Bitcoin Forum

First church to accept bitcoins:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-church-becomes-first-in-the-uk-to-accept-bitcoins-for-its-collection-9118955.html (http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-church-becomes-first-in-the-uk-to-accept-bitcoins-for-its-collection-9118955.html)


and also this:

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/churches-starting-evangelize-bitcoin/ (https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/churches-starting-evangelize-bitcoin/)

They'd better make sure nobody changes the QR code...

so i can send Jesus some BTC?

Awesome, i'm going to heaven for sure... I mean aside from killing gay/lesbian, i can send buy some heaven estate with my btc.

Church accepts bitcoins? Nice. But I don't donate to any organisation who wants to tell my that prostution or sex before marriage is wrong. I don't think that way.

Man, these guys are doing something good by setting an example that BTC is for everybody, and you're deriding their religion. For shame.

so let me guess.  you want an organization that tells you what to do?  :)

No. I don't look for a parental replacement. I just want the freedom of doing things I want which includes sex without marriage and commitment afterwards as long both are consent.

so u like jails

no he whats a church that goes by the book he wrote, the doctrine he establish, and the tenets he ordained over the many years he has ruled this earth with his multitude of followers.

Superstition is the end of reason.

No gods, no masters.

When will temple accept bitcoins ? ;D

yeah, everyone is equal ... idiot!

Try this experiment take flour, eggs, sugar, baking soda, butter, milk, and a oven and just leave them in the kitchen, how long do you thing it would take to evolve into a cake?
 a million years, a billion years, a trillion years?  It won't happen because there's no action behind it, and there no plan behind that.

Before you have an earth, solar system, or galaxies you must have a plan, as well as the ingredients and action to carryout that plan.   Who created the ingredients, and who designed the plan?  You can't get a "bang" without bang ingredients and a plan to make a bang.

...  who created thought, who created a system where by the invisible mind controls the physical body  ...  

You live in a world where 90+% of the world population are theist.   Be glad they don't treat you as you treat them.

Comparing everything that exists to a cake, nice. And where does that 90+% figure come from? Does that include non practicing "theists"?

Hope the LE don't bust this church and search for any drugs lol

The 90+% figure is what I use when I don't feel like using 97% and bickering over percents. 

You have those who believe there is a God, the God, the Gods, and those who don't believe there is a God.  Those who believe there is a God but not worthy of worship, praise, or honor are still theist.      There are tons of kids that thoroughly hate their parents and and what nothing to do with then (unless of course they need them), even go as far as to wish they were not their parents but they don't deny their parent's existence. 

In time most come around.  It's absolute foolish to live on this earth for a full lifetime and exit our reality believing all of this organization could occur without a plan.

does the church accept bitcoins that i win from poker/gambling? what if i took up prostitution and earned em that way, they still takin em?

I believe religion is healthy and vice versa. In the context that it doesn't negatively interfere with a person's thoughts, actions, or overall well-being(life). If religion helps someone stay grounded, all the more power to them. It it does the opposite for someone else, it makes them feel suppressed, then all the power to them also.

When you throw around numbers like 90% of the worlds population are at the very least Theist then you are arguing from ad populum and authority
If you need a further explanation of what those arguments are please feel free to look them up on the medium we use that contains more information than the entire known human history.

When you argue from these positions you may think it's credible but even if 99.999999% of the people in the world were Theist is doesn't prove that any god exists
Science is the best medium in which we can falsify our claims and as of now we have perfectly reasonable explanations/theories for the beginning/state of the universe and life and the things we don't know right now we say we don't know.

Your analogy is completely wrong about Evolution as well.. it's no wonder you think that way.. Just to elaborate on that though in Quantum Theory you could calculate the time it would take for those ingredients to become a cake.. It would be a number though that no one person could fathom.. I suggest watching a 1 hour presentation by Brian Cox.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u9YmpCg9bY will blow your mind

To think that you on this tiny speck of a planet in the massive universe..possibly among many more that your specific deity has a plan for you would be foolish

Wikipedia has different numbers.

That makes roughly 18 non-believers, leaving 82% at best as theists. Care to back up your 97% or even 90%?

Also; if you want to avoid bickering over things try to back up your statements. This is bitcointalk. You will be called out.

Go tell that to the Bábism, Bahá’í Faith, Christianity, Catholicism, Protestantism, Restorationism, Gnosticism, Islam, Judaism, Rastafari movement, Mandaeans and Sabians, Samaritanism, Unitarian Universalism
Ayyavazhi, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Confucianism, Shinto, Taoism, Eurasian, Cargo cults, Hellenistic, Shinshukyo religions.

Do your homework and stop sucking numbers from your ass.

Ignorant people are born every day and trolls every second day.


In 2007, there are an estimated 157,529,444 people worldwide who are atheists. This is according to data compiled from the 2010 World Factbook of the United States Central Intelligence Agency.  This number represents about 2.32% of the world population at that time. Translated to current population statistics there would be about 170,088,267 atheists in the world today.

A 2010 survey published in Encyclopædia Britannica found that the non-religious made up about 9.6% of the world's population, and atheists about 2.0%, with a very large majority based in Asia.

"Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God" - Lenny Bruce

@abitnut:  non believers is not the same as non religious.  you can believe in god or a higher power of some kind without being religious or being associated with a particular religion.

I used to be hardcore atheist but realized at some point that Divinity can exist and not necessarily be the bible's concept of God.  Some would call this pantheism.

Technically everyone is an Atheist in some respect (unless you believe in every single god known to man)

I don't really like the word to be honest and it has a lot of bad stigma attached to it (mostly unfairly attached by theists)
We also don't attach the latin "A" meaning without to anything else in life

I'm not a stamp collector but I don't go around calling myself a AStampCollector .. nor would any of my views/opinions/morality etc be based from that

What's wrong with you, your info supports my position.

I said 90+% are theists (I know it is 97%) you provide info that atheists are approx 3%, that means we are saying the same thing.

Read with comprehension.  











