jump to last post 1-50 of 114 discussions (693 posts)

Leave us alone.

  1. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 7 years ago

    Having posted many times on matters pertaining to evolution and creation, many evolutionists can't help but rebut. In no uncertain terms at times. But just to play your game for a moment, and supposing you are right, I am simply a product of my "personal evolution". I have been shaped by my genes, and my society, through my generations (same as you). I have therefore got into a branch of evolutionary (sub)species that is classified "religious".
    Does that make me (and others like me) vulnerable to other (sub)species, that are of the "atheistic evolutionary" branch? And if so, it demonstrates the "survival of the fittest" aspect of the theory, and one of us will survive and the other not (ultimatey). Or ar we yet another species targetted for extinction? Alternatively, just leave us alone! We can't help what evolution has made us.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      lol

      Please read what I have written about evolution. Biological evolution has nothing to do with "personal evolution," or society, and religionism is not a sub-species that has been "targetted for extinction."

      Evolution didn't make you ignorant of biology - you did that yourself - free will?

      Tell you what though - you guys stop telling me there is an invisible magical super being in the sky with a set of rules. I will stop telling you it is rubbish. Deal? big_smile

      1. BDazzler profile image82
        BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        And then hubpages traffic would drop 50% ... big_smile

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I was thinking of charging........ big_smile

          1. AEvans profile image72
            AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I believe in that invisible magical super being, spaghetti monster, by the way Mark you forgot to add the Meatballs!!!big_smile Big {Hugs}

            1. dcmerkle profile image60
              dcmerkleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Hey! That would have to be organic meatballs! wink

      2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Quick reality check for you: The "invisible magical super being in the sky with a set of rules" is this any different from "the law of gravity"? It's invisible and it operates according to specific rules.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Quick reality check for you.

          Yes - it is completely different. The Flying Spaghetti monster may be invisible, but you claim He is not the creator if the Universe.

          By your reasoning, anything that is invisible must exist, so why do you deny that FSM created the Universe?

          You are a selective atheist and therefore a hypocrite. As are all believers.

          And LOL - Once again - another one here with a user name that sounds very like "Money Changers" arguing for a god with a set of rules. lol

          Wonderful irony. Thank you.

      3. Make  Money profile image72
        Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I'll put my stamp on aka-dj's post concerning "Leave us alone".

        Mark you say "religionism is not a sub-species that has been "targetted for extinction."  But some of your posts that claim you can't wait until religion is put out of existence sure rings of genocide.  Is this a communist plot?  You are coming to the Religion forums on your own accord so expect to continue to see posts about religion, God, the Bible and Jesus Christ.  If you don't like it you know what you can do.

        1. quicksand profile image84
          quicksandposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          smile

        2. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Make Money Changers - I was quoting dj and have no intention of leaving you alone. You must admit having me here is more fun that arguing amongst yourselves as to who interpreted which bit of the fairy tale to mean what?

          Not sure why you think I am a communist other than to start a fight - which I see a lot from religionists. Do I take it then that I should start lumping all of you as the same and assume that you prefer forced sex with under-age boys simply because you are a catholic?

          1. Make  Money profile image72
            Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I don't lump all atheists as communists although your belief system is so close to a communist it's uncanny.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Well, feel free to elaborate using quotes to show how my belief system is communist. If I was to describe my political leaning, I would have to call myself a moderate anarchist in that I think what we need is less government, but it is a necessary evil we cannot dispense with completely.

              1. Make  Money profile image72
                Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Mark it's funny that you describe yourself as an anarchist.  I just stumbled upon this Islamic web site (finally one that denounces terrorism) that states "Darwin legitimized violence by claiming that humans are, in essence, animals struggling for life."  It quotes this from the Koran "Those who make mischief in the earth: theirs is the curse."  Sounds like it's describing an anarchist to me.  I found this web site in the top spot of 637,000 web sites for a Google search for "Communism and Darwinism".
                http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/ … alism.html

                So to the comparisons:

                1. Soviet Russia was the first country to legalize abortion in 1920.

                Any threads denouncing abortion Mark attacks like a growling Russian bear.

                2. From the above site "This relationship between Darwinism and communism goes right back to the founders of both these 'isms.' Marx and Engels, the founders of communism, read Darwin's The Origin of Species as soon as it came out, and were amazed at is 'dialectical materialist' attitude."  Look under the sub-title "The Bloody Alliance: Darwinism and Communism".

                Mark seems fascinated by Darwin too.

                3. After the Communist Russian Revolution they first attacked organized religion in an attempt to stamp it out.

                Mark continually attacks any thread in here concerning organized religion.  Meanwhile he is coming to these Religion forums on his own accord.

                4. Communist Russia killed over 65 million of their own Russian citizens, mostly Christians.

                In a few posts Mark has stated that he can't wait until organized religion goes out of existence.

                5. Soviet Russia had a group called the League of the Militant Godless that attacked religion in an organized way.

                Mark seems to be trying to gather his own flock of militant godless.

                1. Inspirepub profile image87
                  Inspirepubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  You have made an error of logic.

                  You argument is structured thusly:

                  Communists do X.
                  Mark does X.
                  Therefore, Mark is a Communist.

                  This argument is logically flawed, but many people fail to see the flaw.

                  Perhaps you will be better able to see it if I use some simpler terms, keeping the same structure.

                  Birds whistle.
                  Mark whistles.
                  Therefore, Mark is a bird.

                  Can you see the problem with the reasoning now?

                  Jenny

      4. 0
        sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mark, please tell me what wind actually is.

        1. Paraglider profile image90
          Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Eat some re-heated rhubarb and you'll never ask that question again...

        2. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Read your bible Sandra. All the facts you need are in there................ big_smile

          1. 0
            sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Sorry, the Bible doesn't even tell me what wind actually is.  I was asking you because I though you would have an answer. smile

            1. aka-dj profile image79
              aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The FSM stirring the heavenly pot of noodles caused the hurricanes, which in turn generated all other winds. Quite simple, really. lol lol

              1. 0
                sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                LOL, or the serpent passed gas.  big_smile

                1. aka-dj profile image79
                  aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  After eating rhubarb! Or was that cabbage? lollol

                2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                  TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  That is funny. What is the point of the question about wind and the bible exactly, I don't get it. Should the bible explain the DepartmentMotorVehicles too? Or what about Pepsi and Coca-Cola and Microsoft?

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    This is  a reference to some one who believes that the wind moving  leaf is proof that their particular god exists.

                    We also like to have a little fun. Guess you don't go in for that sort of thing huh?

            2. Lady Guinevere profile image61
              Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Sandra, nice to see you around.  There aren't many answers in the Bible because it was put together by men who only put enough answers in it so they could be the ones they would ask.  God forbid they go elsewhere for the answers to the questions that won't be answered.  They would be told they would go to hell and fire and brimstone and that Satan would get them.  Only if they actually did research they would find there ins't a Satan or a Devil in the hebrew Bible and the history and what was used in the Bible today are mostly fabrications.  Now some will say that I am Satan's followrer because I went and did research and am still getting answers to my questions. The bible was put together by MAN and therefore Man was in control of everything--espeically woman.  They took Lillith and crucified her because she would not listen to Adam.  She was his Equal, but MAN did not like that.  The Satan they believe just disregarded God and is after us is not that at all.  Satan was told by God to worship Adam.  Satan didn't want to do that becasue he was God's first Angel and he was not evil at all.  He was God's adversary --for God not against God at all.  He was in charge of judging man to keep man on tract with God.not to kill him or steal him or make him into ungodly things.

              1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Actually in Matthew 4:10 the word satan is used. In the original Greek text it reads "satanas". I put your argument into standard form for you. And here's what it would look like if presented in a logical format.

                Major Premise:  Man is unreliable
                Minor Premise:  The bible was put together by man.
                Conclusion:       Therefore, the bible is unreliable

                Now I will refute this argument by counterexample, observe....

                Major Premise:  Man is unreliable
                Minor Premise:  Man wrote your history books
                Conclusion:       Therefore, your history books are unreliable

                Shall I keep going?

                Major Premise:  Man is unreliable
                Minor Premise:  Man wrote your prescriptions
                Conclusion:       Therefore, your prescriptions are unreliable

                Ok, I think I made my point, but I will give you one more;

                Major Premise:  Man is unreliable
                Minor Premise:  Albert Einstein was a man
                Conclusion:       The discoveries of Albert Einstein are unreliable

                1. LondonGirl profile image92
                  LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, LG said, "in the Hebrew Bible". Matthew isn't in the Old Testament / Torah, is it now?

                  1. BDazzler profile image82
                    BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Not sure where she got her information, but it occurs 23 times in teh Old Testement.

                    It is tyically pronounced saw-tawn'

                    It is spelled Shin,Tav,Nun

                    It's general meaning is "Aversary" or "One who withsands or opposes"

                    It occurs as follows:

                    Numbers 2 times
                    1 Samuel 1 time
                    2 Samuel 1 time
                    1 Kings 4 1 time
                    1 Chronicles 1 time
                    Job 11 times
                    Psalms 1 time
                    Zechariah 2 times.

                    As I said, I don't know where she got her information from and I've only taken one Hebrew class, but I'm sure this is correct.

                  2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Again? I'm not even going to bother answering you any more. Why don't you just go count beans somewhere. : ) Just in case you don't get the humor, that's what we call accountants, and since you're so focused on the mundane, you should just be an accountant, if you are already not one.

                2. Lady Guinevere profile image61
                  Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  All fine and good only I said the orginal HEBREW text.  Different language, different translation and definition.

                3. Sufidreamer profile image81
                  Sufidreamerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  That one - The problem is, as any historian knows, is that history books are unreliable.

                  Read a Greek history book; any mention of Greek atrocities against the Turkish populations is omitted. Likewise, a Turkish textbook omits any mention of atrocities against Greek civilians. Therefore, history books are unreliable.

                  Working backwards through his own logic, that means man is unreliable. If man is unreliable, then the Bible must be.

                  I need more Ouzo. hmm

                  1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Simple. If you are not going believe the bible because man wrote it, than stick to that premise. You can't on one hand deny the credibility of the bible based on the premise that what man wrote is unreliable and then turn around and believe something else that man wrote. If man is unreliable, are you not a man? Therefore what you just typed is unreliable. Why is it that people get lost in examples? Do they do this on purpose or is it just attention deficit disorder? Or is it an indirect attempt to dissuade me from refuting by counterexample?

                4. Inspirepub profile image87
                  Inspirepubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I have never seen anyone claim that any history book, medical prescription, or even Albert Einstein was the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth.

                  Everything in science is always a working hypothesis until something better comes along.

                  Only religions claim perfection and infallibility for their "words of God".

                  Jenny

                  1. RKHenry profile image79
                    RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    You've drawn this absolute conclusion how?  Or should one approach this view as an opinion and not absolutism?  Yes.

          2. Make  Money profile image72
            Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Stumped again eh Mark.  Good one Sandra. smile

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Your IQ is showing Mike. I thought she was joking. smile

          3. Rose Ella Morton profile image59
            Rose Ella Mortonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            The wind is enternal no one know exactly where it start, or where it exactly end. There are many subject and question in this universe that man will never have the knowledge to answer or fully understand.

