How can the Bible not be real?
They sell millions upon millions of copies every year! Have you never seen one before?
- Registered Member
Member for 10 years, 9 months, and 18 days
Last active Fri, Jul, 17 2015 11:01:27
- 0 Followers
- 6,378 Total Posts
- 1111 Thanks
Mar 19, 2014CosmicSpore posted a message on Who brought sin and death to the earth? Man, Satan or God?Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
I am willing to compare mine to your any day of the week and am always eager to improve when possible.
You're willing to compare because you're a hypocrite.
When people have no ground to stand on meanwhile judge others for exactly the same, that is very much the definition of "hypocrite".
Furthermore, you're absolutely not eager or willing to improve, as you state you are, because many here demonstrate your hypocrisies, errors, and fallacies... yet you refuse to listen or change your ways.
This makes you a liar as well as a hypocrite.
Yet I see no one making a case.
What does that tell you?
That you're blind, too.
Listen - If you want to be eager and willing to improve.... Then just do it.
Don't just make such statements and never follow through with it. Better yourself - rise above those you despise, do not become like them. And actually LISTEN to what other people have to say for once.
Becoming your own enemy is merely to tear yourself apart in the process. If this is what you desire, then so be it... but this is absolutely not a way to improve.
Mar 19, 2014Posted in: Computer Science and TechnologyQuote from Superintendent
If you help us code our games, you will be entitled to a share of income.
No really? And I just thought everyone wanted to break the law and force people to work as slaves without pay... Who woulda guessed someone out there would actually pay you for doing work!
Quote from Superintendent
You would join our app-making developer group, CraveTech.
And what kind of "app-making developer group" is this?
You leave out fundamental details... Such as what kind of people the developer would be working with, how many, and etc.
Which honestly leads me, and everyone else here, to assume that you are not really an "app-making developer group" but actually a "guy with ideas" and you're just looking for someone to do all the programming work for you.
....Is that right?
Mar 18, 2014Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from Roddo7
I was referring to that. And yeah, I think I meant 'I might be needing' instead of 'A'
If you need help with that I'm sure there are many here who would be willing to help.
You can PM me personally if you'd like my help, I'd be very willing (although I won't be on again until later or tomorrow).
But be careful in whatever you do with this. The problem with trying to fill in 'holes' of your life with things like "God" is that like some suggested, some people can give you "easy answers" that sound too good to be true.... And they most likely are. They are not often thought-out answers, and usually questioning them causes them to fall apart only leading you deeper into despair and feeling lost.
Religion, or "God", can indeed help you to fill in this despair in your life... but you must do so properly and it requires effort and thought. As I stated previously... There are no "easy answers" in religion, only those who wish to abuse religion for their own purposes will ever give you these.
I, personally, believe in my own interpretation of 'God' because I was once lost in despair, as well. Religion, organized religion, forced me to become even more lost.... I hated what people had become in my eyes. The Church was Evil. The people in society were Evil. I wanted everything, and everyone, to burn.
Then I studied, and I learned, and I saw good people, too. I found myself again, with thought.
I found TRUE religion. The REAL religion. Not a specific one, but the underlying force of religious influence, of religious thought... This underlying ideology of religious helped me to abolish the dogmas of society for the things I had seen as Evil, to understand why people do Evil, why other people themselves are lost like I was.
This is why I speak a lot about this subject, because I've been invested in it ever since. I still oppose most forms of organized religion, though. Organized religions do not provide you with answers... Only people can do that. Good people.
Mar 18, 2014Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from Roddo7
People = You and I
It means the same thing pretty much, and even opens it up further rather than directing it at people who believe in God - you can use your beliefs as an example you know.
Did you actually read my post, the one you're replying to? I explained how they weren't the same thing. In fact, I also explained why I couldn't do both in one post.
And if you read my previous post, you'll see I give a brief summary (in a rather long post) of why 'People' believe in God (in response to someone else).
Though, this has absolutely nothing to do with why 'I' believe in "God". It doesn't, in any way, reflect any of my own beliefs. It has very little to do with 'Me' other than I was brought up and raised in the culture I explained, as was everyone else who is on Earth right now, particularly in 'Western Civilization'.
You should understand the differences before you ask such a question. Yes, we are all people. But unlike "people" in general, I am also an individual with my own personal beliefs.
It's a matter of if you want a generalized understanding or anecdotes. Therein lies a significant difference.
Mar 18, 2014CosmicSpore posted a message on Who brought sin and death to the earth? Man, Satan or God?Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from Metadigital
Not unless you enjoy becoming what you despise.
