Let's have a religious debate in the middle of this board!

[Kenneth Kenstar]

DrunkWino, I can drive to where you live in 2 hours and take your keyboard and mouse away if you shut down this topic. >_>

[Fake from State Jarm]

"You didn't answer the question! It was a shitty rationalization and ignoring the question at hand!"

I did answer the question, kenny. I inferred via the 'jesus quote' that god required a certain amount of faith to intervene, and that it would be harder to have this faith for a more tangible problem. the more evidence there is of a problem the harder it may be to have faith against it, and visual confirmation of a lack of a limb, as well as mental adaptation to the lack of a limb, is additional evidence.

"Why won't God heal amputees, but, other people may receive their own miracles? Could it just be that miracles do not exist and they are logical coincidences?"

from my personal experience it is unlikely that miracles don't exist. it is more likely that they exist than such incredible coincidence occur as the phenomena i have experienced. however i can't extend my personal experience objectively to you, i can't even reproduce it reliably, so while it's a reason for me to believe, it's not much evidence for convincing someone unless they already trust me to be honest.

as i said, a theory as to why a god wouldn't always perform miracles, is stated above. do you have proof that god does not heal (any) amputees?

"Hell, really, I could say I have already won this argument because two believers of God just pretty much posted two long answers that directly oppose one another (except a few points)."

these answers do not oppose eachother. it could easily be said that my theory applies to when god is not non-interventionist, or that god is non-interventionist to the degree that there is a lack of faith in god.

"Also, some of those answers are based on the bible which is kinda interesting.

Wait.

Why the FUCK would you quote the Bible?"

/facepalm

because the questions were based on the bible.

i dont see any answers i made quoting bible that weren't bible related questions. if i missed them feel free to bring them up. as for the faith has made you well quote, the theory is valid with or without a biblical reference to it. perhaps i should say semi interventionist.

as for the bible's credibility, i already said i don't take it all literally, but at the same time some of its literal statements are possibly credible. i'm really only pointing out that anyone who says 'such and such unobserved phenomena is impossible' aren't really backing that statement up.

"it just makes you sound like an idiot to take anything in that book in context at ALL."

so because the bible is uncredible, the referenced egypt, canaan, and rome never existed? you have to be careful with overgeneralized arguments. I take some of it as possible depending on where it is and how much sense it makes relative to everything else i know from science and logic. god is a possibility, plain and simple. even if god doesn't heal all amputees, this wouldn't disprove the existence of miracles. it's really pointless to try to disprove it or prove it. if a phenomena does not occur in a pattern that is subjectable to the scientific method, that phenomena can hardly be verified by anything but personal experience. and personal experience can't really be transferred. this is why they call these things personal beliefs.

[Lanna]

The only way I'm going to get anything legitimate from people who believe in the Bible is if I piss them off.

Just because someone believe in God doesn't necessarily means that they also trust every word in the Bible. >_>  And seriously, are you actually wanting an answer or a way to bash other people's faith?  Because as far as I know, the questions have been answered by two other people.  What are you trying to prove here?

[DrunkWino]

DrunkWino, I can drive to where you live in 2 hours and take your keyboard and mouse away if you shut down this topic. >_>

You can try. What'll end up happening though, is I'll end up getting you drunk, maybe swing on over to UVA and helping you wreck a poor, dumb, stressed out freshman chick. Then, I'll pour more booze in you till ya pass out and then you'll awaken a day or so later on a freight train pulling into Tijuana.

/wouldn't be the first time...

[Kenneth Kenstar]

I'm just testing/fucking with the religious people on the board. I never really made this topic with any clear intention of direction or discussion. Just to incite the words of the religious, really.

Why? Because I'm deathly afraid of ignorance.

No, I'm not saying the religious are ignorant. Read on.

Ignorant religious types basically just deny anything that could prove them wrong, will make no effort to secure any of the questions they are presented and just blow it off as "the will of God", and then will actually go around preaching to people insisting that anyone not with them is evil.