    2. MBP42 profile image61
      MBP42posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Huh? Are you a Christian or an Evolutionist? You didn't make any sense.

      1. Paraglider profile image90
        Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The two don't have to be mutually exclusive

        1. aka-dj profile image79
          aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          That depends on ones view of creation. Either He created everything, or evolved everything. To me it is m/exclusive.

          1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
            Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Not true!  He may have created everything and it evolved thrugh that thing you call FREE WILL, but it was still created in the beginning!  Just as your thought is creted by you and then it evolves through change of an outside stimulus.

            1. aka-dj profile image79
              aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              What's not true? How does one know what's true. Is it a relative, based on time, or perspective? I do not dispute parts of evolution, but, its a small part only. So, evolution, creation, are diametrically opposed. They cannot be both true at the same time. Or is logic out the window on subjects like that? hmm

              1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                It is not that hard to understand dj. big_smile

              2. Lady Guinevere profile image61
                Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                So how do you know if you ave the trut about religion?  How do you know that there is a True God?  You can't see any of them and you can't see any of them in the process of evolving.  See the same can be said about what you think too.
                Have you ever thought about something and planeed it and it didn't have the results to you were expecting?  Isn't that the same thing?

                1. 0
                  sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  That would be because God is unchanging and you cannot see evolution for what it is but you can identify it by what it produces.  The same thing can be said about God, like the process of evolution itself is unchanging, so too is God unchanging but people evolve in Spirit just as life evolves physically.  wink

                  Everything can be true and false at the same time.  Depends on they eyes of the beholder doesn't it?

                  1. BDazzler profile image82
                    BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    It's even more complicated than that ... there are things that are true. There are things that are false.

                    Then there is perception.

                    Then there is communication of that perception.

                    It's like the STNG Episode Darmok and Jesus' description of the Kingdom of Heaven wink

      2. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        You have obviously not been around to read my posts in the past. I suggest you have a look at my profile, read the post again, and all shall be revealed! cool

    3. RKHenry profile image79
      RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'm curious about something.  I went to the original post and reread it.  Here it is.

      After 25+ pages and some 620+ replies, what is the consences?  Does anybody agree on anything?  Has anybody changed their minds?  And. Was anything ultimately decided concerning this matter or not?

      1. Paraglider profile image90
        Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Why expect consensus? Religion is about 'knowing' you have the truth and everyone else is wrong! lol

        1. mohitmisra profile image61
          mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Sorry Paraglider but that's the reason a man of god knowledge is called master. smile

          1. Paraglider profile image90
            Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, but in Scotland every boy is called Master until he's old enough to be called Mister smile

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              When I was a kid - it was any public schoolboy. At some point (can't remember when) you became an esquire - then you became Mister.

              1. mohitmisra profile image61
                mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Master- an enlightened one.

                1. aka-dj profile image79
                  aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  If you have faith as a child. Younger is better of than older(and so well educated). lol

                  1. mohitmisra profile image61
                    mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    One needs to become like a child again to enter heaven- absolutely no ego.

            2. mohitmisra profile image61
              mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              We are on a Religion forum so the context is religious and you know it.Master means an enlightened one or Brahmin or knower of God , an awakened one. smile
              Master also means a Captain at sea etc etc but we are not going off in a different tangent. smile

        2. Aya Katz profile image89
          Aya Katzposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Come on, Paraglider, it doesn't have to be like that! That's only true of monotheistic religions. When there are many gods, you don't have to doubt the existence of someone else's god in order to believe in your own. Then the argument is merely: "My god is more powerful than your god, and my priest can turn more rods into snakes than yours!"

          1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
            Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Some new or old information to throw in here.  When the switch to monotheistic God came about they didn't get rid of the old many gods, they made them into the Saints they have today.

          2. Paraglider profile image90
            Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I know smile   I was gently prodding some of our more zealous brethern (or cistern).

  2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Scientific research is conducted by using "hypothetical premises", and until they come up with hypothetical premises that better explain the phenomenon in question or until the "hypothesis" is disproved they stick with their "hypothesis". To look at the topic of God's existence from a scientific standpoint, is one's belief in God's existence so absurd of a "hypothetical premise"? Has this "hypothetical premise" been disproved? Or do "evolutionists" only refute hypothesis that they aren't comfortable with and accept the ones they like assuming that both had sufficient evidence to at least be considered?

    1. Paraglider profile image90
      Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You're closer to describing scientific method than some people here. But you didn't mention that to count as scientific, the hypothesis has to be stated in a falsifiable form. gravity and evolution are so stated. God's existence is not.

      1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I beg to differ. For one thing, the case for "gravity" is a "deductive argument" whereas "evolution" is an "inductive" argument. The conclusions of deductive arguments that are "valid" and have true "premises" are never wrong, false or "unsound" to be exact. No new evidence can change the conclusion of a deductively sound argument. By contrast, an inductive argument is only sound in appearance until new contradicting evidence surfaces. So with an inductive argument, there is always the possibility of a new verdict. And the hypothesis for God's existence IS falsifiable. I will give you a day to figure it out. If not, no worries, I will still share it with you anyway. I'm not afraid to share what I know. I don't "beg the question" like many Darwinist's always do. Reflect therefore......

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The fairy tale of a god is not falsifiable. Because there is no evidence or reasoning to falsify. You are starting from the premise that there is a god rather than working towards one.

          I have evidence that the stories in the bible were taken from other sources. And I can prove they were. Does this mean that you will accept that the bible is not the word of a god when I have proven this to you?

          And I beg the question for you to provide some measurable, falsifiable data. Anything really. big_smile

        2. earnestshub profile image86
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Unfortunately the loan consultant sounds like...............well...... a lone consultant! Give a day to figure it out? How about 20 seconds. Your arrogance is showing and frankly so is your ignorance. To bamboozle you have to actually know something first, not just run words past your lips that sound clever to you alone. .

        3. LondonGirl profile image92
          LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          It's hard to take "anything" seriously with quite so many "inverted" commas in the "reasoning", I find.

          1. Sterling Sage profile image75
            Sterling Sageposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            "I" don't know what you "mean." Is there something "distracting" about putting "too many words" in "quotes?" I think it's perfectly "clear." lol

        4. Paraglider profile image90
          Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Not true, even about gravity. Before Newton's contribution, Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler and others were simply measuring and describing the movement of stars and planets. Kepler demonstrated that a planet in an elliptical orbit sweeps out equal areas in equal time intervals.  He was accurate, but empirical. He merely said - this is what happens. Newton demonstrated that this behaviour could be explained if there was an inverse square force GMm/r^2 acting radially between any two masses. (He also evaluated G, the universal gravitational constant). But this was not deductive. It was intuitive. It was also wrong and was superseded in time by Einstein's relativity which encompasses Newtonian mechanics without requiring gravitational attraction.

          1. aka-dj profile image79
            aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I was once rebutted for posting "religious" material in the "science" subject. I now have to sa, this one should be in the "science", and not the "religion" topic. hmm

            1. Paraglider profile image90
              Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Fair enough, but LoanConsultant first came up with a spurious pseudo-scientific argument which I felt should not be allowed to stand unchallenged, in case anyone might be tempted to believe it!

              1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                So are you here to prevent anyone from believing in God? If you are wrong, what does this mean for you? If I am wrong, what does it mean for me? Who is worse off, if wrong? Something to think about.

                1. Paraglider profile image90
                  Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  No. That's Mark's mission and he's doing a sterling job without my help! I don't care what people believe, having dispensed with belief in my own life (as far as possible). But I do care when people appear to be trying to mislead others by pseudo-scientific argument. Because that does a disservice to science.

            2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
              TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I really don't like the term religious. It comes from a Latin term "religare" which means; to bind. I think a better rendering is "metaphysics". Meta; change   Physics; nature. To change your nature....The realm of the spirit gave birth to nature. Science attempts to understand all of the ramifications, why's and wherefore's. Science is helpful and learning is good obviously. But with a little understanding of the laws of nature men begin exalting themselves against God. Instead of showing God appreciation for revealing the laws of nature to us through scientists we rebel against Him.

          2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
            TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Again, empirical is deductive, don't you know this? Regardless of who discovered gravity and who explained it, as it stands now, it is still deductive and empirical, unlike evolution. I will not put commas anymore for added emphasis because some get distracted by it. And at least you keep your rebuttals focused on the issues in question. Very much appreciated

            1. Paraglider profile image90
              Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Again you seem not to have understood me. I was saying that the contribution pre-Newton was empirical - mathematical description of observed data, without explanation. Newton's contribution was not empirical or deductive because it is impossible to deduce Gravity from the data. He postulated Gravity. That is intuitive. And he put it forward in a falsifiable way. and no-one could falsify it for about 250 years.

              Where I could agree with you is that evolution is in the area of proto-science, unlike classical physics. Such proto-sciences are subject to statistical analysis, which is not wholly deterministic. So, yes, there is more room for doubt, even though the analysis to date has been overwhelmingly in favour of Darwinian theory (within it's original field).

              1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                This was my point from the very beginning of this discussion. Although it took you a while to recognize the validity of my argument at least someone here on this forum is being logical. There is one thing I have noticed that is quite common in these types of forums. Namely the highlighting of irrelevant details. Most people have short attention spans and their faculties of concentration are atrophied. Therefore I try to be as concise as possible. If I agree with someone 3 years later no one even remembers what it is that I'm agreeing with and the validity of the argument is downplayed. If we are truly seeking the truth, there should be no attempts however subtle to distract the minds of students. This is manipulative. I can manipulate too, if I wanted too. But I don't want to manipulate people into believing in God and the bible. I want them to discover the truth for themselves, that way if their faith is tested it will withstand the fire. I just present my case in a logical format and leave it up to them to decide. If I wanted, I could use various mind manipulative techniques, but that is witchcraft which is an abomination to God. Einstein's rendering of Gravity is excellent, if it may be stated as such. But notice how The Wright Bros. did not consult with him on formulating their airplane. Refrain from analysis paralysis. Yes, Newton's rendering was intuitive and many of Einstein's works were also intuitive as well as Edison and Ford. Therefore, intuition cannot be written off as a totally unreliable source of information. Intuition is right-brain oriented. Logic is left-brain oriented. For those of us whose intuitive faculties are still undeveloped we must rely on logic. Once they are both highly developed than you start touching your inner genius. Many Christians intuit God's existence. Their intuitive faculties are highly developed. They don't need proof, they just already know. But what about those of us who don't have this faculty of intuition developed? Well, that's where logic comes in. Logic is considered a science. Without the contribution of Logic to the sciences there would be no Scientific Method. Period. At it's root the scientific method is logic revised and tailored to conduct scientific experiments. Let us contrive a continuum for phenomena ranging from one extreme of concrete to the other extreme of abstract. The more concrete or base or dense in nature the phenomena being examined for research, the easier it is to use the scientific method to understand it. By contrast, the more abstract, subtle and superlative, the more difficult it is to examine via the scientific method. So now that we have our continuum ranging from abstract to concrete, let us formulate a rule. Let us examine where the phenomena in question would be placed on our continuum. The closer it would be to the concrete, the more likely results would be obtained using the scientific method. The more abstract the phenomena the less likely results would be achieved using the scientific method. And thus we would have to shed some of the addendum's placed on to the pure logical method by the scientific method and resort back to just pure logic. And of course logic is used by the apparatus called the mind. Therefore the mind is the apparatus whereby man discovers God. Even the crucible of self.

