Atheism is irrational, illogical and boring

Jump to Last Post 251-300 of 396 discussions (1882 posts)

60
bangawking000posted 16 years ago
Let those who want to go to hell, go to HELL!!!

If anyone can prove that their god is real, well prove it!
reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
onthewriteside - out of interest, how are all these Dec 25 birthdays arrived at as different places and times used different calendars?
reply report
1. 0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  From what I understand, the zodiac calander (star charts) were there source of understanding and keeping time.
  
  There were also at least 3 (though I don't know for sure) different calendars using the same method. As I understand it, Taurus dominates the sky during the winter months in the Northern hemisphere.
  
  But obviously on the other side of the world, Taurus does not dominate the sky (I don't know which one does). The constellations shift or move somewhat of 1.3 degrees every year (something like this) so what is common to believe that a Taurus shares certain traits, it is not really so because evidentally Taurus at one point in time was Aries.
  
  So while they all seemed to come to use the same method, it is likely that none of them were actually born on December 25th but during a winter solstice in the north and summer solstice or as they call it (I think) tropical solstice.
  
  So I think the actual date is irrelevant and the literal occurrence of these people being born on this day is a myth.
  reply report
  60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Actually Sandra, the constellations precess 1 degree every 72 years, which is why this number is so prevalent in the bible. that means that each zodiacal "house" lasts 2160 years (assuming each is divided equally into 30 degrees). twevle houses gives us the 25,920 year "Great Year". It doesn't have as much to do with the constellations shifting, as it does with which house the Sun rises in as they shift. Which constellation the Sun rose in was an observable event.
  
  EDIT: Another interesting note: the Sumerians claimed that their Gods, the Anunnaki, lived on another planet in our solar system...a planet that has an orbital period around the Sun of 3600 of our Earth years. Their hexagesimal mathematic system was based on this belief. 3600 divided by 72 (the number of years it takes for 1 degree of shift) = 50 years...the number of years in a biblical Jubilee.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, I knew I didn't have it right yet I knew something to the effect. Thanks for putting it up.
  
  Also can you explain the 13th constellation for me? I know it was removed but I cannot remember why.
  reply report
  60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not familiar with a 13th constellation. Was it added later then subsequently removed? As far as I know, the Sumerians, the Egyptians, and the Hebrews all had 12 constellations.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well I can't remember off the top of my head but it was originally part of the star charts but was removed (if I recall right) because it doesn't occur/or hadn't re-accrued since it's inception.
  
  Also (if I remember right) Ophiuchus the 13th sign passes through pretty quickly and is known as the Serpent Bearer.
  
  I bring it up because as relevant to Revelation not being a prophecy foretelling future "human activity" such as mass destruction (though I wont put it past the ignorance of religion to make this happen) but telling about the Constellation Ophiuchus that will dominate the "heavens and earth" for a brief time before the known 'second coming' appears again in the heavens.
  
  Hence, The birth of 'christ'. The death of christ. The resurrection. the serpent rule (anti-christ)for a brief time. and the second coming.
  
  Which leads me to believe that whatever this constellation happens to be (because it hasn't been seen on earth since it's inception) sounds more like a cosmic event.
  
  How it would transpire is anyones guess but I would rely on the astronomers to tell us what's up.
  
  I would think that it is probably a very bright star in this constellation that will dominate our sun giving the illusion of some sort of backwards solar eclipse.
  
  But I am getting off topic again.
  reply report
  60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  AHHHH...I see what you're getting at. The "planet" the Sumerians believed their "Gods" came from was called Nibiru. It only comes near Earth once every 3600 years from the direction of the constellation Hydra (the serpent). Incidently, they referred to Nibiru as the "Lord of Hosts", and it has been argued that the biblical "coming of the Lord" actually refers to the next passing of this celestial object. The Sumerians called it a planet, but some modern scholars have considered it to more probably be a brown dwarf twin of our Sun, making our system a binary one, many others in the universe are.
  
  As constellations don't "move" in and out of Earth's view, Ophiuchus probably refers to this same object.
  
  But you are correct...we probably should be getting back to the topic...hehe!
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  yes, yes I know, I just forget sometimes as a human spectator living in the northern hemisphere. Okay back to the topic at hand.
  reply report
  60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  LOL! I'm with ya though...I do agree that a lot of the events described in the biblical tales are probably astronomical in nature...
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  There was a 13th constellation Ophiuchus which is known as the Serpent. In Christian teachings the Serpent is an Ahrimanic principle. (exerpt: Ophiuchus was better known in classical times as Asclepius, [in Latin, Aesculapius] the God of Medicine. He learnt the art from Chiron, the Centaur. On either side of Ophiuchus in the heavens lie the two parts of the sign of the serpent he holds, Serpens Caput, the Serpent's Head and Serpens Cauda, the Serpent's Tail. The twined serpent staff is the badge of the medical profession to this day.
  
  Ironically the Elixir of Life, the fountain of youth and reference to Soma (the nectar related to divinity) are all related to the myth of Ophiuchus, the serpent, that which gives the ability to heal and empower. In Christianity however, the serpent, snake, dragon (all the same thing) are references to the dark side or satanic.
  
  The ability to access this is a physical ability, the teachings of which within the christian church were closed to the masses.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Excellent Jewels. I knew I could count on you. xo!
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Nice info Jewels ,I read about the 13th sign Ophiuchus something astronomers wanted included but astrologers were against it, or was it the other way around?
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  In line with it being myth, the 25th aligned with the summer solstice, and in line with astrology/astronomy (remembering it was not separate in the ancient days), to text is referring to the Sun being the divine principle and not Jesus/Christ. The Word (in the beginning was the word) refers to the Solar Logos (Logos in Ancient Greek is Word as in creative principle). The sun being that which is a divine principle is at its most prominent at the summer solstice.
  
  God (the divine) never had arms and legs.
  reply report
2. 60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  That's a good point paraglider. It has to do with the winter solstice, so technically the local date could be different, but by our calendar, this is when their "birthdays" would fall.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Onthewriteside & Sandra too - thanks! I wasn't thinking, because it should have been pretty obvious
  reply report
61
marinealways24posted 16 years ago
Maybe enlightenment came from seperation of religion and individual free thought without fear or boundaries. Maybe the "spark" was simply individualizing which is not simple to do in today's society which was likely 99 times harder in society of the past. Maybe individual free thought and debate was the moment we developed "human minds" rather than animal minds which would all think alike. No 2 individuals free of religion will think alike. I have never seen a church member debate a preacher as debate is not openly welcomed in most religions. If this is all true, would the question not be whether or not the ability of "absolute individualism" is divine intervention to seperate us from other life known?
reply report
60
Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago
A little off topic this one but worth a visit for a giggle, with some serious points in.

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnBo … f_Nazareth
reply report
1. 60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  LOL! That's hilarious!
  reply report
74
Inspirepubposted 16 years ago
glendoncaba,

This may be a little off-topic, unless you have a proposition in mind?

Are you proposing something like:

9. The life of the man on whom the Biblical Jesus was based follows exactly prophecies written before he was born.

...?

We need to keep the debate focused around specific propositions, or it goes all over the place and we get 500 posts for no progress.

Jenny
reply report
1. 80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Oh queen Jenny:
  
  Of course your highness. I have missed about 500 posts and was surprised to find my prophecy arguments at the last post so I jumped righ in but with enders permission I go right along with your proposition with a slight change in wording:
  
  The life of the person historically and theologically recognised as the biblical Jesus Christ of Nazareth was prophesied in Scripture with exact references to his birthplace, his baptism, and his passion.
  reply report
60
onthewritesideposted 16 years ago
So we are looking at 69 weeks after the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem, the Messiah would come, right? That's approximately 1 year and 4 months. From when? From the destruction of the 1st temple? That happened long before Jesus' time. The temple (and Jerusalem) were still very much in tact in Jesus' times, and weren't destroyed by the Romans until years after his death. I don't see a point here...
reply report
1. 80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Daniel was concerned about Daniel 8:14 and its symbolic prediction: "for 2300 evenings and mornings then shall the sanctuary be restored to its rightful state".
  
  At that time the temple in Jerusalem was in ruins so Daniel would be expected to know that the prophecy would be about spiritual restoration or cleansing associated with the annual Day of Atonement.
  
  evening and mornig = day
  
  Daniel quite likely knew that his contemporary the prophet ezekiel had been shown in long-time visions that A DAY SYMBOLIZES A YEAR Ezekiel 4:6.
  
  The end of that long prophecy inn Daniel 8:14 would be 1844 when we believe the preparation for judgemnent/cleansing started, but thats another discussion.
  
  In Chapter 9 the angel wanted Daniel to kknow what was gong to happen to his people the Jews. Use the year day principle and give me your conclusions. Remember now, no unfair debating tactics, just look at Daniel 9:24-27 and please give me your honest response. You dont have to agree with me but I firmly believe that this text points to one historical charactwr: Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The Magi knew of the prophecy as well as the Jews.
  reply report
  60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  OK. So the first temple was completed in 953 BC, and was destroyed in 587/586 BC by Nebuchadnezzar. The second temple was completed exactly 70 years after the destruction of the first and was destroyed again by the Romans in 70 AD.
  
  So if the temple was in ruins during the time that Daniel was writing, then he must have been writing sometime between 587/586 BC and 517/517 BC.
  
  If we apply the whole "day=year" thing like you suggest (which I agree is possible), adding 2300 years to any of these dates does not gives us the time of Jesus.
  reply report
  80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  You are getting warm. Congrats with the year day principle. Now lets understand symbolic prophecy.
  
