Logic dictates that there is a God!

[vtmarik]

Things the Christians or those that associated with Christians stole:

1) Monotheism: by claiming that their god is the one TRUE god.
2) Christmas: the fir tree, the concept of "yule" and the yule log, the date of Jesus' birth (as it is clear from the scripture that Jesus wasn't born in December. The shepherds would not be out with their flocks, the Palestinian winters are too cold).
3) Easter: The bunny as a symbol of fertility, eggs as an additional symbol
4) The Cross: An ancient alchemical symbol depicting the quartering of the universe into passive and active principles. Also, a symbol for healers.
5) Jesus: According to the scripture, Jesus had skin of bronze and hair like sheep's wool. Yes, the scripture says that Jesus was a black man. Yet you guys stole the name and transformed him into a long-haired white drifter who looks like a young Kris Kristofferson.

There are others, but I can't think of them right now.

[Zackismet]

I really hope someone has mentioned the ontilogical arguement.

If nobody has, all of this posting has been a complete waste of time.

[Zackismet]

and omfg- i've read what jay2 says...

and i've changed my mind to who i think is the most retarded person on CC... At first i thought it was nyg...

but jay, you beat him by a long shot


(when i say retarded, i mean it in the literal sense- the slowest mind on CC- i do not mean mentally handicapped)

[Lurker]

Sorry, just found it

Politics and Religion turns me on (intellectually speaking)

But i still prefer a nice pair of eyes and boobs

snip

Well, I agree about prefering the eyes but I would rather have nice legs since folks have 'discovered' augmentation...

[Heimdall]

I really hope someone has mentioned the ontilogical arguement.

If nobody has, all of this posting has been a complete waste of time.

That arguement is the silliest argument i ever heard. For those of you who don't know, the argument works by examining the concept of God, and arguing that it implies the actual existence of God; that is, if we can conceive of God, then God exists — it is thus self-contradictory to state that God does not exist.

If this were true, it would mean that anything that humans conceive does exist (Easter Bunny, Mother Goose, Santa Claus, ...)

Ontological Argument

[Zackismet]

Ah, but you're forgetting that you first have to accept that we exist within a multiverse before even rationalizing the existence of god through its own defenition.

[Zackismet]

Okay… I’m going to start with the basics. Jay, I’m not saying you’re wrong in claiming there’s a god- but some of your claims are… wrong- to say the least. Anything I don’t quote you on, I agree with or find nothing wrong with it.

Now science has said, Life cannot come from non-life

Yes, science said- past tense. There have been hundreds of conclusive experiments based off the initial research of Stanley Miller that have proven basic essential RNA and nucleotide elements can arise from inorganic compounds of the primitive earth through simulations which mimic what is believed to be the conditions of primitive earth. I have conducted the isolated simulations myself in my AP biology class. Life can come from non-life.

Science also dictates evolution could never have happened
…. Evolution my friend is an imposibility.... Science teaches the ability to SPEAK is a LEARNED behavior!.... WHY do we not see it all around us???

1st- Wow, that first part- I don’t even know how to respond to. Read a book.
2nd- Speaking is not considered an evolutionary trait, it is an adaptation.
3rd- We do see evolution all around us. The resistant virus strains, the larvae that can live in pure DDT- all from natural selection. Evolution is not a magical changing force of nature, it’s simply a label. These changes exist through mutation of DNA strands that are usually so minor that nothing happens. However, sometime the triplet sequence for the amino acid will code for an entirely separate protein- that’s when a new trait will become apparent. And if this new trait allows the individual to reproduce more successively than its brethren, it will become the dominate phenotype. Evolution has just taken place.

I don't care how slow it is there would be fossil evidence of this process occuring.

THERE IS FOSSIL EVIDENCE. Simple fact, nothing to argue. And you know what? There actually WERE lizards with feathers. The Dromaeosaur, a close relative to the well-known Velociraptor, developed feathers for warmth before their offspring eventually took to the skies.

But there is NO concrete evidence that evolution ever occured. (That is the transformation of one spiecies into another totally different spiecies over a long period of time)

The definition of species is simply a new breed that cannot, in any circumstance, mate with another and produce a fertile offspring. This has actually been observed among many species of the animalia kingdom in recent years (recent being the past couple hundred). The change is actually quite abrupt, after a certain phenotypes have been gained by natural selection- in their offspring these is suddenly a being that cannot mate with its relatives. This is a new species. Usually they produce no offspring since no others like them are born, but every now and then there are- and this is the beginning of a new species.

