Okay, here we go. Finally there  The problem here is two-fold: First, it's a false-analogy to liken an omnipotent god to some imaginary dragon, even if you ascribe the imaginary dragon to be omnipotent. This is where logic weighs in on things and can catch subtle distinctions which make a world of difference. Instead of an imaginary dragon, let's use the well-know examples of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Russel's Teapot. Again, for simplicity, let's just focus on the FSM. Specifically, the problem is that the FSM, even if omnipotent, is a false analogy. This is because the identifying characteristics (i.e. what constitutes its identity) of an omnipotent god is its omnipotence, whereas for the FSM it is both omnipotence and the topological characteristics of being a monster made of spaghetti who flies, i.e. its physical constraints. So, an omnipotent god, or ID for "intelligent designer," is defined in terms of a total lack of constraint, whereas the FSM is defined in terms of both constraint and a total lack of constraint. This is critically important because it means one cannot be the other. If an ID omnipotently assumes a level of topological constraint, it does not lose any aspect of its identity because it remains omnipotent and thus is still equal to itself. However, if an FSM omnipotently changes its topological constraints, e.g. it becomes a teapot or a dragon, then its core identity is changed and is no longer equal to itself. An FSM who becomes a teapot is no longer an FSM no matter how omnipotent it is. Second, and stemming from this first point, we must then concede that if an ID exists, it falls totally outside of observation and empiricism, and is therefore a priori untouchable by empirical science. Therefore, Occam's Razor, which only applies to empirical phenomena, is irrelevant. What then matters is whether an ID is implied by logical necessity, and the method of exploration required to determine this is in no way based upon observation of empirical events. There needn't be any assumption of a "God-of-the-gaps" if you can determine what is logically necessary at a fundamental level, and at a 100% level of tautological confidence. My only questions about this are: 1. If God is omnipotent, why couldn't He make Himself to be within the universe and outside of it, entirely, and at the same time, while not allowing the universe to have anything to do with anything outside of it, and vice versa, except that He allowed it to be so in certain instances? 2. Is there any way an Objective God could let some people believe in Him while completely allowing those people who didn't believe in Him to not even recognize that He exists, and also letting a method exist to reach those people who didn't believe in Him so that now and again some of them would become believers? |
|
|
|
I am here to just say one thing? Why do YOU hate islam? and you should really give a valid reason not a shitty one that says 'Because media' and Yes, I am a muslim for those who ask, just tell me, come out of your shell and say why you HATE it, and I could be here to clarify things to you. Also here is something that most people mistake about islam is that "Islam hates other religions" for this I say, Islam does not hate ANY religion, but it suggests to 'invite' them to islam, as slowly, and peacefully, even if they refuse, you can try and try, until it's their choice, you stop. and for all the wars that happened, it's because the other religions decided to come into war on Islam. If you need anything clarified, I am here to answer you, don't be scared, I won't be offended by anyone, also haters, you can reply, I won't care  I would hate Islam if I happened to be a hateful person. I pity Muslims. |
|
|
|
Actually I'm respect all religion. But these day, mostly criminal come from Islam. Terorist, ISIS, etc  This religion is something different than others. I hate mostly afterward. Is it because this religion is very dominant so they can do anything they like ? I respect the fact that people are people. I look for the truth in religion. |
|
|
|
Now you tell me!  |
|
|
|
The word "gender" in the minds of EVERYONE who is not some kind of dictionary-nerd, linguist, has its whole meaning wrapped up in "sex." Say the word, "Gender," to the average person on the street and he thinks "sex." And if you ask Americans whether angels really exist, 3 out of 4 of them will tell you they do. I suppose you think this is how science is done?  So sorry, science is not a fucking popularity contest. Science simply isn't (for the most part) out there trying to prove the existence of angels. Thus, science doesn't (for the most part) even talk about the existence of angels. Rather, science talks about a host of other things that are just as fictional as scientists think angels are... things like Big Bang, Evolution, Black Holes, the idea that stars are nuclear when electric arc law fits star activity better, etc., etc. Why are these things fictional? Because they are only ideas and theories. They have no real proof behind them. |
|
|
|
I am here to just say one thing? Why do YOU hate people? and you should really give a valid reason not a shitty one that says 'Because Jews, Because Christians, Because Atheists'
and Yes, I am a people's person for those who ask, just tell me, come out of your shell and say why you HATE people like myself, and I could be here to clarify things to you, or not...
