far as athiests in general go, you cant pigeon hole them. Athiesm does not define what you are, it defines what you are not. The only real difference between the two sides is the idea of intelligence. Hence the id theory. I say natural, you say divine. I say science, you say god.
One other small observation about the infinite. Dont you think that something has to end for it to have ever existed. I something is forever, it has no value at any one moment. Real value is a measure of rarity.
ps: Please excuse my spelling. My phone does not have predictive text.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mr. Mobzilla,

I’ll try 200 words thing…but I’m not making any promises.

I am certain that you, like most atheists, are a very moral person. Here’s what I have been trying to help people see: If there is no God there is no reason to be moral. You can if you want to, but no one has the right to tell you that you must. What I want atheists to admit is that they have no right to impose arbitrary standards on others. Imagine someone kills one of your family members. You do not have any absolute standard by which to measure the killer’s behavior (matter and energy are amoral), and thus you have no right to condemn the killer’s behavior. Can an antelope condemn a lion for eating its cousin?

I am certain that no one can live in a manner that is logically consistent with the presuppositions of an atheistic world-view.

The atheist actually is the ultimate existentialist. They leap! They take a leap of faith everyday. Atheist act as if life has value; however, they have no logical reason to believe that that value actually exists. My very good friend Gill wrote, “They (atheists) act the way they act because that’s what feels right to them.” (Sep 27th, 2006 at 6:16 pm) Here is an interesting thought atheist action on pure emotion and not sound reason. That sounds like what Christians are often accused of doing. Certainly many Christians have a blind faith, but I do not. I cannot see everything, and I do not claim to know it all. However, my conclusions are logically consistent with my presuppositions.

I am going to post a definition of faith. It is probably going to be a bit long (imagine that. However, it should be profitable for any one who is interested in an intellectual definition of faith.

Now about you post on Sep 21st at 10:18: I believe that natural selection is the means by which God has providentially equipped His original creations or “kinds” to survive and adapt in a fallen world – a world, which is now separated from God because of the original sin of mankind. This separation has been observed and is commonly known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The universe is now subject to the uniformity of causes in a closed system. The system is not sealed shut, however. It is open to the hand of God, and thankfully God often reaches into our system. With His perfect will and wisdom, God is providentially guiding our system to His desired end.

Evolution contains certain doctrines I cannot accept. Why? I believe God’s testimony about Himself and His work (See my verbose post to Eric V on Sep 27th, 2006 at 6:24 pm.). That said the problem with the church back in the day was bad theology and hermeneutics. Could my theology and hermeneutics be bad? Sure.

Let me end with this. There is one central message in the Bible. Regardless of what many Intelligent Design pushers will tell you, God is not nearly concerned about your understanding of human origins as He is about your understanding of human destinations. The historicity of the Biblical message is sound. Jesus’ fulfillment of messianic prophecies is amazing and very telling. They prove God is there and He came here to redeem you (See my post to Gill on Sep 27th, 2006 at 8:16 am, particularly the section titled Jesus is unique.).

So much for 200 words…

Thanks for the post. Thanks for thinking.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear Nyx,

Murder is wrong. I do not think we should do it for any reason. The often-misunderstood phrase: “eye for an eye” is not a mandate. It’s actually ensuring that punishment does not exceed the crime, that’s it.

I’m thankful that God forgives murderers. Because I think a killer can sincerely be remorseful. Maybe He should suffer some consequences, but not eternal consequences.

I should probably make sure everyone understands that sin indirectly sends people to hell (For an accurate description of hell see my post to Laurie on Sep 26th, 2006 at 6:06 pm.). Sin separates us from a holy God. The Bible tells us that God doesn’t like to or want to punish anyone, but he has to. His perfect justice and Holiness prevent Him from just overlooking our sin. However, He punished sin when Jesus of Nazareth died on the Cross. If you will allow Jesus to take your punishment, which will satisfy God’s perfect justice and enable you to encounter His holy presence, you can have a relationship with God. In this way sin only indirectly sends people to hell, because it’s actually there refusal of God’s offer to pardon them that sends them to hell.

Good question.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear Howthehelldidthatparrotgetinhere,

You wrote, “For all we know, the universe may be eternal.” Actually, Edwin Hubble proved that the universe is expanding in the late 1920’s, and since that time virtually all scientist understand that the Universe had a beginning.” However, I guess you did say, “Science has been wrong before.” I agree.

You wrote, “Human judgment is learnt behavior… Morals don’t come from god. They come from our parents.” So is it wrong for someone to murder your family? According to your logic, you have learned that it is, but your learned perspective is merely an illusion.

You wrote, “Sin can be described as a deviation between what we do and what we believe.” I don’t think sin can be defined that way. The Christian definition of sin is: That which is contrary to the Person, Character, and Nature of God. You see God is the standard. He is the great I AM. If holiness was not part of His nature (holiness in this since is an sin-allergy) sin would not exist. God’s standards are not arbitrary. They are rooted in His Character, and it is intrinsically impossible for Him to be anything other than Himself.

Lastly, you wrote, “If something is forever, it has no value at any one moment. Real value is a measure of rarity.” I do not follow your logic, but suffice it to say that the infinite is inqualifiable. That’s why God simply calls Himself “I AM”.

You’re a deep thinker. Thanks for the post.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

A Biblical definition of faith: Faith is not Blind!

WARNING!!! This is long and “preachy”. However, it’s a worthwhile read for any one who who would like to know why i think faith is logical. If you don’t care what I think, cool.

A Look Into Abraham’s Faith
Nicholas E. Craig

I want to look at a very familiar story in the Bible. But it’s not just a story. It really happened a little over 4,000 years ago. In this story God tests Abraham by telling him to sacrifice Isaac, who is Abraham’s only son. As we read the story you’ll notice that it’s filled with things that are extremely similar to the sacrifice of God’s only Son, Jesus. This story is a foreshadowing of Jesus’ death and resurrection. But this story also teaches us about faith and worship.

What is faith? Many people think that faith is blind. They think is faith is closing your eyes, and just believing something for no reason. But that’s not what the Bible teaches about faith. Let’s read a little bit of the story…

Genesis 22:1-4 “Now it came to pass after these things that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” Then He said, “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” So Abraham rose early in the morning and saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son; and he split the wood for the burnt offering, and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. Then on the third day Abraham lifted his eyes and saw the place afar off.” (NKJV)

Does that seem weird to anybody? It does to me. God says, “Sacrifice your son.” And Abraham just gets up the next morning packs his human sacrifice kit and sets out to kill his son.

Where does obedience like that come from? Do you think Abraham got any sleep that night? Think about this three-day journey. What do you think was going on in Abraham’s head?

The Holy Spirit tells us in Hebrews 11:19 that Abraham concluded “that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead….” How did Abraham develop that much faith in God?

To answer that Question we need to look at Abraham’s past experience with God:
(1)God had identified Himself to Abraham. God had spoken to Abraham at least five times
(2)God had proven Himself trustworthy. How? Isaac the son that God told Abraham to kill was what you might call a miracle baby. Abraham wanted a son; there’s no doubt he thought about it often. But Abraham’s wife couldn’t have kids, and they were getting old. I mean really old. Abraham had given up hope of having a son, and decided to set up his number one servant to inherit his stuff when he died. But God made a promise to Abraham. Let’s read that promise.

Genesis 15:1, 2 & 4 “…the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision, saying, “Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your exceedingly great reward.” But Abram said, “Lord GOD, what will You give me, seeing I go childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” And behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, “This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir.” (NKJV)

God had proven Himself trustworthy. Isaac’s existence was proof.

Illustration: Isaac was a teenager when the story we’re reading took place. There were probably days that Isaac got mad at Abraham and yelled, “I hate you dad!” The he ran to his room and played his harp as loud as he could, just to make Abraham mad. On those days Abraham probably wasn’t thinking, “Boy, God sure is trustworthy. Praise God for Isaac!” But some days He did think that. Maybe on the day Isaac got first place in the Beersheba Donkey Derby. He looked over at Isaac and thought, “Praise God!”

(1)God revealed Himself to Abraham.
(2)God proved Himself trustworthy.

Maybe you’re thinking, “What’s all this got to do with me?” Well, I tell you these things because God is calling you to trust Him like Abraham did. God is calling you to put your faith in Him. I know what you might be thinking; “God never revealed or proved Himself to me.”

But He has! That’s what the Bible is. In the Old Testament He was setting it all up. He was saying here’s what I’m going to look like and here’s what I’m going to do. Then He came in the Person of Jesus, and revealed Himself and did what He came to do. Then He put the final touches on proving Himself when He rose from the dead. God has revealed and proven Himself to you and to the world. (See my post to Gill on Sep 27th, 2006 at 8:16 am, particularly the section titled Jesus is unique. This section will detail Jesus’ sciectifically amazing fulfillment of 333 ancient Messianic prophecies).

The Bible doesn’t ask you to believe with your eyes closed. The Bible tells you to check it out. John wrote a Gospel. And in it he wrote about seven miracles that Jesus performed, and then he said this:

John 20:30-31, “… Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (NKJV)

The book of Luke might be the best example. Luke was a doctor who wrote a Gospel to Theophilus. We don’t know who Theoplhilus is but here’s what we do know: Luke interviewed eyewitnesses to the things he wrote about, and Luke gave specific details like names, places, and dates. Why did Luke do that? Luke said he did it so “that you may know the certainty of those things (Luke 1:4).”