Dude,

Prefix         Meaning   Example
a-, an-, ab-   without   amoral, abnormal, atheist, atypical, agnostic, anemic, ...

enjoy
http://wordinfo.info/units/view/2838/page:1/ip:1
 

Good. With the decrease of people who goes to church, they might want to lessen their sins by giving to church.  ;)

First they let they gays in church now they are accepting satan money.... what next eating babies?

j/k good endorsement.

one step closer to catholic little boy drama going mainstream

23 pages with an average of 10 words per page

230 words using the A prefix

Estimated to be over a million words in the English language
http://www.languagemonitor.com/number-of-words/number-of-words-in-the-english-language-1008879/

230/1000000*100 = 0.023%

That's just single words as well not even descriptions

And that's not even relevant to the point
Well done.. you're very special..

Church accepts bitcoins? Like all the other good business, give the chance to people to donate on their most convenience way.

Hey don't look it as an attempts to promote bitcoin. That way, it sounds very negative. Instead look at it as a way to provide alternative payment option which donors are comfortable with using and at their convenience. I don't understand why we need  to create an issue out of everything

Can we ask the church to use the BTC to pay for the service it gets, not change it into fiat?

rest assured if they are bright enough to accept btc as a part of their collections, they will likely limit their fees as best they can.  The problem is however, that because of fluxuation in rates they may not want to take the gamble of storing btc, fiat is still the most stable of currencies

churches and religion have nothing to do with crypto

just like thy have nothing to do with fiat, gold, or any other currency ...  the simple fact is they would be wise to accept all currencies -- well not all, you know there are very many that simply have no place in the house of God, or to be handled by those of 'the faith'. 

Perhaps I should have explained the reasoning for my militant anti-theism. It is based on 3 premises:

1. Our civilization is a zero-sum game between reason and violence. Where one flourishes, the other suffocates.  When one waxes, the other wanes.

2.  There is also a similar zero-sum game between reason and superstition. Where reason thrives, superstition suffocates - and vice versa.

3. As superstition is the enemy of reason, it is therefore the ally of violence. A more superstitious world is a more violent world. History strongly supports this. Our world has become steadily less violent since the dawn of the age of reason a few hundred years ago. Although this seems a bit counter-intuitive given the World wars, it's true.

Check out "the surprising decline in violence" on youtube. And check out The real God, an Epiphany.

Also check out Christopher Ryan's interview with reason TV. Human beings are sexually omnivorous,  he argues strongly. Monogamy is one of the myths we need to let go of, because the more we embrace our hyper-sexual nature, the less violent our species will become.

.Religion's rabid demonization of natural human sexuality is one of the primary ways it makes our world more violent.

That, my friend, is moronic verse.   

It is clear by the usage of the term: "zero-sum game", your knowledge is extremely narrow, the term you meant is "zero-sum gain".   Nevertheless, your postulations are disjointed, illogical, and irrelevant to the matter of God. 

How in the world can you compare or contrast "reason" and "violence"?  Starting with such a weak base it's impossible to build any type of logical argument.  Might as well compare peanuts to hub caps, then conclude "that because there are more ways to eat peanuts these days, God must exist because he didn't create cars man did." -- disjointed premise and illogical conclusion.

Superstition is about that which is 'super', or greater than what one would be expected to believe.  'Super' anything by definition falls outside of the norm.  Given that 90+% of the world population are theist, Atheist are the ones who are 'superstitious'. 

How does anyone that believes "the big bang theory" not understand that a plan had to be conceived prior to anything of that magnetude, furthermore that someone had to create the ingredients to make the thing in the first place. 

You can't make a sandwich without ingredients and a plan of action, but somehow I'm to believe that a full universe came into existence without ingredients or a plan of action -- that's irrational, illogical, and ill-conceived foolishness.

This thread is getting way off course. I can't say I'm surprised of course. Any time there's a topic that's integral to one's identity, there's going to be a different opinion from every participant. The thing is, whether you're an Anglican Christian, a militant atheist, or anything else, your beliefs aren't relevant in Bitcoin Discussion. The thread is about a church in London accepting bitcoins in its collection. It's not "What do you think of churches in general?" Nobody would make that thread because we know that everyone has his/her finger on the trigger when it comes to sharing opinions.

In a futile attempt to steer towards relevant discussion: I support their decision to accept bitcoins. Not only does this help them by making donations more private, it shows people that Bitcoin isn't just for obscure online probably-illegal applications.

ooh satan money and baby eating contests.  so what comes after that?

If they want to grow by leaps and bounds, their leaders should develop Ponzicoin - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=825091.0 - and implement it among their members.

:)

I don't agree with many of the church's teachings but I don't think we should be trollish about it. Let's praise them for taking this step.

We don't in the sense you think "believe in the big bang theory"
We have examined the evidence that was left over from it and concluded that is most likely how the universe began

No one knows (including you) at this point what happened before it and very simply if you say that you require "someone" had to create the universe, then it doesn't answer anymore questions that it poses itself
I.e. Who created the creator and you fall into an infinite regression
If you say that a creator has always been or is some uncaused cause.. you're only digging yourself a deeper hole

I think Socrates once said "True knowledge is knowing that you know nothing"

Also if you think that "nothing" can't come from "nothing" I suggest you have a good think about what nothing actually is and watch a few of Lawrence Krauss' lectures on the subject

So much hatred of religion here. Such screwed up idiots. If Apple were to accept bitcoin, people would celebrate. If a church accepts bitcoin, people start hating on God.

So irrational. So much hatred. So wrong. So messed up.

if so, then there should be many followers will accept bitcoins! good news!

Higher bitcoin adoption, even if it is by churches, is good.  :)

http://darrellcreswell.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/televangelists-transportation2.jpg
They'll make these guys look poor.

Wish all of God people lived like them, since that is not the case I'm glad some of the faithful are enjoying the fruits of His glory. 


 

Interesting. But in the other thread there is a guy which said that his uncle said that bitcoin is satanism and Satoshi the devil  ;D ;D ;D.

Anyway, this is a good thing, and hope that bitcoin of church will be used for a good thing.

I just read that one too he should show that to his uncle now lol. But it's a really good news it'll sure get more attention in the community
or atleast among normal people who never heard of bitcoin.

Yes of course. Apart the case that bitcoin can help church and poor people, this is a good way to make advertising to bitcoin to the people who never heard of bitcoin.