I don't hate religious people, but, I do hate what I just mentioned above more than a lot of things.

Why?

It's 2008. That's why.

"Philosophy, science and religion are not enemies."

The fuck they aren't.

- Cloning research. We can't do this at ALL. We'd be playing God and that's wrong! Even though cloning can be used as a backbone to cure...pretty much everything...we are still going to be ignorant and say NO to playing God! People are making this research out to be us creating people. No, you fucking idiots. It's used primarily to try to HELP THE PEOPLE WHO EXIST ALREADY!

- Stem Cell research is affected by religion. Did you know that most stem cells are gathered from ADULT LIVING HUMAN BODIES rather than by fetuses? But, no, we are angering God by killing babies! YOU ARE A BABY KILLER IF YOU SUPPORT STEM CELLS. Even though stem cells (just like cloning) are pretty much the closest thing to what you can call a "medical miracle", it's not God's miracle so it's sin!

Gays marrying? Fuck that, religion is way too sacred and wholesome to be fucked with by faggots. Faggotry will ruin America and piss off God!

Muslims? Not in my America! If they don't believe in Jesus, they are obviously terrorists and should not

 - Be in America
 - Have rights
 - Run for President
 - Should just get the fuck out

So, see ya later Muhammed Mohammed you fucking sand nigger terrorist!

BTW, did you know Obama is a Muslim? I bet you are scared, so, I'll forward you a copy of my chain letter I'm sending over MySpace and to everyone I can email!

If your religious beliefs are only based solely on that flawed book and not say...personal experience or actual thinking on the matter that doesn't just resolve to making up some bullshit based on a book that is not credible by scientific means...then I feel you are detrimental to our societies' progress.

And, can you actually deny that? A lot of the problems in our society have some twisted way to do with our religious preferences and not just actually taking the time to examine both sides of the coin. Hell, the media even depicts the nonreligious to be godless people who are just crazy thinking God doesn't exist.

We aren't perfect, I know. But, haven't you felt the need to re-examine your own feelings on the book that says to execute people who work on Sundays? That phrase written is supposed to mean as much to you as being good to one another according to the Bible. But, that's a bullshit argument anyway.

Here's two good questions:

Science has established the backbone ideas of

- The Beginning of the Universe
- The Beginning of Earth
- Man appearing many, many years after Earth's appearance (God created the Earth in 7 days, but, gave it a couple million years before putting man on the ground and creating a woman from a rib)

Science has CREATED life in a way that accurately matches many young Earth theories. It's borderline proven at this point.

Why do you still believe in God/your faith?

And

Do you believe in creationism?

Please note that I'm not asking if you have belief in evolution at all.

What'll end up happening though, is I'll end up getting you drunk, maybe swing on over to UVA and helping you wreck a poor, dumb, stressed out freshman chick. Then, I'll pour more booze in you till ya pass out and then you'll awaken a day or so later on a freight train pulling into Tijuana.

God damnit, that might work.

[IronSoldier820]

I'm just testing/fucking with the religious people on the board. I never really made this topic with any clear intention of direction or discussion. Just to incite the words of the religious, really.

Right, so you made this topic with the pure intention of trolling. You didn't actually want a debate to try to argue a point successfully, or just for the sake of having a debate, you just wanted to piss religious people off. I'm unsure as to how this topic can stay open as long as its clean if it didn't even start that way.

If your religious beliefs are only based solely on that flawed book and not say...personal experience or actual thinking on the matter that doesn't just resolve to making up some oxshit based on a book that is not credible by scientific means...then I feel you are detrimental to our societies' progress.

I've thought about my religious beliefs a lot myself, but...really? Christianity is based on The Bible. Its that simple. So not only do you state that by quoting the source of our beliefs is ignorant, you basically call the Bible a piece of shit. Now I've heard that plenty of times before, I know plenty of atheists and agnostics who have problems with the Bible - nothing new. But to call people who believe in it detrimental to society and progress? I know you've basically screamed it at this point that you believe Christians are backwards, illogical people, but damn.

...