Not enough UPs on my button!!! WHY???
Admin, please give yourself 1000 up-votes for me. Thank you.
Mar 18, 2014Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from aranamor
People always want explanations for things. It's in our nature, we're inquisitive as a species and we instinctively look for reasons as to why the world works. Gods in any culture are typically described as beings that are on a higher spiritual, physical, and/or mental level than even the greatest of human beings. As such, they would be able to do things that had no visible cause or source, and would be impossible for Men to accomplish. Nobody knew how lightning worked for ages, and so Lightning Gods capable of calling down storms appeared in the stories of the people. Fertility Gods who controlled the crops and birth rates, War Gods who incite Men to hatred or give them strength to overcome foes (the former being more common in agrarian societies, the latter being more common in raiding or hunting societies), Gods of Animals and Gods of Plants, Gods of Water and of Wind, you get the idea. When people found out how things really worked, they began to forget the old Gods, since they weren't good explanations anymore. Christianity's 'triumph' arises from an all-powerful, all-seeing, metaphysical God who controls everything indirectly, and thus can't be countered. It's a cheap move, but it's a cheap move that made it the predominant religion for well over 1600 years. From an Agnostic Neopagan perspective, I see Gods as abstract representations of the forces of Nature and of the Mind, something formed from our collective conscience anthropomorphising Nature herself. The God and Goddess in my eyes are more representations of Nature than the Guiding Force actually driving Nature.
That's not really how things happened... Your bias is very apparent.
Religious beliefs obviously developed over time along with humanity's understanding of the world. But religion was not a "science"... It was an understanding of the way the world worked, it was not an 'explanation'. As understandings of the world grow, so did religion.
It would go from spiritualism, which would see everything as being of a spiritual existence, to more materialistic views where gods could/would control the materials of the world.
Spiritualism and Gods weren't abandoned for 'science' or a better understanding. It was understanding which would allow humanity to simply 'transcend' these beliefs. They no longer had cultural needs for some things any longer.
Worshiping and honoring trees for giving wood was no longer culturally relevant. They felt it no longer necessary, likely because as civilizations grew their desire for wood (and permanent residence) grew, harvesters would bring it back and it'd be sorted by carpenters. The people whom would live in the home would never see or understand all the work that spirit would go through to become a home.
Tribes would no longer praise and honor animals together as their populations grew and the hunters would bring their meat to butchers, which would then sell the meat... The buyer unaware of how the spirit of the animal was treated... No longer seeing it as a spirit, but as merely food for their family rightly earned with coin from their labor.
These kind of things simply did not apply as civilizations grew anymore.... But a greater understanding came about, wherein humanity was still subjected to wars, natural disasters, and such.... and so 'gods' whom would control these processes could be understood.
They understood these things as greater forces, and as such they understood those forces as gods.... Those gods would then be given human-like traits because that is how they could best be understood and imagined, especially in stories.
Cultures would develop wherein gods are no longer relevant either...
Monotheism would question why there is not a God of gods, a King of Kings.... Why there would not be one greater/greatest underlying force above all others.... A question of philosophical merit, and of cultural relevance for a peoples whom might believe that favor of gods is necessary, and therefore favor of the 'Highest God', the god of everything, is therefore the most applicable and useful one to worship. And so he was worshiped as the underlying force above all others.... an intangible philosophic force that gave greater understanding to these people.
Philosophy itself would develop in other areas, as well... People whom no longer need the gods, again as society grew, would start to question everything they had previously accepted.... Society had reached such a peak where worries over starvation, dehydration, and disease, and bad harvests were no longer as troublesome.
They questioned.... Why things exist, how they came to be, what forces lied underneath everything.
Many would conclude and accept that there was a true underlying force to reality - Logic.... They called this 'the Logos'. They called this, 'The Word'.
And as such, many also questioned the existence of gods they could not see... and were punished.
And the two cultures met together.... Monotheism and Logic.
Together as one, they provided greater answers to everything. To reality, to understanding, to knowledge... To Purpose.
It was philosophically deep... but meanwhile provided practical, useful things that could be understand and performed by the common, uneducated people as well as the rich and the leaders.
Many people practiced these things together, accepting some aspects more than others... but they would not be truly combined, and in some cases met with contradictions or internal disagreements.
So, along would come a man who would truly combine both 'Monotheism' and 'Logic' into a singular understanding. He would declare God is 'The Logos'. He would declare God's authority as 'The Word'. He declared that God was the initial and fundamental aspect of all reality, the guiding force of all things.... He would essentially declare that God is Logic, that Logic is God. He united the two concepts.