                1. Paraglider profile image90
                  Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Going back to your reply to me, and cutting out your long preamble about how to conduct discussion in forum, you returned to the point as follows:



                  Intuition, inspired guesswork if you like, can indeed be a source of knowledge. But only of raw, untested, personal knowledge. To be taken seriously by a discriminating audience interested in objective knowledge, a few more steps are required.
                  1. Assuming your new-found knowledge is true, list as many logically inevitable consequences (predictions) as you can.
                  2. Check them out to see if the predictions are true
                  3. If any are not, then your knowledge is refuted
                  4. If you genuinely can't refute your own theory, go public with it in a form that lets other people apply tests to attempt refutation

                  Unless you do all of the above, your knowledge amounts to nothing more than a feeling.

  3. quicksand profile image84
    quicksandposted 7 years ago

    All forums on religion and science are interesting indeed. I could actually spend days viewing the content, contradictions, and opinions of those who are experts, those with basic knowledge, and the reactions by those who are mild tempered and above! smile smile smile

  4. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    1) It's hard to take "anything" seriously with quite so many "inverted" commas in the "reasoning", I find."

    Do you have A.D.D? Can't you stay focused on the subject matter? Be distracted then by commas, if you must.

    2) Unfortunately the loan consultant sounds like...............well...... a lone consultant! Give a day to figure it out? How about 20 seconds. Your arrogance is showing and frankly so is your ignorance. To bamboozle you have to actually know something first, not just run words past your lips that sound clever to you alone. .

    What is your argument exactly? For starters, if you want to debate, how about presenting a structured argument instead of just rambling on with your weak rhetoric? Why is it when I debate with the likes of you, they always resort to Ad Hominem? How about if you quit being a coward and address the argument and quit trying to distract seekers of truth from the issue at hand? If you want to be a comedian than be one. Don't be afraid, go pursue it as a career if you feel that you can.

    3) The fairy tale of a god is not falsifiable. Because there is no evidence or reasoning to falsify. You are starting from the premise that there is a god rather than working towards one.

    Well at least this rebuttal makes sense. Here is the answer; Evolution and Creation cannot both be true. When Evolution ceases to be a theory, than you WIN! But until then, keep your God Complexes to yourselves. If you are going to teach Evolution in schools why not give them both sides of the argument so that they can make an informed decision for themselves? I completely despise this biased approach.

    4) I have evidence that the stories in the bible were taken from other sources. And I can prove they were. Does this mean that you will accept that the bible is not the word of a god when I have proven this to you?

    I have evidence that you're evidence is false and was taken from arrogant & presumptuous sources. And I can prove that they were. Does that mean that you will repent of this blasphemy and confess that Jesus is Lord?

    5) And I beg the question for you to provide some measurable, falsifiable data. Anything really.

    I will. Keep an eye out for the hub. : )

    6) Quick reality check for you.

    Yes - it is completely different. The Flying Spaghetti monster may be invisible, but you claim He is not the creator if the Universe.

    By your reasoning, anything that is invisible must exist, so why do you deny that FSM created the Universe?

    You are a selective atheist and therefore a hypocrite. As are all believers.

    And LOL - Once again - another one here with a user name that sounds very like "Money Changers" arguing for a god with a set of rules. 

    Wonderful irony. Thank you.


    Ok, you should be ashamed of yourself. This argument is weak! Is this how you debate? Turning the words around to make it false and then refute the premise that you created? Please, take this rubbish somewhere else.

    I expected some really meaningful dialogue here. Really. I guess I will go back to YouTube

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Let me get this straight -

      You have already decided that whatever evidence I was going to show you  is a lie and produced by arrogant and presumptuous sources. lol Without even seeing it.

      You selectively believe one fairy tale (which was stolen from other previous fairy tales) over all the other fairy tales. Yet the argument that you are a selective atheist is weak.

      And you have proof of this fairy tale that you are going to put in a hub.

      And I should be ashamed of myself for not arguing to your intellectual standard.

      Tell me about your user name. I didn't think your boss liked money changers......

      1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Actually in the Torah it says, "YOU SHALL LEND TO MANY NATIONS AND YOU SHALL NOT BORROW." I'm simply being obedient

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Ah - You are Jewish then? Good - I don't get nearly enough of them to make fun of. The lack of a silly hat in your avatar threw me off.

          1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
            TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            The Torah is the five books of Moses. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, & Deuteronomy. When anyone studies these books they are studying Torah.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I know what the torah is thank you.

              Now that we have dispensed with that, I am wondering what your purpose is here, or even why you are continuing this meaningless dialogue?

              1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                What is my purpose? Are you kidding? Don't post a question or make a statement and then when you get a response, ask why? Now all of sudden you wonder about purposes? I thought your belief was that we just "poofed" into existence with no purpose and no creator? And now you have the audacity to ask me about purpose. What's your purpose? Is it not to heckle Christians? I'm your nemesis. That's my purpose

                1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Awesome. I have been waiting for you. smile What took you so long? All the others dropped by the wayside after a few sallies.

                  Now please say something of substance.

                  1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Lol! Ok, that's funny. Now you have me laughing! Why if a building structure was discovered on Mars, scientists would conclude that there is life in space? They would presume that a higher life form made the building structure. Is this any different from presuming that a life-form higher than our own made us? I have to leave now though. But I'm interested to see what your reply will be

                2. LondonGirl profile image92
                  LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  In my belief system, poofs, poofing etc is unlikely to create new human life....

                  1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
                    Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    What creates new *human* life?

                  2. Paraglider profile image90
                    Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    I suspect your joke was too English wink

                  3. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Are you kidding me? Please spare me your weak elementary commentary on words or phrases. You are like a cheerleader or a bench warmer; hahahah on the side lines putting in your little 2 sentences here and there but are unable to sustain the argument by yourself. Let me see YOU debate with numerous people who are all trying to convince YOU that YOU have no idea what YOU are talking about and let me see how YOU hold up. You seem to me like a follower. Learn to think for yourself. Very few people recognize their own individuality and are therefore acting out the roles that were given to them. Unfortunately this leads to many people not discovering their own innate greatness. When they do it's too late in their lives to really capitalize on it, if they discover it at all. Cast off the role that was handed to you by Lord knows who! And allow your true self to shine forth from behind the veil.

            2. AEvans profile image72
              AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Loan Consultant: It isn't nice to make fun of anyone and their beliefs.sad

              1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                It was me that said that. big_smile

                He just told me I was providing meaningless dialogue, the sources I get my information from are arrogant and presumptuous and I make weak arguments. sad

                And as you know, I only make fun of belief systems that are.......... funny big_smile

              2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I think you have me confused. The statement about Jews was made by Mark.

    2. AEvans profile image72
      AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      As you know I hate arguing over Christianity but check out an article that I found on the web,
      http://www.ccwtoday.org/article_view.asp?article_id=166 it is very clear, however again I am certain that someone will argue the facts.
      However I am with Mark on this as everyone should be given a choice, how can we preach the word of God as adults and not stand by the word? Here is the underlying concern for so many non-believers , we as christians tend to push our religion, many do not live by the Bible and therefore become hypocrites. How can we lead them if we are not doing right ourselves? When do we know when to be silent and just pray? BDazzler, SirDent, Eddie and Barbie Perkins, we should all take a look and see how close they are to God and learn from them. They do not lash out at non-believers, they go to the good book and find answers, the speak the truths of themselves, and they pray for those in need. They are leaders of God and through them and many more on HubPages maybe some of us simply need to listen and come at things in a different direction. smile

  5. Make  Money profile image72
    Make Moneyposted 7 years ago

    Yeah we might as well laugh seeing you can't answer her question Mr IQ?

  6. quicksand profile image84
    quicksandposted 7 years ago

    Of course one has the right to believe or disbelieve in something of his or her choice to his or her hearts content and one has the claim to remain undisturbed by those with different ideas. However discussion between "unlike poles" is healthy and harmless ... and indeed most interesting. Provides fodder for the mind too!

    Whose mind? Ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! 

    smile

  7. Lady Guinevere profile image61
    Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago

    Pride goeth before a fall!  Oh and you can take that as you wish.  Karma happens.  Those who sit on high pedestals usually fall quite hard.

    1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not sure where you stand on any of these issues Lady G. Principles are like concrete pillars that are immovable. Align yourself with principles and you cannot be shaken. You say pride goes before a fall; and indeed it does. But you have pride and then you have confidence. There are 2 main demographics who accuse me of being prideful:

      DEMOGRAPHIC 1. Those who lack confidence and are insecure within themselves. And for whatever reason, they think that I too should be insecure about myself, the way they are. And when they see that I am not, they get upset and accuse me of being prideful.

      DEMOGRAPHIC 2. These are they who for reasons unknown, automatically and for no apparent reason, put themselves on a pedestal above me and make unwarranted, unsupported assumptions about where I am on the scale of being; and try to control me. When they cannot, instead of just giving up; they give it one last shot and try to use reverse psychology and accuse me of being prideful.

      So yes, pride does go before a fall. But I'll take my chances, because one can get up from a fall; but ignorance results in destruction; and there is no coming back from that one.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        So proud, arrogant and condescending are OK now then? Because YOU KNOW lol

        And are just trying to educate the ignorant, therefore it is fine..........

        Come on Nemesis - you have really fallen down on the job, so to speak. Tell me about the circular earth again. big_smile

        1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          What in the world are you talkin about?! I'm still waiting for your response about the historian Josephus who documented the life of Jesus. Whom you claim did not exist. Did you think I forgot?

      2. Jewels profile image82
        Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Principles can be founded on nonsense too.  So it's best they are movable.

  8. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    And as far as people accusing me, that's nothing new. Jesus said 2000 years ago, "Marvel not if the world hate you. Know that it hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love it's own, but because you are not of the world and I have chosen you out of it, therefore the world will hate you." So accusations, that's nothing to me. That's a given. The challenge is keeping the love of God in your heart and not giving in to the temptation of pleasing people rather than God. It is a little easier for me however, because right from the start there was a contingency of people against me for various reasons. So it's not big deal to me that there are people who disagree with me. So what, who cares. I gave up trying to please people long ago. And much liberty followed. For people who aren't used to opposition, yes, the Christian life can be somewhat challenging. Why would someone choose this unnecessary opposition unless there was a reality underlying it? Why not just follow the masses and be like everybody else?

    1. Sufidreamer profile image81
      Sufidreamerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      er.....but I don't hate you.

      1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
        Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hahahahaha Surfi and Mark, he sure hasn't been here long enough to see what my history is around here.
        Love is NOT having strings attached.  I doubt that he gets that.

        1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this
    2. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Now you are comparing yourself to Jesus? lol

      I don't hate you either - although you are rather asking for whatever comes your way big_smile

      As for following the christian sheep................

      1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mark's Conclusion: TheLoanConsultant is comparing himself to Jesus." Although I will not refute this statement, please show me exactly from where you infer this?

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          big_smile

    3. LondonGirl profile image92
      LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I don't hate you. I just feel a mild sort of contempt.