And I’m too lazy to find anything you’re wrong about scientifically. You should just ignore science since you can obviously not comprehend even the slightest insinuations it poses- stick to what you do know about the bible.

[Backglass]

Wow...talk about your "Resurrection"!

HERE WE GO AGAIN KIDS!!!!!!!!!!!!

any one can make a basic form of life just by using chemicals that you got around the home

I'd respond to this...... but I can't stop laughing!

Although I still contend that this gods/angels/demons/leprechauns business is just folklore....I must agree with jay. Thats pretty comical!

If this were true, it would mean that anything that humans conceive does exist (Easter Bunny, Mother Goose, Santa Claus)

And all this time while Heimdall was kicking my ASS at classic...I was cursing a fellow free-thinker.

BROTHER!!!

Good luck with jay, Heimdall. You will eventually reach a point where he shuts down, threatens to leave CC forever, then just decides to ignore you as your arguments arent valid in his world (ie: You didnt drink the christian kool-aid).

HEY JAY!: Jesus help you stop that smoking for good? Or did he let you down and you started back up again?

[heavycola]

OK, zackismet for prez.

Lions: 10
Creationists: 0

How about the nativity: there was a local census ordered by Quirinius, it's true, but it took place years after King Herod died. How do we know? Contemporary documentary evidence. The two accounts are absolutely, factually incompatible.
And why would the Romans have ordered Jospeh to return to the birthplace of David, his supposed ancestor of 1,000 years previously? It's like my government ordering me back to Normandy because that's where my ancestors were living in 1007. It's insane. Bottom line: the messiah was prophesied as being born in Bethlehem, so Mark & Matthew had to invent ways to get him there. Kings coming to worship, virgin birth - all stolen 100% from Hellenic mythology, as Harry said, to soften those people up for conversion.
Not to mention the different accounts of Jospeh's lineage in different gospels - almost no crossover of ancestors! And doesn't the virgin birth mean that NONE of Jospeh's DNA was present in jesus, thus sinking the 'line of david' prophecies?

In short: the NT has been useful as a code for living, sure, but theological scholarship has shown christianity to be essentially false.

End of thread.

[jay_a2j]

Not to mention the different accounts of Jospeh's lineage in different gospels - almost no crossover of ancestors! And doesn't the virgin birth mean that NONE of Jospeh's DNA was present in jesus, thus sinking the 'line of david' prophecies?

(smiles) Umm you need to study scripture a little more before discounting it as bunk. I am currently doing a study and this very thing was explained. There are two liniages of David's line to Jesus. One is in Mathew the other in Luke. The lines are the same until all of a sudden there is a difference in the two lineages in these two Gospels. Why? Some would say this is a contradiction but they are not. Because one is the liniage of Joseph and the other is the liniage of Mary. Yes, it is true. Joseph and Mary were distant cousins. And there you have your explanation. Jesus was born in the line of David.... through Mary and also Joseph decended from David.

[Backglass]

I see. Your silence is telling. <sigh>.

I am sorry Jay. I guess god didnt want you to kick your addiction. You probably didnt pray hard enough, or believe enough in him for if you did...he would have smote your drug addiction and banished it to hell.

Try harder next time, wont ya? You just have to pray harder next time...you obviously didnt believe in him quite enough.

[jay_a2j]

I see. Your silence is telling. <sigh>.

I am sorry Jay. I guess god didnt want you to kick your addiction. You probably didnt pray hard enough, or believe enough in him for if you did...he would have smote your drug addiction and banished it to hell.

Try harder next time, wont ya? You just have to pray harder next time...you obviously didnt believe in him quite enough.

One succeeding in quitting smoking has nothing to do with how hard they pray nor questioning Gods ability to remove an addiction.

On the contrary on New Years Eve I did pray for God to help me quit. And it was too easy. I had no cravings, no desire to smoke at all. Then free will comes in and we make a choice. The truth is, I enjoy smoking.... I have never been a heavy smoker (1/2 pack a day). But there is good news... I have switched to lights. And when I am ready to stop smoking..... I will...and God will be there to help out.