He would declare that this is THE Highest God, and that previous understandings of him and practices for his favor were false. They were without The Logos, without Logic....
He demonstrated that through common sacrifice, acceptance, tolerance of each other that humanity could overcome even the greatest difficulties, and gave them hope that one day they would be able to overcome all things, through God, through the Word, through the Logos.
He also demonstrated that these things could be not just accepted by all, but practiced by all. He gave no favors to the rich, the leaders, or other such authority.... He actively encouraged and spoke to the 'forgotten people' of society... The sick, the poor, the timid.
He would therefore give reason and purpose and a way of life that everyone, no matter their circumstances, could accept. And in turn following this way he would give societies a better chance at survival, as they cooperate with each other, accept each other, love each other - including their enemies.
He would also give people methods to use to understand the world around them... Practical, useful understandings of reality...
It is of no comfort or use to someone to know that rain causes floods.... but he would give them comfort even when the floods would destroy their homes, kill their families.
He gave them the greatest understanding of the world that anyone at that time could ever have imagined.
It was not lies or deceit which led this religion to grow.... And although, of course, there was much of that in the Church when it came to become a power-entity, when it's authorities themselves corrupted the influence and persecuted people ignoring the ways of their teachings.... And this may have helped it to prosper....
But you must understand, this religion is not accepted because it is the "easiest answer"... It told people that they had to love everyone, even their enemies.... That they had to abandon their old ways of life and start again with a completely new understanding about reality, or else be forgotten, thrown away, abandoned forever.
This was not an "easy answer". This was anything BUT an "easy answer". This was merely the clearest and best understanding for people at the time.
And, I'd argue, that it is still the clearest and best answer for many people today.
Sure, many people are indeed lost. They are confused. They do not understand.... And their Church gives them "easy answers" sometimes...... But don't confuse a RELIGION with the acts of a CHURCH, of an authority. Of people whom might be corrupt and not even follow their own ways, but instead may be both blind and blinding.
This isn't to say everyone is corrupt... but you must be careful, and Jesus did indeed teach this very thing. He spoke of being careful, especially of the people I've just described, very often. It was one of his main themes.
.... So, will you still say religion provided easy explanations, easy answers?
There is some truth to that if you're looking at this within historical events alone.... but evaluate it as a social function. Understand the processes and the ideology. There is certainly nothing "easy" about religion.... As always, these things have only ever come about through ignorance and corrupt leaders. They provide "easy answers" that are not a part of the religion, but a part of dogma they wish to abuse to their own advantage. Dogmas can from religion just as they can come from anywhere else.
You'll find this is common practice for such people abusing ideologies, and is not just specific to religion.
Throughout history religion has led to the practices of philosophy and science and many other things... It is not these things which came from nowhere to destroy religion, it is religion which created them. If religion were about "easy answers" then these things could have never possibly came to be through religion.
Mar 17, 2014Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
You do know that the US spends more per student than any other nation in the world, right? This isn't an issue of lack of funding for education at all.
More than everyone else right now =/= The right amount
.....nor does it mean that money is being spent correctly.
The problems seen in the education system are obviously not all a result of a lack of funding. No one is saying that. Where do you see anyone saying that?
.... But there are problems which obviously can be solved by a lack of funding.
Except that that's not true at all. Better educated publics consistently provide higher GDPs.
Except, that's not true at all. See? I can do it, too.
Your disagreement is meaningless unless you have something to back it up with.... and I'll point out, that I am rather sure already I'll disagree with any statistic you might find supporting the conclusion you make above, as I know you will try to equate "better educated publics" with meaning "percent of people with degrees" as you've obviously already demonstrated this confusion, as seen below.
Bettering education is seen as one of the best ways to boost economic activity in the long term, the problem isn't some sort of conspiracy trying to keep the American public stupid(and for the record, it has one of the best educated publics of any nation), it's just that the execution and certain ineffective policies are keeping it from being all that it could.
As demonstrated... You confuse "best educated publics" with "percent of people with degrees"...
What's the difference? Oh, maybe the whole point of my earlier arguments where I explain that the "higher education" system is catered to Capitalists and is only teaching people the general skills necessary to become part of the white-collar labor force.
.... Or did you miss that part when I said it?.... You did READ my posts before replying, right? I would hope you did.