Also here is something that most muslims mistake about people's person like me is that "Christianity or Buddhism hate other religions" for this I say, Christianity or Buddhism does not hate ANY religion, but they suggest to 'invite' them to Christianity or Buddhism or Judaism, as slowly, and peacefully, even if they refuse, you can try and try, until it's their choice, you stop. and for all the wars that happened, it's because this other religion decided to come into war on Christianity or Buddhism or Judaism.
If you need anything clarified, I may not be here to answer you, don't be scared, I won't be offended by anyone, also haters, you can reply, I won't care Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink  In other news -> I dont understand why people build up hate against each other because of their religion or country or race or whatever . We are all humans ,we are all the same . We all want to be happy and live a peaceful life . Then why do people come in the path of greed , hate , corruption ,etc.and why dont they just live an honest life. live and let live ,folks. Because, "Me want this, and this, and this." And if I am not smart enough to get it by working for it, then I am stupid enough to take it from others by force. The result often destroys the one who lives his hate. This is what is happening to ISIS. They follow both the peace directives and the violence/hate directives in the Islamic writings. The frustration of trying to do both in the contradictory ways that the writings present both to them, causes them to become hateful of their own religion, of themselves for following it. But they don't know any other religion, so they take their hate out on other people. |
|
|
|
Some neurolinguistics experts classify religion as a language virus, which short-circuits critical thinking pathways in the brain. Exhibit A: If science only involved the scientific method and the things that are absolutely proven as fact, then the bolded statement, above, might approach truth. But since science includes many theories that are almost comical in their absurdity, and since science often maintains itself on pure probability (quantum mechanics and quantum math) rather than anything factual, science, itself, is fraught with faith throughout. The problem with the faith of science is, science won't even recognize that it is God that it is basing its faith on. Because of this, it is science that is acting on blind faith more than any formal religion could ever think to.  I like science fiction stories, as well. I simply never wrapped myself up in it so deeply that it became a part of my life. |
|
|
|
The word "gender" in the minds of EVERYONE who is not some kind of dictionary-nerd, linguist, has its whole meaning wrapped up in "sex." Say the word, "Gender," to the average person on the street and he thinks "sex." If he happens to be a protester of some kind, he might have glimpses in his mind of some deeper meaning. But most of the time his thinking will start out with "sex" before it goes on to something else. |
|
|
|
Many Holocaust revisionists... gibberish gibberish, etc.
I really do not know how anyone can say that Hitler was right, he killed too many people, too many people have died because of his crazy head. Many people were killed and tortured in the camps, many cities and countries were destroyed. Even after Hitler right? I can think of a reason why someone would say that. Attention. Perhaps if I were an angry little guy who has to blame someone else for my own failings. Someone who has little to say but gets some kind of lift from the only human attention he ever does receive. Even though the attention is the disgust of civilized people it is something. I see this all the time in small children and in adults who can't get past that phase of emotional development. I see these "isms", like racism, as the result of people who know there is something wrong with who they are but protect their delicate ego by projecting their problems and scapegoating rather than face their failings and better themselves. Obviously hitler was a maniac and only the most self deluded personality would think otherwise. Right! Name a government and nation that has never fallen. As for the governments and nations that exist right now, the past suggests that they will fall. It is people who fall. Governments and people always fall. The focus on the question is goofy. The focus should have been a question >>> "Was Hitler right, or was he left?" liberal or conservative, a survivor into Argentina or a self-murderer in the bunker? |
|
|
|
Well, because they are apostates from the faith, renounced the faith because they were otherwise persuaded not to believe in anything, and annoy everyone who opposes them, and those who have their faith or religion annoys them. 1. Not all atheists were ever faithful to begin with, ergo only some atheists are apostates from "the" faith. This may come as a shock to you, but there are atheist/agnostic parents raising children. 2. There are many different faiths, not just one. Science rejects all faith equally and without discrimination. Science demands observation and measurement. This is so funny. Why? Because it is so hypocritical. If science only involved the scientific method and the things that are absolutely proven as fact, then the bolded statement, above, might approach truth. But since science includes many theories that are almost comical in their absurdity, and since science often maintains itself on pure probability (quantum mechanics and quantum math) rather than anything factual, science, itself, is fraught with faith throughout. The problem with the faith of science is, science won't even recognize that it is God that it is basing its faith on. Because of this, it is science that is acting on blind faith more than any formal religion could ever think to. |
|
|
|
