M
Medjai
Guest
I am outraged at the growing number of Atheists in society. I can testify to the moral decay here in America.
Can I get an Amen?
Can I get an Amen?
M
major
Guest
I understand what you are saying. I mean all they have to do is look around and they can see that there had to be some creator. Taking some more advanced science classes it is becoming more and more obvious about how everything is put together. But being outraged will do nothing. Atheists want to see you get mad, they want to see you sin and mess up, so we must treat them as friends and not be in a sense, angry with them.
M
mycatz2fat
Guest
Major is right,you can't lose track of your main purpose of being a christian! You have to set an example for those that are lost,not give them more reason not to believe! After all,it was the son of God that spent his whole life on earth with the sinners,not the saints! Like he said "It's the sick that need a doctor,not those that are well". Try harder to be a doctor and not an undertaker Medjai. You'll find out that more of your patients will live!!
mycatz2fat-Sorry,but I don't give out Amens to the fact that there are so many lost souls in the world-
mycatz2fat-Sorry,but I don't give out Amens to the fact that there are so many lost souls in the world-
M
Medjai
Guest
Well I find it hillarious that you took me seriously, I mean how ignorant do you take me to be? I thought 'Evil Atheist Conspiracy' as a title would help you to see that this thread was a satire designed to illustrate the point that Atheists are not evil.
As an Atheist, I think I will bring color to these boards.
By the by, in the more 'advanced' sciences it is becoming more and more acceptable that there is no need for a creator to have been present at all. Perhaps you need to catch up on your studies.
Further, assuming one proves the existence of a creator, explain to me how one could be accepted to accept the God of the Bible as that of which was the supposed causation of all that 'is' in existence today? In fact, one could even go so far as to accepting multiple Gods...
Finally, how is one to rule out the possibility that there was a creator that died or killed itself?
I love how you said that Atheists want to see me get mad. As an Atheist I can testify to the fallactious nature of this statement (hasty generalization; a logical fallacy). We merely assert our view that everything can be explained logically and naturalistically, we have emotions and morals just as do most everyone else. The only difference is you won't catch us killing in the name of Atheism which is quite in contrast to that which has occured in times past. I can of course go into proving this with historical backing if it so pleases you.
Well, sorry for being less blunt, one of your very own told me of this site, he is no longer in your rankings of course.
Make sure to visit this great site, and register to the forums if you enjoy debate and discussion.
As an Atheist, I think I will bring color to these boards.
By the by, in the more 'advanced' sciences it is becoming more and more acceptable that there is no need for a creator to have been present at all. Perhaps you need to catch up on your studies.
Further, assuming one proves the existence of a creator, explain to me how one could be accepted to accept the God of the Bible as that of which was the supposed causation of all that 'is' in existence today? In fact, one could even go so far as to accepting multiple Gods...
Finally, how is one to rule out the possibility that there was a creator that died or killed itself?
I love how you said that Atheists want to see me get mad. As an Atheist I can testify to the fallactious nature of this statement (hasty generalization; a logical fallacy). We merely assert our view that everything can be explained logically and naturalistically, we have emotions and morals just as do most everyone else. The only difference is you won't catch us killing in the name of Atheism which is quite in contrast to that which has occured in times past. I can of course go into proving this with historical backing if it so pleases you.
Well, sorry for being less blunt, one of your very own told me of this site, he is no longer in your rankings of course.
Make sure to visit this great site, and register to the forums if you enjoy debate and discussion.
CCGR
Member
landover baptists is a complete farse and not even funny. you're more than welcome here as long as you're civil. we're not dumbed down watered down Christians who are blindly following what our parents tought us to believe. We weren't born this way and archeology proves our Bible to be more and more true. in fact it has yet to let us down!
the delicate balance our our world and universe which scientists can abrely fathom is proof enough of intelligent design and not Bang! we're all here and not frying because we're too close to the sun or freezeing because we're too far. etc
the delicate balance our our world and universe which scientists can abrely fathom is proof enough of intelligent design and not Bang! we're all here and not frying because we're too close to the sun or freezeing because we're too far. etc
K
Katarn85
Guest
Unfortunately, medjai, you will find that there are a lot of Christians who do post in the manner that you did (even though you intended it for satire), so we have no choice but to take it seriously.
A lot of Christians are very opinionated, but have no clue of how to defend these opinions. They'd get eaten alive in the intellectual world. You should stay, medjai, just to weed out and eliminate any Christian extremist garbage.
Have a nice day.