"Detrimental to our societies' progress."?

Seriously, what the hell. You sound like Hitler talking about the Jews. Oh wait, you probably hate Jews too, considering they also believe in God. (Yes, I'm aware I just invoked Godwin's Law...dammit)

Hell, the media even depicts the nonreligious to be godless people who are just crazy thinking God doesn't exist.

Maybe because nonreligious people are godless? You know, doesn't that kind of make sense? Nonreligious...godless...aren't those synonyms? Well, take that back, I'm sure there are plenty of religions out there that don't believe in Gods, but I've never seen such a fine example of circular reasoning. "Depicting nonreligious people as godless people who don't think God exists"...alright, maybe I'm overstepping my boundaries here. I had an atheistic friend who believed God existed but that he was a dick and, thus, considering himself nonreligious. So I'm guessing you have a similar stance.

We aren't perfect, I know. But, haven't you felt the need to re-examine your own feelings on the book that says to execute people who work on Sundays? That phrase written is supposed to mean as much to you as being good to one another according to the Bible. But, that's a oxshit argument anyway.

Glad you were able to admit how weak that argument was, considering you just quoted what you told everyone else was an incredible source.

[bioakky]

One can believe in a god yet not subscribe to any of the religious edicts surrounding the belief in that god.

[C-zom]

I guess its time for me to post... cause I'm bored. I'll probably end up giving no further gain to this topic. <_<

About... three years ago, I was extremely religious. I even brought my nubbetry on to these forums. And then it stopped immediately. I hit a brick wall and never recovered. Then I opened my mind (I was ignorant then, and probably am now.) and saw the negatives. That everything has two sides. That right comes with wrong, and vice versa. You simply can't have one or the other. With Christianity, going to church and being caught up in religion comes negative. You become distant in your own world. You think every word on a flawed book is proven fact. And it is flawed. At least its hypocritical.

People say God is all good, he is perfect. I'm sure he's perfect in a sense of his own. He can manipulate anything, and do what he wants. But I don't believe he's all good. He makes mistakes in the Bible. He floods the earth and cries over it, he lets Satan into the Garden and doesn't stop him, he didn't detain Satan before he rebelled en force. Or so the stories go. It seems God cannot control evil, and allows it into our world. He sends his son, abandons him and lets him get killed all for no reason but to make salvation OPTIONAL. Because the option of evil must be in play, there must be something negative.

Why? If God allows evil but doesn't stop it, he isn't omnipotent. These questions and others ultimately drove me from faith. And I never see people open to this subject, and others. Christians never accept this point of view and my own youth group threw me off as misinformed. My point is, if there is God I don't understand him. And if there are two sides to everything, why is God both? Doesn't make sense to me.

[Fake from State Jarm]

Kenny i can answer your questions and your arguments but i don't see what the point is if you don't want me to.

"I think intelligent discussion on the things you believe or not believe in is overall healthy and should be encouraged over ignorance."

"I never really made this topic with any clear intention of direction or discussion."


the young earth theory took place over eons. the amount of ignorance it would take to think we have borderline proven that theory is staggering. but that's a tonicular misconception that operates much the same as religion. if you are going to theorize about billions of years, you need more than just a few hundred years evidence. the scale of the theory is so disproportionate to the scale of the evidence behind it that any rational scientist would understand it as impossible to prove and useless. but apparently as long as you are more skeptical than creationists, you don't have to be as skeptical as logic or science would require to have your theory accepted by the (pseudo)scientific community.

as for evil, it is logically impossible for an individual to prevent evil outside of self-control, if there are other individuals in existence. you can't love someone so much that your love forces them to be good.

[Mr_Cynic]

"So here is question #1: Why won't God heal amputees?"
It would invalidate the idea of faith.  The idea of religion is that is you are good on this Earth and make it better, you will be rewarded in heaven.  Our reward is heaven, not a spontaneous healing.  Furthermore, Jesus died for us, which is a greater sacrifice still.  Many have turned pain into an offering to God.