  9. Lady Guinevere profile image61
    Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago

    " "Don't start no stuff, and there will be no stuff. ""

    I believe you came here and started the "stuff" first.  So are you talking to yourself here? tongue

    1. 0
      sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      This is what I don't get about you LG.  It's like the sweet Lady Guinevere that I so admirably subscribed to and talked to and read daily has turned into someone else.  sad

      1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
        Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        All I can say to this is .....I am not perfect.  big_smile
        Sorry to dissapoint you.
        I never promised you a rose garden....LOL

        EDITTED

    2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well so far it's been 50% ad hominem and 50% topic related. Quit the ad hominem and there will be nothing for me to challenge and we can get back to our religious dialogue. Even though I prefer to use the term metaphysics.

  10. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Part of the problem is the way these posts are structured. It's very easy for someone to think that a statement was meant for them when it was meant for another statement that someone else made. I see people responding to statements that were not made to them and getting offended by them. Many of my statements were taken out of context. I thought people were here to ask questions and offer alternative views? Please let the next statement or question be relevant.

    1. Sufidreamer profile image81
      Sufidreamerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Fair enough - you are dealing with multiple topics. That is difficult. smile

    2. Eric Graudins profile image60
      Eric Graudinsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      It's just those pesky athiest troublemakers stirring things up.

      Here's where to report them to the FBI
      http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0503/atheists.html

      A small extract:
      As a result of this inspirational, secret meeting, Landover Baptist has been called upon to draft legislation to address the problem of Atheist traitors living like cockroaches in our midst.  But you can do your part, too.  If you are reading this, you know of a practicing Atheist in your community, and would like to report him to your local police department, we'd like to tell you how simple it is

      And there's also 5 handy tips for spotting them!

  11. Lady Guinevere profile image61
    Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago

    I got to go.  Heads up, I will be on and off here for the next few weeks.  We are having work done on our house and will be moving and moving and sorting stuff as we go along.  Fun! Fun! Fun!  They aren't going to start until Wednesday morning and tomorrow I will be starting to move things.

    1. LondonGirl profile image92
      LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Hope all goes well! Are you having to move out while the builders are there?

    2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well, don't be gone too long cause I still wanna fight! LOL! JK!

  12. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    lol!

  13. LondonGirl profile image92
    LondonGirlposted 7 years ago

    You are lovely too <mwah>

    This is much more fun!

    PS - I do think Donald Trump is a Prize Twit (-:

    1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, it really stretches your emotional resiliency! Doesn't it? I guess it's good practice for the real world.  : )

  14. 0
    Amy Gposted 7 years ago

    Loan Consultant:

    I'll say what I say, then I won't be back, because you're ridiculous.  I was posting on another religion thread a bit ago, where you also were... On this thread, you are a completely different person.  FYI - There are some superb medications available by prescription for multiple personality disorders.  You should find one.

    A few more bits of advice:

    1) You are an arrogant jerk.  Get over yourself.

    2) Don't talk a big GOD GAME about yourself, and scream to the world about how pure and christian you are, then go and talk schmack about LG, or anyone, for that matter. 

    3) I'm not sure what makes you believe that you are the authority on religion, but I can tell you that you are not.  Nobody is.  Refer to #1, and get over yourself. You live in a cult compound, don't you?  I KNEW IT!

    Overall, you definitely cannot sway what you call "non-believers" by force-feeding them facts that you have regurgitated from some kind of previous teaching.  Their opinions are no less right or wrong than yours. Suggestions are fine, healthy debate is great, but when you begin to insult a person's intelligence and belief system with your insistence on your own, you just look like a giant A-Hole.

  15. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Well of course you will not come back. After that ridiculous blend of nonsense, I wouldn't either. You can't just step in at the end of the 12th round and then try to give your useless extremely irrelevant commentary and expect me to just let it go unchallenged now do you? Don't you see that London Girl and I are laughing about it? Unless you were there throughout the whole debate you would not understand the spirit behind anything I said. London Girl did not take anything out of context from the last comment I made to her because she knew that I was referring to not only her but to myself as well. But you see, you don't know me so just be quite and go sit down somewhere. Or perhaps bless us with your silence or with your knowledge. I'm open to both, it's your choice.

  16. Eric Graudins profile image60
    Eric Graudinsposted 7 years ago

    Go Amy G!
    I reckon you'll be able to chuck him in the back of your truck and haul him around after that little serve!
    I'm becoming your fan!
    Eric G.

  17. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Ok, Mr. Mark Knowles I was occupied. Now what were you saying?

    "I don't see what an obscure reference to something that the church denied for many years as being in any way relevant to our previous discussion. Let's get back on track."

    Actually we are on track. I doesn't make a hill of beans what the church denied or denies! I'm talking about what the Word of God says. It stated the earth was circular long before science acknowledged it. You wanted facts right, well there's one for you. If every church member just suddenly vanished off the face of the earth, it does not change The Word of God.

    Now in regards to the statement, "You say that you accept evolution as happening. Is that correct?" The theory of evolution takes some facts that I agree with but then starts reaching. So do I agree with evolution as a whole? NO. But do I agree with some if it's propositions? YES.
    Listen, if evolution is SO SCIENTIFIC than how come it hasn't been proven yet? Many other scientific hypothesis have been proven, what's taking so long for this one, I've been waiting for a while already.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Please name me one scientific theory that has been proven. big_smile

      And as for the earth being circular..............

      I would have thought the WORD OF GOD would have been a little more precise. Perhaps even have got it right? No?

      That is proof enough for me right there that your book was written by ignorant savages.

      I suspect that if I was ignorant of the TRUTH, and when I turned full circle, every direction I looked, and every direction I walked for a few days it was all flat, I too would come to the conclusion that the earth was a circle. And flat. big_smile

  18. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Mr. Paraglider, I perceive you are a scholar. So let us begin...

    Here is your statement;

    "Intuition, inspired guesswork if you like, can indeed be a source of knowledge. But only of raw, untested, personal knowledge. To be taken seriously by a discriminating audience interested in objective knowledge, a few more steps are required.
    1. Assuming your new-found knowledge is true, list as many logically inevitable consequences (predictions) as you can.
    2. Check them out to see if the predictions are true
    3. If any are not, then your knowledge is refuted
    4. If you genuinely can't refute your own theory, go public with it in a form that lets other people apply tests to attempt refutation

    Unless you do all of the above, your knowledge amounts to nothing more than a feeling."

    Basically what you just described is the scientific method in a nut shell. If you only knew my friend. This is what I use when I test the truth of a scripture in my life. Observe...

    Acts 2:38 "Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ, and you shall receive the gift of The Holy Spirit, for the promise is to you and your children and all that are afar off. Even as many as The Lord our God shall call."........I assumed this new found knowledge at the time to be true......I read the history of this experience throughout the bible and observed that whoever called upon The Name of The Lord received The Holy Spirit......I assumed that if I repented and was baptized in Jesus name, I too would receive The Holy Spirit. And I did. If I did not then I wouldn't be sharing it with you....Furthermore I am going public with it. Now someone might say, "But your whole experience is subjective, how can it be verified?" That's a good question, and that's where God confirms His word to the person individually and reveals the secrets of one's heart. Do you not know that there are vibrations of energy that are too high a frequency for the tools of science to detect? But because it cannot be detected does it cease to exist? Did ultraviolet rays spring into existence suddenly when man detected it? Or did it already exist prior to? Is it so unfathomable that this could be the case with the Eternal Energy from which ALL things proceed, whom Christians refer to as God?

    1. Paraglider profile image90
      Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Why do you insist on patronising me with phrases like "If you only knew, my friend". Do you think I just happened to describe scientific method by accident?  And later - "Do you not know that there are vibrations of energy that are too high a frequency for the tools of science to detect?"  I'm a physicist, OK?

      You are the one here who apparently does not understand scientific method. You are the one apparently believing the aim of the method is to prove things true. It is quite the opposite. Your use of the word 'Energy' is so loose as to be almost new-ageist.

      You yourself suggest that someone might say your whole experience is subjective. Indeed they might. Nothing you have said by way of answer to your own imagined challenge is remotely objective. The ball's still in your court.

      1. LondonGirl profile image92
        LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Check.....

        Possibly even check mate (-:

        1. Paraglider profile image90
          Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, If I'd felt like being rigorous, my answer would have been - No, I do not know there are frequencies higher than we can detect. I know there is a continuum up to the limit of what we can detect and I think it likely that it will extend beyond that limit. Theory suggests as much. But no-one knows, yet.

          But it was easier just to say I'm a physicist wink

  19. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    MARK KNOWLES

    "Please name me one scientific theory that has been proven. big_smile

    And as for the earth being circular..............

    I would have thought the WORD OF GOD would have been a little more precise. Perhaps even have got it right? No?

    That is proof enough for me right there that your book was written by ignorant savages.

    I suspect that if I was ignorant of the TRUTH, and when I turned full circle, every direction I looked, and every direction I walked for a few days it was all flat, I too would come to the conclusion that the earth was a circle. And flat. big_smile"

    So basically what you're saying is that this fact is irrelevant to you, ok fine. Here's another fact for you. A recognized historian by the name of FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS documented Jesus Christ's life, miracles, trial, crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection. 7 recorded aspects of who Jesus is.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Now you are putting words into my mouth.

      I said it was wrong. Not irrelevant to me.

      And no scientific theory can ever be proven.

      1. 0
        jjrubioposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mark- Don't you see you are talking to a brick wall with this guy. He is so into proving everyone wrong he is losing sight on the reality of what the Christian faith is based on: LOVE
        I respect your feelings as much as anyone else's.

        Jesus loved all and respected all whether they believed he was Christ or not. Just like we should respect all whether they believe in Christ, God or whatever religion. You have a right to what you believe and he wants to take that from you.
        I say, let all believe what they want to believe. In the end we all will be accountable for ourselves.  smile

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I know. He promised to be my Nemesis though, and I still hold out hope big_smile

  20. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Mark Knowles: "Now you are putting words into my mouth.

    I said it was wrong. Not irrelevant to me.

    And no scientific theory can ever be proven."

    Now you are putting words in my mouth, where do you get this scientific theory nonsense from?

    You still haven't responded to my statement about the historian's documentation of Jesus Christ?

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Let's deal with one "fact" at a time huh?

      1. The earth is not circular. Therefore I questioned the bible as being the WORD OF GOD, because it got that "fact" wrong.

      You then said, "So basically what you're saying is that this fact is irrelevant to you."

      And I said - "stop putting words in my mouth."

      Scientific theory nonsense?

      A scientific theory is a preposition that is accepted as true and has not yet been dis-proven. Not proven. Which is why I asked you to show me a theory that had been proven. Seeing as you were using the argument that if evolution was correct, it would have been proven - like all the other scientific theories that have been proven. lol

      Please try harder Nemesis.

      We can get to the other "fact" when we have dealt with the ones we were already discussing.

      1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
        Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I am coming in late here so fogive me if I step on toes or this has already been discussed.  I am extrememly busy with people fixng our house and it will cintinue for the next few weeks. 
        Now about the circluar Earth and Flat Earth and the Word of God ---getting it right?  Galilleo had it right that the Earth was round and not flat and they were going to kill him for lying.  Now why would they do that if he were tellig the truth--becasue they like to hide the truth.