In addition, there is the part of my, above, post that you didn't quote. It talks about freedom for all people... how Americans can regain freedom from their own government that they seem to have lost. God wants freedom for people, just because that's the way He is. He would like freedom for all people so that they might spread His Word. But He offers the freedom even if they don't do His work. America has freedom built into her founding documents. Because of this simple fact alone, God favors America. The points listed in this post are just the beginnings of why God might continue to maintain freedom in America, even though many of the people of America are sinning much. Lol. America likes to portray itself as free and freedom loving but but there's nothing free about it and the idea of America is just a colossal hypocrite and contradiction. Land of the free but spying on its citizens and the rest of the world? Land of the free but lock up more people than any other nation and most of them for petty drug offenses? Land of the free but will evade your country whenever it feels like it? Land of the free but is a country that is founded on genocide and theft? I don't think so. America is a delusion and so is anyone who think it's the greatest country or the country of god etc and this is exactly what's wrong with both blind belief in religion and blind patriotism. America doesn't like anything, nor does it portray itself as anything. America is a group of people, and a group of groups of people, who have many different ideals and do many different things. What you are talking about is the way some people (usually the media) portray America. America doesn't spy on its people and the rest of the world. There are one or two agencies of a corporate legal system that do that. America doesn't lock up people for petty illegalities. It is a corporate legal system that does that. It is not America that does any of the wrongs you mentioned. It is a group of people who have pulled the wool over the eyes of the people of America who are doing it. Indeed, there are bad things mixed within the good in American government. But the people of America are victims of a small group of legalistic jokers who want to control the whole world. Americans are victims, just like everyone else. I know it is a little bit long. But read and think about the whole thing that I wrote above, instead of only skimming it. The people of America have the ability to get themselves out of their legal troubles by using the legal system against itself. They simply don't know it. There is one thing that keeps the American government from being the best government in the world. It is the ignorance of the people regarding how easy it is to individually get out from under the civil-like "legalness" of their own system when they perceive that the system is wrong. Other than that, the American system of government is the best and freest. |
|
|
|
Hitler may have been reasonably correct for Hitler, the Nazis and the Third Reich, but when you look at the devastation the Allies covered Germany with in WWII, you can see that Hitler was wrong for the people. |
|
|
|
I don't want to raise my children in a society that is non-Bible. Why? Because it is hard enough to get them to be good people living in only a Bible society. Letting them live among ardent sinners makes it really difficult to raise them properly. |
|
|
|
The point is, Islamic writings support active violence at times and peace at other times. Therefore, who is the greater Muslim? The one who supports the violence and the peace? Or the one who only supports the peace? I haven't heard of any of them only supporting the violence... probably because they don't live long if they become this way. |
|
|
|
I didn't get you J J Philips, What you want to say , Would you please tell me again, Im confused between A,B,C,D and 1 2..  I didn't understand a single word from your words.. If you clear this to me i will be very thankful Let me try a simpler example. I'm Canadian. Suppose I told you two things: (1) Canadian law supports freedom of expression. (2) Canadian law does not support freedom of expression. Would you agree that both of these things cannot be true? Either (1) is true, or (2) is true, but not both. In my opinion only one option is correct..If Law support freedom is correct then the other is wrong..And if you compare Islamic law with the canadian law then please for God sake think sensible.. Good. Now, let's switch to Islamic law. For the same reason, both (1) and (2) here cannot be both true: (1) Islamic law supports freedom of expression. (2) Islamic law does not support freedom of expression. Do you believe (1) or (2) is true? Absolutely this: (1) Islamic law supports freedom of expression. In fact they want you to express yourself. This way they will know whether or not to assassinate you. |
|
|
|
God is as blissfully unaware of our pathetic squabbling as we are of the bacteria in our gut.
A much more compelling argument for God than any organized religion, but still there is no evidence to support this or any other god-claim. Since you don't know this for anything like a fact or even close, you are setting yourself up as God by asserting the things you assert. |
|
|
|
The topic should have to do with whether or not Hitler changed his mind when he moved to Argentina after he lost the War. |
|
|
|
Read the story of the creation of the universe in Genesis in the Bible. God took what was the earth, and separated it, placing some of it above the sky (atmosphere, firmament) while leaving some of it below the sky. Then He made some of the earth material above the sky to become the sun, moon and stars. Thus the earth is not only the center of everything, but it is everything. In addition, Jesus came to save mankind. He didn't come to save the angels. In fact, Hebrews in the New Testament explains that the angels are lower than Jesus. Thus, as far as God is concerned - God Who created everything - the earth is the center of the universe, at least figuratively, because that is where mankind who He is attempting to save live. |
|
|
|
Because the bible is inconsistent and contradictory. Some parts promote rape, some are "against it". Ugh, this has already been stated, the below shows that the bible allows for rape. Please open up your nearest bible and go read it. I've read the passages. What's your take on these?