  BTW Jenny this is not rabbit hole it stand to validate several biblical propositions.
  
  Ok lets try this again. We are in Daniel 9.
  
  Daniel is perplexed because of the prophecy of Daniel 8.
  
  You need to understand the temple inn Daniel 8 is not the earthly Jerusalem temple, its symbolic of god
  s temple in heaven. Why would god's temple in heaven need to be cleansed, atoned for? That I'm also happy to discuss.
  But first I want you to know I believe that the bible is the divinely inspired word of god because of fulfilled prophecies such as Daniel 9.
  
  Thats why Paul could write: "When the time had fully come..."
  
  Daniel 9: 1-3 He examines the literal prophecy of jeremiah about Israel's captivity. Jeremiah had prophesied a return after 70 years and daniel was now in the 68th year so he wondered if it would indeed e 2300 years. He reads the rest of the scroll and sees Jeremiah calls for Jews to seek Lord.
  
  Daniel 9: 4-19: Daniel prays a most beautiful intercessory prayer.
  
  Daniel 9 :20-23 Gabriel appears and consoles daniel
  
  Daniel 9: 24-27 gabriel explains the Jewish nation's part of the 2300 years prophecy.
  
  First of three decrees 538/537 BC to resettle. Do your calculatons from there and you will find that Messiah cut off at 31AD year of crucifixion.
  
  Dont think this is anti-semitical but the 70 weeks of days symbolic ends at AD 34 when the Jewish nation killed stephen the first Christian martyr, and from there as a nation their probation was closed. Jews no longer as a nation represents the oracle of God, now the christian church.
  
  The year of Messiah baptism and crucifixion is predicted in Daniel 9.
  reply report
  60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  What? I guess through symbols we can make the Babble say whatever we want it to...
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  The commentaries in the Douay-Rheims Bible regarding Daniel 8 describes 8 of Daniel's prophecies from that chapter that have come true. Antiochus in the 8th prophecy is in 1 & 2 Machabees. Daniel 9 talks about all 3 physical temples, the time between the 1st and the 2nd, the time from the 2nd to the Baptism of Christ and the 3rd that has yet to be built.
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I can confirm this with the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible 1899 Edition but to the baptism of Christ.
  
  It sub-titles Daniel Chapter 9 like this,
  
  "Daniel's confession and prayer: Gabriel informs him concerning the seventy weeks to the coming of Christ."
  
  Then there are commentaries on certain verses. These are the commentaries for verses 24 and 25.
  
  24 "Seventy weeks"... Viz., of years, (or seventy times seven, that is, 490 years,) are shortened; that is, fixed and determined, so that the time shall be no longer.
  
  25 "From the going forth of the word"... That is, from the twentieth year of king Artaxerxes, when by his commandment Nehemias rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem, 2 Esd. 2. From which time, according to the best chronology, there were just sixty-nine weeks of years, that is, 483 years to the baptism of Christ, when he first began to preach and execute the office of Messias.-- Ibid.
  .
  .
  .
  Also for continuity from the Old Testament to the New Testament the second part of the prophecy in Daniel 9:27 that reads:
  
  "there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation: and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end."
  
  can be confirmed in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 that reads:
  
  "3 Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, 4 Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God."
  reply report
  80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  somebody ought to publish this thread.
  
  This is good stuff. I didn't know we had so much in common makemoney. I need to sit down with a local priest and compare notes. I still believe theologically we are polar opposites but never knew you guys believed in the Messianic predictions of Daniel 9 as well. Makes for interesting discussion, but this not the forum. Notice the atheists cant answer this one. They dare not. I suppose the only way they can answer is to discount the prophecy and the bible. And for that they will have to answer to Jewish scholarship. Masoretic text and all.
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah a little off topic but I'll try to keep this short folks. I realized this a few years ago when I was having a Jehovah Witness come over once a week. JWs are 7th Day Adventists like yourself and I think the Mormons too if I'm not mistaken. Well the JW guy said "Oh look the Catholics are copying us." He didn't take into account that Catholic theologians have been studying the Bible for just about 2,000 years.
  
  You know we shouldn't be polar opposites with it saying One Body in Christ so many times in the Bible. Yeah it will be interesting to see how atheist reply to this. I had a real good discussion with another 7th Day Adventists a while back. I think you will be surprised at the outcome. Feel free to add a comment to the thread if you like, Religion vs the Bible.
  
  Mike
  reply report
  60
  Eric Graudinsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Who would buy it ??
  
  Yes folks, that's a genuine, rare 4 LOL comment.
  (Probably worth quite a bit on EBay)
  
  Some very brave, strong person could start a thread to discuss out the royalties that everyone should receive from any income generated. It would be longer than this one.
  
  Why Strong and brave?
  Well, that's an essential quality for anyone standing between a religious person and money.
  
  My, this thread has grown since I last looked. 1219 posts. My Goodness!
  I'm not going to make any pretence that I've been able to keep up with it.
  Is Jenny still moderating? Or have you all driven her crazy?
  
  OK, back to the discussion.
  Your court Jester signing out now.
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  They are not answering it because it was ruled off-topic.
  
  Rather than dumping piles of Biblical quotes and argument in the thread, why don't we get on with debating he proposition:
  
  9. The life of the person historically and theologically recognised as the biblical Jesus Christ of Nazareth was prophesied in Scripture with exact references to his birthplace, his baptism, and his passion.
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I just noticed this. The Catholic Bible says 69 weeks of years takes us to the baptism of Christ. Jesus' ministry after His baptism was for 3 and a half years. 31 AD was the year of the crucifixion minus the 3 and a half years of ministry brings us back to 27 AD. Then to add the 70th week of years or 7 years for the full 490 years brings us to 34 AD, yeah when the Jewish nation killed St. Stephen the first Christian martyr. 7th Day Adventists and Catholic figures are not just close but identical with this. Cool.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well isn't that a trip!!?? Prophecy rules!
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  If the different bibles have slightly different versions of what Daniel prophesied, does that not suggest that editors have tampered with the prophesy to make it fit better?
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  All the known manuscripts are available to view.
  I personally use the RSV it's the best literal translation because older more qualified manuscripts have been found since the King James Version was released.
  There are two types of Bibles, literal translations which are translated directly from the manuscripts. Then there are those that reword the Bible to make it easier to understand.
  I think this is a good time to discuss what the "infallible Word of God" actually means so it makes a little sense.
  The Bible as it was inspired by God to the authors is the infallible Word. However the Word was preserved by man. So when we see things such as obvious scribal errors, critics will leave them there because a more qualified manuscript hasn't been found yet. This is a good thing because it shows that they are unwilling to change them.
  When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found it was amazing how well preserved out current versions of the Bible actually are.
  So, no the different translations don't say something different they just say it differently...if that makes sense.
  Take the Iliad for instance, I have three different translations and some are more poetic than others but the content doesn't change.
  Thing is we have many more manuscripts written closer to the time period than the Iliad but no one questions the accuracy of the Iliad. So the proposition that the Bible is to be treated like other works of antiquity would qualify it much more than the Iliad.
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Paraglider I use a software program that if I copy a text from just about anything online, paste it into the software and click Speak it speaks the text I copied to me. I just did this for Daniel 9 from the King James Bible. While I was listening to the KJB I was following the words from Daniel 9 from the Douay-Rheims Bible. Both the KJB and the DRB are just about word for word in Daniel 9. I am noticing this all through the Bible too. And seeing both translations were compiled near the end of the 1500s and the beginning of the 1600s we can be near certain there was no collaboration between them.
  
  I imagine glendoncaba's Bible is awful close too. From different versions I am noticing that just a word here or small phrase there is a little different but in just about every case the meaning doesn't change.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I'd got the impression your bible and Glendon's had a discrepancy of a 'week', i.e. 7 years. Maybe just my misreading of the various posts. This stuff doesn't read very easily you know!
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I thought that from the start too but those additional 7 years are from the baptism of Christ until St. Stephen the first Christian that was martyred.
  reply report
  80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  No discrepancy, thanks to this thread I discovered area where my catholic brother and I agree, that is the messianic fulfillment of Daniel 9:
  
  baptism ad27
  death ad 31
  Stephen ad 34.
  
  70 weeks end ad 34.
  reply report
59
enderw1gginsposted 16 years ago
Morning gang...off to church!
I dont agree with proposition 8 either.
1. it has only been backed up by an opinion rather than facts
2. God could have created man in His image ie. born with it
3. it presupposes evolution which:
a. is not a part of the agreed upon cannon
b. doesn't necessarily rule God out

K bye!
reply report
1. 92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Not true, because:
  1. it is derived from logic which is permissible in your rules. Logically sentience (self-awareness) must precede all other knowledge. Source? Cogito ergo sum. Without sentience there is no mind, only instinctive reaction.
  2. God could have created a sentient being but without sentience the being could not know God. Please allow the being to exist for a few minutes at least before it has to know God
  3. the proposition does not presuppose evolution. I think sentient beings evolved but you can have God create them in a flash if you want.
  The proposition stands. Sentience precedes religious and all other knowledge.
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I second this. If we are going to have a discussion, logic must apply and logically, sentience is a pre-requisite to know anything other than base instincts.
  
  The proposition stands.
  reply report
  0
  Leta Sposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  lol Why do I find this funny?
  
  OK...checking in...checking out. Hi, Sufi!
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  because it is funny, intentionally.
  reply report
2. 74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Now, Ender, don't jump to conclusions.
  
  Paraglider is proposing this fact with logic as its evidence.
  