        About myths, and this may be the wrong thread, but I will post it here anyway---the religions are beginning to think the Holocaust is a "myth".  Again it is truth and many peole who have gone through that horrific experience can tell you that it was true...again why the coverup and what else is being covered up?  Then all this stuff about the History channel is all for the "un-believers"  Is that only for the religious documentaries or is it across the board?  If they have other things are as true as they can get at this moment in time that they did the documentaries then it goes the same across the board and not just for some and not others.  The argument that only the religious documentaries are for unbelievers is null.

        1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I cannot believe that some people are saying the Holocaust was a myth, that just really pisses me off!!!

          1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
            Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Well I can't believe that searching for truth (as Christ told us to do) is a reason to call someone an unbeliever.

            1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
              TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Well before the bell rings, how's your house thing coming along?

              Now let's take a look at your claim,  "Well I can't believe that searching for truth (as Christ told us to do) is a reason to call someone an unbeliever."

              What is meant exactly by this term, "unbeliever"?

              And who's saying, "Thou shall not search for truth?" Jesus said, "If you continue in my Word then you are my disciples indeed and you shall KNOW the Truth and the Truth will make you free." John 8:31,32

              1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
                Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                The house is coming along slow as usual with more money than we expected.

                They didn't just "Know" the truth until they were shown or experienced it in one way or another.  If they had just "Known" the truth they wouldn't be here or had a life to live.  Yes, the truth will set your free--not everyone has the same truth according to scripture.  Each person will learn what they are to learn in ways only they can learn and all things are not in that Bible, so it states in that Bible.

        2. LondonGirl profile image92
          LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          More one random psychotic bishop.

          1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
            TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Donald Trump came through the other day asking about you.  wink

  21. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    Mark Knowles: I see the structure of your arguments is improving since our first discussion. Your welcome. But still....I am your nemesis. To be exact I will rewind the statement in a more explicit form; "If EVOLUTION is so scientific in nature then why is it not a law?" If it get's upgraded to a Law, then... well I guess we will continue evolving into a higher form of creation than we already are. Why would the process stop suddenly? And if we evolved from apes, then why are there still apes? Why not conduct an experiment with a specific ape family perpetually and see how long it takes for them to become human? You say show me your God? I say show me the human who was once an ape! And I want to see the affidavit! and pictures!

    That is funny what you said about walking around in circles though, I'll give you that one.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Please don't patronize me in this fashion. If you are just looking for a fight, why not say so and I will oblige.

      Now - let's deal with your "fact" that the bible says the earth is circular.

      The earth is not circular.

      Therefore the bible is incorrect.

      Therefore the bible is not the word of god.

      And what makes you think evolution has stopped?

  22. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago

    PARAGLIDER:

    "Why do you insist on patronising me with phrases like "If you only knew, my friend".

    Surely you don't think I'm referring to PHYSICS, when I say "If you only knew." I'm referring to my experience with God!



    "Do you think I just happened to describe scientific method by accident?  And later - "Do you not know that there are vibrations of energy that are too high a frequency for the tools of science to detect?"  I'm a physicist, OK?

    Very well then. So why can't you assume that it's possible that God is a form of energy that cannot be detected by instruments of science? We can't even detect MIND much less God!



    "You are the one here who apparently does not understand scientific method.You are the one apparently believing the aim of the method is to prove things true. It is quite the opposite."

    Who said anything about proving it to be true? It's certainly a good place to begin. Scientific method is baby food to me, you science buffs swear it's so sacred. Although it IS simple I'm not downplaying it's effectiveness.



    "Your use of the word 'Energy' is so loose as to be almost new-ageist."

    If it's not energy tell me then, what is it? Dead matter?

    You yourself suggest that someone might say your whole experience is subjective. Indeed they might. Nothing you have said by way of answer to your own imagined challenge is remotely objective. The ball's still in your court.

    Contrariwise, the ball still is in your court. I asked you what your thoughts were in regards to the mind being the only vehicle whereby man discovers God, since there is no current scientific instrument that can register HIS energy force.

    1. mohitmisra profile image61
      mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Science doesnt not know whats in our oceans forget this cosmos-its so very limited. I like it a physicist in our midst telling us the limitations of the science- in fact I love- cheers. smile

      1. Paraglider profile image90
        Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mohit - As a scientist, I know better than to make exaggerated claims regarding my knowledge. It's a pity some religious types have not learned this humility.

        1. mohitmisra profile image61
          mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          You are truthful you say you have no knowledge about God.

          1. mohitmisra profile image61
            mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I agree there are people who are walking the spiritual path but behave like masters,they have along way to go ..

            1. Jewels profile image82
              Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Totally agree with you there Mohitmisra. smile

          2. Paraglider profile image90
            Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Change 'about' to 'of' and I'll happily agree with you. I have plenty knowledge on the subject but simply doubt its truth.

            1. mohitmisra profile image61
              mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Unless you come across him yourself its is correct to doubt.

            2. Paraglider profile image90
              Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Better still, change it to 'from'. When that happens, I'll believe! smile

              1. mohitmisra profile image61
                mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                No problems.Its a question of time. smile

                1. Paraglider profile image90
                  Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm 56...

                  1. mohitmisra profile image61
                    mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    No problem once again.God is beyond time.smile

                2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                  TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Hopefully he doesn't wait until it's in his old age. For he could be of great use to the Kingdom of God.

                  1. mohitmisra profile image61
                    mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Do not doubt gods perfection smile

            3. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
              TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Who is Tony? And why are you running from God? You want evidence? You have to know what you want and then you're more likely to find it. So tell me then, what evidence do you seek? You have controversies with God and you feel denied something and you want to make Him suffer because you know that He knows. Only YOU will understand that one. And I'm sure you'll deny everything I just said but could it be that if you seek Him He will give you what you felt denied these past 20 or 30 years? And that could be your EVIDENCE. Or did you forget and write it off as unattainable? What is it that you want? A family? What evidence do you require? Let us test the realm of the spirit. The trials have ended, the interview is over, what do you seek?

              1. mohitmisra profile image61
                mohitmisraposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                He seeks revelation or enlightenment which is just fine-the proof smile

                1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                  TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Indeed it is. That's how I got it. There is a manifestation too, which I also have experienced. But in most cases the revelation comes first and then the demonstrations follow

  23. Paraglider profile image90
    Paragliderposted 7 years ago

    Why should I assume that god is a form of energy since I have not yet seen any evidence that god exists? You are right that we can't detect Mind either. For me, 'mind' is a word we find useful to describe consciousness. Descartes said as much centuries ago. Similarly with the 'soul'. I don't believe the soul has any existence independent of the body. I'd say, in that, it is no different from Freud's ego, self, id, etc - it is just a useful (to some) way of describing an aspect of consciousness. The soul is an older concept than the ego of course, but just as much a human construct. To me, there is no difference between your claim that the mind discovers god and mine, that the mind imagines god. How could you tell the difference?

    1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      If we were to assume that God existed, what would you consider evidence? What if we were to formulate a list of "evidences", what would be on our list?Would it not be creation itself? The very atoms? Cohesion, Chemical Affinity, Electro-Magnetism? As far as I'm concerned there is overwhelming evidence of God's existence and the Universe itself is full of clues; It's not God's fault if we ignore the evidence and formulate alternative, less logical, less mathematical and less probable views. And in reference to the mind. The ego and the soul both describe the same thing, "consciousness". I disagree about the soul and the ego which is consciousness being merely a human construct. Where I can agree is that these TERMS are human constructs. However the phenomenon these terms DESCRIBE operate and exist independantly of human recognition or description thereof. Why would you assume that God doesn't exist as opposed to assuming He does exist? Assuming that there was no evidence to support either position? It is more logical to begin with the assumption that God does exist and make all inquiries and assumptions from this single premise. When you do, although alot still goes unexplained, more things are able to be explained with God as part of the equation, as opposed to removing God entirely. And, while many have their personal reasons for assuming God's existence, and admittedly some would appear to be irrational, it doesn't take away from the logic inherent in the claim that there is a creator. And in regards to your question about the imagination: "How can we tell the difference?" That is an excellent question to which each individual must fend for themselves and do their own work. You cannot put God in a box that suits our finite prejudices and biases. Assuming God existed and that He was wise enough to create all that we see in the cosmos, wouldn't it make sense to conclude He created us with the ability to commune with Him; given we met Him halfway with the effort necessary to activate the abilities resident within each and every human soul?

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol

        How is it logical to begin with a baseless assumption? Once you have made this assumption you are led to all sorts of irrational acts. Like killing each other over who knows what this god wants. lol

        I recommend the Oxford English dictionary for a good definition of the word "logic." big_smile

        1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Lol! Mr. Mark Know-Less, how are you? Did you miss me?

          1. Mark Knowles profile image59
            Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Of course I did. Your particular brand of logical thinking is always a welcome addition to the discussion. big_smile

        2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I hear this argument all the time and it makes me just want to throw up! I'm so sick and tired of hearing this weak argument that if I never heard again I would think that I must be dreaming. Listen well son and listen good, if people want to kill they will kill, PERIOD. God has nothing to do with it! OK! So what are you saying? That if people didn't beleive in God there would be no killings? The problem is with people and not with the concept of God. People who commit atrocious acts invariably find ways to rationlize their behavior. God has nothing to do with it. Even your rebuttal is a rationalization. A rationalization to not believe in God. I understand peoples frustration with all the turmoil caused through religion. There are many things that lead to the harm and detriment of manking. Automobile accidents, airplane crashes, gun related deaths, etc., etc. Shall we destroy all automobiles because they have been know to be the cause of many deaths? Shall we no longer fly in airplanes because people have been know to die in them? Of course not! And the same principle applies to God and religion. Many corrupt people use religion as an avenue to gratify their vices of lust and greed. Many school teachers exploit young children. But this does not make what these teachers are teaching any less true. While their character may be in question what a teacher taught about math & science remains the same. Regardless of their conduct. If a Chemistry teacher goes out and robs a bank, does that change anything that the teacher taught in regards to Chemistry? Of course not. And so it is with The Word of God. Man corrupts the message. The message did not corrupt man.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image59
            Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Aw diddums. I see you have avoided my question though. And using the argument that people will kill anyway so therefore it is OK to kill in god's name is not exactly a strong argument. I hear that one all the time.

            Why don't you answer the question instead?

            I think it is perfectly rational to not believe in something there is no evidence for.

            Don't you?

            1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
              TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I never said it's ok to kill in God's name. If people want to kill they will kill. PERIOD. God has nothing to do with it. Have you not taken the time to think that there are many good things that are done in God's name daily? My church donated 10k worth of medical supplies to a hospital in Siera Leon in the continent of Africa. In regards to evidence, the Universe is enough evidence for me; in the very atoms themselves; consciousness and our very own solar system, just to name a few.

              1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                LOL - How is this a logical argument? If you want to say that is what you believe then fine. But why are you trying to turn it into something it is not? Because it is illogical.

                So - if you are not prepared to own the bad things done in god's name - how can you justify owning the good things?