My husband and I asked our church if they would take Bitcoin.  They said they would look into it.  

We have been holding our coins for the past year though so haven't sold them yet.  If and when we have another bubble, we will sell a few though and we will want to give a portion to our church.  At this point the conversation will hopefully go like this. "We would love to donate a few thousand to the church but we want to do it in Bitcoin.  Can you set up an account at Coinbase or Circle and we will send those funds immediately?"  

I think they will decide to take Bitcoin. ;)  We will see though.  

Also, while I am in India in a few weeks I am going to see if the organization I am working with will set up a Unocoin account so I can send them some too.  It is such a great way to donate internationally because it can save so much on fees. 

that's an inspiring story, wonder if you would write a little article for us so that we could publish it in our new online publication expected to launch in a few days.

I'm trying to aim it towards the good news of the CC industry: stories that make you feel good you got into CC, motivate you to stay in CC, and inspired you to do something great to improve the CC industry.

let me know if interested

I dare any intellectually honest theist (don't laugh, they exist!) to watch this 7 minute video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j8ZMMuu7MU).

Fail! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum_game

Like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk7gKixqVNU).

Dear Christians,

In the following argument of nine premises, I will aim to convince you that Jesus of Nazareth was a fictional character, and not a real person. I do not intend to sway the beliefs of many of you, nor even budge them - I know this to be an impossibility, for if the religious mind is well-trained at anything, it is circumventing rational argument. I only intend to sew seeds of doubt, in the hopes that perhaps some of you will nurture them and let them grow. Here goes.

1. Much, if not most, of the Bible is arguably fiction. Quit being so intellectually dishonest, Christians - this is the twenty-first century. That means the burden of proof is on YOU. If you make a claim about the universe, it is up to you to prove it is true, not the other way around. It is not up to us, the rest of the world, to prove your claims false - that is not scientific thinking, that is anti-scientific thinking. Because I am a man of my times, and believe in correcting ignorance, what I am doing here is out of courtesy to YOU, just as if I were to argue publicly that there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster orbiting Venus preparing to blow up Planet Earth, one of you would probably, out of simple human decency attempt to correct me and point me towards the truth. This is my way of doing that. Now, back to the Bible being fiction... that part's easy. Find me a snake with vocal chords, water that is dense enough for a human being to walk on, or a chemical process that converts complex carbohydrates to fish. Until then, you're out of luck, sucker. The evidence wins, and the evidence sides with me. These are invented stories... fictional dramas meant to impart some moral lesson. They are not real.

2. Following point two: from an objective, scrutinizing view, there is no reason to believe one story in the Bible over another. We cannot honestly engage shades of truth here - either the books in the Bible are historically true or they are not. Since they almost ubiquitously contain material to make the scientific person skeptical, we can chance to say the same is true of the entire book: either it happened, or it didn't. Therefore, it is no less plausible to disbelieve the Jesus myth than the myth about Enoch the nine-hundred year old man or the creation myth wherein God pats the first humans out of clay. Here's a hint: humans, like all other complex organisms, reached their present condition by millions of years of natural selection through the self-preservation of certain greedy genes. We can observe this happening today; anti-biotic resistant bacteria are a good example. Plus, we've mapped the human genome - we know our ancestry, and it's simian. Even Pope John Paul II said evolution is a historical fact. People did not come from clay.

3. By definition, intellect, or "reason" is the ability to revise one's beliefs in light of better argumentation. Taking simple, empirical data from the the world around you should make it easy to determine that the physical laws of the universe DO NOT CHANGE. It therefore stands to reason that "miracles" can only possible be one of two phenomena: A, an outside agent actually interfering with the laws of the universe; or B, hyperbolized coincidences. Considering the Bible was written in a time when allegory was the most common form of journalistic reporting and most people still believed spitting on a wound was an appropriate way to cure it, it is far more reasonable to assume the latter.

*Side note: Seriously Hoss, let me clue you in on something: things that are impossible to do now - like walking on water, resuscitation after days of biological death, and wine magically turning into blood - were just as impossible 2,000 years ago. There's a much greater power in the universe than "belief." It's called "observation."

4. To believe these stories, you must create strange rationalizations that do not hold up to true intellectual scrutiny. This brings us to the issue of honesty. Without deluding yourself, can you honestly answer the following questions? Such as, why doesn't God heal amputees? He heals everyone else miraculously, right? But neither you nor I have ever seen an amputee grow back a leg. Oh wait, God has a special plan for them. But isn't he supposed to be loving and just? What's with the discrimination, man? Or how about Jonah surviving in the belly of that whale? Wouldn't he be partially digested after three days? Maybe Baby Balooga had a slow metabolism?

5. Following four, and this one is my favorite: if Jesus is the one true messiah, the only God, whom you shall hath no other gods before him, yada yada, how come so many gods DID come before him having nearly identical biographies? There are no less than two dozen god-men of the ancient Mediterranean whose birth was heralded by a bright star in the East (Sirius, for those who don't practice astronomy), who were also adored by wise men, walked on water, fed the hungry, resurrected the dead, were crucified and rose again, etc. Many even had the same birthday as Jesus - December 25th! Not coincidentally, this was the Roman Holiday of Saturnalia centuries before the clergy decided to call it Jesus' birthday. Surprise! Christians plagiarized earlier religions. I cannot spell it out any clearer than that. Knowing that, how can one believe anything Christian doctrine teaches? How do you even begin to separate what was invented from what was borrowed? You don't. The cold, hard truth is, it was an old story then, and it's an old story now. These messianic archetypes - the man that is god, the man who conquers death - existed long, long before Jesus came around. They were old news when soap was a cutting-edge technology, before written language was even invented. They are ancient fucking history. Jesus was not the antitype of these messianic figures, he was their distillation.