Basically Luke is saying, “Theo, my man, look I know you’ve been hearing that Jesus is God and that he died for your sins and then rose from the dead. Man, listen I’ve checked it out and it’s true. I’ve included all the details the names, places, dates, and all that stuff. Go check it out for yourself if you want.” So when Theophilus got the letter he could have taken it to the places Luke talked about and found the people Luke mentioned and said, “On such and such date did so and so happen?” The people would have been like, “Yea man, you should’ve been here. It was crazy man. Jesus was all healing people and stuff.”

God has revealed and proven Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ. And God wants you to have faith like Abraham.

I welcome all replies, even the ones that call me names.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“atheist action on pure emotion and not sound reason. That sounds like what Christians are often accused of doing. “–here’s the deal. Atheists believe that it makes more sence for there not to be a god. I believe that it makes more sence for there to be a god. Chrisitans such as yourself believe it makes more sence for Jesus to be the son of god. There is nadda wrong with trusting in something you cannot prove if it helps you live a better life. What IS wrong is telling someone else they’re wrong for believing/not believing in something they cannot prove, and Christianity does have that steryotype. On some leval, it takes faith to do ANYTHING–including waking up in the morning….you have faith you will, that you won’t randomly drop dead, right? Athiests don’t not have faith in ANYTHING….they just don’t have faith in god.
-
“Could my theology and hermeneutics be bad? Sure.”–wow, my respect for you just like….tripled. Heh, no joke, very rarely will anyone even admit that they MIGHT be wrong.
-
“He punished sin when Jesus of Nazareth died on the Cross. If you will allow Jesus to take your punishment, which will satisfy God’s perfect justice and enable you to encounter His holy presence, you can have a relationship with God.”—aaah, you make it sound so easy….let me put it this way. A muslim follower comes up to you and INSISTS that the only way towards heaven is by accepting Islam and Allah. They use the Koran as proof that they are right, quoting passage after passage that says only muslims will make it to heaven. Your responce? Somehow I doubt you’re gonna convert. You’d use logic from your bible to show how YOUR way is the right way, but of course the muslim has his Koran which says otherwise, and around you’ll go until one of you gives up and walks away. My point is that different people accept different things, and mearly saying that ‘bible pasage so and so’ says ’so and so is the right way because so and so said so’ won’t convince ANYONE who doesn’t already accept the bible. Also, not to offend, of course, but….I don’t think I’d like being Christian. It tends to come across so nice and simple…’accept Jesus, he loves you so all you have to do is accept him!’ …..but I CAN’T accept him. It’d be going against everything that makes my life meaningful.
(and yes, non-christians can have meaningful lives, hehe….we may be lost, but we’re having a good time being lost.)
-
“According to your logic, you have learned that it is, but your learned perspective is merely an illusion.”—that’s actually a question that philosophers have been asking since the dawn of time. What is real? What is the right way to act? For some, mearly saying ‘because god says so’ doesn’t cut it. Also…I agree with the idea that morals are taught by parents. That’s how, to my mind, Hitler could exist. Obviously his morals were a tad different then ours. (And, who knows, maybe god loves people like him and hates people like you and me. There’s always a chance, though HOPEFULLY it’s a small one.)
-
On Abraham– this is what I would have said a year or two ago when I didn’t really believe in anything whatsoever (typical teenaged rebellion, lol): wonderful for him, but prove to me Abraham existed (actually, HAVE they proven his existance? I may be behind the times on that one…), and prove to me he did exactly what the bible says he did, and prove to me why ANYONE would accept the ideas of human sacrafice as not blind faith. Abraham didn’t KNOW god was only testing him, so to have the faith in god that’s required to be willing to kill his son……some see that as inspiring. Others just see it as disgusting and foolish. Last but not least, if he saw something that cemented his proof, super. But some people haven’t and taking what someone ELSE says they saw as your proof for whatever is kinda risky, if you think about it.
-
“That’s what the Bible is.”–once again, that only works for those who accept the bible. I’m sure it makes perfect sence for you, but you’re not gonna win anyone over by saying ‘the bible tells me so.’
-
……from now on, I’ll always picture biblical people as talking like stoners currently on a rather large high. XD ~your very good friend gill

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Most excellent Gill,

You wrote, “There is nadda wrong with trusting in something you cannot prove if it helps you live a better life.” Well, I think is something wrong with believing without good reason. To me faith = I know this will work, not I hope it works.

You wrote, “A Muslim follower comes up to you and INSISTS that the only way towards heaven is by accepting Islam and Allah. They use the Koran as proof that they are right, quoting passage after passage that says only Muslims will make it to heaven. Your response? ” Well, I would say, “Establish your claim historically: multiple attestations, criterion of embarrassment, hard archeological evidence, etc.” I have studied Islam and debated adherents; I’m still a Christian.

You accuse me of using circular reasoning (i.e. The Bible says the Bible is true so it has to be true that the Bible is true, etc.) However, I have not used one Bible verse in any of my verbose posts to prove the authenticity of the Bible. I have used sound reasoning and logic alone. I have used Bible verses to clarify the Biblical position on certain topics.

You wrote, “…Morals are taught by parents.” Okay, but that means that they are only an illusion. That’s a fact. That needn’t be kicked around by the lovers of knowledge (philosophers). Get your mind around this simple concept: Matter & Energy + Time + Chance = There is no such thing as right or wrong.

Imagine someone comes to your home, steals your stuff, rapes your wife, kills you kids, and on top of all that, they leave your home a complete mess; what right do you have to say their actions were wrong? To what standard will you appeal? Every code of law developed by mankind is arbitrary. That is, if the opinion of the majority changes, so will the law. If there is no God there is no absolute moral standard. What is…is always right. Who are you or who is your government to impose arbitrary standards on anyone? Your atheistic system begins with the impersonal. Matter and energy are amoral. They don’t care about your family. However, you do. I do. Everyone should. Why? Your family is intrinsically valuable.

BUT, according to your atheist presuppositions, the only logical conclusion is that our perceiving them as valuable is an illusion.

Atheism: DENOUNCE IT OR DEAL WITH IT!

Anthropological Argument – An absolute moral standard requires God’s existence.

C.S. Lewis wrote, “Human beings, all over the earth, have this curios idea that they ought to behave in a certain way.”

Lewis called this “the Law of Human Nature.” All people inherently believe that some things are absolutely wrong and some things are right. Inside of the human psyche are two buckets. In one bucket we put the things, which we consider good, and the things, which we consider bad we place in the other bucket. The question pertinent here is not what goes into these buckets, but rather, where did these buckets come from?

Some will say that these “buckets” have been learned. They will argue that people learn right and wrong, good and bad from their parents, school, and so forth. This would mean that there is really no such thing as evil; and morals are relative to each situation and person. However, if you ask, “Is murdering innocent people wrong?” will anyone respond, “Depends on the situation.”? This is an extreme example, but it proves that there is an absolute moral standard. And if there is an absolute moral standard, there has to be a God. Why? Matter and energy are silent; matter and energy do not care if someone is murdered.

Maybe you’re thinking, “We as people establish the absolute moral standard. We as highly evolved beings have learned and taught ourselves that we should do what’s best for the masses and the preservation of life. We as morally conscious beings not only are capable of and have established that standard, but by the wisdom of the majority, we will continue to do so.”

Sounds good, but lots of innocent people have been murdered for what was deemed best for the masses. In fact, if there is no God, and we, as people want to do what’s best for the masses and the preservation of life, we should kill innocent people. The guy who came up with the phrase “survival of the fittest” was named Herbert Spencer. He once wrote, “The poverty of the incapable…starvation of the idle and those shoulderings aside of the weak by the strong…are the decrees of a large far seeing benevolence.” His ideas, which have their roots in Darwin’s natural selection, eventually played a huge role in the rise of National Socialism in Nazi Germany. Francis Schaeffer has pointed out that to the Nazis some people “were an unwanted burden on society – parasites who consumed more than they gave.” Considering the rising population and the inevitable depletion of our natural resources, wouldn’t it be best for masses and the preservation of life if we kill the elderly, handicap, mentally ill, and anyone one else who isn’t making a strong contribution to the whole?

Obviously, that type of thinking is purely evil. However, it has been thought. People who considered humanity capable of deciding what’s best for humanity have thought it. My reason for mentioning this type of thinking is to illustrate that just because the majority says a thing is good or bad doesn’t make it so. The majority is incapable of inventing the absolute moral standard because our standard will always be relative and arbitrary; it will be anything but absolute. Some will say that humanity is constantly learning, and making improvements in the area of morals. However, this only serves to further substantiate the point: If we are improving, we are getting closer to perfection. Perfection is the absolute moral standard, which proves God’s existence.

“The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard…you are, in fact, comparing them both with some Real Morality.” – C.S. Lewis

Is murdering innocent people wrong? Yes. How do we know that it’s wrong? How do we know that it’s absolutely wrong? We know because there is an absolute moral standard, and if there is an absolute moral standard, God must exist.

God created the world = purpose, meaning, value, aesthetics, etc.

The world happened accidentally = adapt or die

God created the world = be nice to people

The world happened accidentally = do what you want just don’t get caught by the theist who think they have a standard by which to judge your behavior or by the hypocrite atheists who want to impose their self-righteous arbitrary standards on you.

About Abraham, He certainly is a historic reality. You wrote, “Prove to me why ANYONE would accept the ideas of human sacrifice as not blind faith. Abraham didn’t KNOW god was only testing him, so to have the faith in god that’s required to be willing to kill his son…some see that as inspiring. Others just see it as disgusting and foolish.” Maybe Abraham didn’t know he was being tested, but he did know two things: (1) God promised to give Him lots of descendents THROUGH Isaac. (2) God had fulfilled His previous promises. Thus, He concluded that God would keep His promise to give him lots of descendents THROUGH Isaac, even if He had to raise Isaac from the dead. That’s not blind faith that rational reasoning.