Lightsaber activated,
Katarn85
A lot of Christians are very opinionated, but have no clue of how to defend these opinions. They'd get eaten alive in the intellectual world. You should stay, medjai, just to weed out and eliminate any Christian extremist garbage.
Have a nice day.
Lightsaber activated,
Katarn85
M
Medjai
Guest
So you are going by the idea that conditions here are convenient?
Fortunately, evolution doesn't claim that that's what happened. It says that what came first was the self-replicating molecule. The chances of something like that happening are also high -- probably on the order of 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 or so, give or take a few zeros.
Of course, there are about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the universe, so the chances of a self-replicating molecule arising by chance starts to look inevitable.
Just in passing, I'd like to mention that your argument about the spontaneous generation (I am assuming you will go into this as we continue) of bacteria is a very, very old one and is regularly debunked in just about every discussion between theists and non-theists. So if you read it in a book, check the copyright date. If it was written after, say, 1990, it means the author is being deliberately dense and probably can't be trusted further than you can comfortably spit a rat.
Finally, I am not here to argue the beginning of the Universe, the fact is that the universe started time and therefore there is no 'before' the universe. This might be a hard concept for you to grasp.
I seriously hope you don't try any silly cosmological arguments as they are all quite base and rather easily refuted through the means of lacking in logic.
You could of course claim that God can perform outside of logic, if you do , we go into an entirely different level of debate. Do you make this claim?
Are any of you evangelicals (fundamentalists)?
Yes, Landover Baptist is a spoof but it is very funny. If you don't see the humor in it you simply have a base sense of it. Or take offense at it in that the interlaced jokes are directed at befuddling baptists...
Fortunately, evolution doesn't claim that that's what happened. It says that what came first was the self-replicating molecule. The chances of something like that happening are also high -- probably on the order of 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 or so, give or take a few zeros.
Of course, there are about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the universe, so the chances of a self-replicating molecule arising by chance starts to look inevitable.
Just in passing, I'd like to mention that your argument about the spontaneous generation (I am assuming you will go into this as we continue) of bacteria is a very, very old one and is regularly debunked in just about every discussion between theists and non-theists. So if you read it in a book, check the copyright date. If it was written after, say, 1990, it means the author is being deliberately dense and probably can't be trusted further than you can comfortably spit a rat.
Finally, I am not here to argue the beginning of the Universe, the fact is that the universe started time and therefore there is no 'before' the universe. This might be a hard concept for you to grasp.
I seriously hope you don't try any silly cosmological arguments as they are all quite base and rather easily refuted through the means of lacking in logic.
You could of course claim that God can perform outside of logic, if you do , we go into an entirely different level of debate. Do you make this claim?
Are any of you evangelicals (fundamentalists)?
Yes, Landover Baptist is a spoof but it is very funny. If you don't see the humor in it you simply have a base sense of it. Or take offense at it in that the interlaced jokes are directed at befuddling baptists...
M
Medjai
Guest
Now, if you acknowledge evolution, disregard my statistical factoid of course. That was for any creationist apologists on the board.
M
Medjai
Guest
Woah, that is unexpected, thank you
LionOfJudah
Member, Dreamcast Fishing Guru
well what started it all, just wondering
M
Medjai
Guest
There was no 'beginning' or 'start'. Think about it...
I am not claiming to have absolute knowledge Lion. I am quite willing to admit I don't 'know it all'.
Just because we 'don't know' does not mean there isn't a logical reason behind something. The God of the gaps is no God at all. I am sure I don't need to go into the historicity of things that we at one time did not know and attributed to God that were later shown to be quite naturalistic?
I am not claiming to have absolute knowledge Lion. I am quite willing to admit I don't 'know it all'.
Just because we 'don't know' does not mean there isn't a logical reason behind something. The God of the gaps is no God at all. I am sure I don't need to go into the historicity of things that we at one time did not know and attributed to God that were later shown to be quite naturalistic?
LionOfJudah
Member, Dreamcast Fishing Guru
well what must be realized is that something had to come first is all i am saying, what is your view on creation, was it by devine intervension or was it just yet again another random chance by science?
M
Medjai
Guest
If everything came from something, the idea of an everlasting God is negated by your own deduction... Think about it.
When you use such a sarcastic tone in saying "yet again" you are commiting the fallacy of syntax, or creating a sarcastic tone towards another view to belittle its perceptive validity. Commonly used to discredit others in the eyes of the layman.
My views on 'creation' are not founded as I don't believe in 'creation' at all.