                If people want to help other people, they will help other people. PERIOD! big_smile

                1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                  TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Agreed. And that's my whole point. There are bad things done in God's name and there are good things done in God's name. To judge the validity or soundness of someone's argument from their character rather than the argument itself is faulty reasoning. Fallacious reasoning. Ad Hominem. So when people argue that there is no God because those who claim to beleive in Him do evil things does not address the claim about God's existence in no shape, way or form. This is irrational and outrite illogical.

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    All right - so we agree that people who believe in god are no more or less likely to behave in good or bad ways and it makes absolutely no difference if some one believes in a god or not. They are no better or worse than anyone else and are no more likely to follow the teachings in their holy book than some one who does not believe.

                    When some one claims that they believe in a god and this god has told them that they should behave in a certain way and they then proceed to behave in no better or worse way than a non believer - does this not cast doubt on their statement that there is a god?

        3. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Peeople killing each other over"who knows what God wants" has nothing to do with God. Haven't you ever heard of immaturity? Or what about neurosis? One of the major problems lies in the fact that people or so ridiculously controlled by their emotions, biases, and prejudices that they fail to think critically through many things. People are constantly missing the main point and getting distracted by small petty & seemingly inconsistencies.  People just need to get their head out of their ass and wake the hell up! Mant times what I disagree with is not peoples conclusions but rather how they arrived at those conclusions. I don't give a rat's ass how many people died in the name of religion. That has no bearing at all whatsoever on the truth value of Christian propositions. If you want to disagree,fine go right ahead but please find good reasons to do so and not fallacious ones. How about if people just go ahead and practice whatever religion they want but without doing harm to others. Herein lies the successful compromise. Anyone who kills in the name of religion is a false representative of what religion is about.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image59
            Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Of course it does, and I do care. The simple, logical conclusion is that there is no truth value in the propositions if people are unwilling or unable to follow said propositions. Surely you can see that?

            I realize that, like many believers, you do not care how many are abused or killed whilst the perpetrators hide behind a god. And use the excuse that these are not "real" christians or whatever. But that excuse wears a little thin now. See the recent Irish report of abuse in Catholic institutions.

  24. Abhishek87 profile image76
    Abhishek87posted 7 years ago

    I was content with reading through the forum but this is something I need to ask.

    Ummm, Do you think you would have a fight or debate or whatever if the scientific guys would "assume" things the believers said ???

    Their whole argument is based on the fact that there has to be some sort of tangible proof, it need not be the complete proof but something.

    Q :    If I said it, would you Assume that God is NOT a form of energy ???

    1. Paraglider profile image90
      Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'd have to say I'm not very sure what you're asking. But forget proof. Science deals in disproof. As I said to the Loaner, I see no reason to speculate on the nature of god before being convinced of the existence of god. Why would I?

      1. Abhishek87 profile image76
        Abhishek87posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        But then , what is disproof? Its only the absence of proof. one and the same thing.

        1. Paraglider profile image90
          Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Absolutely not! But I've explained this many times and would rather refer you to a hub I wrote on the subject:  http://hubpages.com/hub/Freedom-from-Belief

  25. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 7 years ago

    Based on many of the posts, I might be inclined to interpret that the atheist/evolutionist/rationalist is the more highly evolved. You(all) collectively, in your own words state that by either inferring or outright saying, "god, (in whatever form or religious teaching) is outdated, obsolete or unneccesary." Is that about it? hmm

    1. Paraglider profile image90
      Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'd go with unnecessary. I don't think it was ever necessary, so would steer clear of outdated and obsolete.

      1. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The trouble I have with that is that taking the whole human population into consideration, I would say it's the other way around. If you combine all the religions, and "spiritual" groups, they would have to be HUGELY larger than the "non". I don't have
        %ages, but I would be surprised if it were not so. hmm
        You guys have a bigger job "evangelising" the world than we do. big_smile:

        1. Paraglider profile image90
          Paragliderposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I'm well aware of that. I don't try to win converts; I just state my position. Remember though that many of your world belief systems are mutually exclusive and can't all be right.

          Why didn't you join in on the generous game thread? Could you not think of anything good about anyone else's philosophy?

          1. aka-dj profile image79
            aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I agree! I have chosen the one with the Risen Saviour. It answers more of my questions and needs better and more fully than any of the others.

            Where is that thread? BTW, I only get to spend an hour or two a day on the net, so here I am. PS Never mind, I found it. Thanks.

  26. Paraglider profile image90
    Paragliderposted 7 years ago

    For the record, the ancient Greeks, Pythagoras among them, had the Earth spherical. It was the early church that ironed it flat again wink

    1. BDazzler profile image82
      BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Man! That must've been a huge freakin' iron! lol

      1. 0
        sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        LOL,  I wonder what He called it? LOL

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The bible lol

          1. Abhishek87 profile image76
            Abhishek87posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            big_smile big_smile big_smile

      2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        That IS funny, however.......

  27. Lady Guinevere profile image61
    Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago

    Pictures of how the work on the house is coming along:
    http://www.kodakgallery.com/ShareLandin … leid=en_US

    Today is day 2 and I will be taking more pictures and then more until they finish that one deck.  I will be writing a hub about it when it is all done.

  28. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    So Mark, let me get it straight, cause I got lost here - are you stating that the Earth is flat, circular, or not exactly circular? smile

    1. BDazzler profile image82
      BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Isn't that a circular argument? wink

    2. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      No. The Money Lender stated that the bible said the earth was circular. And this was one of his proofs that the bible is the word of god.

      I pointed out that the earth is not circular. A circle being a two dimensional shape. i.e. - flat

      Therefore the bible was wrong.

      Then he changed the subject. big_smile

      1. Misha profile image74
        Mishaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Ah, now I see what you meant smile
        I guess a few people on this thread misinterpreted your point smile

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Which was the whole point of changing the subject and going off on a bunch of tangents (sic). That is what you do when faced with a tricky question you do not wish to answer. It's the eleventh commandment. big_smile

          1. 0
            sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            11th commandment, thou shall not speak. LOL  smile

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              LOL - Is that me or thee? big_smile

              1. 0
                sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I dunno, your gonna have to ask God about that. lol smile

                1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Perhaps you could ask it for me - seeing as you understand what it says?

                  1. 0
                    sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    LOL, I already said I dunno, either way an answer from God wouldn't work ya anyhow. smile

          2. LondonGirl profile image92
            LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I thought the 11th was, "thou shalt not get found out"?

      2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mark I cant be here long, cause I have to go. But that argument is weak. I'll give you a few days to come up with a better rebuttal.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          What?

          The fact that a  circle is a two dimensional shape is a weak argument? lol

          ciao

          1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
            TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            NO! No one is talking about exactness of shapes and angles. I cannot believe you are holding on to that. And you are holding on to that for dear life aren't you? If I were to draw a circle on a piece of paper, certainly that is not the kind of exact, specific shape the bible is referring to. And you know that! You didn't seem like the kind of person who would settle for appearances, but maybe I was wrong. So never mind that fact then since you are stuck on appearances. Zilch, Done, Scratch, Over, forget it. So again, for the THIRD TIME, I'm still waiting on your commentary on the historian Josephus? Any day now, I'm waiting?

      3. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
        TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It was not proof that the bible is the word of God. I would be ashamed of myself to present such a weak argument. It was in response to your statement about the facts in the bible.

  29. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    Oh, I am not arguing, I am just trying to understand Mark's position smile

    1. BDazzler profile image82
      BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Ah, sorry sometimes I forget ... it was a joke "a circular argument" is a term in formal debate or logic ... The classic is Jesus is real because the bible says so and the bible is true because it says Jesus is real.

      While that's internally consistent, it's not truly logical becase each assumes the other to be true.  That's a "circular argument".

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Not a oblate spheroidical argument then? big_smile

        1. BDazzler profile image82
          BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol lol lol

      2. Misha profile image74
        Mishaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for the explanation smile

    2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Never mind BDazzler. He doesn't even know himself what he believes. I think he believes in circles though, because where he is now, is where he began. His statements and his questions and his "apparent friendly gestures" are just to corner you, he is a child, just ignore him. I followed ALL of his comments, that's right ALL, and all of his time on here, he has yet to say something of substance. He tries to make people feel that way he himself feels. He needs to read Jewel's hub about depression, maybe it will help him. I prefer to see him strong rather than weak.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mark believes that a circle is a two dimensional shape. Which proves to him that the bible was not written by anything other than ignorant men.

        If you had followed ALL my comments, you would have understood that. Is it too difficult a concept to grasp perhaps? big_smile

        Nice to see you resorting to ad hominem though. I thought that upset you? lol

        1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Discipline works perfection

          1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
            TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Again, for the FOURTH time, JOSEPHUS,JOSEPHUS,JOSEPHUS!

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              NEVER HEARD OF HIM. TELL ME ABOUT THE CIRCLE AGAIN lol

              1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Ah, ok I get it. Tell you what, when you tell me about Josephus, I'll tell you about the circle. CIAO

                1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  So why is it you christians cannot answer a straight question?

                  1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                    TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Are you kidding me? You of all people should know that you can't answer a question about CIRLCLE'S straightly.

          2. Mark Knowles profile image59
            Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Lax slow imperfect.

            1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
              TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              smile

        2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Furthermore, did you not read my last statement?

      2. BDazzler profile image82
        BDazzlerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hey LC, are you talking to me or about me?

        1. LondonGirl profile image92
          LondonGirlposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          does he take sugar?

  30. 61
    madmacposted 7 years ago

    It's been awhile but since this is a religious forum and if people have read any of my comments they know that I'm against religion of any type. I was a Catholic for most of my 50 years until " I saw the light" so to speak. I'm not against anyones beliefs but as I stated why do we need religion to get us through life. 2 days ago my 10 yr old nephew was staying here and he told me he was scared to death of the dark. I tried to explain to him that movies and such were only make believe and he said it wasn't movies but the Devil that scared him. I asked him why and he said that the Devil could take his soul if he was bad and I asked him where he heard this and he said church. I asked him why he thinks there's a Devil and he said that he believes in God so there has to be a Devil. So I asked him why he believes in God and his response everyone does. Apparently the Church teaches that if your not afraid of God then you can't believe in him. That's something to teach young kids, so I asked why would you believe in something that your afraid of that you don't have to believe in God and that if you go through life not hurting anyone and being the best person you can than if there is a God he will accept you into heaven. He asked me if I believe there is life after you die to which I said no. He asked me why and I asked does it make sense to live a life for whatever amount of years then die and walk around as a ghost? That the soul is the essance of who we are and the body is just the vessal that we use while were alive. What would be the point of living a life only to die and live another. He asked me what I think happens when we die to which I said you go into nothingness. He said that it scares him to think theres nothing after life [10 yrs old] I said why would it bother you. You'll be dead with no emotions of any type just try to live a good life and that will be your legacy when you leave here because no-one will care if you believe in God or not. This is what happens when a person believes in Religion of any type.

    1. 0
      sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Why was he at church?  I mean no disrespect of course and don't mean it to be an offensive question but I am curios.

    2. Make  Money profile image72
      Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Good question Sandra.  I'm sure his 10 yr old nephew's parents won't be too please with madmac's godless indoctrinating of their son. 




      If you were a Catholic for 50 years like you say madmac then why would you have to guess what the Church teaches by saying "Apparently"?  You can call me skeptical.

      1. 61
        madmacposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It's ok Sandra Rinck I understand his sister took him and in response to your question Makemoney, the Church seems to change it's teaching like shirts. It once taught that Jesus was the son of God now it's their 1 in the same. In my time I don't recall ever hearing a priest say that or that we should be afraid of the father in order to believe in him. The Church teaches all kinds of trash to our children like about 25 years ago when the Bishop stated to my then 7 year old niece and others that if you don't accept the body of Christ you can't get into heaven. What about all the other religions out there that don't teach this are they all hell bound? No I don't consider myself an Atheist, I just choose after considerable research not to believe. I asked my brother recently why he believes in God and his response was because I do. He asked me why after all the years I believed so strongly do I not now believe and my response was that I actually took the time to read the Bible actually read it. He or others can't prove that God exists but I can prove to relative certainty that he doesn't simply by reading the Bible. As I said why is it that whenever the Apostles asked Jesus something he always answered in parable? When you ask a priest about this you always get " so you can figure it out for yourself or you can study the bible for a 1000 yrs and never understand or get the same meaning,or he works in mysterious ways etc" Jesus was sent to die for our sins and to teach us about God [or in this case himself] but what do we know other than he's Alpha and Omega   nothing.   I am in no way condeming those that choose to believe as apparently everyone needs something to believe in but why we can't believe in each other astounds me. It's easier to believe in a mythical being that no one it seems can positively proves exists than something flesh and bone it's simply mind knumbing. And in case your wondering why I come to this forum if I don't believe, it's because of the things some of you choose to say to justify why you believe. It seems to me that if YOU truly believe in your faith you shouldn't have to justify anything to anyone. That says to me that you don't really believe completely, your listening to others opinions as you may be having some dought of your faith it's for me curiously intriguing.

        1. Make  Money profile image72
          Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          You are right madmac, we shouldn't have to justify anything to anyone.

          Why can't we just come to this Religion forum and talk about religion peacefully, without being attacked?  We should be able to, don't you think?  It's not one religious group attacking another religious group in here.  It's those that don't follow a certain religion that are doing the attacking.  And basically that is why this 'Leave us alone' thread was started.

          Madmac we can believe in each other.  A person does not have to be of the same faith to believe in the goodness of that person.

          By your words I am still skeptical about you saying that you were once an RC though. smile

          You may be still searching and don't realize it yet madmac.  That may be why you are drawn to the Religion forums.

          1. Jewels profile image82
            Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Interested in what you are skeptical about. Do you mean he never was a RC, or that he still might be?    I was an RC too and I know I am not now, and  I know many who have left the church because it did not fulfill them.  The controversy didn't help either.  But I didn't have a choice in the beginning, I went to catholic schools.  When I was old enough to know the difference I chose differently.

            1. 61
              madmacposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Thank you Makemoney and your right even though I was raised a Catholic and yes made to go to church, I like the vast majority of Catholics just went through the motions. But I did very much believe in God to the point of saying the rosery 2/3 times a day and I really believed that when I spoke to him I could hear him speaking back. Weird I know but thats how strongly I believed, Yet one day I sat and actually read the stories in the book not like 95% who just skim and pick out the things that make what they were going through in life at that moment seem for the lack of a better word real. I started noticing contradictions in the scriptures that made me want to read more than I started really getting into the stories and a prime example is Job. Heres a man that had so much faith in God and vise versa that the God let the Devil do whatever he wanted to Job short of killing him. According to the book the Devil put upon Job unbelievable affliction including killing his wife and chilldren. Yet when he never gave up his faith the Lord rewarded him 10 fold. Was Job suppose to forget his loved ones? Yet this God knowing that Job wouldn't loose faith, let Job go through all of this. I ask you how many parents out there would let harm or suffering come to their kids or loved ones to prove a point? This is the almighty.... As I said, I can show many stories like this in the "good book" Now some would say that they are just that stories, if this were the case then what part of the book is real? You can't pick things out of the book that you think happened so the book is either all fiction or it isn't. What about all the lies it tells us for example, Jesus and God are suppose to be 1 and the same yet when Jesus was dying on the cross he looked up to heaven and said "father why has thou forsaken me' why would he say that if he were God? Or on the 6th day God created man yet we know for scientific fact that dinosaurs walked this earth and that more importantly Man walked among them. Where did Adam and Eve come in? You have to remember that God created them on the 6th day and they went on to have many  children including Cain and Seth. Again if as the book says that these were the first humans on earth where did Neanderthal man come in, again a lie. I have many more but now you can understand I think why I stopped believing. Since the book isn't true and most religions are based on it where does that leave our beliefs? You can't say faith because faith is based on the book and it's teaching. I truly believe that most if not all believe in this book and religion because their scared there might not be anything after death. Why would they be scared as they would have no awareness of feelings after all they are dead. Why is everyone worried about what happens after they die? They should be worrying about the here and now. Mind boggling and as I said, I don't come back here because I have doughts, I come back to read some of the reasons given for beliefs and then theres the way some treat those that don't believe as they do. Thanks

              1. Make  Money profile image72
                Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah some parts of the Old Testament are hard to understand.  I don't claim to have all the answers, nobody does.  Some people believe in God because they believe He has answered their prayers.  Some people believe in God to hedge their bet in case life after death is actually true, which is a good reason in itself.  Some people just need to believe in something.  The question that always comes up is, what is this life all about?  You know what I mean, our mere 60, 70 or 80 odd years on this planet is nothing when you consider the life of this planet (old or new earth theory).  Then there are concerns for deceased love ones.  These are some reasons why people ask the question, what is this life all about?  And that brings people to belief systems.  Some people will say that life is about leaving a legacy but when most of us are dead and gone only our loved ones will remember us until they are gone.  A lot of people believe there has to be more to it than that.  I'm sure you can respect their choice to believe, can't you madmac?  Funny I've used the username mikemac quite a few times online.  I should have with Hub Pages too cause I'm definitely not making any money. smile

                Mike

                1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
                  Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Mike you just gave a whole bunch of generalized statements.  Now I ask of you--Why do YOU believe in God and how did you come to YOUR conclusions?

                2. 61
                  madmacposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I can understand that Makemoney and again I'm in no-way condeming or putting anyone down for their beliefs. You have given many reasons why they choose to believe but anyway you look at it people believe because their scared and I'm guessing that includes yourself. As far as legacy is concerned, many people in this world remember those that have left us for many reasons ie: for their humanity, their work with the sick, their many various accomplishments in life, books are written about some, statues are made of others it goes on and on. Not just their loved ones but many shall remember them for the legacy they leave behind good or bad. Man has been killing one another since the beginning of time it's their nature but I'll almost guarantee if you could look up the stats that 95 plus % were killed in the name of 1 religion or another. If there had never been any religion in this world what do you think it would be like today? It without dought couldn't be worse. Might I point out  with reference to the church, if people had even bothered to read the book they would find out that Jesus said "Peter was his rock and upon this rock you shall build my church" and that they "apostles" shall build a movable  tabernacle and what it would be made of. It also says several times in the book that "God will not enter man made temples" then says "where 2 or more gather in my name, there I will be" talk about a contradiction thats like putting stop and go on the same sign. Someone said that they believe because they have gotten an answer to their prayer, I used to think the same thing till I went over the answers I had recieved and they all can be explained at least the ones I remember. I realize that it is an impossibility, but if I had 1 wish that I believed would save humanity from distruction it would be to abolish all religions and peoples thought about it even if it was for 4/5 years just to see what would happen. There is 1 thing about the book I choose to live by and that is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"  It's too bad everyone couldn't live by that rule as the world would be 1 heck of a better place thanks Makemoney

  31. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    Welcome back Jenny, we badly missed you here smile

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Seconded big_smile

  32. quicksand profile image84
    quicksandposted 7 years ago

    Phew!

  33. quicksand profile image84
    quicksandposted 7 years ago

    Sigh!

    No offense meant.

    I am off to Paraglider's forum. smile

    Follow me my hearties!

  34. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    Uh-oh.... sad

    1. RKHenry profile image79
      RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'm with Misha on this. 

      Sandra, I thought your last post was well written, understandable and in line to your past conversations.  It is good to see someone comfortable with themselves.  I appreciate the calm, but firm stance of your position.  It makes it easier for people to read and to understand the conversation.  Much more productive than some of Mr. Knowles past publications.  Sorry Mark, no offense intended.  I appreciated Sandra's focus and approach. 

      Sandra, I know this off topic but I wanted you to know that you have gained yourself a new fan.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        None taken smile

        1. RKHenry profile image79
          RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Good, I'm glad.  I certainly meant none. 

          Mark, I'd like to know if what Sandra said and I quote, "I know this, you know this but yet you really can't see it because you are too heavily clouded by anger or something that all you want to do is fight with believers because you don't like it. "  Has any merit worth mentioning?  Understand completely if you do not want to address it.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image59
            Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            lol

            Sure - I am angry that people will abuse their children and prevent them from having a decent education because their god tells them to. Sure I am angry that people try to get the law changed to prevent women from being able to choose an abortion because their god says so. Sure - I am angry that the catholic church actively protects it's priest who abuse children sexually. Sure, I am angry at the conflicts caused by religions in the past and now. Sure - I am angry when the government uses god to persuade young men to join the military and kill strangers.

            Aren't' you?

            But that doesn't mean I am "clouded" by it. Just that I have decided to speak out against it.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image59
              Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Well? Or were you just wanting to stir the pot ?

              1. RKHenry profile image79
                RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Your pot?  Are you kiddin'? No way. Especially on a topic with religious content- hell NO!  I maybe young, but I ate my veggies growing up.  Get me? 

                I can't say that I'm angry about that stuff.  I grow tired of the on and on and on scripture quoting crap.  Boring!

      2. Misha profile image74
        Mishaposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Looks like you jumped to conclusions yet another time smile

        No need to apologize, no offense taken cause it obviously was not intended, like in all previous cases smile

        Yet I did not mean anything of what you wrote here. I think both Mark and Sandra understood my post as I intended it smile

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I understood perfectly. smile

          I thought I was pretty restrained?

      3. Make  Money profile image72
        Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I'll second that.  Sandra is making a lot of sense these days.

        And Mark, I'll say no offense to you too.  Seriously this time.  We have a pile of problems on this little planet of ours but for you to blame everything on organized religion is just way off side.  It's just not true Mark.  If you are going to continually look for who's to blame then be consistent.  If you are going to be consistent then you have no choice but to also blame atheist marxists governments for many many atrocities committed.  They are far from innocent.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          MIke - If I come across anyone pushing the marxism you are talking about, I will be just as vociferous with them. Misha is right marxism/religionism whatever - just another BS excuse to dominate you.

          Odd that you buy into one particular brand don't you think?

          Oh yes - that's right  - a magical invisible super being runs one of them. wink

  35. quicksand profile image84
    quicksandposted 7 years ago

    Gosh! Foucalt was right! Pendulums do swing both ways ...

    1. 0
      Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      OMG!  Somebody has read Foucault!  smile

      1. Mark Knowles profile image59
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Loved it (the book)  Although, it was his only decent one. sad

        There used to be one in the Natural History Museum in London. Every morning they started it swinging with a load of sand spread out on the floor. Awesome. I could watch it all day.