You need to stop blamming God for the choices WE humans make. I may still smoke..... but I haven't had one symtom of MS in 16 years. And if my God is big enough to take a disease like MS away, He surely can handle a nicotine addiction with a willing participant.

[heavycola]

Not to mention the different accounts of Jospeh's lineage in different gospels - almost no crossover of ancestors! And doesn't the virgin birth mean that NONE of Jospeh's DNA was present in jesus, thus sinking the 'line of david' prophecies?

(smiles) Umm you need to study scripture a little more before discounting it as bunk. I am currently doing a study and this very thing was explained. There are two liniages of David's line to Jesus. One is in Mathew the other in Luke. The lines are the same until all of a sudden there is a difference in the two lineages in these two Gospels. Why? Some would say this is a contradiction but they are not. Because one is the liniage of Joseph and the other is the liniage of Mary. Yes, it is true. Joseph and Mary were distant cousins. And there you have your explanation. Jesus was born in the line of David.... through Mary and also Joseph decended from David.

Umm... the lines aren't the same, they start with different sons of Solomon. And why is Matthew's lineage incomplete?

the way you read the bible - as 100% literal, god-given truth (apart from the bits that need to be interpreted differently, obviously ) means that one screw up and it all comes topling down. So of course you have evangelicals telling you that one is Mary's line, despite the fact they both end in Josephs. Why didn't god just say straight out it was mary's line, possibly by including mary in it?

Obviously your MS remission is amazing, but there are 350,000-400,000 MS sufferers in the US alone. It's not a great strike rate for god really is it?

[WL_southerner]

jay there is the 5th gospel that the church kick out in 12th cent the gospel of judus they also change alot other things to make the bible to what they wanted so how can you take the bible to be true

[vtmarik]

The lineages in Matthew and Luke are there because both Matthew and Luke didn't believe in the concept of the virgin birth. If they did, they would have never attempted to link Joseph to that lineage.

One of the conditions of the messiah is that he be descended from the line of Solomon and David. Unfortunately, since God is his dad, he can't be descended by blood. So that's why the "Oh, that second lineage is Mary's" and "Oh, well, she became a part of the family when she married Joseph" arguments exist, to deflect from this glaring oversight in the scripture.

[MR. Nate]

there is the 5th gospel that the church kick out in 12th cent the gospel of judus they also change alot other things to make the bible to what they wanted so how can you take the bible to be true

Do me a favor: Learn Koine greek. Go to Duke university. Read the manuscripts from the 1st century. Translate it. Compare it to the NASB.

As far as the Gnostic gospels - all are dated between the 2nd and 5th century. They were only held by a small minority of those who claimed to be Christian. They have lots of mistakes, which is why they weren't included in the cannon. The other books . . . not so much.

On the lineage - ancient lineages tend to not name everybody. The number don't work well if you work out average ages. The author would make a lineage with the important names, leaving out the unimportant ones. So instead of my being MR. Nate, son of Dave, son of Kurt, son of Ed, They'd knock out Dave & Kurt because they weren't significant, but Ed, well, he was a hero, so everybody recognized him. The "son" is better translated descendent. So occasionally, even when we have the same list, the names are different (theres a few in Genesis like this) It's a question of what each author was seeking to highlight in that lineage.

[Backglass]

On the contrary on New Years Eve I did pray for God to help me quit.

Evidently, not hard enough or your god of choice wouldnt have abandoned you in your hour of need.

The truth is, I enjoy smoking....

Why didnt you just pray really hard when the urge to do more drugs hit you? Surely he would have helped you out...right?

I may still smoke..... but I haven't had one symtom of MS in 16 years. And if my God is big enough to take a disease like MS away, He surely can handle a nicotine addiction with a willing participant.

Ahhh yes...the TV Healer. So in your mind your magical storybook god chose to cure you of one disease while ignoring the one that kills hundreds of thousands annually? By my calculations, you were already a nicotine addict when you were "healed". Why didnt your magic-healing god just take care of all your problems at the same time? Was the "feeling that washed over you" only the "MS Magic dust" and not the "Drug Addiction Magic dust"? You would think this magician would have a "Fix Everything!" bag of magic dust for the true believers. Hmmm...maybe he does, but you just didnt qualify.