  It does not in any way presuppose evolution. It makes no suggestion as to when or how the spark of sentience appeared - in fact it specifically excludes the origin of the spark from its purview.
  
  God creating Man with the spark is completely consistent with the proposition as put by Paraglider.
  
  I see no inherent atheist assumptions hiding in the wording anywhere.
  
  Jenny
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
no roadbollocks here...
reply report
86
Sufidreamerposted 16 years ago
Hi Lita,

Are you having fun in your new career as a trollslayer?
reply report
1. 0
  Leta Sposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  NO! Quite tired of it. I wish somebody would kiss the toad and make it disappear. God! (oops, inappropriate expletive here.)
  
  Para: haha...yeah, checking out now,
  reply report
  68
  Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  It's all in your lips, Lita
  reply report
  0
  Leta Sposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Nah. Don't think so. I sometimes wear too much lipstick, anyway. I'm thinking Maddie has got to ban him after the crap he said to MM. Just flat out--I don't care where you are--on the internet or in real life. A gown middle-aged man has no justification acting this way. If this were real life, and he had said those kinds of things at work, at a party, etc., he would be fired, sued, or arrested...the people he attacks are private citizens. Simple as that.
  
  It isn't cute, intelligent or at all amusing. Your assumption of any 'flirtation' is completely, so, so much in your head. Yeck. I think he has a serious problem and I just want him out of here, period.
  reply report
  68
  Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  It was not me who talked about kissing a toad
  
  But I am back looking at what he said to MM, did not really see anything extraordinary, so I guess I would double-check...
  reply report
  0
  Leta Sposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  'Kissing a toad,' was a metaphorical joke because of your assumption. Which is completely, utterly incorrect. I don't like rude, dumb people, period.
  
  He asked MM if she was always jealous (or something like that) of women more physically attractive than herself.... I haven't even heard my bf's teen sons say crap like that to any women or girls. They have manners and are decent.
  
  If you can't see how that is extremely low and rude, and a personal attack, well...
  reply report
  68
  Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  LOL You know that I am just teasing you on kisses, don't you?
  As for personal attack on MM, this was no good, but frankly no match to your own personal attacks on TK. Are you going to report yourself, too?
  reply report
  0
  Leta Sposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I disagree about what you stated. I guess one has to have a sense of these things and what is appropriate. And as I stated, I am 'mirroring' his behavior (I have explained the term numerous times--if you want more info., google it). If he is to continue doing this--I for one do not enjoy seeing it and am a bit incensed. These are real people connected to these keyboards, after all. Not some fantasy-life creatures middle aged guys with social problems can play with on the internet.
  
  Sure, I will report myself. Probably get a warning. I don't really care. I am sure of myself and right in this case. And as soon as he is ousted, my so-called 'attacks,' will cease.
  reply report
74
Inspirepubposted 16 years ago
OK, I need sleep again.

DON'T PANIC - I have not quit. I am just resting.

While I am asleep, when Ender gets back from church see if you can get him to see that Proposition 8 is completely compatible with everything Christian, and in the meanwhile will the prophecy-lovers please either "put up" a proposition or "shut up" ...

Everyone else, avoid rabbit holes and slanging matches, and I will see you all in my morning ...

Jenny
reply report
1. 92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Goodnight, and thanks for your efforts
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Seconded. I wait ender's return from grovelling for the next stage. Although - I am off - and away from a computer for at least 2 weeks on Tuesday, so he needs to get his skates on.
  reply report
2. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I figured prophecies had been allowed way back. If not I would like to propose the use of Biblical prophecies.
  
  9 or 10 or where ever we are at now.
  
  "Biblical prophecies are allowed if the prophecy is in the Old Testament and revealed in either the Old or New Testaments or is common knowledge."
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/16891#post240566
  
  Jenny left a forum with the updates so you don't have to guess.
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  No, Mike, it wasn't allowed - people have just been ignoring the moderator's comments.
  
  I think there are too many terms in this sentence that are debatable in themselves.
  
  I suggest you take whichever prophecy you think has been "revealed", and make a proposition that it has been "revealed", and provide evidence, and let people debate the evidence.
  
  But you need to bear in mind that it is always easy to interpret things in retrospect - there have been so many "End Days" which fulfilled the prophecies in Revelations already, as Paraglider pointed out - so the prophecy would need to be specific enough to be falsifiable. Choose carefully ...
  
  Alternatively, join the debate on the proposed Proposition 9, which is aiming to get agreement that three specific elements of the life of Jesus were prophesied in the OT.
  
  Jenny
  reply report
77
cindyvineposted 16 years ago
yawn
reply report
1. 0
  Leta Sposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Yep, yawn.....I'm about to write a hub on henna tattoos, I think...
  reply report
61
Randy Godwinposted 16 years ago
Wow, I just came off of the beach to find this thread still going on. Of course you all know no one is going to win. Too much to read to find out myself. Has Joey put everyone in their place like he claimed to? My service comes and goes, but who care down here. No problem Mon!
reply report
80
glendoncabaposted 16 years ago
Now I need to search only 40 odd pages to find the other 7 propositions.

This thread is like religion.

the encounter with truth changes from time to time. but truth remains the same. And jenny is like a prophet pointing us back to the way.

Good.

Good.

Life. Art. Life.
reply report
68
Mishaposted 16 years ago
No prob Lita, I just happen to think you are shooting yourself in the foot. I am shutting up about this issue, I said all what I possibly could. Sorry for off-top guys.
reply report
0
Leta Sposted 16 years ago
OK, Misha, cool.

To bring this thread back to the topic posting:

Do most fundamental theists see God as a sentient being, or as a force larger than that--encompassing and embedded within everything in the universe?
reply report
61
marinealways24posted 16 years ago
How did a drunk dude build a boat to hold every animal in the world x 2?
reply report
1. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  That sounds like a lead up to a joke.
  
  Very carefully.
  reply report
2. 70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I have never been that drunk! That is one helluva cargo to take care of drunk or even sober.
  reply report
61
marinealways24posted 16 years ago
I cannot hit the rim pissing when I am drunk much less build a wooden cruise ship!
reply report
1. 0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
Mike & Glendon - the problem with these prophesies is that to make them work you have to know when a week means seven years, when a temple means Jerusalem and when it is a symbol for something ethereal, and when 'the going forth of the word' means 'the twentieth year of king Artaxerxes, when by his commandment Nehemias rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem'.
And, it's only through retrospective analysis that any of these 'insights' are arrived at.

If you set 100 scholars the task of demonstrating fulfillment of OT prophesy in NT, they'll find it, because that's the task at hand. But only by looking backwards and juggling meanings and numbers.
reply report
1. 80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  The magi were studying real prophecies. So was Daniel. So was Christ.
  
  Paul was aware galatians 4: "When the time had fully come...
  Titus 1: "promised ages ago and at the proper time manifested in his word."
  
  The 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 is unchallenged.
  reply report
2. 0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly.
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
Actually this is quite interesting. The two Theists currently present believe they are polar opposites (at least Glendon sees Mike as such, though Mike is more conciliatory).

And doesn't that say something about the nature of theology? You don't even have to look to Islam of Judaism for conflict with Christianity. Christianity has it all, right here, within the single body in Christ.

I'm well aware that Science doesn't always speak with one voice either, but at least we have method to decide between competing theories. Theology, for all its history, is in its infancy still and evermore shall be, world without end...
reply report
1. 80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Para:
  
  Please treat the exchange between mike and myself as a mature comparing of notes. dont digress now. theology is the queen of the social sciences.
  
  social sciences and natural science use similar principles but not exactly same. Natural science you are in concrete world, with social sciences you deal with people and their cultures, beliefs, attitudes etc. Not so concrete. Yet we both use the empirical method.
  
  realm of religion goes a bit farther and requires faith. it is experiential subjective.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  In earlier posts I've described theology as a venerable art form. That's what I still think it is. Clearly it's not a physical science but to qualify as a social science or even a proto-science, it still has to get its act together. It's an art, like music. Fine as a diversion or even to devote a life to, but wholly unsuited to informing political decisions.
  reply report
80
glendoncabaposted 16 years ago
When you look at prophecy keenly you will see that God acts in human history.

While historians and scientists (including atheists) are scared about 2012 planetary alignment, mayan code and nostradamus calculations, I rest my living faith upon the word of God.
reply report
1. 92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  2012 will prove to be another non-event, just like all the previous ends-of-the-world. Unless of course some group of idiot cultists contrive to foment some serious trouble. Not likely.
  reply report
54
kmackey32posted 16 years ago
This thread is stupid stop replying to it so it goes far far away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
OK, off to work.
Mike - in principle I don't object to that proposition but I think it will be very hard to agree on fulfillment as most are exceedingly loose and vague (deliberately so - look how silly all the millennium prophets look now! The same fate awaits the 2012-ists)
reply report
80
glendoncabaposted 16 years ago
Inspirepub wrote:

"Theists and atheists agree that:

1. Statements cannot be proven true, but they can be proven false.
2. Believing something to be true is a choice beyond the rational, as the rational can only demonstrate that something is false, not that it is true.
3. The Bible makes reference to people, places and events which are historically verified by other sources.
4. The Bible contains some inconsistencies and/or inaccuracies.
5. There was a historical figure who corresponds to the Biblical Jesus.
6. The NT accounts of the life of Jesus are accepted as accurate if there is a non-Biblical corroborating source.
7. For the purposes of providing evidence for new facts, the Bible should be treated in the same way as any other writings of the time."