In any case, be this all as it may.... The problem is not really here nor there. You're speaking of Capitalist systems to support the Capitalist systems..... You do understand the fundamental error here, correct? It's like using the Bible to support belief in the Bible... It's just circular reasoning that is not convincing to anyone else who doesn't already believe in it.
So are you merely trying to stir our emotions with your links and arguments, or what?
You are trying to make it appear as if the statistics you link to are actually relevant enough to be applicable to all of what I was speaking of.... but, I must ask..... How is it relevant? It does not seem that way to me...
To me, it merely seems as though, as I've already explained earlier, that the Capitalist systems are good at preventing real education and are rather good at teaching people the skills necessary to join the labor force in order for the bourgeois ruling class to not have to compete for laborers and instead force the laborers to compete for labor, therefore reducing the Capitalist price of labor and therefore allowing the Capitalist bourgeoisie to exploit laborers even more.
Is this not a fair deduction of these systems? If you disagree, explain why.... but this stuff about "better educated publics" is truly irrelevant to these arguments, or at least not relevant in any way I can see.... So I can undoubtedly say I'm truly not convinced by anything you've said.
Education is funded by property taxes, that's why bad neighborhoods have bad schools and good ones have good schools. Many schools in the US receive excess funding, as is the case with my high school. This is also one of the contributing factors to the United States having poor social mobility.
All the more reason to solve the issue of funding, is it not? Again, how is this relevant to your point, or to mine?
You stated it's not an issue of a 'lack of funding'.... but did you not just explain it is?
Maybe you could state it's not a problem of a 'lack' of it, but a problem of 'distribution'.... but are you truly arguing there is an 'excess' of funding in some areas and that it provides absolutely no benefits to the students? That if we were to derive funding from elsewhere (the military) and could provide ALL SCHOOLS with such "excess funding" that this would not be greatly beneficial..... Especially given situations wherein the education system as a whole were reformed to better improve real education and not just teach labor-skills?
To me, if you did not argue as such, I would simply think you are wrong.... There are many benefits to more funding....
Better teachers, more teachers, happier teachers.
Better books, more books.
Better equipment, more equipment.
Better safety, more safety.
What does funding NOT provide?
It seems like y'all just want to blame the US for everything.
It seems like you just want to blame everyone else and defend the US blindly.
What is the point of comments like this? They easily work both ways.
Mar 17, 2014What do you want to know....Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
Why 'people' believe in God, or why 'I' believe in God?
Topic asks two questions... I can try to answer either one, but I'd rather focus on just one because it'd be too much work to explain both well enough in a single post. My own beliefs do not ever reflect the populace, and how I define 'God' is completely different.
Mar 17, 2014CosmicSpore posted a message on ¡Personal! : What is your belief and why? (Religious/Agnostic/Atheist & Everything Inbetween)Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from Beltir
A little correction here:
Just being under 50% of the population doesn't make you a minority. It would if there were only 2 possible options, but there isn't.
Well, perhaps... I think it depends on what type of 'minority' you're talking about.
If you're referring to a minority part of the population, meaning "US vs THEM" mentality, which is what I assumed he was going for, then it's 49.9999~% or less.
But if you're referring to other ideological bodies and what part they all make up, then that's really a lot more work to figure out a number than I honestly wanted to put into this.... and if anyone is talking about that then you're definitely correct.
Christians, in the US at least, make up so much a larger percentage of the population than any other ideological group that it's basically impossible to believe they could in any way be a "minority".... You'd have to, like you said, drop the number down to a tiny percentage in order to get it to represent that kind of minority....
That would basically mean knowing the hearts of about 205 million people, going over double the previous estimate (that's assuming somewhere around '15%' [of the 77% of Christians] is accurate).
Either way, I think we both made our points pretty clear... There is no way for him to deny these things.
- To post a comment, please login.
Mar 18, 2013Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceThat's not an excuse. Communism, socialism, and capitalism have always clashed, and yet the capitalistic societies somehow managed to innovate massively and grow.
The USSR grew from a largely feudal society into the second most powerful empire. Plenty of innovation occurred.
Mar 18, 2014Metadigital posted a message on Who brought sin and death to the earth? Man, Satan or God?Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
Then you are in no place to judge others, for you stand on no moral high ground.
Mar 18, 2014Metadigital posted a message on Who brought sin and death to the earth? Man, Satan or God?Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
Not unless you enjoy becoming what you despise.