My conclusion? It must have been something you did. Shame on you. Pray harder. Give more next Sunday.

Hey! Too bad there arent any TV Preachers who specialize in making those smoking demons "COME OUT" huh!

Keep checking the TV Guide, will ya?

[WL_southerner]

nate check again your on about ordox r/c was the one that changed the bible when it was based in france and not rome where it is now it was there version that got adopted all round the world and if you are up to date on things then you know that few scriptures have been found in a jar in a desert that do back up the 5th gospel

[Hamlet]

OK, zackismet for prez.

Lions: 10
Creationists: 0

How about the nativity: there was a local census ordered by Quirinius, it's true, but it took place years after King Herod died. How do we know? Contemporary documentary evidence. The two accounts are absolutely, factually incompatible.
And why would the Romans have ordered Jospeh to return to the birthplace of David, his supposed ancestor of 1,000 years previously? It's like my government ordering me back to Normandy because that's where my ancestors were living in 1007. It's insane. Bottom line: the messiah was prophesied as being born in Bethlehem, so Mark & Matthew had to invent ways to get him there. Kings coming to worship, virgin birth - all stolen 100% from Hellenic mythology, as Harry said, to soften those people up for conversion.
Not to mention the different accounts of Jospeh's lineage in different gospels - almost no crossover of ancestors! And doesn't the virgin birth mean that NONE of Jospeh's DNA was present in jesus, thus sinking the 'line of david' prophecies?

In short: the NT has been useful as a code for living, sure, but theological scholarship has shown christianity to be essentially false.

End of thread.

hate to say it but "of the line of DAvid" doesnt mean he was josephs son. it means jospeh claimed him as is son therefore jesus inherited his lineage. lineagae then isnt the saame as today. by the way i am not a christian dont bother lumping me with the jesus freaks i was just pointing something out

[heavycola]

See?

[unriggable]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... t=Abstract
http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/ ... rigin.html
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=2219

Prove to us that you really want to show us your point and read these. (Amino Acids were not one of the original additions of life - they came from comets later)

But anyways, you are wrong. I don't really know how else to say it. We have proved evolution so many times over, it isn't even worth it anymore. Really, you don't offer advice anymore. Here's the deal to proving evolution is true:

Do you agree that molecules from the air that settle to the ground will create a thin layer, much like a tree ring? You have to, because this is one of the way scientists know how old archaeological digs are.

If you answered yes, then do you agree that there IS indeed a way of finding out how old something is, and that something from today could not find itself in the deep grounds of the, say, cretaceous period, because we could analyze the soil compounds around the said object and find out what age it is from?

If you said yes, do you agree that there has been no human (homo sapien) skeleton residue found within the last several hundred thousand years, no homo erectus skeleton found within the last million or so years AND not up to / past about the time homo sapien started appearing...?

If you agree to these three, you have just proven to yourself evolution is true. Congratulations!

[unriggable]

Also your logic for why things are the way they are is complete bullshit. "Well its all happened by chance so there". Wrong. The necessities for life are somewhat simple - have an atmosphere that is not too thick and not too thin. Earth has that...but did you know that Titan, Saturn's moon, does too? It's not that uncommon, in fact, there must by millions of planets capable of supporting life in the universe (whether they have life is different).
The other thing about how your theory is bullshit is simple: "Well if it happened by chance, would we really be like this?". No. But we would be different, and we wouldn't know what ELSE we could be, therefore we would be asking the same question (even if we were frogs, we wouldn't know what else we could be, we'd still say "What are the odds that we would be like this if we evolved by chance?"). Think outside the god damned box. I can't stand people like you who only think what they see and hear.

[jay_a2j]

OMG! Revived! And on Valentines Day! Sweet!

[unriggable]

Hey! Let's escape the fact that I'm wrong...
...douschebag.

[heavycola]

Hey! Let's escape the fact that I'm wrong...
...douschebag.

A warning, sir:
This thread is tricky. You start off knowing you are right, arguing well, making strong points rooted in science and rationality, and then you come up against closed-minded nonsense, tinfoil hat weirdness and the old questions like "Well how come there are no half-fish-half-monkeys then?" and you start to wonder why you are still bothering, and then you cry softly to yourself and vow never to post in here again.