7. Following point 6. If you are skeptical of this information (and you should be, as doubt is the seed of all knowing), investigate the matter for yourself. One hugely recurring problem I find when debating with Christians is that they either know very little about other religions or are ignorant of their existence entirely. This is counter-intuitive to me, and perhaps my own fault in failing to understand the religious mind. Shouldn't it be fairly crucial to make the most educated decision in choosing a religion, if practicing the "right" one is important to you? For example, you wouldn't want to choose a religion based on plagiarism, would you? Or one that literally absorbed every earlier belief system it encountered through endless politicizing or the diplomacy of the sword? Well, better crack those books then - there's a whole heap of gods who fit the Christ mold long before Christ. I suggest you begin by researching Mithra of Rome, Attis of Frigia, Dionysis of Greece, Krishna of India, and Horus of Egypt. The last should be of particular interest to you, as his mythology is almost an exact carbon copy of Jesus', right down to the twelve apostles and three-day rebound time after being murdered by jealous clergy. Though, I should point out that Horus was worshipped nearly 1000 years BEFORE Christianity began spreading through the Hebrew-populated Roman colonies. This should come as no surprise to you, as it's written right in the bible that the Hebrews came out of Egypt.

8. On a more serious note. Western civilization may have been "built" on Judeo-Christian values (at least the "don't kill" and "don't steal" parts), but we have become a modern society and have adopted the scientific way of thinking. While the aforementioned values have indisputable merits, maintaining the dogma in its entirety is no longer necessary, especially when we consider the violence and segregation it has caused throughout the ages. Furthermore, philosophically speaking, Christian ethics are severely outdated. Since the Enlightenment, the Western World has seen far superior ethicists to Jesus of Nazareth. Kant and Mill, for example, created life-affirming ethical systems that can be applied to a wider range of people without destroying their culture or beliefs about where the universe came from and what kind of sex they should consider perverse. Truly, there is no reason to cling to the old way any longer. We have adopted science and reason in every other aspect of our lives... yet somehow we have retained Bronze Age ethics? It makes no sense. Why should we continue to believe it is better to be tribalists than to be humanists? This mentality is not compatible with a just, egalitarian society. Besides, Jesus may tell us to love one another, but he also says we should maintain the Old Testament in its entirety - no cherry-picking - which means we technically must condone rape, incest, slavery, and genocide (!). If we can do away with these parts (and we have), why not do away with the whole thing?

9. In the grand scheme of things, it would be generally permissible for one to believe in Christian ethics if it were readily understood that Jesus was not a historical person, and the story is allegory. However, if you are a Christian, you probably do believe that Jesus was a real human being. This is a threat to both the advancement of science and the absolution of religious conflict in the world, two issues that are paramount to our survival as a species as our planet nears carrying capacity and is dangerously on the brink of overheating. It creates too slippery a slope for other theocratic nonsense to take hold; for example, tthe mindset that human beings can literally live after death (how many soldiers would we send to die if everyone believed this is the only life?); or that preserving the existence of cell clusters which bear no conceivable human traits is somehow a better aim than alleviating actual human suffering; or that sex is harmful, but killing, bigotry, and total obedience to clandestine authority are healthy practices; or that blood sacrifice is a value modern societies should endorse. But Jesus WAS a real person, you say! There's a plethora of evidence! No, not really, outside of the gospels. And those hardly count as "evidence." They are secondary sources at best. Here's why: if a historical Jesus really lived and died between 0 and 33 CE, then we know beyond a doubt that at least forty years passed before the earliest gospel - the one written by Mark - was scribed. Because the aforementioned gospel discusses the destruction of Solomon's temple, we know it was written in or sometime after 70 CE. Given the lifespan of the period, that means the author or authors were at best infants or young children when Jesus of Nazareth was supposed to have been crucified. Moreover, the gospel writers are not themselves mentioned in the gospels, and they make no claim to actually having met Jesus. None of the apostles who walked with Jesus nor anyone who even met him wrote accounts to that effect. Granted, there are certain mentions of a "Christ" in the writings of Mediterranean historians from that period (not Justin Martyr or Pontius Pilate - sorry, but those are proven forgeries). However, if are a serious Christian, these should be of little consideration to you, as you know "the Christ" is really a title that simply means "the Anointed," and was taken up by many rabbis of that time. In not ONE of these documents is a man named Jesus, or Yeshua of Nazareth mentioned.

In conclusion, the gospels which discuss the life of Jesus of Nazareth are at best hearsay, almost certainly hyperbolized, and at worst complete fabrications. What we can determine beyond a doubt is that for at least four decades after his death, everyone in the world, including his sworn followers and students, simply forgot their messiah existed. If that doesn't cast on you a serious shade of doubt, then nothing will, and perhaps I'm not "the fool".

Dude prostitution is bad if a pimp is involved! Why because he will take most of the money and the girl will barley get anything! Choose wisely your next girl!
Sex before marriage is also bad! When? When you find the true love of your live and you just wished that you could be a virgin again and only have sex with here! True love is hard to find, if you don't have this regret than it's not true love!

The story will be more "inspiring" after we actually sell some coins. ;)  Maybe we can wait until then?

I am looking forward to seeing what opportunities arise if and when Bitcoin grows in value.  There are so many amazing organizations out there.  I used to joke that my dream job was to be a "philanthropist."  Hopefully that desire can become a reality at some point down the road.  Sure, I give on a small scale now and I am doing some mission work here and there, but there is so much more to be done to help the world.

Yes.  I agree with Serje.

People perceive God, and His laws, as ruining their "fun."  However, the "rules" are really just to protect us from harming ourselves and others.

I can say that the fact my husband and I waited to have sex until marriage is why we have so much trust and respect for each other.  I never worry about him cheating on me because he proved he had enough self control to wait for me and he showed me he loved me by waiting for me too!  Regardless of if you believe in God, or want to follow God's laws or not, there are benefits from doing so.   At least try to understand why these values are important for some of us.

Look Jesus has broken out of off topic.  ::)

Dear nut jobs, get back in your hole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartarus

Mods move or lock the thread or it will be 100 pages of insanity.

I can't believe I'll be the first to say this..
Amen.

:D rofl

hahahahaa, I didn't bother to read past the first sentence because by thing it was clear to me you didn't write it, it was above your mentality. So I just googled a paragraph to find the same material posted 5 years ago http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sfo/1104940994.html   "Originally Posted: 2009-04-03 5:02am"; perhaps about the time of your birth?

If you don't believe Jesus existed then work for regular pay on Christmas day, and don't bother using the worldwide calendar because this 2014 years thing pertains to 'since Jesus' died.