Mar 17, 2014Beltir posted a message on ¡Personal! : What is your belief and why? (Religious/Agnostic/Atheist & Everything Inbetween)Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
No, I'm not mistaken, and no your aren't just here spreading the gospel, otherwise you wouldn't be posting in other threads. Face it, you're here because you want to be here, not because you are glorifying god by being here. Is the person that spends every day of their life studying the bible and worshiping god more christian than you or not? You're apparently more christian that other christians... oops, I mean sundayers because you devote more of your life to god than they do, so you have the ability to look down upon them. Seems pretty judgmental and prideful to me.Quote from Freedomna
You assume the only way to Glorify god is through reading the bible. When I am on these forums, I am spreading the gospel, educating people on Scripture. When I play video games, I do it with a Brother (fellow Christian) or someone I am reaching out to as a way to bond with them. Romans 12 states our body is a living sacrifice. Everything we do, we do for God. Even actions such as studying for a test can glorify God as we are to be thought as Ambassadors to Christ. We must be an example to Gentiles and being a lazy bum with a 1.2GPA is not setting a particularly good example.
Quote from CosmicSpore
3. Therefore, you imply you have knowledge in which at least 27.00~1% of these self-defined Christians are not following the teachings of Christ. (To reduce 77% to a minority you must reduce it down to less than 50%, which means at least 1 person above 27%.)
A little correction here:
Just being under 50% of the population doesn't make you a minority. It would if there were only 2 possible options, but there isn't. For example, let's say 49% of people are A, 31% are B and 20% are C, A is still the majority by a wide margin and C is the minority. When it comes to religion, it's even more split than this because of how many different religions there are, and that makes it even harder for Freedomna's argument, because he'd likely have to reduce it to under 15% to actually get it to possibly be considered a minority.
Mar 16, 2014Just to pop in and clarify what's been said.Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
Quote from Thunder_StrikeYou should not have to give up what you worked hard to earn, to someone who wont work just as hard as you.
The idea is that you didn't do this on your own. In fact, there's not a wealthy person out there who thinks they are solely responsible for their success (if they thought this, they wouldn't have been successful in the first place). You always owe your success on the society that props you up whether its in the form of social government infrastructure (highways, libraries, utilities, etc.), the connections you make along the way, or the people that you serve.
Because you are so dependent on all of these things, it makes sense that you'll be giving more back into it than others who don't need them as much to maintain their standard of living.
Quote from Thunder_StrikeToo many people abuse the welfare system, and don't pay taxes, yet they get to sit in thier house and watch Maury Povitch all day every day. Fix your god damn welfare system, then I might not be upset when you take my money to give it to them.
If you're in the US (which from this tone I'm going to assume), then this is an illusionary problem mostly perpetuated by the conservative media. It's victim blaming, which is something we're very good at in the US. We blame uneducated people for being ignorant despite the fact that it's never one's own fault when one isn't taught. We blame poor people for being poor despite a near Great Depression level economy that has persisted in this degenerate state for years now. This sort of victim blaming gets us nowhere, especially when it's entirely untrue. It's an insignificant percentage of people in the US who live off the government without really contributing to the country. They literally have no impact on our economy.
The problem with the welfare system in the US isn't that people are taking advantage of it, it's that the money that should be going into welfare is getting diverted into bailing out the mega rich or funding the country's continued imperial expansion. These are not liberal agendas. They're neo-conservative ones.
If you want to make the rest of the world laugh at you all you have to do is suggest that the problem with the US is that it's too liberal.
Mar 14, 2014The government is extremely authoritarian the government arresting and having Communists killed. Deng is a traitor and is a shame when he was purged Mao did not have him shot.Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
The growth in China was built prior to Deng taking power look at the Soviet Union massive impoverished country revolution and suddenly it advances to compete with the United States on the world stage as a super power in 30 years. "They could ruthlessly evict and tear down slummy old housing in historic Beijing, and the same process in a democratic country would take a long time. Such ruthless and effective leadership is great for taking control of a large population."You consider tossing people on the streets a good thing? China is a corrupt hell hole and I wait the day the underground Communists groups overthrow the current Capitalist government of China.
You consider the dissidents in Tienanmen Square a bad thing. They were calling for workers democracy over politics and the means of production. They were quoting Lenin and Marx they were workers and students appalled by the hijacking of their revolution by the capitalists.
I support all calls for the second Socialist revolution in China to kill all those who are in power who destroyed the government built by the workers in the initial revolution. The only thing the current leadership deserves is being shot in the street.