ONE HONEST RESPONSE:

I respect you guys a lot but I would find it blasphemous to engage in a discussion with these propositions because:
I &II beginning to see that this methodology is inadequate to discuss religion. I could tolerate earlier it as a background guide but I am now seeing that you cant use hard and fast rationalism (which as a philosophy I need to investigate more) to investigate religion.

III & IV Yea I'm okay with. and the few areas requiring clarity do not undermine the total message of the book. Some of the apparent inconsistencies are due to our lack of knowledge on literary style of ancient writers.

V Three cheers.

VI &VII This is where I say good bye. Which believer agreed?
I'm outa here. You guys did a Honduran coup on ender wiggins?
The bible speaks for itself or it does not speak at all.
The following article might help to give some perspective. someone referred to the site earlier.
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jexfound.html

Jenny you are a sweet one but but but.......
I'm off writing hubs and plan to drop by now and again to see how you guys can defend bible without the bible. There just arent enough external sources. The bible was miraculously preserved.
reply report
1. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Dido
  reply report
  61
  tksenseiposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  The singer?
  
  ???
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Miraculously ripped off the walls of Egypt, easily replicated, not at all mysterious and let's not forget that other non biblical writings have also been miraculously preserved.
  
  But lemme guess... god wanted it that to fulfill the prophecy and test your faith?
  
  Not only do you guys seem to not know how to read anything other than the Bible... a miracle indeed, you also don't know how to use the tools your almighty god provided for you to see anything else... must be a defect.
  
  You guys see god everyday but have no idea what it is. It's spelled out for you in every way in your bibles (yes plural) but you haven't got a clue.
  
  Your god does not and never did exist. It is a metaphor, a story an allegory.
  
  Learning about life is not at all boring. Life exist outside the bible. The bible is not god, it is not gods words.
  
  Every time you read it and repeat it you pay homage to the Pegan gods, but you hate pegans.
  
  Jesus was an Egyptian, pagan, jew, Coptic, gnostic, prophet and by prophet I mean an astrologer, a story teller. He was everything but god.
  
  He internalized god (as you should do) he most likely believed in reincarnation. He knew something that you have all but forgotten.
  
  And as for the Islam. Your books transcribe the same things. You received portions of the bible (because the bible was not even compiled yet) call it unreliable but use it to give the Koran credibility.
  
  Either Mohammad is a liar about his god given word, (Mohammad the man who didn't know how to read) or he went by what he could see and felt inspired (as a natural reaction to bs) to either avenge or revenge but it certainly was not the word of god.
  
  Christians and Muslims cannot get agree on their holy books because both of them are "fabrications", they are rip offs. They are banana phone translations.
  
  Your religions have done everything but bring you closer to god. They degrade you into savage, immoral, pitty beings who don't know where else to go because they told you to never look outside the bible for god.
  
  -sorry you guys have been dooped in the biggest way about one of the most important aspects of life.
  
  All you have is... everything outside the bible is a conspiracy by satan. You have to be kidding me.
  
  Your books tell you to hate pegans (pegans are the worst according to the koran but not highly esteemed by the bible either) yet they are pegan.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  and Aeneas?
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Have you never heard that saying before? I second that = dido.
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I've heard and used ditto.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  ditto !
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Okay I misspelled it.
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I forgive you Mike. Are you ready for your exorcism yet? Promise you will feel better.
  reply report
2. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  This is a quote from the above web site.
  
  "At first glance, the "Jesus-myth" seems to be a stroke of genius: To eliminate Christianity and any possibility of it being true, just eliminate the founder! The idea was first significantly publicized by a 19th-century German scholar named Bruno Bauer."
  
  And this is a quote from this web site about the House of Rothchild.
  http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_ord … warnin.htm
  
  "Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) was born in Frankfurt-on-the-Main in Germany, the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, a banker and goldsmith. Their name was derived from the 'red shield' ('rotschildt') that hung over the door of their shop, and had been the emblem of revolutionary Jews in Eastern Europe."
  
  Bauer is the original family name of the House of Rothchild. Today on TV I heard that the New Age movement is also affiliated with the New World Order, like the House of Rothchild is. Kissinger thinks Obama is primed to create the 'New World Order'.
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
From what I have read this morning, I have a further proposition:

Christianity is a house divided, with neither the method nor the will to heal itself.
reply report
1. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I'd go with "Christianity is a house divided a little bit, but nothing that can't be healed"
  
  But that's a new long topic of it's own. Glendoncaba, enderw1ggins and I have already mentioned it for later.
  
  @ Jewels, would you be wearing your cat outfit?
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  ordinarily I wouldn't but for you I'd make an exception.
  reply report
2. 74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I will take this as a joke ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Of course. But even Mike accepted the first half of it.
  reply report
89
Jewelsposted 16 years ago
Apologies in advance Jenny. Again way off topic and branching out into other subjects. I will try not to engage. Try!
reply report
60
Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago
Well, I am bowing out of this one and leaving the various religionists to argue amongst themselves as to who retro-actively mis-prophesied what.

Seeing as all my comments have been ignored by the theists in favor of arguing about who has the best religion, I think I can logically deduce the following:

Theism is illogical, irrational, boring and leads to inevitable conflicts.

I submit as evidence the preceding several pages of "discussion."

Atheism is obviously the only rational choice here when comparing theism vs atheism.

ciao
reply report
1. 92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I thought we made a little progress when EW accepted the formula that allowed for evolution, but it's all just fallen in a heap since then.
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  My apologies. I've not helped here.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  No worries - neither have I!
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well, Ender has been AWOL, and he has been the theist most willing to step outside "The Bible is true because it is true".
  
  In his absence, I think a couple of the others have finally read the canon and found it not to their liking.
  
  At least one has said he will not participate in any discussion in which the Bible is not allowed to be used to prove itself to be true.
  
  As many Christians in particular feel that way, Ender may have to team up with Mohit to carry on the theist side of the game.
  
  I am not sure how familiar Mohit is with the structure of a formal debate, though, or how willing he would be to adhere to Rule 1 ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I would not agree with that Jewels, you have offered many ideas, and ernestly contributed.
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I agree she has written some wise passages.
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Ahhhh, thanks you guys, can feel the heart there.
  reply report
2. 59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  where is the evidence in the preceding pages???
  
  Also you were unable to answer the following
  
  If you are evolved from monkeys then why the current monkeys around you in the zoo are still monkeys???
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  That betrays a total misunderstanding of evolution.
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Evolution is a rabbit hole. Many firm religious believers also believe in evolution, therefore it is irrelevant to the question at hand.
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  It is relevant to what Mark has said
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Two wrongs do not make a right. If he goes off-topic, exercise self-discipline and do not follow.
  
  Or take it to another thread ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  First of all, this thread was not started by you
  Secondly, there is no hard and fast rule by HUBPAGES that we can not go off the topic.
  Thirdly, the topic is Atheism is irrational, illogical and boring
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  From the hubpages "Forum Rules.":
  
  Stick to the Topic: Please stay on the thread’s topic when replying to an existing thread. If you don’t see an open thread about something you’d like to discuss, please open a new thread.
  
  http://hubpages.com/help/forum_rules
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Mark you are like superman, somehow you come when needed! Is this a gift from FSM?
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Yeessss, LoL, it's a gift of FSM (F****ING S**T MACHINE) to Mark
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Please everyone, self-discipline ... let it go through to the keeper ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  
  Hey Mark,
  
  First, you violated the guidlines.
  Secondly, there is no punishment for breaking these.
  Thirdly, the topic is Atheism is irrational, illogical and boring
  Forthly, you are ingeneous
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I am the elected moderator of this thread.
  
  If you had bothered to read the thread, you would know this.
  
  In this thread, everyone agrees to stay on topic. If you do not agree to stay on topic, do not post in this thread.
  
  The overall subject of the thread is being discussed one issue at a time. The current proposition under debate is this one:
  
  9. The life of the person historically and theologically recognised as the biblical Jesus Christ of Nazareth was prophesied in Scripture with exact references to his birthplace, his baptism, and his passion.
  
  You may introduce an alternative proposition, as long as you provide evidence as per Rule 1.
  
  It's a game with rules. You don't run on to a soccer/football field, pick up the ball and run with it. That spoils the game for everyone.
  
  Either play the game by the agreed rules in this thread, or start your own game in another thread with your own rules.
  
  And everyone else, it's really hard for new people to understand there are rules when you guys go off-topic and respond to their off-topic posts. Have a heart ... don't feed the off-topic themes ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  who elected you as a moderator ???
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Everybody who was participating in the discussion at the point where somebody said "you know, we really need a moderator ..."
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  where is that point ??? show me
  reply report
  89
  Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Page 6 and 7 covers the offer and acceptance of Jenny as the moderator.
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  The statement of Ender was "I LOVE YOU" nothing else. Further, there is no such thing as moderator in forum guidlines
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  We collectively agreed that Jenny would be moderator. I know that because you speak for god, you have no respect for any one else, but please get out of this discussion if you cannot stick with the rules we all agreed to.
  
  Thank you.
  report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Hey Mark,
  
  you forgot to take the pills today.
  
  The statement of Ender was "I LOVE YOU" nothing else. Further, there is no such thing as moderator in forum guidlines. Also, on page 6 and 7 you did not propsed her as a moderator
  report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Mark the atheist needs pills, Mohit the poet needs pills, who else Usmanali?
  report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I did, thats all that matters. My idea, my thread....Jenny is the moderator and you are off topic. You are not only breaking the rules of this thread but you are breaking forum rules as well.
  
  Now either contribute or start your own thread!
  