"We all know that amputated legs do not spontaneously regenerate in response to prayer. Amputees get no miracles from God."
So?  Neither do priests, bishops, tonices, or anyone.  If everyone was given a miracle, the act of believing would be pointless; pretty easy to believe in someone who gives you everything you ask for.  Life is, in a way, a test of worthiness, though also a gift.
.
"If you are an intelligent person, you have to admit that it's an interesting question On the one hand, you believe that God answers prayers and performs miracles. On the other hand, you know that God completely ignores amputees when they pray for miracles."
You just admitted there are miracles.  If you're being facetious, God performs a miracle where it can't be proved to be a miracle.  See above for why.

"In order to handle it, notice that you have to create some kind of rationalization. You have to invent an excuse on God's behalf to explain this strange fact of life."
You have to create a rationalization to try and prove he doesn't exist, and while doing it, you had to admit miracles exist.  Care to explain that?

"Look out at our world and notice that millions of children are dying of starvation. It really is horrific. Why would God be worried about you getting a raise, while at the same time ignoring the prayers of these desperate, innocent little children? It really doesn't make any sense, does it? Why would a loving god do this?"
Because God gives everyone infinite care and love; love in general is limitless, we all have boundless potential for love.  God's is beyond human explanation.  Furthermore, God didn't "do this," WE do this.  Does a parent give their child every little thing?  No, they'd be spoiled.  Now I'm not saying feeding starving children is a little thing, but it can't be helped.

"To explain it, you have to come up with some sort of very strange excuse for God."
No, not really.

"Third question: Why does God demand the death of so many innocent people in the Bible?"
Like?

"Why would a loving God want us to murder our fellow human beings over such trivial matters?"
Only if you take it literally.  Many of the slaughters can be explained in either a metaphorical manner or are more likely the writings of an ancient people living in a violent and warlike world trying to justify their wholesale slaughters.

"That makes no sense, does it? In fact, if you think about it, you realize that it is insane. So you create some kind of rationalization to explain these verses."
You're assuming here God thinks the way we do, which He doesn't, and that the Bible is literal, which it isn't.

"Question #4: Why does the Bible contain so much anti-scientific nonsense?"
What?

"- God did not create the world in 6 days 6,000 years ago like the Bible says.
- There was never a worldwide flood that covered Mt. Everest like the Bible says.
- Jonah did not live inside a fish's stomach for three days like the Bible says.
- God did not create Adam from a handful of dust like the Bible says."
You're again assuming the Bible is literal. Is Plato's allegory of the cave wrong just because it can't be literally true?

"These stories are all nonsense. Why would an all-knowing God write nonsense? It makes no sense, does it?"
He didn't write it.  He inspired it.  And it's only nonesense if you don't care to think about any deeper meaning in the Bible.

"Question #5: Why is God such a huge proponent of slavery in the Bible?"
WHAT THE HELL?  No, he really isn't.  If anyone is, the writer was.

"Question #6: Why do bad things happen to good people? That makes no sense. You have created an exotic excuse on God's behalf to rationalize it."
Again, no.  Bad things happen to bad people too.  The true test of a good person is if they remain good in the face of adversity.

"Question #7: Why didn't any of Jesus' miracles in the Bible leave behind any evidence? It's very strange, isn't it? You have created an excuse to rationalize it."
No.  How would curing people, as the majority of his miracles are, leave behind any evidence?

"Question #8: How do we explain the fact that Jesus has never appeared to you? Jesus is all-powerful and timeless, but if you pray for Jesus to appear, nothing happens. You have to create a weird rationalization to deal with this discrepancy."
No I don't, because I don't pray for that.  "Blessed are you who will believe without seeing."  Getting to meet Jesus would be a truly amazing experience, but not something I pray for.

"Question #9 – Why would Jesus want you to eat his body and drink his blood? It sounds totally grotesque, doesn't it? Why would al all-powerful God want you to do something that, in any other context, sounds like a disgusting, cannibalistic, satanic ritual?"
You are assuming it's literal again.  This has been understood by outside groups since Constantine made Christianity the Roman religion.