Last but not least, you wrote, “…Taking what someone ELSE says they saw as your proof for whatever is kind of risky.” Not if it is historically proven. Are you going to through all of History’s testimony? Further, God wants to prove Himself to you Gill, but not with a silly sign. I challenge you to ask God to reveal Himself to you, and then honestly investigate the claims of Christianity, especially Jesus’ resurrection. In fact, I council you to investigate all the world’s religions and philosophies, but only after sincerely asking God to reveal the truth to you.

I’m not what you meant by the stoner comment, but fire it up I guess.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If any one wants me to shut up, admit that the logic of the anthropological argument is sound and undenable. I will then shut my big fat mouth, which I sure most of you have been praying will happen…well, maybe wishing would be a better word choice.

I like everybody.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“And here I thought I was going to be WORM food. What, exactly, does dirt eat?”

Heathens!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Regarding morality: Why do we think murder is wrong? I think its entirely possible that we simply evolved to think murder is wrong.

Once social structures emerged murder didn’t get you anywhere. Sure you could kill some guy and take his stuff, but then everyone else gangs up on you and either kills you or casts you out of the tribe/pack/whatever. No more descendents. Whatever genetic cues bent you toward murder become reduced in frequency and within a bit of a consensus on whether or not murder is cool.

Of course, it never completely gets bred out… there are some nutty fitness charts associated with this kind of thing.

But as for how athiests can find meaning in anything: Even we accept that eventually we will not exist, and neither will any of our works, the things around us and our experiences while we do exist are still real. So are the pain and joy, sadness and satisfaction that other people experience.

So you live meaning to capitalize on not only your own feelings, but those of others, while you’ve got the chance. Justice and love here and now are extremely important, because it’s all you’ll ever get.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic…. Long-winded rhetoric does not equal logic. An “absolute moral standard” is exactly what is wrong with religion. Those people obsessed with the morality issue tend to look for the immorality of others, rather than of themselves. A lot of people have been tortured and murdered for the sake of morality, as well. The Crusades? The Spanish Inquisition?…etc. You call this moral behavior based on a belief in God? Your argument just got deflated. “I don’t need faith, I have experience”—Joseph Campbell.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I can’t admit anything you said is sound, Nic, because there are only 24 hours in a day, and no possible way I could read everything you wrote in that amount of time. :) I will say that I appreciate your thoughtful posts. It is a relief from the fire and brimsone ones.
/
In response to what I did read, I will address only one point, as I believe it is the foundation for every point I read. You presuppose that there is a god.
/
You attempted to establish this in your first post, however, there is a basic fallacy in your arguments. Our inability to understand something does not mean that it must be attributed to a divine source. It is supreme arrogance to assume that we have become so advanced that if we do not yet understand a thing, it is beyond understanding.
/
The fact that we cannot imagine a beginning of the universe without something coming before it, does not prove the existence of a creator. The quantum world is filled with examples of things that do not fit with our Newtonian view of the universe. Though we can test and prove the mathematical models that describe the quantum-verse, when we attempt to visualize it, we fail. We are very much like the person that is blind from birth that may be able to give you a definition of the color red, but cannot imagine what it would be to experience the color red.
/
The fact that we cannot explain something, or find it amazingly complex, does not prove the existence of a divine designer. History has taught us that we always have more to learn. Much of what we once believed impossible are simple givens today. No doubt the same will prove true when future generations look back on us and call us primitive.
/
Whether there is or is not a god can be neither proved nor disproved. So, without this foundation to build on, we cannot accept the bible as anything more than an interesting story compiled from the writings of some very human authors. Belief in a creator, which is the foundation of bible, requires a leap of faith… and if we are going to rely on faith, there is not point in considering logic.
/
All of this comes down to a simple choice… faith or logic. When you choose one, it requires rejection of the other. Religion is based on faith. Science is based on testable observation and logic. The two are separate animals despite many attempts to blend them.
/
That brings us back to the purpose of this entire website. Keep religion out of the science classroom and where it belongs, in church. They each have their place and that is where they should remain.
/
RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear The Paul,

So you admit that you can’t condemn anyone for murdering your family, right? You just have to blame it on genetic mutations and deal with it, right?

Mr. Mad John Kidd,

You only inflated my argument to new heights. Are you saying that the crusades were absolutely evil? By what standard are you determining that? Thanks for proving my point.

Further, Mr. Mad John Kidd, you can’t rule out the validity of a thing just because its adherents have been, and maybe still are, idiots. Sadly, there is often a huge difference between the actual Christian message, and observable Christian behavior.

Again, thanks for proving my point about the existence of an absolute moral standard maybe since you speak Atheistanese my good friends in here will be able to understand you.

Dear One Eyed Jack,

Thanks for the post. Here’s my reply:

The Christian definition of Faith (Most Christians may not know that this is the correct definition.) is the antithesis of a blind existential leap. The Bible encourages you to measure its message against what you can observe from history, human nature, and the cosmos. It is designed to be empirically tested. Of course, I don’t mean scientifically tested. Obviously, you can recreate historical events. However, that doesn’t stop the truth from coming out in a courtroom. A jury is not asked to close their eyes and convict a man or set him free based on a blind feeling. Nor are you asked to leap into Jesus’ arms.

You are obviously an intelligent individual; therefore, you must understand that the atheist has to close his eyes and leap in order to believe in moral standards. Every one who has commented to me on this site has said, in similar words, “There is no absolute moral standard.” and then moments later, “The crusades were bad.” or “Humans have evolved an understanding that murder is wrong.” Somehow these individuals fail to see. So I reply, “How do know for sure that the crusades were bad?” or “If morals are something we evolved, we could easily evolve into a higher state in which we were amoral, right? Who knows what the future holds? In fact, if there is no God, and we, as people want to do what’s best for the masses and the preservation of life, we should kill innocent people. The guy who came up with the phrase ’survival of the fittest’ was named Herbert Spencer. He once wrote, ‘The poverty of the incapable…starvation of the idle and those shoulderings aside of the weak by the strong…are the decrees of a large far seeing benevolence.’” Yet, somehow they refuse to see.

Lastly, I’m curious One Eyed Jack, is there any particular interpretation of quantum mechanics to which you subscribe?

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Oops! I meant to say that you cannot recreate historical events in the above post. I guess I should proof read before I submit next time.

Hug somebody.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“How do know for sure that the crusades were bad?” …seriously?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Stow it people
I am the reason for the steeple
and I will you show you what’s up.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Those who live by the sword, die by the sword.

RESPECT

find out what it means to me.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Jesus SON OF GOD
Mighty are his words.
They last forever.
And the congregation shouts Jesus is just all right with me.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

God will have the last say, that is right
and if you do not do what is right
it is obvious
you are headed in the wrong direction.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Dear The Paul,

So you admit that you can’t condemn anyone for murdering your family, right?”
/
Not exactly. I can still condemn them as much as it’s possible for a human being to do so, and if you press me for a natural answer as to why I feel I can do that, my answer is, “Because, in essence, I was programmed to.”

If someone kills my family and I chalk it up to a genetic mutation producing a human monster or a biblical interpretation of the source of human evil, I don’t really see any difference for how I should react. The person is an aberration from the design of a loving and omniscient god or a naturally occuring and unsentient survival program. An aberration either way.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mr. Exterminator,

That’s my point exactly.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dearest The Paul,

So you’ve personified natural selection, and now it cares about your family. Okay.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic,
/
The discussion of an absolute moral standard is as tricky as any religious discussion. For the religious, a moral standard is handed down from a divine authority. Even among the atheist or agnostic, moral standards are genarally derived from societal norms which have been heavily influenced by religious ideology.
/
Consider crimes of vice such as prostitution and illegal drug use (US based for our discussion). These are victimless crimes. Anyone involved in these activities do so by choice. Nobody is harmed by them, unless by personal choice.
/
We legalize alcohol and tobacco, but outlaw marijuana. Numerous studies show that marijuana is much less harmful than alcohol, yet even possessing marijuana is a crime. Why?
/
There are numerous states in the US where certain sexual acts between consenting adults within their own homes are illegal. Why? You can pay actors to perform sexual acts on film and then sell that film, but you cannot pay someone to have sex with you. Why?
/
The answer is that we do not live in a society of absolute morality. The contradictions mentioned above illustrate that our standards of morality are conditional and situational. They also illustrate how heavily our morals are influenced by religious dogma. There is a greater concern for policing your neighbor’s sin than asking the question “what is moral?”
/
I believe we (the entire human race) are morally immature. Our judgements are still based in religous ideology, and history shows that that we humans have a nasty habit of justifying our worst atrocities with religious authority. If we are to grow, we have to consider moral questions outside of the realm of religion and develop a moral standard that is independent of personal ambitions.
/
My definition of what is moral (good or evil if you will) centers on one idea. Evil is when your actions or inactions will harm to another. Good is when your actions or inaction will benefit another. As with any moral standard there are thousands of ‘what-ifs’ to deal with, but it is a base to build on.
/
RAmen and pass the marinara… as the good book says “Bogart not the tasty red sauce, lest ye not be invited back.”… yes that must be in there somewhere.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It isn’t contradictory to say that there is no absolute moral standard and then go on to say that murder is wrong. Murder is wrong by the moral standard that exists right now. In the future that standard may “evolve” into something that we would see as completely amoral. No one can know that, and none of us will ever know that so we just go by the current standard, though it is by no means aboslute.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

My good friend One Eyed Jack,

You wrote, “Evil is when your actions or inactions will harm to another. Good is when your actions or inaction will benefit another.”