So Mr. Cut-N-Paste Guy go find an article that explains who drew up the plans for this thing often referred to as the multi-verse, find an article that tells you who created all of the ingredients of nature, find an article that explains 'the start of time' not simply 'the beginning of time', find an article that explains how the invisible mind can control the physical body.

Also, when the argument is about 'theist' vs 'atheist' grabbing an article on 'Christians' misses much of the point.  

As for the "zero-sum game" since the subject subject of your material had absolutely nothing to do with gaming, the phrase "zero-sum game" was dead wrong.  Your usage of that term was wrong furthermore the only logical correct usage for your material was "zero-sum gain" not "zero-sum game"; again your context was clear, that's why your  phrase usage was wrong.   Go ask your 3rd grade teacher which is the right phase for that comment.

Btc has very little up/lift/rise left in her.  There are simply too many scams and scam artists destroying the CC industry.  When I look at such a fine company as Mintpal just get blindsided by a hack then taken over by pure evil just hurts me to the core.  All that the original Mintpal developers created just flushed down the toilet.

Without a more secure BTC the coin will continue to drop in value. 

One of the things that can help a lot is the multi-sig wallet, people just have to use it.


As for your ambition to do philanthropy you can get some practice at EMC2, EMC2 is a cause-coin our mission is to find science endeavors to donate to; 2% of the coins mined are put in a fund that is specifically budgeted to make donations to science.   Help us find some science research causes to donate to.

Of course you didn't. Whenever a theist faces an impassable logical challenge, they reveal their intellectual cowardice almost instantly.

Here, learn how to create a universe (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEE2L2l3PAo).

LOL it's called game theory, look it up on the internet. You won't find it in bronze age books of fictional allegory.

Religion is on the decline, and that's not going to change. In fact it will almost certainly accelerate now that we are firmly in the information age. Sooner or later you're going to have to face reality (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RfUj09pWfM).

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/weq6dgaa40wjcnlrh8yqqg.gif

hahahaha, you are going from dumb to "dumber".

I ask you to find an article that tells you who created all of the ingredients of nature, you go for a video that purports to describe how to create a universe. 
Again, that goes back to the baking of a cake, just because you know how to bake a cake doesn't mean you know how to make the ingredients (flour, milk, eggs, etc) used to make the cake.  You know the ingredients to create the universe, now find a video to show how those ingredients are made without any other earthly ingredients?




The earth as we know it breaks down to six essential elemental ingredients: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulfur.  So using ingredients exclusively created by man that have nothing to do with any of the mentioned items, make any of these items mentioned -- show me you can 'make your own dirt' from nothing.

As for your claim 'religion is on the decline', there's no poll on earth sizable enough to accurately reflect the worldwide view of religion.  But given that it was a Gallop reference, my guess is the survey focused on the USA, given the state of the USA (homo/marijuana/education/war/prison/removal of religious expression from much of American life)  I'd say that number is still much too high.  It's because of idiots like you why our country is going down as you believe. 

Look at all of the countries where religion is highly valued then compare them to countries where religion has little value you will see a meaningful difference in the quality of life. 

Nevertheless, the subject is theists vs atheists, remember the 90+%[?] that was about theists not about religion, nor about Christians, your ADD/ADHD is ridiculously obvious -- get help.

BTW, how's it going on the article that explains 'the start of time' not simply 'the beginning of time', or the article that explains how the invisible mind can control the physical body.   Explain in a rational, logical, reasonable, and responsible way how something with such great sophistication as a universe or human be created without a plan?

Cite peer reviewed, independently verified,  falsifiable evidence for a plan and the architect of the plan.
Also cite the plan itself.

Here is my plan,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theogony
Disprove it.

Sir, if you take that route, comparing religious states to mostly non-religious states, the non-religious will win.

America, btw, is still mostly Christian, so you're statement, " given the state of the USA (homo/marijuana/education/war/prison/removal of religious expression from much of American life)" is horrendously wrong.

Homosexuality, or those(men) that are predominantly homosexual(I agree with Kinsey on the statement that mostly everyone has some degree of bisexuality), it is caused by factors beyond their control, such as hormonal changes within the womb, as well as genetics(epi-marks), based upon recent findings. With women, it's more diverse in the sense that even self identified lesbians are aroused by scenes depicting men according to a recent study done by the sexologist, Meredith Chivers. For the most part, that plays into the theory that women are more sexualiy fluid than men(have greater degrees of bisexuality). Again, those things are out of their control, and what gives you the right to deny them love?

Sorry, just wanted to explain a bit to on sexuality........

To the part about non-religious countries standard of living vs religious countries. The less strict religious democratic countries will always win(since the biggest exclusively non-religious countries are communist and would make no sense to compare them).

Compare India's extreme sexist view towards women, along with their caste system, leads to an overall depressive state of affairs. Have you not seen the countless rape and murder committed in India by men taking advantage of women because they are physically stronger and believe themselves to be more entitled? Have you not seen the deprived state of being some people live in according to India's caste system i.e Untouchables? India's entire backwards and twisted manner of being is due to it's strict religious outlook. Take that away and you'll get a much freer and overall less repressive state.

The United States may have it's problems, but thankfully over the years, it's people have begun to become more acceptable of what was previously viewed as wrong or backwards i.e (true)homosexuality. That's a luxury to have considering that many(strict,religious) countries around the world are repressing it's citizens in the sake of their religion.

Religion has been used to unify people and provide for them a moral code to live by. But as the times are changing, so is our "need" for religion. Don't let your religion/religious beliefs cloud your judgement(as it does to so many people). Remember that as the centuries have passed, mis-translations of text may have occurred along with outright lies, so it's my belief that one should know when to go by their religion's beliefs, but have their own individual judgement in matters as well.

I personally don't believe in any one religion as being the right one since they all have long histories of horrible atrocities committed in their name as well as overall, sometimes, very inhumane rules(concerning the laws of moses in the old testament, a lot of which were absolutely horrible) . I believe in "something", like a nagging thought on the back of my mind, or a cushion of air that I don't know exists, but I partly believe it does...if that makes any sense at all..

hahahahaahahahaaaa, you're worse than the other guy, are you his dad?   Your username explains your sexuality 'position'.