"And finally, Question #10 – Why do Christians get divorced at the same rate as non-Christians? Christians get married in front of God and their Christian friends, all of whom are praying to God for the marriage to succeed. And then they say, "What God has put together, let no man put asunder." God is all-powerful, so if God has put two people together that should seal the deal, right? Yet Christians get divorced at the same rate as everyone else. To explain this, you have to create some convoluted rationalization."
No one is perfect.  This is a human failure, not God's.  The law says not to murder, but people still do.  This is hardly the fault of the lawmaker.


This is really and truly the most ignorant, poorly informed, poorly formulated, snide, idiotic, misrepresentative...  Thing I have ever heard of or seen.  It ignores all the basic precepts of Christianity, misrepresents parts of the Bible, takes the Bible literally when no one but some fringe groups do, and at one point accidentally admits God's existence.

[Grand Poobah Marx]

"So here is question #1: Why won't God heal amputees?"
It would invalidate the idea of faith.  The idea of religion is that is you are good on this Earth and make it better, you will be rewarded in heaven.  Our reward is heaven, not a spontaneous healing.  Furthermore, Jesus died for us, which is a greater sacrifice still.  Many have turned pain into an offering to God.

"We all know that amputated legs do not spontaneously regenerate in response to prayer. Amputees get no miracles from God."
So?  Neither do priests, bishops, tonices, or anyone.  If everyone was given a miracle, the act of believing would be pointless; pretty easy to believe in someone who gives you everything you ask for.  Life is, in a way, a test of worthiness, though also a gift.
.
"If you are an intelligent person, you have to admit that it's an interesting question On the one hand, you believe that God answers prayers and performs miracles. On the other hand, you know that God completely ignores amputees when they pray for miracles."
You just admitted there are miracles.  If you're being facetious, God performs a miracle where it can't be proved to be a miracle.  See above for why.

"In order to handle it, notice that you have to create some kind of rationalization. You have to invent an excuse on God's behalf to explain this strange fact of life."
You have to create a rationalization to try and prove he doesn't exist, and while doing it, you had to admit miracles exist.  Care to explain that?

"Look out at our world and notice that millions of children are dying of starvation. It really is horrific. Why would God be worried about you getting a raise, while at the same time ignoring the prayers of these desperate, innocent little children? It really doesn't make any sense, does it? Why would a loving god do this?"
Because God gives everyone infinite care and love; love in general is limitless, we all have boundless potential for love.  God's is beyond human explanation.  Furthermore, God didn't "do this," WE do this.  Does a parent give their child every little thing?  No, they'd be spoiled.  Now I'm not saying feeding starving children is a little thing, but it can't be helped.

"To explain it, you have to come up with some sort of very strange excuse for God."
No, not really.

"Third question: Why does God demand the death of so many innocent people in the Bible?"
Like?

"Why would a loving God want us to murder our fellow human beings over such trivial matters?"
Only if you take it literally.  Many of the slaughters can be explained in either a metaphorical manner or are more likely the writings of an ancient people living in a violent and warlike world trying to justify their wholesale slaughters.

"That makes no sense, does it? In fact, if you think about it, you realize that it is insane. So you create some kind of rationalization to explain these verses."
You're assuming here God thinks the way we do, which He doesn't, and that the Bible is literal, which it isn't.

"Question #4: Why does the Bible contain so much anti-scientific nonsense?"
What?

"- God did not create the world in 6 days 6,000 years ago like the Bible says.
- There was never a worldwide flood that covered Mt. Everest like the Bible says.
- Jonah did not live inside a fish's stomach for three days like the Bible says.
- God did not create Adam from a handful of dust like the Bible says."
You're again assuming the Bible is literal. Is Plato's allegory of the cave wrong just because it can't be literally true?

"These stories are all nonsense. Why would an all-knowing God write nonsense? It makes no sense, does it?"
He didn't write it.  He inspired it.  And it's only nonesense if you don't care to think about any deeper meaning in the Bible.