The universe has always existed, in one form or another. There are several theories of just how things became as they are, yet I see no reason to subscribe exclusively to any single one of them as of yet. Once the gap in that of quantum physics and relativity is mended into one compatible theory I will be far more intrigued by modern discovery. I do not 'know' it all. So don't expect me to answer extremely difficult questions, whereas you can answer 'God did it' I can not and as such you are creating unfair situations for me. I hope you understand what I am saying.
When you use such a sarcastic tone in saying "yet again" you are commiting the fallacy of syntax, or creating a sarcastic tone towards another view to belittle its perceptive validity. Commonly used to discredit others in the eyes of the layman.
My views on 'creation' are not founded as I don't believe in 'creation' at all.
The universe has always existed, in one form or another. There are several theories of just how things became as they are, yet I see no reason to subscribe exclusively to any single one of them as of yet. Once the gap in that of quantum physics and relativity is mended into one compatible theory I will be far more intrigued by modern discovery. I do not 'know' it all. So don't expect me to answer extremely difficult questions, whereas you can answer 'God did it' I can not and as such you are creating unfair situations for me. I hope you understand what I am saying.
Tek7 (Legacy)
CGA & ToJ President
This thread has been moved to the Religious Discussion forum, so it is now in the capable moderating hands of CCGR and NSpire.
I'll be leaving out for Springfield in the morning (we've been a bit delayed by some automotive problems), but even if I was available to moderate the discussion, I'd rather not. I don't care much for online debating myself but I understand that is has value to others. That's why I've appointed people with a greater wealth of patience to moderate such debates.
I always feel a quick twinge of guilt for "passing" these threads on to others but I quickly overcome it when I remember the importance of delegation. Thank you again for all your help, CCGR and NSpire!
Please remember that you are authorized to use whatever means necessary to keep the peace--this includes editing and deleting posts, banning (by IP and/or e-mail address), deleting accounts, and changing account information (password and e-mail address) to prevent the user from logging in again.
I'll be leaving out for Springfield in the morning (we've been a bit delayed by some automotive problems), but even if I was available to moderate the discussion, I'd rather not. I don't care much for online debating myself but I understand that is has value to others. That's why I've appointed people with a greater wealth of patience to moderate such debates.
I always feel a quick twinge of guilt for "passing" these threads on to others but I quickly overcome it when I remember the importance of delegation. Thank you again for all your help, CCGR and NSpire!
Please remember that you are authorized to use whatever means necessary to keep the peace--this includes editing and deleting posts, banning (by IP and/or e-mail address), deleting accounts, and changing account information (password and e-mail address) to prevent the user from logging in again.
mrpopdrinker
New Member
I have thought about that and my answer is that God had no begining whatsoever nor can he be explained in the realm of science and this may interest you medjai.[b said:
[b said:
LionOfJudah
Member, Dreamcast Fishing Guru
well science can never answer the question of what came first, no one can, because eventually it will come down to faith in one idea or another, now then if for SOME STRANGE CHANCE that us Christian are wrong, well we have lived a very quote "good life" and had fullfillment.
Oh yeah i am a heavy science buff took every science class in HS, and in college ( a Christian one) i drive 30 mins to the local state school so that i can take my Chem, Physics, and PERSONALLY the more i learn about these subjects the more i come to realize how stupid random chance is, (first you need a habbital planet) and second it just shows me that it has to be a God thing
think about it if the eart was even .01% out of its axis right now then it would be uninhabital, if it spun 1 mph faster or slower it could be uninhabital.
Oh yeah i am a heavy science buff took every science class in HS, and in college ( a Christian one) i drive 30 mins to the local state school so that i can take my Chem, Physics, and PERSONALLY the more i learn about these subjects the more i come to realize how stupid random chance is, (first you need a habbital planet) and second it just shows me that it has to be a God thing
think about it if the eart was even .01% out of its axis right now then it would be uninhabital, if it spun 1 mph faster or slower it could be uninhabital.