      2. quicksand profile image84
        quicksandposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah! Looks like it! Wonder who t'was! smile

  36. Abhishek87 profile image76
    Abhishek87posted 7 years ago

    A question in response to a question put in one of her (Sandra) previous posts here: Why don't you guys leave us alone ( specifically to Mark smile )

    Why don't you look at Mark as someone who has lost his path and help him out. He's got questions, answer him and help him ? I mean, I m a Hindu, I hear that a lot in India here, people saying that they would like to help those who have lost the path (read atheist) and so on ....

  37. Abhishek87 profile image76
    Abhishek87posted 7 years ago

    Adding to Mark's 'I am angry' post, I don't know if any one here knows about Shiv Sena. its a political party in India, which I and for that matter any sane person would hate more than anything :

    The things they do in the name of Indian religion and culture is beyond contempt. Like they hit people on the Valentine's day coz its not 'indian" culture, I mean wtf ....

  38. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    I think you were Mark smile

    1. RKHenry profile image79
      RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Misha I liked your phrasing uh-oh.  I said I agree with you on that.  Then I paragraphed down to begin what I wanted to say.   Where did I say YOU had the SAME feelings, intentions or conclusions that I did?

      Whose jumping to conclusions again???  Did you say YOU were the 1 jumping?  I concur.
      Misha dude get real.  If I thought so highly of you I'd join your little club.  But I don't and so the idea of you riding on my coat tails is out of the question.  I spoke for myself.  I speak for myself.  Don't like people using your catchy phrases- don't write them.  Never write down anything you don't want repeated English class 101.

  39. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    RK,

    Usually when people say at the start of their post that they agree to somebody, they then go on to expand on this or to stress points of difference. Absolutely unrelated continuation is somewhat - ummm - unusual. That's why I thought you made some conclusions of what I have said.

    I suspect they don't teach such things in English class 101 nowadays, yet you better learn it to avoid further misunderstandings...

  40. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    Mike, you are as usual missing the point that communism is built on christian values smile

    This is not to say that I blame all our troubles on christianity, this is to say that if the only other thing to blame is communism, then they are pretty much the same smile

    1. Make  Money profile image72
      Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      No Misha, this is just one of many web sites that say Darwinism was at the route of communism.
      http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/ … alism.html

  41. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    LOL Mike, this is not my fight, I just wanted to make a point tongue

    In fact I can (but won't) argue that darwinism is built on Christian values too smile

    1. Make  Money profile image72
      Make Moneyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      No definitely not a fight Misha.  The Russian communist revolution came about because of the totalitarian monarchical power of the Czar, who happened to be a Christian.  The discontent was with the Czar not Christianity because the majority of Russians at the time were Christian.  The communist system became totalitarian, resulting in greater oppression of the people it was designed to "serve."  Don't you agree?

      Neo-nazis wrongfully claim the Russian communist revolution was started by Jews.  So I found this wikipedia on Jewish Bolsheviks that quotes,


      So doesn't this also show that the Communist Party's routes were atheistic?  Not only did the communists attempt to stamp out Jewish culture but all religious culture after the revolution.  “Communism,” Rakovsky explains, “cannot be the victor if it will not have suppressed the still-living Christianity…”

      I don't know how you think Darwinism was built on Christian values when it is claimed that Darwin converted to Christianity on his deathbed.  This along with the story that Darwin renounced evolution before he died are both contested by Darwinists.  Nevertheless if Darwin was not a Christian through his life then I don't know how Darwinism could have been built on Christian values?

  42. Lady Guinevere profile image61
    Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago

    Why does Christianity treat God and Jesus as possessions?

  43. Make  Money profile image72
    Make Moneyposted 7 years ago

    Mark I'd just like you to know that myself as a Catholic am also angry that some Bishops in the past have shuffled priests that have abused children to different parishes.  Catholics are as irate about this as anyone.  Keep in mind these were Catholic children.  A good example of this is how Boston demanded the removal of Bishop Law.  This is no excuse but child abuse is not exclusive to the Catholic faith.  It happens in all communities, religious or not but is not done in the name of any religion.  Child abuse is deplorable.  I am also angry at the conflicts caused in the name of religion, these people are twisting God's word.  I am angry when the government uses God to persuade young men to join the military and kill strangers too, again twisting God's word.



    Because I choose to LG.  That free will thing again, you know.  I have had some of my prayers answered.  I am not just hedging my bet, I truly believe in everlasting life.  I believe there is more to this life than what we see.



    I don't believe it does.  We do try to share, if you know what I mean. smile

    1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
      Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      That is kind of lame Mike.  I mean you expect everyone else here to state the exact specifics of the way they believe and why (just so you can shoot the hell out of them and make them feel inferior to yourself).  Just bcause I do??.  Come on, don't you have any thoughts of your own or are they tied to that doctrine that I posted here.  My how you just skipped over that, yet it is YOUR own doctrine. Besides what to jam down other's throats you are also taught how to look over your own religious doctrines.

      I don't understand your response to the above when I asked why Christianity treats God and Jesus as possessions.  It certainly doesn't seem that way with religioun.  Dobletalk there eh?  You cannot keep God nor Jesus in your own box and then let others experience their goodness by a password only you now.  They do not work that way.

      1. 0
        sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        You know I actually like Mikes thoughts, I really don't feel like he shoves anything down peoples throats. I suppose the difference or the vibe in feelings people get from a person who speaks passionately about what they believe some how comes off as them pushing their beliefs.

        At first I felt a little hesitant to understand him because of it but then I just started to listen and understand where he was coming from and see if I could find the same things in myself and then I did. 

        I do actually come to the forums to learn from other people too, not just you LG, or Viralinspector (who has not been here a while now) and Country Women, and Mohit (who has successfully managed to overcome his welcoming committee lol- way to go Mo!) and Paraglider and Eng M. and Jeromeo and BDaz, who have really offered me a lot. 

        And I say me because while I am reading, I am learning for myself.  I don't always agree and for the most part, they are responsive to the disagreement and I learn and sometimes they blow my mind away with something I never would have thought of before and unfortunately LG, you use to be one of my favorites but lately all you have offered are things like "gag me with a spoon". 

        I don't know what has gotten into you lately.

        1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
          Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Apparnetly you have seen what he has trust down my throat.  I also never expected to hear that you didn't only learn from me.  I am not your teaher.  Everyone is their own teacher.  I really don't know what you are talking about.  Yes I did say that and so what of it? He deleted his first post but I quoted what his original post.
          I posted my thoughts to Mike and he ---well you have to read it for yourself if you can't get it, I am sorry for that.  I made Mike mad because I posted about the LOVE of God and the rest of the world.  I really don't think you read his response.
          Fine I just won't say anything anymore and back out of these forums period.

          1. 0
            sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Well to be fair LG, he said some things to me as well except, I didn't presume that he hated me or that he really honestly felt that I was gonna go to hell.  Actually, I felt the other way about it.  That if I just give him a good listen about his intentions and the things he is saying and put all the other stuff behind me that I could just read it for what it is. 

            Also, I called him Satan too, and other people have called me Satan as well lol.  You are not the only one but I guess the difference is how you take it.  It wasn't something I was going to hold inside me plus because I understand of the seemingly contradictory statements in the Bible, I well understood that he wasn't calling me, Sandy, Satan as if he really believed I was Satan himself. lol.

            1. Lady Guinevere profile image61
              Lady Guinevereposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I never called anyone any names and I never said that I hated anyone. I think you are getting someone else mixed up with Mike.

  44. Mark Knowles profile image59
    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago

    Mike - you are like a broken record. What do you not understand about the difference between a scientific theory with evidence and a political belief in an invisible super being?

    I have no idea if Darwin was a christian or not. I have no interest in his political beliefs.

    I guess that because you base your entire life on a faith based belief - you just can't envisage anyone doing any different? lol

    And still you fight to defend the child abusers in the church. The church is above reproach huh? Why is that?

  45. Make  Money profile image72
    Make Moneyposted 7 years ago

    To tell you the truth Mark the church is above reproach.  It wasn't the church that did it.  It was some priests and the Bishops that shuffled them around.  If you want someone to blame and hate and go after then go after those priests and Bishops.  You have my blessing. smile

    Seriously.  But don't forget the non-Catholics that do the same.

    You call me a broken record Mark?  You are the epitimy of a broken record.  You never say anything different.  I am starting to believe that you truly are a communist.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Oh - do they hide behind the irreproachable church also?

  46. Make  Money profile image72
    Make Moneyposted 7 years ago

    Nope, go after them Mark.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I am doing. It is called the church.

      1. RKHenry profile image79
        RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Does it matter what church?  I gather that you are an equal opportunist, but when you refer to Church- what Church or Churches?

        1. AEvans profile image72
          AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Here we go, What a beautiful Sunday it is  big_smile Quite a Windy day and the weather is warm:D

          1. RKHenry profile image79
            RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Why, whats wrong?  Did I do something bad?

            1. AEvans profile image72
              AEvansposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              You didn't do anything bad, check out the thread it is quite interesting , fighting , fighting, fighting. sad

        2. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          All the same to me. I am completely non-denominational. A backwoods wooden church in Arkansas that claims "humbleness;" the Roman church that raped entire continents to build their golden edifices;  a Mosque in Birmingham that breeds suicide bombers - all the same as far as I am concerned.  big_smile

          1. RKHenry profile image79
            RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Got it.
            Yeah, how about that Birmingham incident?  Did you hear why that guy killed them people?

  47. Make  Money profile image72
    Make Moneyposted 7 years ago

    True commy belief Mark.

    How about going after atheist commys that killed over 100 million in the 20th century?

  48. knolyourself profile image61
    knolyourselfposted 7 years ago

    " Did you hear why that guy killed them people?"
    Antidepressant drugs?

    1. RKHenry profile image79
      RKHenryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Funny

      No I don't think it was antidepressants.  [smile face]

  49. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 7 years ago

    I have been away again for a few days, and finally, it looks like we have been left alone. big_smile
    At leaston this thread, and for now! Not neccessarily elsewhere though. sad
    Oh well, one could only hope. sad

  50. Misha profile image74
    Mishaposted 7 years ago

    Sandy, you are searching and changing, right? Nowadays you are not the one who you were a year ago, and talk and react differently. Other people do the same. All, including LG smile

    1. 0
      sandra rinckposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well I respectfully disagree I am exactly the same the only difference is that I decided to stand up for other people who believe in God and in doing so, the negativity turned my direction as well. 

      I think that you like the submissive Sandy better lol because it was easier but submissive Sandy can and does think for herself and only stays submissive until a point. smile

      And when I do speak up, no one likes it, why?  Because I do have a mind of my own?  Because I do treasure other peoples beliefs in God as well?  I am not ashamed and I wont stand down just because those who continually dish it out don't like it when it comes back on them. 

      I am not gonna shut up just because I might lose the respect of those who really loved the submissive Sandy.  That to me is oppression at it's finest. 

      Anyways, Misha, I still love you so we cool. smile

      ps.  although I am a little bit sad to some degree that I have. sad

 
working