"Question #5: Why is God such a huge proponent of slavery in the Bible?"
WHAT THE HELL?  No, he really isn't.  If anyone is, the writer was.

"Question #6: Why do bad things happen to good people? That makes no sense. You have created an exotic excuse on God's behalf to rationalize it."
Again, no.  Bad things happen to bad people too.  The true test of a good person is if they remain good in the face of adversity.

"Question #7: Why didn't any of Jesus' miracles in the Bible leave behind any evidence? It's very strange, isn't it? You have created an excuse to rationalize it."
No.  How would curing people, as the majority of his miracles are, leave behind any evidence?

"Question #8: How do we explain the fact that Jesus has never appeared to you? Jesus is all-powerful and timeless, but if you pray for Jesus to appear, nothing happens. You have to create a weird rationalization to deal with this discrepancy."
No I don't, because I don't pray for that.  "Blessed are you who will believe without seeing."  Getting to meet Jesus would be a truly amazing experience, but not something I pray for.

"Question #9 – Why would Jesus want you to eat his body and drink his blood? It sounds totally grotesque, doesn't it? Why would al all-powerful God want you to do something that, in any other context, sounds like a disgusting, cannibalistic, satanic ritual?"
You are assuming it's literal again.  This has been understood by outside groups since Constantine made Christianity the Roman religion.

"And finally, Question #10 – Why do Christians get divorced at the same rate as non-Christians? Christians get married in front of God and their Christian friends, all of whom are praying to God for the marriage to succeed. And then they say, "What God has put together, let no man put asunder." God is all-powerful, so if God has put two people together that should seal the deal, right? Yet Christians get divorced at the same rate as everyone else. To explain this, you have to create some convoluted rationalization."
No one is perfect.  This is a human failure, not God's.  The law says not to murder, but people still do.  This is hardly the fault of the lawmaker.


This is really and truly the most ignorant, poorly informed, poorly formulated, snide, idiotic, misrepresentative...  Thing I have ever heard of or seen.  It ignores all the basic precepts of Christianity, misrepresents parts of the Bible, takes the Bible literally when no one but some fringe groups do, and at one point accidentally admits God's existence.

Everything I would have said but didn't.

[Kenneth Kenstar]

I'm just testing/fucking with the religious people on the board. I never really made this topic with any clear intention of direction or discussion. Just to incite the words of the religious, really.

Right, so you made this topic with the pure intention of trolling. You didn't actually want a debate to try to argue a point successfully, or just for the sake of having a debate, you just wanted to piss religious people off. I'm unsure as to how this topic can stay open as long as its clean if it didn't even start that way.

You are taking things out of context. I want an argument for once that just doesn't lead to bullshit from the religious. I don't care what you think of that last statement, because all I usually hear about "God" is that he is either "planning" to do something or he's just too great of a power to do anything.

So, why not get some truth in this topic? I'm not going to soften my opinion if it's my opinion.

I wanted to incite the words of the religious because I want to know what makes you guys tick.

"Detrimental to our societies' progress."?

Seriously, what the hell. You sound like Hitler talking about the Jews. Oh wait, you probably hate Jews too, considering they also believe in God. (Yes, I'm aware I just invoked Godwin's Law...dammit)

Putting things in my mouth isn't going to make God real. OH SNAP

Hell, the media even depicts the nonreligious to be godless people who are just crazy thinking God doesn't exist.

Maybe because nonreligious people are godless? You know, doesn't that kind of make sense? Nonreligious...godless...aren't those synonyms?

I guess I didn't word that in the best way. But, if you actually took the time to recognize that what I wrote was...

Hell, the media even depicts the nonreligious to be godless people who are just crazy thinking God doesn't exist.

Remove this

Hell, the media even depicts the nonreligious just crazy thinking God doesn't exist.

And, the message is still implying that the media displays the nonreligious in an unfair way.

We aren't perfect, I know. But, haven't you felt the need to re-examine your own feelings on the book that says to execute people who work on Sundays? That phrase written is supposed to mean as much to you as being good to one another according to the Bible. But, that's a oxshit argument anyway.