Got to put you on ignore

Ah, some people(Armis) will forever dwell in their ignorance. Stupidity surely is a hard thing to change.

Waiting...

It's not his fault and it's not stupidity. This person - like most religious adults - was indoctrinated during their formative years, long before they had developed the critical thinking skills necessary to discern truth from falsehood,  long before they would ever hear the phrase scientific method".

There's a reason every religious group forces their bullshit down the throats of young children. It's the only time they can. By the time any modern teen has been educated about science, getting them to believe in a god would be as difficult as getting them to believe in santa claus.

IMHO indoctrinating children into anything is a form of child abuse, and should be treated as such by the law.

We should refocus the discussion discourse towards increasing bitcoin's exposure among the general public.

The indoctrination by the "scientific community" is more rampant in the US than any other religion at this point.

But I am off topic.  Sorry.  Please go to the "off topic" section for more discussion.

God issued mankind 'conscience' as well as a 'conscious', between the two mankind inherently has a sense of good and bad, as well as right and wrong -- morality.
Goodness, what is good,  and righteousness, what is right is born from mankind's inherent moral foundation.   It is on that foundation all of mankind's laws were
conceived.

Here is how you know smoking is naturally not good, and also naturally the wrong thing for humans to do:
- smoking irritates your eyes, that is one of your senses telling you to move away from the smoke,
- smoking taste nasty (it becomes an acquired taste to abused taste buds), a second way your body is telling you this is not good,
- smoking irritate your nose, deadens your nasal receptors, and weakens your sense of smell, a 3rd way your body says stop,
- smoking irritates your lungs, resulting in coughing, a 4 way your body is tell you this action is wrong for it.
all of the above smoking reactions are AUTOMATIC responses, they were installed with mankind's initial programming  
as an early warning system to move away from potential harm or danger.

Long before cancer comes into the picture your physical body told your invisible mind that smoking was not good and likely wrong,
it was then for the mind to make an executive decision.   If you was in a burning building rescuing your family it would make sense
to override your body's automatic responses, but that was not the case.   There is no naturally good reason for smoking.  Since it harms
the body in multiple ways it should be considered wrong or bad activity.  

Indoctrination (aka brainwashing) is used to encourage, train, induce, coerce, or otherwise force someone to do, or not do, something that s/he would otherwise be expected to do, or not do, naturally.  If an action is naturally good, like eating food you may need to train someone to eat properly, that would not be indoctrination;  however to train a carnivore (like all humans) not to eat meat would take indoctrination, even though it is for the betterment of the person.  Not all indoctrination is wrong, however any indoctrination that results in the degrade of the overall quality of life of the community is not good for the community.

Indoctrination is the only way a society of any size would accept notions that are inherently bad or have no good natural purpose like homosexuality.  

Homosexuality has no good natural purpose.  Heterosexuality has an inherently good natural purpose -- to perpetuate the species.  

Indoctrination is the only way a society of any size would accept the notion of abortion as a 'choice'.  They tell you that it is 'only tissue',
they call it an embryo, as if it is not human at that point.   Two humans that naturally conceive can ONLY produce another human, as such
the "embryo" is really a 'human embryo'  not a chicken embryo, or a cow embryo, or a dog embryo.  

Indoctrination is the only way a society of any size would accept the notion that the "rule of law" trumps truth, that the ruling of one district judge
can override the known wishes of the tens of millions of people in that district, and that a national referendum on all of the issues of major national concern is not
the most sensible way to decide major national issues.  

Indoctrination is the only way a society of any size would issue foreign aid to nations while many of its states are in various states of financial crisis.

Indoctrination is the only way a society of any size that has such a poor overall public education system not give serious consideration to the
education sectors within the country that have an exceptionally long history of educational excellence.  

  
All responsible religions teach you to 'train up a child in the way he should go', a wise parent will teach their children to know good and bad, right and wrong,
without them necessarily needing to experience it all.  

The deeper you delve into the various levels of righteous consciousness the closer you will get to God.  If 'the plan' and 'the ingredients' are before a time science has discovered on one side and infinity is beyond a time can appreciate on the other side,  consciousness would represent that major hole in the middle that we live with every day that science has no true clue about.   There are many levels of consciousness from embryonic consciousness to fetal consciousness to infant awareness, to normal brain adult awareness,  to the daydream, to the groggy, to the light sleep, to the deep sleep, to the about to wake, to the boxing knockout, to the faint, to the coma, to the vegetative state, to the clinically brain dead, and so on ...

You don't know the beginning, the end, or the big doughnut hole in the middle, because you are on the merry-go-round called modern science.  

http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120922215052/creepypasta/images/a/ab/Jesus_facepalm.jpg

Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology.

It is distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.

Science can only educate, never indoctrinate. Unlike religion, critical examination, observation, deduction, peer review, and doubt are the foundations of the scientific method:

http://www.cdn.sciencebuddies.org/Files/5084/7/2013-updated_scientific-method-steps_v6_noheader.png

Witness, ye internet friends, the hatred and ignorance that grows from superstition:

You disgust me. It's one thing to have imaginary friends as an adult. Hell, you can even go telling other adults this embarrassing, cringe-worthy thing about yourself. I don't care! But when you start spreading blind hatred, you're fucking repugnant. To do it from behind a computer makes you a repugnant, hateful coward.

I dare you to bring your ignorant, backwater, hateful ass to New York City and say this shit outloud. See what happens. Spoiler: You'll get your ass kicked, and you'll deserve it. If there is a creator, you are a disgrace to all creation.

http://ih.constantcontact.com/fs157/1102339729411/img/391.jpg?a=1112473369314

http://cristianaziraldo.altervista.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/MorganFreemanonHomophobia.png

http://www.cooldailyinfographics.com/images/infographics/2013/07/homophobia.jpg

http://alwaysquestionauthority.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/1012031_619704901401542_1221490736_n.png

http://www.crewmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/homophobia.jpg

What's funny is that with him and a lot of other people with his beliefs that in most other situations of their lives they apply the critical reasoning necessary to dismiss claims that are unfounded and yet fail to apply it to their religious beliefs.