Atheists believe that we are merely animals, right? Animals kill other animals everyday in the jungle. Is that immoral?

Mr. nyx,

Bravo! I do believe you’ve almost got it!

Now answer me this: Can you imagine a time when you will ever be able to say, “They killed my perfectly healthy and innocent child, but I’m sure glad they did. I mean, it would have been immoral if they did not!”

I have been using extreme examples to illustrate my point; however, it applies to every area of out life. If there is no God, everything is truly relative. If there is no God, everything is a matter of opinion and must be subjectively interpreted. Take aesthetics; is beauty really in the eye of the beholder? Pictures of actual rape are beautiful to some sick individuals, but wait…we can’t call them sick. After all, everything is relative.

Some of you might think that the theory of relativity supports this way of thinking; however, Einstein never intended for his theory to be applied to social concepts like morality or aesthetics.

Atheism: DENOUNCE IT OR DEAL WITH IT!

My good friend Mr. nyx is telling us he is okay with relative morals, but he really is not. If we could follow him around for one day, we would see him acting like every other human; we would see him if acting as if human life has value. We might even see him cringe when he heard dissonance pretending to be music. He has a right to cringe. He has a right to open his heart wide to everyone around him, and value their individuality. That right comes from God. Matter and energy are silent. They do not care about aesthetics. The do not concern themselves with dissonance. They cannot evolve into MEANINGFUL arrangements on their own.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hello–
” I think is something wrong with believing without good reason.”–oh, I agree. I’m not suggesting you go out and decide to worship worms because worms are cool. I’m just saying that believing in an unprovable concept such as god isn’t a bad thing.
-
I’m sure someone well-versed in Islam–ie, not me–would be able to come up with tons of proof somewhere. Also, in terms of circular logic, when you were arguing about faith coming from god you used Abraham and plenty of quotes. (unless I missed something along the way)
-
“Matter & Energy + Time + Chance = There is no such thing as right or wrong.”—-fine. I agree with you on that. Ok? There IS no such thing as right and wrong that is not arbitrary. There is only what WE think is right and wrong, but we cannot know if we are right until the day we die and find out. We can have FAITH that we are right, but can we know for sure? No. All morals are arbitrary….most Americans find it disqusting to have more then one wife, some tribes out there find it a-ok.
-
“according to your atheist presuppositions, the only logical conclusion is that our perceiving them as valuable is an illusion. “–first of all, they’re not MY standerds….also, I’m sure some would agree with that. However, that is taking it to the utmost extreme. God is not the only thing to=morals. People can develop morals based on other things. Who are we to impose such arbirtrary standers? Ask the lawmakers who pass laws they feel are best for their people…..ideally, anyway. Who are we to impose….but, hell, who is GOD to impose? Who is ANYONE to impose ANYTHING if you take it that far? Yes, god is good and god is great, but is that enough? Philolosophically speaking, who has the right to decide these things? Do we have the right if there is no god? I can’t answer that, I’m not a deep enough thinker. Something my teacher told me just today……there are no absolutes. Truth and lies do not = right and wrong.
-
You’re right. To have an absolute moral standerd that IS UNDOUBTABLY RIGHT, you have to have god. Which is why I’ll be the first to say that my morals may be wrong. I don’t deal in absolutes so much, I deal in the shades of grey. Murder is wrong=absolute. But what if you kill a murderer….say, a serial killer who goes around tourturing people for fun? What if you were married to one of his victims and you kill him? What if pain and violence is all the serial killer knew, if he never had anyone to tell him, ‘this is not acceptable’? Who is wrong? Both? Niether? I can’t answer that. I have my OPNIONS on the matter, but god may have others. I don’t know.
-
“In fact, if there is no God, and we, as people want to do what’s best for the masses and the preservation of life, we should kill innocent people.”–ah, but it’s not the best for the majority I’m so concerned with…..it’s the best for EVERYONE. What’s best for everyone is staying alive…..so naturally, a murderer doesn’t have my vote because what he’s doing is not best for everyone. (I’m an idealist, can you tell?)
-
“Not if it is historically proven. Are you going to through all of History’s testimony? Further, God wants to prove Himself to you Gill, but not with a silly sign. I challenge you to ask God to reveal Himself to you, and then honestly investigate the claims of Christianity, especially Jesus’ resurrection.”—I have. Trust me. I’ve looked into Chrisitanity, into the idea of having Jesus as the messiah…….and it doesn’t add up. Maybe to you it does. But to me his rebirth hasn’t been proven, and to me the messiah has yet to come. To me, everything that tells you Jesus IS tells me Jesus ISN’T. In my heart I think there is a god, and in my heart I think he’s a just one. I might be wrong, but untill I find out I will just keep living my life as I think I should.
—(I was taught that the messiah would bring peace. I have yet to see peace on earth on anything resembling a large scale. I cannot accept that Jesus is the son of god, so I’ll keep waiting till my messiah shows up. Don’t make the mistake so many Christians make and assume that anyone who doesn’t accept Jesus just doesn’t know enough about him. I’ve done plenty of reaserch, I’ve read the bible–several times, thanks to hebrew school–and I do not and will not accept the notion of god as you have him.)—
–
“You only inflated my argument to new heights. Are you saying that the crusades were absolutely evil? By what standard are you determining that? Thanks for proving my point.”–by the standerd of society, I would pressume, whose standerds may or may not be correct. However, I think the point he was trying to make is that those people believed in god and absolute morals, and did what they did anyway. Obviously they thought god was ok by it. And yet you would disagree. If different people can have different views on god’s moral system, then doesn’t that make it arbitrary depending on what you think god wants?
-
“There is no absolute moral standard.” and then moments later, “The crusades were bad.” or “Humans have evolved an understanding that murder is wrong.”—I won’t say that, for one. I’ll say ‘I THINK murder is bad’ and ‘I THINK the crusades were bad.’ I’m not about to pressume that’s what GOD himself would say. How the heck would I know? I’m just a 17 year old chick with too much time on her hands.
-
Lastly, let me just clarify: MORAL SYSTEMS ARE NEVER ABSOLUTE. I have my personaly feelings on what is right and what is wrong, and–to be honest–laws are passed because everyone wants to live the best life for THEMSELVES. It’s all very self-intrested. Does this make us hypocrites sometimes? Sure. But we’re humans. All I know is that to me, murder is wrong and laws against it are right, so I will support those laws. To me, everyone has the right to be happy as long as they are not imposing upon the happiness of others, as murderers are doing. In order for me to say that, I have to impose upon the happiness of murderers. Is this right? Guess I’ll find out when god tells me.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

By the way—WHY do you keep saying ‘Atheism: DENOUNCE IT OR DEAL WITH IT!’?? We all read it the first three times. (Whee this is fun….here’s hoping Bobby doesn’t mind us spamming the place.)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

youre an idiot apparently, because GOD supposedly FORGIVES.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Most Excellent Gill,

I’m sorry I said that the atheist presuppositions where synonymous with yours. As you may have noticed, I’ve been corresponding with numerous people.

You wrote, “Also, in terms of circular logic, when you were arguing about faith coming from god you used Abraham and plenty of quotes.” – I was simply putting forth the Biblical definition of faith. Basically, I used 234,567,890 words to say, “Here is how the Bible defines faith. Other religions such as Hinduism, Mormonism, Evolution, and they like may ask you to leap, but the Bible says be certain. To the Christian faith is knowing not hoping.”

About imposing moral standards, you wrote, “Who is GOD to impose?” – God does not arbitrarily impose rules on people. Every command, law, or thou shalt not is a direct expression of His character. You should pick up C.S. Lewis’ book Problem of Pain. It will give you a picture of God and reality that you might find rather shocking and impressive. I could post my summary of the book, but only if you’re interested.

“Something my teacher told me just today…there are no absolutes.” – Ask your teacher if he or she is absolutely sure there are no absolutes. To say there are no absolutes is an absolute statement. I think you should change schools.

You wrote, “To me his (Jesus) rebirth hasn’t been proven.” – I am going to post a “Case for the Resurrection”. I hope you’ll read it.

You wrote, “I was taught that the messiah would bring peace.” – He did. Remember reading about Jesus riding a donkey into Jerusalem on what we now call Palm Sunday? Kings rode donkeys into a city in times peace but horses in times of war. Jesus was going into Jerusalem to make peace for the world. He made peace with God a possibility for all mankind by being nailed to a cross.

You wrote, “If different people can have different views on god’s moral system, then doesn’t that make it arbitrary depending on what you think god wants?” – Jacques Derrida, linguist and inventor of the deconstruction approach to literary criticism once said, “We need to interpret interpretations more than to interpret things.” For Derrida and other postmodernist, there is no such thing as objective reality. For these thinkers, all definitions of reality or truth are subjective, simply creations of the mind. Truth is relative, and subject to the nature of the interpreter’s cultural and social experiences. To these thinkers the Bible has infinite truths. However, the absolute truth of the matter is that there was an objective truth and intention behind the writer’s statements and claims. I personally believe that the Spirit, whom inspired the authors, indwells me and illuminates the truth for me. However, I will give you a naturalistic answer: It is always impossible for finite creatures to develop an exhaustive assessment of a text; however, by using the historical, grammatical, literary method of interpretation an individual can get a truthful understanding of the authors original meaning. That’s a fancy way of saying, “Read the Bible just like you would the Newspaper and you should do fine.” BUT you must remember to interpret everything through the appropriate historical context, understanding the writer’s grammatical and literary intentions.