Glad you were able to admit how weak that argument was, considering you just quoted what you told everyone else was an incredible source.

That's kinda the point, ya know. Why else would I quote the book? To make an argument. However, I said it was a bullshit argument because I don't want to waste my time arguing about mistranslated, edited quotes and phrases in a couple thousand year old book.

It's funny you attempt to insult my argument, but, completely ignored my two, simple questions in my last post.

If your game is taking things out of context, ignoring two simple questions, and making fun of an innocent grammar mistake, then ggnore to you.

ggnore, indeed.

[Kenneth Kenstar]

Kenny i can answer your questions and your arguments but i don't see what the point is if you don't want me to.

I do want you to.

the young earth theory took place over eons. the amount of ignorance it would take to think we have borderline proven that theory is staggering. but that's a tonicular misconception that operates much the same as religion. if you are going to theorize about billions of years, you need more than just a few hundred years evidence. the scale of the theory is so disproportionate to the scale of the evidence behind it that any rational scientist would understand it as impossible to prove and useless. but apparently as long as you are more skeptical than creationists, you don't have to be as skeptical as logic or science would require to have your theory accepted by the (pseudo)scientific community.

as for evil, it is logically impossible for an individual to prevent evil outside of self-control, if there are other individuals in existence. you can't love someone so much that your love forces them to be good.

The Young Earth theories and the origins of life fit specifically into many other established theories as well as being compatible with each other all the way to evolution.

I tried not to bring up evolution, but, the theory of evolution is the same as it has always been. This virtually unchanged theory matches very well with all the other established life origin theories.

While I'm trying not to argue pro-evolution, I am arguing there is very consistent evidence. The "Pseudo"-scientific community uses actual evidence and facts to back up their statements, so, I'm not sure I follow your argument very well.

[DrunkWino]

I remind everyone, if you start the "attack the debater," bullshit, there will be pruning in here. It's already started *looks at IronSolider*, so don't do it anymore or I'm going to have to do shit I don't particularly like doing.

Debate points and issues, not each other.

[Kenneth Kenstar]

BTW

No hard feelings on this topic, please. I'm definitely going to hold my end of that no matter what you say.

[Fake from State Jarm]

Kenny i can answer your questions and your arguments but i don't see what the point is if you don't want me to.

I do want you to.

the young earth theory took place over eons. the amount of ignorance it would take to think we have borderline proven that theory is staggering. but that's a tonicular misconception that operates much the same as religion. if you are going to theorize about billions of years, you need more than just a few hundred years evidence. the scale of the theory is so disproportionate to the scale of the evidence behind it that any rational scientist would understand it as impossible to prove and useless. but apparently as long as you are more skeptical than creationists, you don't have to be as skeptical as logic or science would require to have your theory accepted by the (pseudo)scientific community.

as for evil, it is logically impossible for an individual to prevent evil outside of self-control, if there are other individuals in existence. you can't love someone so much that your love forces them to be good.

The Young Earth theories and the origins of life fit specifically into many other established theories as well as being compatible with each other all the way to evolution.

I tried not to bring up evolution, but, the theory of evolution is the same as it has always been. This virtually unchanged theory matches very well with all the other established life origin theories.

While I'm trying not to argue pro-evolution, I am arguing there is very consistent evidence. The "Pseudo"-scientific community uses actual evidence and facts to back up their statements, so, I'm not sure I follow your argument very well.

i think we got young earth theory mixed up with old earth theory.

the pseudo-scientific community isn't pseudo because it uses evidence and facts. I think that's great and I'm glad scientists are gathering evidence. the pseudo part is in the fact that the larger the theory, the more evidence it requires to back it up, and the pseudo scientists are the ones that are ignoring this rule and assuming a few hundred years of evidence is sufficient to theorize reliably about billions of years. we need more time... which is itself evidence, and direct observation of what happens over such a time period. at the same time, those scientists are still gathering evidence and that is still scientific and supportable.

i'll answer the rest later.