Mar 14, 2014MCFUser9145166 posted a message on ¡Personal! : What is your belief and why? (Religious/Agnostic/Atheist & Everything Inbetween)Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from CosmicSpore
This pitiful excuse for a theologist basically just implied that people with physical or mental disabilities, (like the one Jesus referred to in the scriptures he's attempting to explain!!!!!), were not actually part of God's design ("wonderfully made") and were INSTEAD, and let me use another quote from him.... "damaged".
I retract my support of this article, the guy did have a few good points but I will not condone the lack of tact he used when writing this. I will also talk to Dr. Jacoby about removing that article from his page and replace it with the one he used from the presentation I mentioned previously; I am sure he will agree with the both of us that writing of that sort is not the publicity you want on your webpage. It is revolting that the author would say that about his son as the way he used damaged implies that his son is not even human. So good points he may have brought up or not; the fact that the author would be unbiblical to make a statement like that...
I am going to find some (hopefully better) new sources and do a better job reading them. I am sorry to have wasted your (and my) time on Clayton's article.
Edit: Just messaged him. If I am not mistaken, he is currently on a plane towards California so I should have a response when he lands.
Edit 2: Thank you mysterious person who gave me rep.
Edit 3: If you give me until tomorrow I am going to watch the video Jacoby posted (and I linked to.) I want to triple check everything just to make sure I am not going to be surprised by any comments, and so I do not waste anyone's time. It is a 45min video after all. Until then, I am going out to eat so I may not post for the time being (depends if I get signal or not on my mobile).
Mar 14, 2014MCFUser9145166 posted a message on ¡Personal! : What is your belief and why? (Religious/Agnostic/Atheist & Everything Inbetween)Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from aranamor
Why do Christians even consider it necessary to 'tolerate' other religions, as if other faiths and beliefs are unpleasant and anathema to you? Do my neopagan leanings upset you somehow, despite not affecting you in any way whatsoever? My excuse for not liking Christianity is that it tries to involve itself in both governance and personal lives of people, whether they are Christian or not. You don't see Wiccan lobbyists demanding that teaching evolution in schools be sacked in favour of saying that all life springs forth from the mating of the Lord and Lady, do you? You don't have to tolerate the rest of us, because we don't try to take over your education, your personal lives, or bend laws to favour ourselves while penalizing you. Unfortunately, the rest of us have to tolerate you because Christianity and interference go hand to hand, and have done so since Augestine.
-The only thing that "upsets" me about other religions is that if I am right, they will never know God and to know God is to know happiness as one has never felt it before. I mean if I lost everything right now, but still had God; I have everything. I might be wrong, for all I know your faith is the truth and mine is not. All I hope is that you believe in your Gods as much as I believe in God.
-Way to group all Christians into one negative stereotype. Contrary to what the media wants you to think, not all Christians try to add creationism to schools. Not even most do... the reason that stereotype exists is because "Ordinary Christian goes to Church and worships God" doesn't draw in the viewers as much as "Fundie nutjob forces local school to teach world is 4,000 years old". People like watching the news to see (among other things) how bad others are to make themselves feel better. It is the same reason Reality TV is a big hit.
Quote from Unyobro
1-Because their faith teaches them that they are absolutely correct
2-and they should pity anyone who isn't enlightened like them. They must pander to the non believers so they can recruit them.
3-It's part of the indoctrination strategy. It's propaganda, they don't respect your beliefs at all.
-You make us seem so arrogant... I mean it is not like the Bible preaches humility or anything right?
-I dislike the term pity. It has very negative connotations. Yes I do feel bad at times that others do not know God, but that is because I see how well God works in others. How the faith changed the lives of so many people.
-Wow... I do not even know how to argue this. There is so much generalization here it is not even funny. Let me put this into perspective for you: What you just said is as misinformed and mad as me saying "Atheists are all intolerant sex addicts who want to get kids high on drugs".
Mar 12, 2014integerArray posted a message on Random Google Search : "Proof the bible is the word of God"Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and ScienceQuote from crafter200
No, most standard equations can predict something with absolute certainty. Newtons second law (F=MA) predicts the force of a moving object with absolute certainty. You could say there are other factors which create dynamic variables, but that was not the point I was trying to make about the math. It works 100% of the time with 100% accuracy.
No, not at all, really. Physics equations are just models. They work extremely well, but there's no way of saying that they are 100% exactly the way the universe works. If, for example, Schrodinger's equation were exactly how the universe worked, then there would be no reason for it to break down when applied to black holes. Similarly, if general relativity were exactly how things worked, then it shouldn't fail to describe quantum effects. Those are two of the most accurate ideas in physics and they don't work together. Clearly, neither is 100%.
- To post a comment, please login.