  For everyone else, I'm wrapping up a busy Sunday...I'll drop in tomorrow to rock your minds!
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  In the guidlines of forums, i think there is no such thing as a moderator.
  reply report
3. 60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  You have to stay it will get a little boring without you
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
Jenny - it would be helpful to have a locked thread with the current set of propositions because it's getting very hard to find them in the deluge.
reply report
1. 74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  There is already a separate thread with the propositions we have agreed. I can add the one (or ones) currently under discussion to it ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  So there is - sorry
  reply report
74
Inspirepubposted 16 years ago
Have the people who proposed Proposition 9 taken their bats and balls and gone home?

Nobody seems to be debating it ...

Would any theists left in the game like to propose an alternative?

Jenny
reply report
74
Inspirepubposted 16 years ago
Look everyone, if you don't like what usmanali is posting, and he won't play by the rules, then just ignore him. He will either play nice, or get bored and leave the thread.

And either way we won't be filling it up with irrelevant posts any more.

Jenny
reply report
74
Inspirepubposted 16 years ago
OK, I am travelling again this afternoon - back to Oslo.

If you don't want to debate Proposition 9, then please propose something else to debate, because at the moment this thread seems to have almost zero on-topic content.

I will be back online tomorrow ...

Have fun!

Jenny
reply report
1. 0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Okay Jenny. Here is the proposition that I do think needs to be addressed first which I brought up because of this off topic situation and the proposed questions not being able to be addressed for one reason.
  
  1. the definition of god needs to be defined.
  
  I know you said we needed to save that for when we get to it but it doesn't seem possible to deduce anything because there are already several different versions going on here.
  
  2. I think the term atheism needs to be defined and agreed upon by the atheist of this thread so that there is no confusion about it.
  
  3. I think the term theist needs to be defined as well for the same reason.
  
  I also suggest that we do get a hp moderator for purposes of those who ignore the rules of hp as well for reason of -snipping content that is purposefully or intentionally meant to derail the discussion.
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Dear Sandra,
  
  The best of the best definition of God is in the Holy Qur'an, preserved in it's origional form and language for more than 1400 years to answer your queries.
  
  Qur'an / Chapter 112 - The Unity, Sincerity, Oneness Of Allah
  1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
  2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
  3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
  4. And there is none like unto Him.
  
  ****************************************************************
  
  The definition of God=One and Only=The Greates=Allah in O and NTs are as follows.
  
  My Father is Greater than I – John 14:28
  My Father is Greater than all – John 10:29
  … with the finger of God cast out devils … - Luke 11:20
  
  Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord – The Bible, Deut 6:4
  I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no savior. – The Bible, Isaiah 43:11
  I am Lord, and there is none else. There is no God besides me. The Bible, Isaiah 45:5
  
  ****************************************************************
  
  The definition of God=One and Only=The Greatest=Allah in Hinduism is as follows.
  
  Ekam evaditiyam
  “He is One only without a second” - Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1
  
  Na casya kasuj janita na cadhipah
  “Of Him there are neither parents nor Lord” - Svetasavatara Upanishad 6,9 part II page 263
  
  Na tasya pratima asti
  “There is no image of Him - Yajurved 32:3
  
  Ma chidanyadvi shansata
  “O friends, do not worship any body but Him, the Divine One.” - Rigveda Book 8:1:1
  
  ****************************************************************
  
  Science also proves the existance of God=One and Only=The Greatest=Allah. There are several scientific facts (not theories) which have been mentioned in Qur'an 1400 years ago. This could only be done by the Creator=God=One and Only=The Greatest=Allah. Science became in accordance with the facts mentioned in Qur'an, for instance,
  
  Regarding the origin of the universe:
  According to “The Big Bang”, the whole universe was initially one big mass (Primary Nebula). Then there was a BIG BANG (Secondary Separation) which resulted in the formation of Galaxies. These then divided to form stars, planets, the sun, the moon, etc. The origin of the universe was unique and the probability of it happening by “chance” is nill.
  
  “Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of Creation), before We clove them asunder?” Qur’an Ch 21:V30
  
  Regarding the impermanence of the sun’s existence:
  The light of the sun is due to a chemical process on its surface that has been taking place continuously for the past five billion years. It will come to an end at some point of time in the future, when the sun will be totally extinguished, leading to extinction of all life on earth.
  
  “And the Sun runs its course for a period determined for it; that is the decree of (Him) the exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.” Qur’an Ch 36:V38
  
  Regarding the nature of the universe:
  Edwin Hubble, provided observational evidence that all galaxies are moving away from one another, which implies that the universe is expanding. The expansion of the universe is now an established scientific fact.
  
  Similarly, many researchers are of the opinion that human consciousness / soul / spirit comes from an unknown source beyond the neurons in the brain and the molecules and atoms that form them. Wilder Penfield, a famous researcher reached the conclusion that the existence of spirit is an undeniable fact. He said “After years of striving to explain the mind on the basis of brain-action alone, I have come to the conclusion that it is simpler (and far easier to be logical) if one adopts the hypothesis that our being does consist of two fundamental elements [brain and mind (or soul)]. …Because it seems to be certain that it will always be quite impossible to explain the mind on the basis of neuronal action within the brain… I am forced to choose the proposition that our being is to be explained on the basis of two fundamental elements. [brain and mind, or body and soul] "
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  It wasn't big. It was a singularity
  
  There are no chemical processes on the surface of the sun. Check out the meaning of thermo-nuclear and black body radiation
  
  The quotes from the researcher clearly state (twice) that he 'adopts the proposition' of separate existence of brain and mind. That is his prerogative. It is entirely at odds with the reporter's commentary "the existence of spirit is an undeniable fact".
  
  By the way, I've seen the pamphlet that you are cutting and pasting this stuff from. It's one of the standard proselytising glossies that you can find in any Islamic bookstall.
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Imagine nuclear science without chemistry grow up man
  
  Regarding the quote of the researcher, he was trying to tell you that spirit and soul are the facts which are never understood by science. These are the things which give motion to nerons.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Chemistry is concerned with relatively low energy reactions involving the outer electrons of atoms. The energy from the sun is thermonuclear. Please inform your pamphleteer.No. He was stating a hypothesis which your pamphleteer interpreted as proven fact.
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Have you ever heard of terms PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY, ATMOSPHERIC CHEMESTRY, MATERIALS CHEMISTRY, COSMIC CHEMISTRY . Come on man, hope you are getting it, after all your ancestors were very intelligent monkeys.
  
  And no, he was not at all hypothetical as he was unable to study the force behind the sparkling organized movements of thousands of neurons. He had no other choice accept declaring the faulure of science in this regard.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Suit yourself. Bye.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Usmani. I will accept Absolute, has no offspring, and no one is god as a good start for the definition.
  
  I will pass on these definitions... not clear enough.
  I will accept; no one gave birth to it, it has no image.
  
  Can you agree with this? If so then great and we will wait for others to give their definitions as well.
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  You are welcome Sandra, it's my pleasure.
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  The best of the best definition of God is in the Holy Qur'an,
  In what way is it better than the Hindu Version?
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Oh i totally agree with that!!! Ninja please, we are talking theism we are not discussing religion vs. religion.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Look if homeboy has a great argument for the belief in his God, right on. However, not all theists are going to agree on this as a definition of god, God, gods or spaghetti monsters. You can define Theism as the belief in deity...beyond that you can let us theists decide who it is in another thread.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Okay so you said that a theist is a person who believes in a deity.
  
  Atheist say deities are not real.
  
  ....sounds like, Ender, you don't really want to come to an agreement, you just want to be right.
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  you replied wihtout even reading it. I just gave the similarites which these religions and even science agree on the topic of ONE GOD-ALLAH
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I read it my friend. I'm not saying your wrong, i'll do that another time!LOL I'm saying that the best definition of God is not necessarily "ONE GOD-ALLAH". I don't agree with it just as you don't agree that Jesus Christ is God. What we do agree on as per the topic is in deity. This is how we define Theism in general.
  
  The reason that we haven't discussed Allah before was because the Allah crew didn't argue much.
  
  I propose this. The Koran is to be viewed in the same way as other writings.
  
  Is that coo?
  reply report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Dear,
  
  You dont agree with it BUT the problem is your interpolated Bibles totally agree with it. And the best definition of God is necesary in the sense that once you get it, you can not play with it as TRINITY or DIVINITY or CRUCIFIXION or CRUCIFICTION. Regarding my disagreement, i, even your interpolated Bibles have a reason for that.
  
  The deity which you regard as god and merge it in TRINITY Myth is totally out of context and opposite to altered and interpolated Bibles.
  
  It's a humble request not to take verses or words like theism / deity out of context by giving your own meanings to them.
  
  The term "theism" derives from the Greek theos meaning God. Theism in the broadest sense is the belief in at least one deity. In a more specific sense, theism refers to a particular doctrine concerning the nature of God and his relationship to the universe. Theism, in this specific sense, conceives of God as personal and active in the governance and organization of the world and the universe.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I can't speak for others and you should do the same. I don't know if you remember this question being asked before. I said that I can only speak for Christianity and gave the Christian definition of God. You are free to give your definition but the debate is deity. You guys cannot expect that anybody else in the theist posse will agree that allah the best definition of god.
  I don't expect you to think that Jesus Christ is God because that discussion is for a different thread.
  All of the other points were fine. Just let it be known that I will never agree that allah is a definition for god at all. This was obviously a baited question and it was overturned by Jenny earlier.
  My proposal stands, "The Koran is to be viewed in the same way as other writings" do not expect me to give any more than that because it will never happen.
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  "The Koran is to be viewed in the same way as other writings" do not expect me to give any more than that because it will never happen.
  You are correct and I am with you .
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Alright, now lets rock some atheist booty!!!
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  This is the best post I have seen yet in terms of defining Theist in an inclusive way. Great work, usmanali81!
  