[Lanna]

Why do you still believe in God/your faith?

When I was 11, I had a certain dream, which led me to sought help - and this brought me to God. I don't know how it did, but it did.  To this day, I'm still very thankful for this event.  I prayed just about every night since then til I was 14.  It was when I started resenting God.  Simply because I hated the fact that some people who considered themselves religious would discriminate the nonreligious ones.

Half a year later, every part of me was crying.  And I knew in my heart that I needed God in my life.  It was then that I realized 2 things.  One was that religion is really only a person's relationship with whoever or whatever they believed in - and the other was: God has a set of ideals and how his followers choose to interpret these ideals are up to them. It's not his fault if one of them decided to go psycho-killer and start a massacred in his name. That's not what he's preaching, at least, not in my heart. He teaches us love, and tells us to be kind to our neighbors - being EVERYONE, regardless of anything. However, this is only my interpretation.

The only things I know from the Bible, by heart, are: 1 Corinthians 13 and the Book of Esther.  My relationship with God is my business.  Not anyone's else.  Though I will say that not all the things in the Bible are bad.  People can certainly base their moral codes on it, whether or not they believe in God, provided they move with time.

And

Do you believe in creationism?

I'm open about how Earth was started, and I have neither accepted nor denied any theories.


Though there is one thing I would like to point out... you make all the religious people look bad.  Did you know that not all nonreligious people are the best of people either?  People are people, regardless of what they believe in.  And believing in God has absolutely nothing to do with acknowledging that he exists, at least, not to me.  It's about sharing God's beliefs and carrying those ideals out in your everyday living.  Even then, people get caught up in things and screw themselves over.

Another thing is, why are some people so into wanting to be proved that God exist?  What does it matter, really?  I always see it as something like this:

God-------------------------------------------------- Your teacher
You can't see him ---------------------------------  You can see him

So you can proof that your teacher exists, but does it really matter if you don't give a shit what the subject that your teacher dictates?  No.  If you care about God and believe in him, not being able to see it really doesn't matter.  And there's always a chance that you will.  I can't prove this and neither can you.

I remind everyone, if you start the "attack the debater," oxshit, there will be pruning in here. It's already started *looks at IronSolider*, so don't do it anymore or I'm going to have to do shit I don't particularly like doing.

Debate points and issues, not each other.

I see... so when Hyper says:

If your religious beliefs are only based solely on that flawed book and not say...personal experience or actual thinking on the matter that doesn't just resolve to making up some oxshit based on a book that is not credible by scientific means...then I feel you are detrimental to our societies' progress.

We're not supposed to be offended.  That's always nice to know.

[DrunkWino]

Difference is Kenny admitted to trolling in the first post.

I don't have a particular problem until you start trolling individual people here. I never said you couldn't get offended. If anyone says they are totally not offended, I'd call them a liar. However, instead of responding by attacking the person, respond to the ideas.

Call it an exercise in honest to goodness debate. Plus if you can pull it off without resorting to Kenny's tactics, you get to hold it over his head.

[1ofkind]

Back to the first post where you bottom lined, and said that you're going to argue by videos that which were the most bigot piece's of arrogant shit I've ever seen makes me aware of the easily influenced mentality you must have for just what appears to be a great reasons that are actually very bad well portrayal. The fact is an actual intellectual: one who greatly questions his own opinion with great criticism from oneself knows that religion is impossible to be decisive about, because there's incredible arguments on both side of the spectrum: human beings are the most out of place thing in this entire universe, all things appearing to have originated from one common cell.

Brainless dinosaurs is one thing that I can understand coming from evolution, but us humans are out of place. Even if everything originated from one cell still we don't make sense. Human being are one extreme to another far far away unscaled extreme. Both ways don't be stupid, and just say that there's no god, but also be questionable - very very questionable with that god given free will, and thought.

FYI a college degrees are starting to become pieces of shit.

[dark tyrant]

No. Not this again. I know how the last one turned out.