I think the biggest difference between him and I will be that I will never claim an absolute and I'm happy to say that I'm wrong
Some people just don't want to give up their favourite play toys.. It's useless to argue with someone not willing to admit they are wrong

Best to just sit back and have a chuckle.. a lot of the rhetoric is just recycled over and over anyway

Wow Beliathon.  That is quite a response.  

My point in the "brainwashing" was more along the lines of almost all children's books today in regards to the earth, dinosaurs, evolution begin with "Millions of years ago" or "Billions of years ago."  This is taught as a fact and now everyone just blindly believes it to be a fact.  I am the one that is seen as crazy because I just don't go along with the "brainwashing" that is taking place.  Is the "millions of years" time frame a proven fact or has everyone just been brainwashed to believe it is a fact? Scientists keep changing the timeline all of the time anyways so it is a huge problem.

As for homosexuality(since that is obviously a hot button for you) our bodies were designed sexually to be male and female (with the rare exception of a mutation in which someone is born with both parts of course)  If males could reproduce having sex with other males, or females with females, I would have to agree that scientifically homosexuality is normal and that anyone that disagrees with this is being brainwashed to believe that it is wrong, but that isn't the case.  Sure, there is deviance from the norm, but it is deviant.  It is not how we were designed sexually, and we were designed.  The reproductive system in the human body is an amazing and highly designed system that just could not have evolved by chance.  The fact that we are being brainwashed into believing everything happened by random chance is the craziest thing of all and makes no logical sense whatsoever.  

All this said, I am not really worried if you do not agree with me on this.  Saddened of course because I know without a doubt what the truth is.  The ones that are really brainwashed will someday have their eyes opened when the judgement day comes.   :-[  Truth is truth, regardless of if I believe it, or anyone believes it.  But we live in a world that does not even believe in absolute truth anymore.  Everything is relative and based on what feels good to us. It is now commonly accepted to determine what is right and wrong based solely on feelings and our cultural norms.  This is rooted in evolutionary theory as well as atheism with no God or higher authority to be accountable to.  But that is all part of the brainwashing too.

 "If males could reproduce having sex with other males, or females with females, I would have to agree that scientifically homosexuality is normal and that anyone that disagrees with this is being brainwashed to believe that it is wrong, but that isn't the case.  Sure, there is deviance from the norm, but it is deviant."

What's been shown, especially in the case of epi-marks, is that the chance of a male becoming homosexual increases as the mother has more kids. So if a mother has had 8 male children, the chance of the 9th one being gay is far higher than of the 1st one being gay. This could be a way to slow down/control population growth. It technically is a deviant from the norm, but it is still natural, kind of like if most people in one town had brown hair, and someone was born with yellow hair, that doesn't make them crazy, they just have a different hair color than most people in the town. Female sexuality however, is much more complicated presumably according to Dr Meredith Chivers work. Women have the capacity to be attracted to things that are sensual. So unlike males, who tend to be a bit rigid in their arousal patterns(could be due to cultural influences), women can be aroused by things that are overall "appealing" such as sexual intercourse if even between animals. They were even aroused by bonobo apes mating: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&sq=bonobos%20sex%20study%20blood%20flow&st=cse&scp=1. I know some people reading this will think, "Well if they're attracted to sensual things, then why are most of them hetero-romantic/heterosexual?(predominantly attracted to males sexually and romantically)". Well, evolution gave males features that would tip the scale in favor of them as being the foremost sexual/romantic partners of women, such as women being aroused by the mere pheromones a male produces, along with the overall structure of the male body, such as strong broad shoulders, tall, etc(especially during menstruation), and many more.

So in actuality, homosexuality is not something unnatural, and not something to be scared of if you're heterosexual and think," Oh the world is going to end because everyone will "turn" gay". That's not the case, as the majority of women and men are predominantly heterosexual with both sexes having specific attributes that appeal to the other, like two pieces to the puzzle. I go by the quote that, " Men drive the world, Women direct it", in the sense that men are usually more headstrong, while women are usually more "careful" so to speak(search up brain imaging of men vs women). Without men, the world will become stagnant and there would be no progression, without women the world will be less peaceful overall.

If you're talking about timeframes, 1billion years>1million years>100,000years>present day, etc. Yes, I can safely say that it's proven that the earth is a lot older than the 6,000 or so years as originally thought according to the Genesis chapter of the Old Testament(Which is also regarded by some scholars are symbolic and not to be taken literally).

You seem to take every portion of your religious text(Quran, Torah, Bible), literally. Try thinking that some passages in those holy books are not to be taken literally. I must say, that I wholeheartedly agree with only 1 section of the bible, which is the New Testament. While I don't really believe in the religious part, I believe in Christ's teachings, they are things that can apply to any religions and all peoples; an overall message of love.

Don't mind him, only a juvenile would go overboard posting pics in such a fashion.  Apparently he has failed to take his ADHD meds again.

The proper definition of homophobia linguistically is 'the fear of man'.  Most animals are homophobic, in that they are afraid of humans; notice most animals will run from man when they see us -- that is homophobia.   

I was at a grocery store one day, the cashier had a huge fat lip that obviously receive multiple stitches, clearly he should not have gone into work but he did.  I asked him how it  happened he told me that his boyfriend did it.  The highest incidence of abuse on homos are what they do to one another, followed by what they do to themselves.   What others do to them is a long distance third.

Ask any emergency room doctor to tell you stories of how many of them grossly injury themselves in an attempt to have "pleasure".   
Ask the police officers and social workers about the number of times they have encountered activities that minimally could be defined as
self-mutilation but could easily go as high as self-torture. Beliathon would have us believe that that is normal simply because it isn't illegal.

Without a moral compass you will get lost.   Notice how Beliathon will switch to any other topic he could in an effort to remove himself from
addressing the root issues at hand -- the existence of God.

You've been wrong on every single point you've made.

Homophobic means - irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals. Also some(there are many species of animals that do not, especially when they haven't encountered humans often i.e animals in exclusive parts of the world) animals fearing man is a learnt behavior, animals do not automatically fear humans, Discovery Channel and studies done on animals(Bears for ex.) should clarify this for you.