  Maybe glendoncaba can come back in, now that it is clearer that the purpose of the debate is not to defend Christianity, but to defend the notion that there is AT LEAST ONE deity.
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Okay so let's break down the term theism so that it remains simple and leaves not room for rabbit holes.
  
  Theist: beliefs in a deity (a supreme god or goddess) that is equal to god.
  
  Again I will re post the definition we of god that was agreed upon.
  
  God: absolute, has no offspring, has no image and no one is god.
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I think you'd exclude some theists with that definition, Sandy.
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  ]
  Here's theism
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Okay so.
  
  1. Theism is a greek word for god.
  
  - god is defined as: absolute, has no offspring, has no image and no one is god.
  
  2. To be a theist you have to believe in at least one deity. Or one particular doctrine concerning the nature of what is: absolute, has no offspring, has no image, and no one is god.
  
  3. theist believe that god: which is absolute, has no offspring, has no image, no one is god, believes god to be:
  active in all government, organizations and Universal law.
  
  -is that what you agreeing to ender? Now all we have to do is define deity and we can proceed to the next question which is; What is an atheist?
  
  And then we can start a real logical debate about the purposed statement that Atheism is irrational, illogical and boring.
  
  Or as you also put it. Theism vs. Atheism.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Umm...where did you get the extra's? Just stick to the statement and we're golden.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Oh you mean just making sure you understood the defintion of god as agreed by the majority who actually cared to give a definition for this thread to proceed.
  
  Do as the Christiansdom has taught you to do and rewrite this removing the definition of god and then maybe you can see the problem.
  
  So please, rewrite it for me again. Thanks.
  report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Theism is the belief in one or more deities.
  report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, now please give a definition of deity.
  report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Jeez lady, what do you want from me?!?!
  report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  The definition of Theism is different from deity. Deity is only ONE=THE GREATES=God=Allah as per Qur'an, Science, Interpolated Bibles, Interpolated Hindu Scriptures (mentioned earlier on page 66)
  report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Speak for yourself, man.
  report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  If you speak on your own without any supporting reference, document, proof then imagine what the heck you will do with E=MC(SQUARE)
  
  It's not the world of monkeys to say or do what ever we want.
  
  Regarding deity, it's related to religion (Theism) and religions are based on their scriptures. So it's logically perfect to get info from these scriptures. And if someone (Atheist) does not believe on scriptures or religions (Theism) then science which is superior for these Athists is also giving evidences of the existance of a SUPER BEING, CREATOR or ORGANISER, even they started quoting the word GOD in the recent famous theory of GOD PARTICLE. Also they are now spending huge amounts like on LARGE HYDRON COLLIDER to ultimately prove the existance of the ONE AND ONLY = THE GREATEST = GOD = ALLAH
  report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Definition of deity...not your deity. I though we established that earlier? Now relax. We'll get to the "who's daddy is the biggest" when we get there!
  report
  59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Ender,
  
  You did not get my point. Our daddy is the same one, THE BIGGEST
  
  Muslims call Him ALLAH
  You call Him God (with capital G)
  In Hebrew He is called as ELOI / ELAH (sounds ALLAH)
  report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well, right on then. Lets stick with theism in general. As a Muslim you can interject some of that debate action and well do these athiests right! No ill will...
  report
  80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  And I'm back, thanks.
  are you saying I was mistaken all along
  OK OK. sorry. Knee jerk reaction and all.
  
  So it's theism vs atheism along the path of philosophy of science.
  
  Well wait there then not so fast. all my original arguments were on that topic except I was speaking as a Christian.
  
  After all I would rather be an atheist than believe in a religion that required:
  
  human sacrifice to appease the gods
  burial of wife with dead husband
  or any other means of propitiating deity with human effort iin order to be saved.
  
  (Christianity is the only religion where God actually takes the punishment of the believer in the person of Jesus and offers grace).
  
  But I see the real debate here.
  Does theism as a worldview make more sense than atheism.
  This will end in a draw. Both worldviews are logical, rational, and interesting. The Christian theist looks forward to an exciting eternity whereas the atheist looks to oblivion. compared to the christian, the end is boring for the atheist.
  
  And since I'm back in the debate remind me to tell you guys later what happened to atheistic Yugoslavia when Tito died.
  
  For worldviews see my hub which I wrote to clear my head, its really a review of an article:
  
  http://hubpages.com/hub/What-is-Your-Worldview
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Actually it is important. We need an agreed upon definition so that the next questions can be answer. What is a theist and what is an atheist, so we can narrow the debate down and have a better understanding for the topic of debate.
  
  Theism vs. Atheism.
  
  You said atheism is illogical, boring and irrational. So since you started this thread, you might as well go along with it. Then other people that call themselves theist might not be so ready to call an atheist illogical...
  
  So far we have define god as: absolute, has no image, has not parents, and has no offspring.
  
  So unless you would like to add something the definition. Then the definition of god stands.
  
  So far, but I haven't gotten caught up in the tread yet. So far a theist, a polytheist, and an atheist have agreed on a definition.
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  That's a suggestion, Sandy, but I can't see you getting agreement for it from the Christians, somehow ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  CUT, people, CUT! For God's sake (without assuming there is one, of course), there is no need to leave these pages and pages of text in when you quote/reply ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
2. 80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I like your sporting metaphors, being a soccer fan myself. Reggae Boyz beaten by canada in gold Cup not amusing at all. My countryman Usain Bolt is so good but I'm not really a big fan of athletics.
  
  I trust we'll have a better game against costa Rica tomorrow.
  
  Consistent with your sporting metaphor, i wont keep running back onto the field....but I have already laid out my arguments for messianic prophecies especially as regards Daniel 9 predicting down to the very year of His crucifixion. And I still say no atheist who understands it can refute it.
  
  Jenny you are a good moderator, the problem is the agreed propositions (particularly the ones agreed in my absence)do not allow for a bible believing Christian to participate with a honest heart and clear conscience.
  
  But I'll pop in from time to time to see whats happening.
  
  Good bye children of one God.
  reply report
0
DarwinsLaureateposted 16 years ago
Personally, knowing that man has a brain evolved to believe in a religion it begs to question what came first.

However, to be very blatant, knowing quantum physics I cannot understand the insistance on the belief of "nothing."

I don't think there is a heaven or hell per se, but I do know misery loves company.

We are all the product of stardust, and the matter and energy to form them just didn't appear out of thin air.
reply report
59
enderw1gginsposted 16 years ago
As a Christian I have to agree with Para’s view on this one. Christianity presupposes a all nowing, all powerful, and all present God; we also believe that God did in fact give complete freewill to mankind. If we knew that God exists with absolute certainty, then mankind would have no free will aside from foolishness.
As a personal opinion, I believe God as a gentleman, leaves a level of mystery as to His existence. No contradictions are found within His character and certainty of his existence destroys any thoughts of actual free will. Otherwise, He would have made a choice to contradict His very nature, making God hardly worth any amount of worship.
Neither the Atheistic (Nontheistic) nor the Theistic crews can provide knock-down-drag-out arguments. Both world views can be rationally deduced , as such, an element of “faith” is applied to each. Choosing the best possible solution to the God/no God dilemma requires a level of discernment and honesty. We weigh the evidence against certainty and make the conclusion.
However, lack of certainty does not negate the importance of such discussion. Word views inherently involve truth statements irreconcilable with one another. For instance, if Christianity is truth then heaven and hell exists. If atheism or nontheism is true then we simply cease to exist after death. Only a fool, without absolute certainty, would choose atheism if Christianity is a possible truth.
This post is purely anecdotal, not an argument for or against any position. Simply put, this is my heart.
To the Atheists, I personally hold more contempt for the pseudo-Christians at large than I do any atheist, agnostics or inbetweeners. As a Christian, my presuppositions contain truth statements about the souls of mankind.
I love humanity, but the beauty of friendship is more than sensual. We rebuke as well as encourage one another. Help each other when the other is in error, we scream STOP when we see danger up ahead. We do more than lay down our lives for one another, we live for others.
Christians, tell me why. If you believe in the existence of God why do you make it look so unappealing? Why do you cause a stumbling block for those who don’t know Christ? Shouting out from the mountaintop that people better believe or they’re going to hell makes me not want to join your stupid club. This behavior is an act of hatred and malice. Not the characteristics of Christ.
I have a deadline today so I will jump back into the debate later on. I hope this post encourages more discussion and challenges everyone. I will see everybody later on.
reply report
1. 80
  glendoncabaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Hey ender I feel you man. All the participants had better copy this because this is the best we are going to get out of you. All the rest is playing into the hands of the game of naturalism and logic and we know you cant search out God by human logic according to the book of Job hence my warning early in the thread.
  
  But this that you have written is the good stuff. Great testimony.
  
  I know it's lonely at the top but dont feel too bad that I have backed out. I just cant throw out most of the bible and still defend my faith.
  
  Here is a somewhat relevant statement in the Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology "Philosophical ideas have commonly framed the Christian concept of God. Biblical statements have hardly shaped such formulations. Consequently, classical, modern, and postmodern interpretations of the Christian doctrine of God have been created under the influence of human philosophical concepts. Aware of this situation, careful students of the Scriptures pursue their search for understanding, determined to submit to the Bible all forms of human reasoning."
  