CCGR
Member
Stephen Hawking and the Quantum Gravity Models
One does not have to be versed in quantum physics to appreciate the metaphysical appeal that Hawking pushes. Alexander Vilenkin has called these models exercises in "metaphysical cosmology." (A. Vilenkin, "Birth of Inflationary Universes," Physical Review D 27 (1983): 2854. See J. Hartle and S. Hawking, "Wave Function of the Universe," Physical Review D 28 (1983): 2960-75; A. Vilenkin, "Creation of the Universe from Nothing," Physical Letters 117B (1982): 25-28)
In the Hartle-Hawking model, space-time is "rounded off" prior to Planck Time. (10 -43 seconds) As noted this model has a great metaphysical appeal and Hawking states: "Only if we could picture the universe in terms of imaginary time would there be no singularities . . . When one goes back to the real time in which we live, however, there will still appear to be singularities." (Hawking, A Brief History of Time, p. 138-139) Hawking further states that the universe "would quite literally be created out of nothing: not just out of the vacuum, but out of absolutely nothing at all, because there is nothing outside the universe." (Hartle and Hawking, "Wave Function of the Universe," p. 2961; Hawking and Penrose, Nature of Space and Time, p. 85)
The very notion of "imaginary time" smacks of metaphysics. If Hawking drops his argument for "imaginary time" then the singularity just simply reappears. Only by cunning mental gymnastics can he avoid the singularity and an absolute beginning of the universe. Hawking further damages his position by saying, "I'm a positivist . . . I don't demand that a theory correspond to reality because I don't know what it is… I take the positivist viewpoint that a physical theory is just a mathematical model and that it is meaningless to ask whether it corresponds to reality." (Hawking and Penrose, Nature of Space and Time, p. 121; Stephen Hawking, "The Objections of an Unashamed Positivist," in The Large, the Small, and the Human, by Roger Penrose, 1997, p. 169) Sounds to me like Mr. Hawking's arguments are no better (actually far worse) than a Christian saying "goddunnit." Atheists always criticize a debunking of their arguments with that familiar ad hominem. The funny thing is, Hawking blatantly admits that his theory is not grounded in reality. All these quantum gravity models posit "imaginary time" to avoid singularities. So these theories can be tossed out because they are completely grounded in metaphysics, no more nor less.
http://www.reachingforchrist.org/apologetics/atheismpe.html
One does not have to be versed in quantum physics to appreciate the metaphysical appeal that Hawking pushes. Alexander Vilenkin has called these models exercises in "metaphysical cosmology." (A. Vilenkin, "Birth of Inflationary Universes," Physical Review D 27 (1983): 2854. See J. Hartle and S. Hawking, "Wave Function of the Universe," Physical Review D 28 (1983): 2960-75; A. Vilenkin, "Creation of the Universe from Nothing," Physical Letters 117B (1982): 25-28)
In the Hartle-Hawking model, space-time is "rounded off" prior to Planck Time. (10 -43 seconds) As noted this model has a great metaphysical appeal and Hawking states: "Only if we could picture the universe in terms of imaginary time would there be no singularities . . . When one goes back to the real time in which we live, however, there will still appear to be singularities." (Hawking, A Brief History of Time, p. 138-139) Hawking further states that the universe "would quite literally be created out of nothing: not just out of the vacuum, but out of absolutely nothing at all, because there is nothing outside the universe." (Hartle and Hawking, "Wave Function of the Universe," p. 2961; Hawking and Penrose, Nature of Space and Time, p. 85)
The very notion of "imaginary time" smacks of metaphysics. If Hawking drops his argument for "imaginary time" then the singularity just simply reappears. Only by cunning mental gymnastics can he avoid the singularity and an absolute beginning of the universe. Hawking further damages his position by saying, "I'm a positivist . . . I don't demand that a theory correspond to reality because I don't know what it is… I take the positivist viewpoint that a physical theory is just a mathematical model and that it is meaningless to ask whether it corresponds to reality." (Hawking and Penrose, Nature of Space and Time, p. 121; Stephen Hawking, "The Objections of an Unashamed Positivist," in The Large, the Small, and the Human, by Roger Penrose, 1997, p. 169) Sounds to me like Mr. Hawking's arguments are no better (actually far worse) than a Christian saying "goddunnit." Atheists always criticize a debunking of their arguments with that familiar ad hominem. The funny thing is, Hawking blatantly admits that his theory is not grounded in reality. All these quantum gravity models posit "imaginary time" to avoid singularities. So these theories can be tossed out because they are completely grounded in metaphysics, no more nor less.
http://www.reachingforchrist.org/apologetics/atheismpe.html
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Oooo. Another atheist who thinks he's all that.
This will be fun.
I have a question dude...if a molecule arose out of a star, you gotta tell me what all stars are composed of...because I'm fairly certain they're not solidified stellar forms of heat...seeing of course how close we can get to stars to check 'em out...
I'm going to clear up something from the first page right now so we don't have any more of this crap going on: 1. Not every person who says they're Christian are. You just proved it with your first post. You can act it, but in reality you may not be.
2. Not every Christian acts out Christ tells us to act. So don't look to man to stand firm against every temptation and evil, or else you'll be dragged down with them, because, just like you, we are flesh.
3. Landover Baptist is NOT a Christian organization...that's like saying The Onion is a reliable newspaper.
You admitted yourself you don't know everything. Guess what? We don't either.