I keep repeating that phrase for shock value. I want people to get passionate. I want people to think.

I am so impressed that you are thinking so deeply at 17 years of age.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Just so no one can say that i haven’t made any posts that are relevant to the original comment, here is a link to a very good article. It talks about why Creationism is just as scientific as the theory of evolution.

http://www.icr.org/article/177/

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic… Your point could fit on the head of a pin. “The less a man has to say the more words he uses in saying it”—Tommy Dewar.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

A Case for the Resurrection
/
1 Corinthians 15:3b-8, “…Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.” (NKJV)
/
1. Jesus died.
The Koran, which was written in the seventh century claims that Jesus didn’t really die on the cross. There have been quite a few short stories and novels that make the same claim. So let’s look at the evidence:
/
First it should be noted that we have lots of early NON-CHRISTIAN sources that tell us Jesus died on the cross (see Evidence That Demands A Verdict, vol.1, p.81-87).
/
Let’s consider the Biblical account:
· Hematidrosis
Luke 22:44, “And being in agony, He prayed more earnestly. Then His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” (NKJV)
/
This is an actual medical condition called hematidrosis. It is rare, but it’s real. Hematidrosis occurs when an individual is under extreme stress. Chemicals get released that break down the capillaries in the sweat glands, and subsequently there is a small amount blood mixed with the individuals sweat. This condition causes your skin to be extremely sensitive, which brings us to the next point…
/
· Flogging
John 19:1. “So then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him.” (NKJV)
/
Roman floggings were horrible. Usually they consisted of 39 blows, but frequently there were more. It depended on the mood of the soldiers. They used a leather whip with metal balls woven into them. The balls tenderized the persons flesh with deep bruises. The whip also had sharp pieces of bone woven into them, which would cut the flesh severely.
/
The persons back would be ripped and the spine would sometimes be exposed. The whippings would land any where from the shoulders, back, buttocks, or the back of the legs. Many people died from this kind of beating.
/
Medical Doctor Alexander Metherell said, “Because of the terrible effect of this beating, there’s no question that Jesus was already in serious to critical condition even before the nails were driven through His hands and feet.”
/
· Crucifixion
Jesus was nailed through His wrists (considered part of the hand in the language of the day) to the wooden beam. The nails would have crushed His median nerve. To get an idea of how that might have felt think about when you hit your “funny bone”. Now imagine someone taking a pair of pliers and squeezing and crushing that nerve. When the nails went through His feet the pain would have been similar.
/
They had to invent a new word for the type of pain that being crucified caused: “excruciating”, which literally means “out of the cross”.
/
When Jesus was lifted up on the cross it would have stretched His arms about six inches in length and both of His shoulders would have been dislocated. This coincidently fulfilled a prophecy written hundreds of years before Jesus was crucified.
/
Psalms 22:14, “I am poured out like water, And all My bones are out of joint; My heart is like wax; It has melted within Me.” (NKJV)
/
When a person is being crucified their muscles and diaphragm are stretched into the inhaled position. In order to exhale the person has to push up on his feet so that the tension is eased. This would go on until the person was too tired to push himself up. The person then goes into what is called respiratory acidosis, which leads to an irregular heart beat and the eventual death by cardiac arrest.
/
The Bible tells us that the soldiers broke the legs of the other two men being crucified, but not Jesus’.
/
John 19:32-33, “Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs.” (NKJV)
/
If the soldiers wanted to speed up the death process, they would break an individual’s legs so that he couldn’t push up and breathe. They didn’t break Jesus’ legs because they were certain Jesus was already dead. This also fulfilled an ancient prophecy:
/
Psalm 34:20, “He guards all his bones; Not one of them is broken.” (NKJV)
(See also Exodus 12:46)
/
Before Jesus died the enormous amount of blood loss (hypovolemic shock) would have caused a collection of fluid around the heart, called a pericardial effusion. It would also have caused fluid to build up around the lungs, which is called a pleural effusion. That’s why when the Roman soldier pierced Jesus side John saw blood and “water” flow from Christ’s side.
/
John 19:34, “But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.” (NKJV)
/
Jesus was dead before the soldier pierced His side, but even if He were not, the spear ripping into His heart would have killed Him.
/
These soldiers were expert killers, and if a prisoner somehow escaped the soldiers would face the death penalty themselves. Be certain that they didn’t mess up: Jesus died.
/
When asked about Jesus after the spear had pierced Him Dr. Metherell said, “There was absolutely no doubt that Jesus was dead.”
/
2. Three days later His tomb was empty.
There is no doubt that the tomb was empty. Historians don’t doubt that. However, there have been attempts to explain away the resurrection naturalistically. Let’s look at those explanations:
· The Swoon Theory
This theory says that Jesus didn’t really die on the cross. He only looked dead. He was taken down off the cross and laid in the tomb, where He revived. He rolled away the big stone that usually takes a few guys to move. Then He snuck past the guards, and went to find His disciples. They mistakenly thought He had risen from the dead.
/
This theory is ridiculous. We’ve already determined that Jesus was dead, but let’s imagine for a moment that this theory is true. In the condition Jesus was in: Do you think Jesus (naturalistic Jesus) could have moved the stone? Could He have snuck past the guards, or even have fought them off? Could He have walked on those ripped up feet? Could He have fooled the disciples into thinking He was resurrected? Do you think the disciples looked at Jesus in that pitiful state and thought, “Wow Jesus rose again. If we follow Him we can have a glorified resurrected body like Hid?” No!
/
· The Thief Theory
This theory says that the disciples, the guards, or the Jewish religious leaders stole Jesus’ body.
/
Okay, let’s start with the soldiers. Why would they steal the body? So they could get killed for messing up their jobs? I don’t think so.
/
What about the religious leaders? They had Jesus killed to stop His movement. Would they steal His body so that His disciples would think He rose from the dead? No that would cause the movement to grow again. If they did steal the body when the disciples started telling everybody that Jesus had risen they would have brought His body out and showed every one that He was dead.
/
Did the disciples steal His body? I don’t think so. Here are a few reasons:
1. The disciples didn’t expect Jesus to rise from the dead.
John 20:9, “For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that He must rise again from the dead.” (NKJV)
/
2. The disciples were hiding.
John 20:19, “the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews….” (NKJV)
/
3. Why would the disciples go to jail, get beaten, and even killed for something they knew was a lie?
/
· The Wrong Tomb Theory
This theory says everybody just forgot which they put Jesus in.
/
1. Ladies first… The women knew which tomb it was.
Luke 23:55, “And the women who had come with Him from Galilee followed after, and they observed the tomb and how His body was laid.” (NKJV)
/
2. The religious leaders had guards placed at the tomb. When the disciples started saying Jesus had risen they certainly would’ve went to the right tomb and silenced the disciples.
Matthew 27:64-66, “Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead.’ So the last deception will be worse than the first.” Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go your way, make it as secure as you know how.” So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard. (NKJV)
/
3. Joseph of Arimathea certainly would have known where his own tomb was.
Matthew 27:59, “When Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his new tomb which he had hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a large stone against the door of the tomb, and departed.” (NKJV)
/
· Alien Recovery Theory
This theory says Jesus came to earth from a superior planet and when He died aliens came, restored Him to life, and then took Him home.
/
I’m not even going to answer this one!
/
3. Jesus was seen.
1 Corinthians 15:5-8, “…He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.” (NKJV)
/
Paul is basically saying, “Look we saw Him. Five hundred people saw Him one time, and most of them are still alive. Go ask them they’ll tell you it’s true!
/
Some have proposed that all these people hallucinated. However, five hundred people do not all hallucinate the same thing, not even at a Grateful Dead concert.
/

4. The disciples were changed.
Before the disciples saw the resurrected Lord they were cowards, but after they saw Jesus they were changed men. Consider these three guys:
· Peter
Peter was all ready to fight with Jesus until he saw Jesus get arrested. After that he lost his confidence. He denied he even knew Jesus three times because he was scared for his life.
/
However, after he saw Jesus he was a new man. He goes out in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost and preaches that Jesus is the Messiah and that He rose from the dead. Peter is in the same city where Jesus just got beat and killed. Not only was this dangerous, but Peter was in the city where people could check out what he was saying. People could ask those five hundred people, and they could ask about the empty tomb.
/
Peter was so sure that Jesus had risen from the dead that he gave his life for that truth. Peter was never the same after Jesus rose from the dead!
/
· James (Jesus’ brother)
James was embarrassed of Jesus while He was alive (John 7:5). But something changed James’ mind about Jesus. It was the resurrection. James was stoned for claiming Jesus rose from the dead.
/
· Paul
Paul hated Christians. Yet when he saw the resurrected Lord all that changed. Paul gave up a life of wealth, honor, and power to be a tent making missionary. Why? Because he knew that Jesus had risen from the dead.
/
The only explanation for the way these guys turned their lives around is that Jesus really appeared to the. Nobody dies for a lie.
/
Maybe you’re thinking, “Well, Muslims give there lives for their god all the time.”
/
True, but they have to believe their religion by faith. The apostle’s didn’t. They knew for sure whether or not they had seen Jesus after His resurrection. They didn’t have to rely on a preacher or a book. They had either seen Him, and touched Him or they hadn’t. And they all gave their lives for the claim that Jesus rose from the dead.
/
Conclusion:
We can be certain that the resurrection was a real space-time occurrence. Jesus really rose from the dead.
/
References:
Case For Christ, Lee Strobel
Case For Easter, Lee Strobel
More Than A Carpenter, Josh McDowell
Evidence That Demands A Verdict, vol.1, Josh McDowell
RE 321 Class Notes, Dr. Cecil Taylor
Journal of Evangelism and Missions, Spring 2004, Vol.3: p.23
Accounting For The Empty Tomb, Lesson One, Don Myers