You meeting one homosexual or bisexual person who's been involved with abuse by their partner doesn't justify you claiming that all of them are violent. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Around 1 in 5 women in the Unites States report that they have been sexually assaulted. 1 in 5. So based upon that evidence, does that give me the right to say that all men are violent ? No, so then you definitely cannot claim that all homosexual men are violent given your 1 encounter.

Morality is innate. Meaning it's not learnt usually, it's basically an aversion to causing pain, physical or mental to another being. Of course this is just a general view, many different cultures have their own view on what's right and wrong, etc.

Fixed that for you. Earth is 4.54 +/- 1% billion years old. This is a proven fact by radiometric dating (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating). It's also common knowledge for any sane person, including every respectable scientist. Sorry, you don't get to discount hard science because it offends your religious view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism

Claiming, in 2014, that the Earth is younger than 4.5 billion years old, is just as ridiculous as claiming the Earth is flat or claiming Sol revolves around Earth. It's flatly moronic, and you should stop doing it immediately.

Are there any other great mysteries (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-agl0pOQfs) you'd like me to google for you? Spoiler:  You will (and deserve to be) mocked and derided until you stop disrespecting hard science.

I am by no means an expert in geology but there are reasons why I have come to question the dates that have been reported as "fact."  Isn't good science at least questioning these things?

The latest estimates suggest a date of 4.57 billion years. But this figure wasn’t established by radiometric dating of the earth itself. Most people are not aware of this. The truth is that the age of the earth has been established by dating meteorites, which are not earth rocks. They have come from somewhere else in the solar system, and their source is assumed to have formed at the same time as the earth. Therefore, the age they supply is an interpretation based on that assumption and is emphatically not “hard science.” How do we know for sure that the meteorites came from another body in the solar system that was formed at the same time as the earth? That’s an assumption, not “hard science.”

Scientists use radiometric dating but radiocarbon dating is more accurate. However, they do not want to use radiocarbon dating, why?  The best laboratories in the world, using the best equipment under the cleanest conditions over the last three decades, have been routinely finding measurable radiocarbon in coal, oil, natural gas, limestone, fossil bones, fossil shells, and even diamonds! If these were all millions of years old, then there should be no radiocarbon left in them. The fact is that all these materials yield radiocarbon dates of only thousands of years. And all of this is documented in scientific literature, such as in the journal Radiocarbon

Also, the amount of helium on the earth shows that the earth cannot be millions of years old.  There would be no helium left on earth.

These are just a few things that make me question the millions of years assumptions.

Some of the radiometric information I used is found here: https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radiometric-dating-and-proof/

https://i.imgur.com/n2bVlCd.png

If you want to learn about Christianity, go ask a priest.

If you want to learn about Demons, go watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

If you want to learn about Earth, you ask a fucking geologist for fuck's sake.

This is not demon-surgery, goddammit. Stop wasting my time with this absurd creationist horseshit.

THIS IS YOU! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5dSyT50Cs8)

Please stop!
We all know this is true!

http://cdn.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1340819070527_9323674.png

They hire scientists and geologists and I wanted to make sure to list where I found some of the information (give credit where it is due).  But you have no rebuttal for the information I listed other than this?  I am just looking for the truth.  Unfortunately I have trouble trusting scientists that portray theories as fact.  That is a huge problem.

Fixed that for you. You are beyond my help or anyone else's until you stop distrusting widely accepted scientific fact.

Pay attention now, because I'm only going to link this once (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D05ej8u-gU), and it is truly poignant, truly beautiful, truly moving.

Just because something is widely accepted does not make it a fact.  Just because society says something is good and OK does not make it moral.  The huge problem is that most of the world just blindly trusts what is told to them or even taught to them in textbooks or go along with the popular beliefs.  We need to think for ourselves.  Why are you so frustrated about what I believe anyways?  I would think you should rejoice in freedom of choice?  If I agreed with you wouldn't you be stifling my freedom?  You obviously cherish choices in lifestyle don't you?  

Edit:  And as for your signature (Voltaire's quote)  "It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong" I could not agree more wholeheartedly!  There will come a day when I will be persecuted and maybe even killed for just saying that I believe in Jesus.  That is all it will take.  Just believing in Jesus will be a very dangerous thing because "established men" will disagree and say that I am wrong and say that my belief is a danger to society (even though as a Christian my hearts desire is to have a world filled with God's Spirit which is evident by the fruit of His Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness and self-control. So I am not sure what the danger is besides the common belief that Christians are keeping the world from their "freedoms" which consists of sexual immorality, lusts, other sins and hate of God's word.)  If it gets to the point where Christians are persecuted (more than we already are) who will be right and who will be wrong?

Edit 2:  If this comes across as judgmental, I am sorry.  I just want people to seek more than what they have been told.  My heart is for people to see that they are so much more valuable than something that "evolved" from nothing.  They are created in God's image.  He loves us intensely and so deeply and the thought that we are not special and created by God is a lie that is being taught as "fact" today.  This is a truth that has to be revealed by God's Spirit though, so I will pray that anyone reading this will feel God's Spirit and see the truth for what it is.

Just convert to fiat, when the price is better and donate it to them, no need for them to adopt BTC, it will take forever.

I am all for whatever good can be done in this world. {Feed the poor or be kind to someone}

There are so many christians around me who hold big amount of Bitcoins, if the church begins to accept bitcoins, they will definitely donate some beyond question. I think it is a good thing and I know nothing before I am a christian.

How many times i have to tell you? GO BACK TO THE FCKING KITCHEN!

Where is your hubby? did someone chop his balls off? The fcker now only use alt account on here huh?

I couldn't agree more. Also this has absolutely zero to do with what we have been discussing, which is head-in-the-sound superstitious ignorance.  

Holy shit, did you really miss the irony of that statement?

Replace "most of the world just blindly trusts what is told to them or even taught to them in text books"
with      "most of the world just blindly trusts what is told to them or even taught to them in holy books"

Why would a church need to accept BitCoin?  They're already tax exempt... must be easier for them to pay for child prostitutes that way.

No way!!  A conversation about Religion on the internet turned into insulting religion.   I DON'T EVEN BELIEVE THIS!

It wasn't even about religion, just short and sweet info about church accepting bitcoins.

I thinks it's best for everyone if I lock this thread. You can always throw shit at each other in Off topic.


Locked