But I'll welcome a debate of any sort.
Toss up an issue if you're going to stick around on this site anymore. I look forward to your presence on this board. Just be civil. If you start screwing up as that one dude...oh WHAT was his name? Just don't namecall, don't bash, and we don't either. We're not ignorant hicks. We're thinkers. We're Christians. We're believers. We have several sources on our side to support Christianity...
And I'll clear this up for you RIGHT now: we will never prove the existence of God. Never. Evolution has disproved itself hundreds of times, but its disproval will not approve the Christian God. If evolution goes down the tube, well, science in general will be the laughingstock of the world. But they'll return with something else. Rest assured of it...read Ecclesiastes 1:9-11 if you don't believe that...it's a couple thousand years old, but hey...true wisdom lasts the ages. And if you don't have a Bible (probably do, if only to attempt to disprove Christianity and God to yourself), here are the verses: "That which has been is what will be, that which is done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which it may be said, 'See, this is new'? It has already been in ancient times before us. There is no remembrance of former things, nor will there be any remembrance of things that are to come by those will come after."
I'm fairly certain you're an intellectual, so I won't bother childizing it for you.
If we prove God, we have no need for faith. We can just go to a textbook and say, "Here. Proof. Why faith?" And that destroys the whole thing of belief in Christ. Because if you know God exists, then you can live your life in any manner you choose to live, sinful or not, and there is no point to looking ahead in hope. It takes faith to move on, to live a righteous life, to walk a Godly way. Take the faith out of the picture, and you can live in a narcissist way right until your deathbed where you can recant and then say you believe in Christ's life, death, resurrection for you, clearance of sins, and that he's coming again.
God will not allow us to prove He exists. We're finite. We can't prove what never began, and never will end. Matter of fact, somewhere in the Bible (Kidan or SSquared or someone help here...), that He stepped out of time into time.
Sure, that's impossible...if you're fleshly.
But what if you're the Divine?
This will be fun.
I have a question dude...if a molecule arose out of a star, you gotta tell me what all stars are composed of...because I'm fairly certain they're not solidified stellar forms of heat...seeing of course how close we can get to stars to check 'em out...
I'm going to clear up something from the first page right now so we don't have any more of this crap going on: 1. Not every person who says they're Christian are. You just proved it with your first post. You can act it, but in reality you may not be.
2. Not every Christian acts out Christ tells us to act. So don't look to man to stand firm against every temptation and evil, or else you'll be dragged down with them, because, just like you, we are flesh.
3. Landover Baptist is NOT a Christian organization...that's like saying The Onion is a reliable newspaper.
You admitted yourself you don't know everything. Guess what? We don't either.
But I'll welcome a debate of any sort.
Toss up an issue if you're going to stick around on this site anymore. I look forward to your presence on this board. Just be civil. If you start screwing up as that one dude...oh WHAT was his name? Just don't namecall, don't bash, and we don't either. We're not ignorant hicks. We're thinkers. We're Christians. We're believers. We have several sources on our side to support Christianity...
And I'll clear this up for you RIGHT now: we will never prove the existence of God. Never. Evolution has disproved itself hundreds of times, but its disproval will not approve the Christian God. If evolution goes down the tube, well, science in general will be the laughingstock of the world. But they'll return with something else. Rest assured of it...read Ecclesiastes 1:9-11 if you don't believe that...it's a couple thousand years old, but hey...true wisdom lasts the ages. And if you don't have a Bible (probably do, if only to attempt to disprove Christianity and God to yourself), here are the verses: "That which has been is what will be, that which is done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which it may be said, 'See, this is new'? It has already been in ancient times before us. There is no remembrance of former things, nor will there be any remembrance of things that are to come by those will come after."
I'm fairly certain you're an intellectual, so I won't bother childizing it for you.
If we prove God, we have no need for faith. We can just go to a textbook and say, "Here. Proof. Why faith?" And that destroys the whole thing of belief in Christ. Because if you know God exists, then you can live your life in any manner you choose to live, sinful or not, and there is no point to looking ahead in hope. It takes faith to move on, to live a righteous life, to walk a Godly way. Take the faith out of the picture, and you can live in a narcissist way right until your deathbed where you can recant and then say you believe in Christ's life, death, resurrection for you, clearance of sins, and that he's coming again.
God will not allow us to prove He exists. We're finite. We can't prove what never began, and never will end. Matter of fact, somewhere in the Bible (Kidan or SSquared or someone help here...), that He stepped out of time into time.
Sure, that's impossible...if you're fleshly.
But what if you're the Divine?