  "...The doctrines of God that result from the study of nature are philosophical interpretations of God, known in theological circles as natural theology".
  
  So you see my brother I am not an expert in philosophy hence I have great difficulty in defending my position without the entire bible. Even Christ used "It is written."
  
  but i really love you all and I am praying for all of us that the God of peace may grant us humility, love, and a heart willing to listen and learn of the Father of mercies who is willing to heal, forgive, and save.
  reply report
2. 74
  Inspirepubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Errrr ... no, I don't think these are the only two options, Ender.
  
  Some atheists do believe that we cease to exist when we die - others believe that nothing is ever created or deleted, it just changes form.
  
  Some atheists believe that there are other forms of experience which are naturally possible in the absence of a living human body, but do not require any theist elements to explain or describe these forms of experience, because they are a natural part of the Universe, not supernatural.
  
  There are more things on Heaven and Earth, Ender, than are dreamed of in your philosophy ...
  
  Jenny
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I was simply illustrating the importance of this sort of discussion not making any claims for or against. Thats why I said "IF God exists...".
  
  It's good to see you Jenny
  reply report
61
Pete Maidaposted 16 years ago
I never understood it when people say God gives them free will. If a man stands over you with a big club and says, "You have free will to pick up that rock or not pick up that rock, but if you pick up that rock I'm going to hit you with this club," I don't call that free will. If an all powerful being threatens you with eternal agony if you don't follow his rules, I don't call that free will. If this being will damn you to eternal agony for simply not worshiping him; that is tyranny of the highest order. There is nothing free about that.
reply report
1. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Lets say God exists for a moment. It doesn't matter if he is tyrannical or not. You cannot tell me that I dont exist because i dont do what you think is right. I exist anyway.
  I think you should read the post again...I dont think you really understood the heart nor the purpose.
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  LOL
  
  Lets assume that this invisible super being exists. Or not. So, because he does not, this is not proof that I do not exist, therefore he does not exist. So I exist anyway right? Which is proof that I cannot make an argument either.
  
  The heart and the purpose are to prove that because I exist, therefore god exists - simple no?
  
  Stick with it ender - eventually you will exist........
  reply report
2. 69
  lrohnerposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well said, Pete. That is exactly why I consider myself a Recovering Catholic.
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I am a recovered Christian. Fear drives religion.In the religious forums nothing is ever stated about the apparently psychotic ramblings of their god. Same old.... just frighten the masses to ensure compliance to a life that is bound with the belief that they are now somehow better.
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
Pete & Others - Everything that can be said about the logical opposite of free will, Predestination, has been said here.
http://hubpages.com/hub/Predestination- … it-or-Nuts
Please read it. It's lonely. And it's even in parable form to appeal to the Christians
reply report
1. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  You are quite the word smith Paraglider. Very interesting Hub on predestination. It's two steps too far for me too. If it wasn't for free will then there wouldn't be any sense in us having these discussions. You always give a good reason to think further. Thanks.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Mike - even the 'simplest' chain of events is far too complex to have been predestined. We don't have many Calvinists on the boards. Tkeeley is the only one who comes to mind.
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  But aren't we in an extremely complex world.? Beyond our understanding. In what seems to be chaos there is order.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Extremely complex, certainly. Predestination doesn't seem to be a part of it.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Some guys are into the predestination scene, I however come from a different school.
  To paraphrase what the others were commenting on, "what kind of free will do we have when a tyrannical God is holding a club above us and threatening us with Hell."
  The answer is simple, they have chosen and God hasn't clubbed em.
  Lets take American ideals and put it into perspective (I'm talking about the idea of America). The land of the free as they call it. We are proud to live in a free country, however this free country has laws. I have the freedom as a human being to kill another man, but that freedom comes with consequence.
  If we understand this as human beings why is it a violation of free will to apply it to spiritual matters?
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Because there is no such thing as god and there are no "spiritual" consequences after death, therefore this is a worthless statement.
  
  Still - the point that unless you do as you are told you will be punished negates the idea of "free will."
  
  You have no free will in the event that there will be a punishment. And this punishment will be after you die
  
  Yes - that was a 4LOL statement (copyright Eric Graudins).
  
  What you now seem to be saying is, "limited free will" based on a set of rules you have "interpreted," from a bronze age book.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Then explain Mr. Mustachio, what is freedom without order? Human rights are defended by justice. You have the freedom to own a copy of Amazing Fantasy #15 and claim it as yours because of laws. Otherwise I could claim a stake on that sucker for freedoms sake and take it off of your hands. Which if you do own it...i might contemplate doing!
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well, Mr Not-living-up-to-his-namesake, this is one of the first issues with your irrational beliefs and therefore "laws."
  
  Not everyone recognizes your "authority," as such - therefore it is worthless, because I am not bound by your invisible super being's laws. Of course - neither are you guys, judging from the fact that believers behave no better than anyone else. Therefore you lot do not believe either - you just say you do.
  
  Atheism Rules !
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  But man is god so its an inner conflict that's all.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  That it is. But you guys are my friends regardless.
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  LOL
  
  In the unlikely event that your invisible super being's one and only son does come back,
  
  I will not be found wanting.
  
  I agree with you that atheism rules !
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Hey Mark...have a great vacation. I'll be waiting for you in the trash talk thread! Have fun, dood.
  reply report
  60
  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks - I will be gone for 2 weeks.
  
  Currently waiting for my wife to be finished getting ready. And I thought we were leaving early..................
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Well, i'll miss you. My dignity wont but i will!
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I believe all is predestined and we just play out our part.
  reply report
  92
  Paragliderposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  In that case, Mohit, why do you take credit for writing Ponder Awhile since you had no alternative and were simply playing out your part?
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  That is priceless Paraglider. If that was the case then Mark would be the high priest of atheism around here because God predestine him to be. There is a little truth to it seeing I imagine Mark has led some to Christ in a round about way.
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I was destined to play it out and I always say god works through me. Have tuned my will to the cosmic will and now there is no struggle between them.
  reply report
  61
  marinealways24posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  What did your God say about you hustling people to sell your book using God's name?
  reply report
  60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Ask god. You dont understand the meaning of enlightenment or the prophets, its too complex for you, let it be for now.
  
  Still didn't see the PDF in my email?
  After gifting you my book you call me a hustler.Have you ever gifted me anything?
  God works through me.
  reply report
  68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah I remember that conversation with Tkeeley. Paraglider I see you are originally from Kyle, Scotland, not too far from where my ancestors used to live in the Highlands.
  reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
Guys, please stop requoting these long posts. Consider the virtual forest
reply report
1. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Ya I saw that i did that, twice. I swear i didn't mean to!
  reply report
59
enderw1gginsposted 16 years ago
It totally looks like i said atheism rules! Ha
reply report
1. 60
  mohitmisraposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Ha Ha
  reply report
60
David Bowmanposted 16 years ago
I mentioned probably a couple hundred posts ago that modern scholars believe that the prophecy in Daniel 9 is an ex eventu (after the fact) prophecy fulfilled in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. The "annointed" the "prince" is referring to Cyrus. The "cutting of of an annointed one" is referring to the murder of the high priest Onias III. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_o … ulfillment

If this is such an important messianic prophecy that was fulfilled in the life of Jesus, why didn't any of the gospel writers mention it?
reply report
1. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  We'll why don't you ask them?
  They used other prophecies in their writings they didn't have to use the Daniel prohecy.
  reply report
  60
  David Bowmanposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Why didn't I think of that? I'll just jump in my time machine and travel to the first century and ask. Sometimes I am just so dense!
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Wurd! Alright you heathens i'm going to bed. Have a good night, hopefully by the time i get back to this thing there will be some more action! Paraglider, its always a pleasure. Mike, keep on rockin in the free world. David, stay cool. Peace i'm outa here.
  reply report
2. 68
  Make Moneyposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  They did but not the same way. These are the commentaries from the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible 1899 Edition for verses 9 and 14 of Daniel 8.
  
  9 "A little horn"... Antiochus Epiphanes, a descendant of Seleucus. He grew against the south, and the east, by his victories over the kings of Egypt and Armenia: and against the strength, that is, against Jerusalem and the people of God.
  
  14 "Unto evening and morning two thousand three hundred days"... That is, six years and almost four months: which was the whole time from the beginning of the persecution of Antiochus till his death.
  
  Antiochus is mentioned in 1 & 2 Machabees numerous times.
  reply report
  60
  David Bowmanposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Where is it stated anywhere by the gospel authors, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, that the events in Jesus' life, his miraculous birth, ministry, crucifixion etc., is a fulfillment of Daniel 9? This is supposedly one of the most important messianic prophecies in all of Christendom and the gospel authors, for some reason, didn't see fit to make reference to it in their gospels?
  reply report
59
enderw1gginsposted 16 years ago
Glendoncaba also pointed out many other prophecies and I posted one as well.
I can see maybe one prophecy being suspect but there are just so many. The odds are ridiculous.
reply report
1. 60
  David Bowmanposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Which brings me to one of the first questions I had regarding messianic prophecies: why couldn't the gospel authors have fabricated fulfillments to those prophecies? It is within anyone's power to write a book that confirms the predictions of a previous book.
  reply report
68
Make Moneyposted 16 years ago
Oh you meant the writers David Bowman. Sorry getting tired, been up all night. As far as I know just Matthew mentions Daniel in Matthew 24:15 when talking about the Daniel 9 prophecy of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place at the end of this era. Good night or morning.
reply report
74
Inspirepubposted 16 years ago
OK, I have read through the discussions that took place in my absence.