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic… The inherent problem with living in the dark ages is that you tend to miss out (or completely ignore) new developments. Apparently, you have failed to recognize the Kitzmiller vs. Dover decision. Intelligent Design is Creationism and Creationism is religion, not science. The rhetoric spewing forth from your keyboard equates to more than simple hot air. It is not only irresponsible, it is, in fact, dishonest as well.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

hello…
“Something my teacher told me just today…there are no absolutes.” – Ask your teacher if he or she is absolutely sure there are no absolutes. To say there are no absolutes is an absolute statement. I think you should change schools.”—Hahah, no way. I worship that guy. Actually, that was just my bad paraphrasing that screwed up the statement. Basically what he said was that you should never asume something is ALWAYS so…always ask questins, because there are always loopholes to be found.
-
“He did.”–for a while. After world war 2 there was also peace. For a while. Then some unhappy humans went back to killing some other unhappy humans, and-wow! War again! When I say peace, I mean EVERLASTING peace, an end to all war. Which hasn’t happened yet, as I see. (How did Jesus bring peace if he ended up being MURDERED, anyway?)
-
“BUT you must remember to interpret everything through the appropriate historical context, understanding the writer’s grammatical and literary intentions.”–Ah, of course. But someone is bound to interpret the rules differently, eh?
-
Why thank you. I try.
-
“we have lots of early NON-CHRISTIAN sources that tell us Jesus died on the cross”–I have no doubt that he did. Many people did back then.
“There was absolutely no doubt that Jesus was dead.”–Again, I agree.
“Alien Recovery Theory
This theory says Jesus came to earth from a superior planet and when He died aliens came, restored Him to life, and then took Him home.”—BEST. THEORY. EVER. Haa, the things people come up with.
My Theory: grave robbers managed to plunder the eygptian pyramids, did they not? So is it not possible that they hit Jesus’s grave for whatever reason? Or perhaps the Roman soldiers didn’t want the body of someone who was obviously influential just lying around. I can’t say for sure as I’m not quite old enough to remeber myself, but there are tons of other choices besides the supernatural/godly.
-
Agian, according to the bible. I can write quite easily that five billion people saw the FSM three thousand years ago. Go ahead, prove me wrong. There’s no evidence that it happened…..but none that it DIDN’T happen either. Also, it is extremly easy to take the number 5…as time goes on a zero gets added to make it look better….and as more time goes on another zero pops up to make it look even better…..or words are mistranslated…
-
“We can be certain that the resurrection was a real space-time occurrence. Jesus really rose from the dead.”—Ah. We can. So all the millions of theological arguments are hereby solved? What if the bible wasn’t around? What if things were mistranslated/invented? And why do I still not think he rose from the dead?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Also, something I must ask……why does it matter whether I think he rose or not? I certainly don’t care if you think he did.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic,

it’s Ms. Nyx, thank you very much.
My actions correspond with what I believe is right and wrong, and my beliefs have been shaped by the society and environment that I grew up in. I wouldn’t say that I’m comfortable with the fact that murder may one day be considered completely moral, but it could happen. There’s nothing I can do about it, so I accept that fact and I try to live based on what I feel is right.
You wrote that my right to appreciate beauty and value individuality comes from God, but I simply cannot reconcile that belief with the way I feel. To me, chance and choas can be beautiful and can therefore create beautiful things. My right to appreciate beauty and value individuality comes from the fact that I am an intelligent being.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Some have proposed that all these people hallucinated. However, five hundred people do not all hallucinate the same thing, not even at a Grateful Dead concert.”

Valid point, but is the Bible the only record of those 500 witnesses?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Some have proposed that all these people hallucinated. However, five hundred people do not all hallucinate the same thing, not even at a Grateful Dead concert.”
And an add on to nyx’s post

And do we have documented evidence supporting that they all saw it? Did they get the people to write down or at least have someone write them down so that we may have evidence that it happened? It is impossible to try and make claims like these because there are way to many flaw’s in the statement itself.

I mean you do understand how hard it is to believe that a man rose from the dead, right? Nothing was ever written down by Jesus, only what people who supposedly knew him wrote down. Let me use this example:

Elvis Presley died on August 16 1977, we have pictures of Elvis dead a door nail on the autopsy table, yet there are people who claim that he did not die; sound familar? There are people who claim that he will return one day out of no where; sound familar? Now there are two different books delving into the Elvis eating habits, both of which contain his famous fried chicken recipe, but wait both recipes are different, glarring differences in fact. Now try to imagine finding out the correct Elvis fried chicken recipe, 1000 years from now.

It is the same thing concerning Jesus’ life, we have nothing that he had written down, only what others believe he said, we have nothing that could possibly describe his life before taking on the roll of “Son of God”, we have nothing of any evidence that he existed, it is a matter of faith and if you choose to believe it, go ahead, I however won’t.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Dearest The Paul,

So you’ve personified natural selection, and now it cares about your family. Okay.

Peace”
/
No, it’s a blind force that cares as much as gravity and entropy do. But in the same sense that gravity “wants” things to fall and entropy “wants” systems to tend toward disorder natural selection “wants” me to defend those who are close to me and “wants” aberrations culled.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Most Excellent Gill,

You wrote, “How did Jesus bring peace if he ended up being MURDERED, anyway?? – He made peace with God for mankind, not peace in human-to-human relations, but in the Divine to human relationship. Please read my post to Laurie on Sep 26th, 2006 at 6:06 pm. It describes this peace in detail. It also details the truth about Hell, and discusses whether or not a loving God could send anyone there.

About Jesus empty tomb, the Roman soldiers had a job to do. They would be killed if it wasn’t done correctly. That’s a historical fact. So no they wouldn’t have let grave robbers come in and steal the Body, nor would they directly disobey there orders. There really is only one logical conclusion, which is that Jesus actually rose from the dead. Sounds crazy, I freely confess. However, scholars have tried to prove other wise for years, and they can’t come up with any viable scenario. People don’t accept the evidence because it’s supernatural; I understand that. The evidence is still what it is.

You wrote, “I can write quite easily that five billion people saw the FSM three thousand years ago.” – I could prove you wrong if you wrote that statement within a generation of the alleged event. I could interview the eyewitnesses. The New Testament documents were all written and in circulation during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses. In fact, here’s what Paul actually wrote: “He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. ” Paul is giving his readers an open invitation to check out what he’s saying. Certainly, many did.

You wrote, “It is extremely easy to take the number 5…as time goes on a zero gets added to make it look better…. and as more time goes on another zero pops up to make it look even better…or words are mistranslated.” – Have you ever read any of the great works (literature) from antiquity? Do you think they are still in their original state? Aristotle wrote his poetics around 343 B.C., and the earliest copy we have is dated A.D. 1100, nearly a 1,400 year gap, and only five manuscripts are in existence. Caesar composed his history of the Gallic Wars between 58 and 50 B.C., and it’s manuscript authority rests on ten copies dating one thousand years after his death.

When it comes to the manuscript authority of the New Testament, the abundance of material is almost embracing in contrast. Over twenty thousand copies of the New Testament manuscripts are in existence today, the earliest of which is only twenty-five years older than the original. The Iliad has six hundred forty-three manuscripts and is second to the New Testament in manuscript authority. The earliest copy we have today of the Iliad was written about five hundred years after the original. Yet, no one doubts that we have what Homer actually wrote.

Sir Frederic Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian at the British Museum and second to none in authority in issuing statements about manuscripts, concludes: “The interval then between dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.” No one who knows anything about textual criticism and ancient manuscripts will disagree.

Lastly, Jesus’ resurrection proves He has power over death. This is the final assurance for Christians that they too will live after dieing.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear Ms. Nyx,

I apologize for the gender mix-up.

You wrote, “I try to live based on what I feel is right.” – The point of the anthropological argument is to help people see two things. Atheist leap. That is, they aren’t quite as rational as they would like Christians to think they are. And most importantly, that atheists cannot live logically consistently with the conclusions of the atheistic worldview.” It’s obviously hard to admit that we’re leapers. That’s what we’re all in hearing trying to disprove. However, you have shown a true understanding of this reality. Thanks for capable enough to recognize reality.

You wrote, “To me, chance and chaos can be beautiful and can therefore create beautiful things.” – I think that from the atheist perspective art and life do have a certain beauty. I actually find it hard to put into words. It probably isn’t apparent to every atheist; certainly the sensitive atheist senses it. It starts with the fact that everything will be eternally lost and never remembered. Her beautiful face and the sensations her whispers create…they’re lost and forgotten. The vivid appearance of that pigment leaping off the canvass…it’s unseen and unappreciated. But the real beauty is in the observation of this reality. I must admit that there is something truly poetic about that moment to me, but it’s sad…really sad.

You wrote, “My right to appreciate beauty and value individuality comes from the fact that I am an intelligent being.” – I’m not arguing your right to appreciate those things. I’m simply saying that according to the logical conclusions of you atheistic world-view you cannot assign any absolute quality to a particular. That is. Green is absolutely beautiful, or Murdering people is absolutely bad.”

You wrote, “Is the Bible the only record of those 500 witnesses?” In this particular case, yes, the Bible is the only source we have for this occurrence.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mr. Allen

You wrote, “We have nothing of any evidence that he existed.” – please do at least a little research before you write something for people to read. There are lots of NON-Christian sources that document the historicity of Jesus.

I am now going to answer you with a very general answer. It’s 3 a.m. at my house and I just don’t feel like getting out a bunch of books right now. However, if you would like me to be more specific, I will…tomorrow.

The major difference between Elvis and Jesus is that people started saying Elvis was alive years after he died, and they were making this claim in trailer parks miles away from Memphis. Jesus’ followers started making their claims three days after Jesus died and they did it in Jerusalem. If someone wanted to prove them wrong they could have pulled Jesus’ bloody body out into the streets and Christianity would have died that instant.

Further, the Biblical claims are supported by lots of different types of evidence, eyewitness testimony, archeology, ect.

You wrote a bunch of stuff about chicken, and well, it just made me hungry. I don’t see any connection to Jesus or the Bible. Further, I think…nah, never mind.

You wrote, “I mean you do understand how hard it is to believe that a man rose from the dead, right?” – I do.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear The Paul,

Please look up the word personification in a reputable dictionary.

Let me explain your theory to you: Mutations happen. The ones that are not useful die off. The useful ones remain.

Natural Selection cannot want anything.

I know I sound like a jerk; please forgive me.

You’re awesome!

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear nic:
You lie. There is no new testament MS only 25 years removed from the original. Read Bart Ehrman’s “lost christianities” to educate yourself based on the latest archaeological findings, instead of simply making stuff up. The Nag Hammadi scrolls prove that there was a large christian gnostic movement in the first and second centuries after jebus which split from the main orthodox movement. Christianity has been schisming into pieces ever since.

Would the one true god let his religion splinter unless it was always just a human contrivance?

I never really hated the one true god but the god of all the people I hated.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

HAVE YOU EVER EVEN READ THE BIBLE, NIC?

When jebus died on the cross, according to Matthew and no other gospel, the “graves of the saints opened and those within came out to speak to the people”. WHERE IS THE NON-BIBLICAL SOURCE FOR THIS MIGHTY MIRACLE? The whole story is a heap of hot steaming feces. Where did these saints go after their useless resurrection? Back to the grave when the time was right? Or did they drop dead in their tracks?

Why do I waste my time…?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

One more note to nic:
You obviously don’t understand the Big Bang. The theory developed because of the observable phenomena of stellar red shift. So, WHY WOULD GOD CREATE AN EXPANDING UNIVERSE, SMART GUY?! The clumping of galaxies happens because of gravity, maybe you’ve read of it.

As Leaky bemoaned years ago, you are engaging in directional mis-education, which is a form of bigotry. You grasp at straws to prove a point which has been consigned to the unscientific realm. Jesus and all the liars after him were the frauds.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Nic writes, “Atheists believe that we are merely animals, right? Animals kill other animals everyday in the jungle. Is that immoral?”
/
Atheists do not believe humans are merely animals. Human are the only species that has the capacity to make moral distinctions. Animal kill each another for a variety of reasons. This is simply the way of nature. There is no moral question involved.
/
I’ll extend this dilema to humans, which is what I believe you are heading towards. Is there ever a time when it is moral to for one person to kill or harm another person? Yes, there is. Self defense is the obvious example.
/
As another example, imagine a mugging. It is not only permissible, but the obligation of others who would call themselves moral to come to the aid of the victim. Remember that I stated, “through action or inaction.” This is an example where taking the role of a pacifist would be an immoral choice.
/
There are times when violence is a moral course of action.
/
RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If we will ever stand in front of god (what you think) noone of us will have a problem with that because we just used our brain which god gave us (what you also think).Not the faith makes you a good human, your actions do.
I don’t care if there’s a god or not.
If it isn’t proved, I don’t think there is a reason to believe in any religion.
Why should I throw my brain away?
(sorry if there are faults in this text; I’m german)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Green can be ugly, and as for murder I refer you to One Eyed Jack’s post.
Yay, I’m not a hypocrite.
/
“Her beautiful face and the sensations her whispers create…they’re lost and forgotten. The vivid appearance of that pigment leaping off the canvass…it’s unseen and unappreciated. But the real beauty is in the observation of this reality. I must admit that there is something truly poetic about that moment to me, but it’s sad…really sad.”–the fact that these moments are fleeting only makes them more beautiful and easier to fully appreciate. It can be sad, but humans would take beautiful moments like that for granted if they weren’t so short-lived. I’d take my fleeting, “meaningless,” beautiful existence over an eternity without pain or chaos or short-lived moments of beauty any day. We only get one life, it just seems a shame to spend it so focused on the “next life.” I’m okay with just having this one. Eternity is one hell of a long time.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Sir Studmuffin,

“There is no new testament MS only 25 years removed from the original.” – John Rayland’s MS (AD 130), located in The John Rylands Library in Manchester, England.

You wrote, “The Nag Hammadi scrolls prove that there was a large Christian Gnostic movement in the first and second centuries after Jesus which split from the main orthodox movement. Christianity has been schisming into pieces ever since. Would the one true god let his religion splinter unless it was always just a human contrivance?” – First, God is a gentleman; he never imposes upon the freewill of men. He let humanity split from a right relationship with Him. So, to answer your question, yes. And about the Nag Hammadi, those writings were written way after Jesus’ ministry so they are not reliable testimony about Jesus. Just any one wanted to go Dan Brown on me. Bart Erham intentionally misleads people to sell books. See this link: http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=4000

“And many bodies of the saints–arose.” Of course it is not known who these were, nor what became of them. It is probable that they were persons who had recently died, and they appear to have been known in Jerusalem. At least, had the ancient saints risen, they would not have been known, and would not so soon have been credited as those who had recently died. What became of them after they had entered into the city–whether they again died, or ascended to heaven–is not revealed, and conjecture is vain.

You wrote, “WHY WOULD GOD CREATE AN EXPANDING UNIVERSE, SMART GUY?!” – Why not?

The clumping of galaxies does not happen because of gravity. The answer the real pseudo-scientists are giving is CDM.

Please do some research before your next post so I don’t have to waste my time. I don’t mean to be rude, but really.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dear One Eyed Jack,

You disappoint me. You wrote, “Human are the only species that has the capacity to make moral distinctions.” What do they measure against? Matter and energy are silent and amoral. Natural selection doesn’t care about anything!!! It is a natural occurrence; please refrain from personifying it in you’re response.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Don’t a lot of these sound like someone who’s going to tell on you to your parents?

“ooh, Bobby, just wait til mom and dad hear about this. You are gonna be in so much trouble. They’re gonna send you to time out.”

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dearest Chat,

You wrote, “Why should I throw my brain away?” – Christianity doesn’t require you to do that. It encourages investigation. The Bible opens up for empirical testing. The book of Luke might be the best example. Luke was a doctor who wrote a Gospel to Theophilus. We don’t know who Theoplhilus is but here’s what we do know: Luke interviewed eyewitnesses to the things he wrote about, and Luke gave specific details like names, places, and dates. Why did Luke do that? Luke said he did it so “that you may know the certainty of those things (Luke 1:4).”

Basically Luke is saying, “Theo, my man, look I know you’ve been hearing that Jesus is God and that he died for your sins and then rose from the dead. Man, listen I’ve checked it out and it’s true. I’ve included all the details the names, places, dates, and all that stuff. Go check it out for yourself if you want.” So when Theophilus got the letter he could have taken it to the places Luke talked about and found the people Luke mentioned and said, “On such and such date did so and so happen?” The people would have been like, “Yea man, you should’ve been here. It was crazy man. Jesus was all healing people and stuff.”

Please read my post to Eric V on Sep 27th, 2006 at 6:24 pm.

Peace

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Dear The Paul,

Please look up the word personification in a reputable dictionary.

Let me explain your theory to you: Mutations happen. The ones that are not useful die off. The useful ones remain.

Natural Selection cannot want anything.

I know I sound like a jerk; please forgive me.

You’re awesome!

Peace”
/
Okay, we’re having some kind of misunderstading here.

Personification is a literary device, and in that sense, I personified natural selection. In that I described the behaviour of a non-living thing in terms of its beliefs and emotions *without actually believing, or intending to show, that it has any thoughts or emotions.*
/
I don’t think that’s quite what you meant when you said I’d personified natural selection, however, as you added that now it loves my family, and left it at that. I picked up an implication there that now natural selection was supposed to be a god I was following, so I could no longer call myself an athiest.
/
Not so. I don’t find any need to follow the dictates of natural selection. It’s a blind force and its interests (if I were to continue to personify it) are not always guaranteed to coincide with mine. However, if I assume myself to be a product of it, then I recognize that it most likely have a hand in any sort of instict or intuitive belief I have.
/
It’s not very hard to see *why* more concerned, more social individuals will have had, in the long run, an advantage over psychopathic murder machines.
/
So insinsting that a moral code couldn’t come from uncaring matter and energy isn’t really right. The vast majority of people will be evolved to develop a moral code. It won’t always be the same one, but given a similar environment there will be enough agreement for a society to form and come up with a set of rules as to what is acceptable and what is not.
/
This is where the idea right and wrong is coming from. It can even seem to have universal hard and unbreakable rules from some angles. We can develop a moral code from this, we just can’t step back and look at it and say, “This is objectively correct.”
/
We don’t need to though, because we’re evolved to think it’s correct, objectively or not.
/
Now this does open up the door to all sorts of uncomfortable questions, but that doesn’t mean it’s not the case.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I know the Chairman of the Kansas State Board of Education and without a doubt, he wants to remove evolution from school and put in creationism. If possible, however he likes to use the phrase’ more local control” as a way to deflect questions about his real agenda. He also believes the government is out to get “Christians” and that the best way to prepare is to live off the land and store up a lot of food and weapons.

He speaks well and reads much, but it is all filtered through his belief system and doesn’t entertain information that he doesn’t have a prejudice for ahead of time, unless he has to.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

COncerning the myth of this “Jesus” or Joshua of Nazereth please feel free to loook at the comparisons of Jesus and the Egyptian God Horas.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The belief in an athiest agenda is pretty scary, huh? All these people get thinking the athiests are going to come get them, and they’re going to need to fight, and so they get ready to fight…
/
Never stopping to think about it. Never saying “wait a sec… if the athiests don’t believe in our god in the first place how can they be planning against him?”
/
No… instead they get to thinking the very purpose the unbelievers live their life is to destroy belief in the Christian God. Why, we even invented evolution for the *express purpose* of muddying the water in regard to how the world was created.
/
Yeah, the athiests are gonna come get ‘em and the only thing to do about it is get ready for a civil war.
/
Bloody scary, that is.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

In other news: EVEonline is a fun game but the Tormentor is *not* a combat-worthy ship and it never will be, no matter how you load it up.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“About Jesus empty tomb, the Roman soldiers had a job to do. They would be killed if it wasn’t done correctly. That’s a historical fact. So no they wouldn’t have let grave robbers come in and steal the Body, nor would they directly disobey there orders”—Yes, they did have a job to do: kill the annoying rabble-rouser cauing trouble for them. I doubt they gave a rat’s ass about what happened to his dead body…..in fact, as Jesus was obviously religious, they might have enjoyed the idea of his grave site being vandlized.
-
“However, scholars have tried to prove other wise for years, and they can’t come up with any viable scenario. People don’t accept the evidence because it’s supernatural; I understand that. The evidence is still what it is.”—doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Humans are stupid sometimes, we rarely come up with all the answers. And supernatural evidence ISN’T really evidence. Can you go to a court room and say, ‘this happened, and i can prove it because there’s no other way for it to have happened so it must be because of god?’ No. Crop circles are often atributed to aliens, but that doesn’t mean they really WERE made by little green men in flying saucers. Just because you don’t know the reason something happened doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Obviously, under this logic you could very well be right. BUT you could also very well be wrong, and it’s that hole that I find disatisfying.
-
“Do you think they are still in their original state?”—No, I don’t. You’ve used that argument before. Difference is, what Plato or anyone else wrote thousands of years ago is most likly VERY different from the orgional…..but then, those books aren’t claiming that believing in them will save your eternal soul, are they? The bible is just like anything Homer wrote….a good story that’s been exaggerated over the years because that’s just what happens. Hell, even if god himself wrote it….that doesn’t mean it still couldn’t be mistranslated over the years! Or is god the one doing the translations, too?
-
“I must admit that there is something truly poetic about that moment to me, but it’s sad…really sad.”–Ah, but without sadness how will you ever apreciate the pure beauty of being happy? (Makes me wonder how heaven can be perfect….perfection would get pretty damn boring after a while.)
-
“the Bible is the only source we have for this occurrence”–and there you have it, why so many people refuse to believe in Jesus’s rebirth. Why ONLY the bible? Surely there were some other folks out there who would have written such a huge event down?
-
“It encourages investigation”–interesting, that’s not the image it gives off to the world…..to many, it sounds like, ‘ask all the questions you want, but if you find the answers elsewhere then OBVIOUSLY you’re wrong and will burn in hell.’ What’s the point of investigation if you’re only allowed to come to the same conclusions as everyone else?
(That’s why my religion always interested me, even when I didn’t agree with it fully…..I’m sure you’ve heard the old joke about how two Jews arguing over relgion will never agree on anything.)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hey y’all,

I like this debate! To be honest, if there’s one thing I believe in before evolution or religion it’s open and uncensored dialogue, so well done chaps! I have a bit of a different perspective that I’d like to ask you about and it’s to do with the massive pre-occupation scientists have with religion and ‘religionists’ about science. Some of you may have read Don De Lilo’s White Noise, a fine novel at the end of which there is a great scene with a nun in a hospital in which she proclaims that she doesn’t actually believe in religious “bullshit” but that the rest of the world needs to believe that someone believes. It’s a bit paradoxical, but interesting. So scientists, is it at all true? Do you like holding the possibility of religion at some deeply subconscious level? And religionists (may religioners is better…) is there an element of excitement or danger in conceiving of the transgressive possibility that you’ve been wrong all along? I’d like to know.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

gill,
i like you. just thought i’d share.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The proverbial shit happens folks and when it rains, it pours kind of thing. You see, what you don’t know is that God knows every hair on our heads and everything there is to know about us. Some of us are seers and visionaries. Some of us have extra ordinary gifts of the spirit to see ahead or to perceive of things. Well, like two kids sitting at a sandbox and life is weird because we are in the end days and not everyone means what they say and the road is paved with good intentions. But the proverbial shit happens. You can quote me scripture all day long but I live this surreal life.
In my life, there is heartache and pain. I don’t know if I can face it again…to live this lonely life. I want to know what love is, I know you can show me. Well, you see this woman sang out loud and her songs were taken from her. It is too easy of a temptation not to steal her songs and how can anyone prove it? Well God can prove it. I ask God for signs and I get them. I know God, I am reincarnated, that’s why.
That does not mean bad things don’t happen to me. I am living here with the rest of you guys, suffering in the end days with the rest of you guys. God is the lamb of Heaven.
He suffered and died for our sins. When I was a little girl of the age of 2, I was knocking on doors and preaching. Yes, I was! My parents did not believe in God and they caused me a lot of grief about it but I kept on asking for signs cause that is my job. Then one day Satanists told me to stop preaching or they would kill me and they proceded to fight me until I moved away. So I blended in with my surroundings and just prayed in secret but these are the end days and Revelations even tells you they shall kill some of you. I was almost killed but let me tell you this, GOD is going to judge those who harmed me and I do not envy you.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

So while the killing four and I have had to be apart all these years, let me tell you right now why he came into my life when he did, maybe just to let me know someone cared if nothing else about what I was going to go through. Maybe even to concur with me on the end days. Our love songs on the radio will be remembered throughout time now. We hope you enjoyed them.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Forgiveness yes, but you see folks, you don’t know all of the story yet either of the confusion that was to take place later on and the pain I went through. You don’t know about the blackouts I had and times where I was so close to death, it was knocking at my door. So you just stop your accusations and stupid remarks. God knows what I have been through. Horrible, truly horrible. Anyhow, it won’t stop me from preaching and trying to reach my goal of letting you know that God is not a fairytale. Where is God? I was praying and my second oldest sister walked in ridiculing me about it. She said I was crazy, there was only her and I in the room. I retorted that God was speaking to me and was still in the room with us and would give us a sign. Right then the ashtray flew off the table onto the floor. Later God would punish my sister, Cindy, for her lies and her trouble making ways. The Bible says he can avenge the enemy and He knows who the enemy of God is. Later, Cindy would attempt suicide feeling her guilt over what she had said and done to me.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Now you’re disappointing me, Nic. I already gave you a basis for moral judgement in my first post and I don’t feel I need to repeat it. We are talking about moral absolutes. It is not measured against another standard. This can be a stumbling block for the religious as they find it hard to separate the idea of morality and divinity.
/
You are correct that “Matter and energy are silent and amoral,” but you are ignoring a basic fact; the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. We are not simply matter and energy. Making such statements is lazy logic and belittles your arguments.
/
/
And the FSM said unto the masses, “Go forth and multiply… but have some dinner first. Never multiply on an empty stomach.”
/
RAmen.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

In reply to Nic

“You wrote, “We have nothing of any evidence that he existed.” – please do at least a little research before you write something for people to read. There are lots of NON-Christian sources that document the historicity of Jesus.”

>>>>> I would go so far as to say that Jesus existed historically speaking, however there is no evidence that he is anything other than a man, and not the son of god. If you can prove to me that he is indeed the son of god I will quit this conversation right now and start going to church.

“I am now going to answer you with a very general answer. It’s 3 a.m. at my house and I just don’t feel like getting out a bunch of books right now. However, if you would like me to be more specific, I will…tomorrow.”

>>>>> Please do.

“The major difference between Elvis and Jesus is that people started saying Elvis was alive years after he died, and they were making this claim in trailer parks miles away from Memphis. Jesus’ followers started making their claims three days after Jesus died and they did it in Jerusalem. If someone wanted to prove them wrong they could have pulled Jesus’ bloody body out into the streets and Christianity would have died that instant.”

>>>>> Here is the problem with that, it’s the same thing, crazy people thought Elvis was still alive, crazy people looking for something to believe in thought Jesus came back. And again there is no evidence that can prove ANYONE saw Jesus come back.

“You wrote a bunch of stuff about chicken, and well, it just made me hungry. I don’t see any connection to Jesus or the Bible. Further, I think…nah, never mind.”

>>>>> It was to prove a point, Jesus never wrote any of his own words down, only what people who supposedly knew him thought he said, the same goes for the Chicken recipe. Let’s think here for a minute, with the two recipes, which one would be the right recipe 1000 years from now? We would have two sides yelling at eachother (in modern standards, Jesus freaks trying to claim one or the other is right) trying to prove which one is right, and without the man who created the recipe, we would never know what was right (in our case Jesus).

>>>>>>>>>>

In any case, whether or not Jesus rose from the dead or not is a matter of faith, a faith which I do not believe in. I do not wish to curb someone elses thoughts about Jesus, in fact I think that what Jesus taught was admirable, I also think the other religious teachers/founders were admirable, I don’t choose favorites or try to undermine other religions.

Pea