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)
They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil. (Judges 5:30 NAB)
I'm sorry, but the bible promotes all the horrors that our society seeks to avoid, such as rape, murder, and the like(Same for the Torah). It's just one big mess and that shows the invalidity of it, there's some moments where laws entirely contradict each other, so it was clearly not inspired by "god".
Selling someone as a slave doesn't mean the person she is enslaved to is free to rape her. "Back than, it wasn't uncommon for poor families to give their children up to slavery. Slavery wasn't as bad as we think of it today. Instead of families letting their children starve or die from sickness, they would send them to be maids or farmers under a boss so that they could receive food, water, shelter, clothing, income, and more. These "slaves" were treated more like servants or workers contract rather than our definine of slaves. Now, in this particular passage, it is discussing the treament of female "servants" in specific. Women were highly protected under the Jewish law due to the fact that they were highly vulnerable in society. This is why we see so many extra laws of protection revolving around women. If a father gave up his daughter, than the 'boss' would have to take on the duties of a father. He was not allowed to sell her to foreigners (as that would endanger her life). If he was unpleased with her abilities to work, she was simply set free from the contract. He also wasn't able to just get rid of her when her time working was up. The men could simply be let free, because they could get jobs. Women couldn't back than, so the boss was not allowed to just let her leave, and end up in a life of poverty. Often times they would arrange marriages for these women (arrange marriages were common back than). The woman had many extra rights in this marriage that most other women didn't get.... for example, she could divorce him in a multitude of cases! If he mistreated her in any way she had the right to leave and she didn't have to give him anything (whereas a woman in todays society may have to give up half of her belongings to her ex after divorce). " Christians: can you explain this verse Exodus 21:7-8? And taking a damsel, doesn't mean they're free to rape them, versus rescuing them and allowing them to live. It's also another instance where people are saying that others are taking damsels, not that God is telling them to do so. Are there any examples in the bible where God tells someone to go rape someone? I don't think we've hit on one, and He does say to kill those who would rape others. Yes of course that's why this passage explicity says ," Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)
" I guess "women ravished" doesn't mean "rape" in your language. Hint: It does. Also, while we're at it, here's a few passages from the bible that depict women as being second-class citizens to men. Hope your happy with the laws "God the father" gave that oh so treats women fairly /sarcasm.
"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."- 1 Corinthians 14:34 "But every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven." 1 Corinthians 11:5
"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, ..." - Ephesians 5:22 So it seems "God the Father" is a mass murderer And a sexist. The point is, God didn't actually tell people to rape. It could have just been sinful people going and doing the rape, if in fact it did occur. (I never argued ravished didn't mean rape, but that they may have mistranslated "ravished" instead of another word "violated" which maybe stood for something else). But the point is God didn't say to do it. This is a pretty good page, Sexism in the Bible: Is Christianity Sexist?The Christian Church is female!
This is going to come to a shock to most non-Christians (and maybe even some Christians), but God's people are referred to as female, not male. In the Old Testament, God's people are the "daughters of Zion." 32 The Church or body of Christ (including us men) is referred to as the "bride" of Christ 33 and God is said to be our "husband." 34 Whenever referred to by sex, the Church is described as "she" or "her."35 In addition, the Greek word for church is a feminine noun.
The essence of biblical equality can be summed up in Paul's letter to the Galatians:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)
The thing that is going to shock many Christians even more is the fact that there is no Mother Earth for them. Saint Paul says in Galatians 4.26: But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. |
|
|
|
Keep in mind boys... Us Jews. We run Bitcoin. So yall can hate and think the Jews this and the Jews that, but when it comes down to it yall hate because no matter what we've been through we always win at the game of money. Jews are always running the financial show. They have the biggest houses, and bank accounts and they sit back and get rich while most of you out here just get poorer. Just wanted to clear up why it is yall hate on us Jews. Please continue with your rhetoric. The Jews of the Torah and Tanakh times believed in the Messiah promised by Moses. They didn't see Him. But they believed that He would come because Moses said He would. Then the Messiah, Jesus, came. But the Jews didn't believe in Him. So, which is it? Do the Jews believe in the Messiah or not? Their faith one way cancels itself out the other way. Thus, the faith that was hotly in favor of the Messiah, and the faith that is coldly against Him, mixes and becomes lukewarm. Jesus, the Messiah Himself, says in the Revelation that he will spit them out of His mouth for being lukewarm. He can't work with a bunch of jokers who won't make a decision one way or the other while, at the same time, making the decision both ways. As with all the Jews of the past, all the money, all the houses and all the lands that they have will be taken from them at death. The real question is, where will they stand for eternity, after the judgment? Hitler, at least, made his decision. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