I am not seeing any real progress on the proposition about prophecies. It seems that we are basically having a Pythonesque "yes they were", "no they weren't", "there's no proof", "yes there is", "that's not proof", "yes it is" merry-go-round.

Since the atheists won't accept the Gospels as ... er ... gospel, I don't think we are going to reach agreement on that one.

However, as Mohit and usmanali81 and Sandra have all pointed out, the detail of Christianity and the Divinity of Christ are rabbit holes, really.

We are not debating Christianity vs Atheism, but Theism vs Atheism.

I am hereby proposing a couple of additional propositions (or rules, since as the moderator I am not supposed to be proposing Propositions).

9. All other religious and philosophical writings shall be treated in the same way as the Bible.

10. Any proposition must be formulated in ecumenical wording (that is, in such a way that it applies to any Theist's position, not just to one particular religion).

And then I suggest that we consider a "definition of theism" proposition based on usmanali81's definition of Theism.

If we agree to Proposition 10, we could also revisit and reword any previous propositions that were religion-centric.

Jenny
reply report
1. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  9. I agree with and the definition of theism.
  10 Needs revision. I propose that if other Theistic views have some great arguments that happens to follow their particular beliefs then we can admit those into the cannon in addition to what has already been established. This way all Theists can use all their resources available to make valid arguments.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I liked your suggestion that the theist take it to a different thread and come to an agreement about 1 definition of theism and then we can proceed.
  
  Having that one this thread will ultimately do more damage on the part of the theist for their inability to agree in a reasonable fashion or if you all can ever agree and so not to change the rules of the cannon that Jenny has already painstaking gone through. lol
  
  -trust me, it is better for your guys' sake.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thats gonna take a little more than ten minutes! I think my proposal is fair and all inclusive and the others agreed earlier. If radical arguments are made from any theists from any school have validity we add them to the canon.
  
  Any BTW what is up my Punk Rawk friend!?
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Oi Centurion! Not much.
  
  Okay can you please state your definition of theist for the record.
  reply report
61
marinealways24posted 16 years ago
Prophets are not logical. Prophets are favoritism. Favoritism of a divine being is illogical.

If there are 2 planes flying, each carrying children. 1 of the planes crash killing all children while the other plane makes it safely to the destination.

Why did one plane make it and the other one didn't?

This would be favoritism. There is no "logical" answer to this question for the religious, so one may say, God has a plan for everything. It's ok if you are content with setteling for irrational answers.

Without logic, there is only conicedence until there is proof.
reply report
66
Lady Guinevereposted 16 years ago
Hey Mike and anyone else that supports church doctrine and getting a cert to be a priest, pastor, minister and the like........what is taught in those schools that anyone else cannot get for themselves? Is it that as the Catholic Doctrine states that they must keep knowledge from their prishioners and clergy at all costs? Is that the type of stuff they teach and it is much better than what one can learn from reading and experiencing what they teach?
reply report
1. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Guinevere, relax a little. Theology is an immensely huge subject. Some go to school for biology others go to school for theology. Those who went to school for theology are much more qualified to speak about particular theological issues than those who haven't.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Now hold on Ender. LG has every right to believe what she does and I do not disagree with her.
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  She does. I didn't say that she couldn't. Look, i didn't learn how to start wars, play for political purposes and conspiracy in college. I learned theology, which is a huge subject the same as biology, literature, history or whatever.
  Her assumption that theological study is a huge conspiracy made by the Church to somehow enslave the world is a simply wrong. Not that she sucks for saying it.
  I happen to like LG very much.
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Twisting my words....eh? I did not say that theology was all church doctrine. Theology in itself by, itself and learned in college is a lot different then learning it through a church Seminery or monastery.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Do you really believe that the Catholic Church is going to divulge all their secrets to you... a regular Joe off the streets with a bachelors degree?
  
  I think you would like to think so because you are for Christ but someone is lying to you. Withholding certain documents from the general public and a disgrace to both the church and the everyone else.
  
  I wouldn't trust them for a second.
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Oh yeah! Prove it without a doubt. Anyone with a brain can go to the library or to a book store or even on the Internet and read exactly what they have in those classes. Those classes don't teach real life events and experiences by going through them.that is the part they cannot teach and they cannot learn if they do not go through them. There is another school people go through all the time--The School Of Life. Not one person on this planet can beat that!
  Just what is theology? Theories--now some things are just that a theory....
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Look Guinevere, I'm from the street and I'm a theologian. I have experiences and a college degree at the same time.
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Soooooo does that make you better than anyone else? There are some things just by your gender that you cannot experience and have both sides of the learning experience. This goes for the other gender as well.
  reply report
60
onthewritesideposted 16 years ago
Jeebus! 1400 posts and still counting!
reply report
92
Paragliderposted 16 years ago
May I offer a 'ku?

I'm a self-made man
University of life
majored in cliché

In other words - how we got to where we are is irrelevant. Think first, or hold your peace (please
reply report
1. 60
  onthewritesideposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Nice Haiku
  reply report
83
dohn121posted 16 years ago
Just by looking at my profile, I take it you know which religion I stand for. To be a real Buddhist, you have to be an Atheist, but to be an Atheist you don't have to be a Buddhist.
reply report
1. 0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I was waiting for someone to say something like this. I kept thinking of crows which goes something like...
  
  All Crows are Ravens but not all Ravens are Crows. Excellent. I hope you will join the discussion.
  reply report
61
marinealways24posted 16 years ago
Who is the deity of the diety?
reply report
1. 70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Think flying fairy..
  reply report
  61
  marinealways24posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  What about wizards?
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Or Gnomes. They fly..at least the one in the hotel commercial does.
  reply report
  61
  marinealways24posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  You can't have gnomes without jakalopes, how irrational would that be?
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  LOL LOL LOL LOL
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I am yet to see a jakalope.... A rabbit with horns is how it was described by one hubber.
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  http://hubpages.com/hub/My-Recent-Acquisitions
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you so much for the link LG, I am glad I live so far away!
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  What do yo mean by that? It isn't my hub but that of Mighty Hunter who hunts Jackalopes!! LOL
  reply report
  61
  marinealways24posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Jakalopes are the truth
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I can see that... and I have read B.T.Evilpants. It is not just his pants that are evil, Glad you outed him as a jakalope.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  They are the truth... I knew it.
  reply report
  68
  Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Our resident jackalope lies all the time to get away from Mighty Hunter
  reply report
  60
  Eric Graudinsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Check out BT Evilpants. He's a jackalope!
  http://hubpages.com/profile/B.T.+Evilpants
  reply report
  70
  earnestshubposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you Eric.. we don't have them in Tassie do we? You guys do have a few wicked animals!
  reply report
2. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Or what is the duty of the deity's deity, dood! Discuss deity doppleganger droppings doing the deed! Very deep!
  reply report
  61
  marinealways24posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe the duty of the deity's diety is to serve the diety's diete's.
  reply report
3. 59
  usmanali81posted 16 years agoin reply to this
  NO ONE
  
  Your question is just as your friend Mark is in hospital and your another friend Earnest comes and informs you about Mark being giving birth to a monkey (evolution) and you ask Earnest "Was the monkey boy or a girl ???"
  
  As i said earlier in the best definition of God
  
  Qur'an / Chapter 112 - The Unity, Sincerity, Oneness Of Allah
  1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
  2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
  3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
  4. And there is none like unto Him.
  
  ****************************************************************
  
  After this the question of asking about the God of God is totally irrelevent and illogical.
  
  Hope you got it
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Just a reminder..that usmanali's definition!
  reply report
60
Eric Graudinsposted 16 years ago
I can't believe that you guys are still banging away on this.
This looks like setting all time records for the fastest growing thread on Hub Pages.
reply report
1. 59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  I know right! I'm the OP with the OPP so I can't ditch my own thread! It wouldn't be civilized.
  reply report
  60
  Eric Graudinsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, but it's driving your HQI (Hubber Quality Index) to dangerously high levels, and you are in extreme danger of being perceived as an empty vessel.
  
  See http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/17031
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Dodging bullets will do that to a man...I'm going to contribute to the trash talking thread! Redeem myself!!
  reply report
  60
  Eric Graudinsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Err - If I remember correctly, it was you who rode into Hub City on your white steed gunning for a certain Mark Knowles.
  And you're complaining about getting bullets fired back
  reply report
  59
  enderw1gginsposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  Oh no! I quite enjoy dodging bullets. But that's why I have more than 10 posts a day my friend!
  reply report
  66
  Lady Guinevereposted 16 years agoin reply to this
  A vesselis only empty until you fill it. Now it it is halfway that way it could be considered half full or half empty.
  
  Are we derailing the topic just a tad--you bet your seat bippy! LOL
  
  I wouldn't have even bothered coming here until my name was mentioned...and it wasn't in the most positive light mind you.
  reply report
0
fierycjposted 16 years ago
You people ought to let this thread go already. Really.
reply report
66
Lady Guinevereposted 16 years ago
So you can't have love until you give love..who wants love?
reply report
0
sandra rinckposted 16 years ago
I just want everyone to be caught up here because the thread was successfully derailed so Ender could save face.

Previously in the thread there was an agreed upon definition of the term god which was: absolute, has no offspring, has no image and no one is god.

This was agreed upon by a theist, a poly theist, and an atheist.
I had proposed two more questions before the actual debate could continue.

1. what is theism?
2. what is atheism?

I want you to give me the definition of deity.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 67 8 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Atheism is irrational, illogical and boring

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Atheism is irrational, illogical and boring

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies