Sure am glad I'm not from Georgia. [Archive]

jjcourtright

05-09-2005, 04:30 PM

Below you will find a conversation between Fox News' Alan Colmes and anti-abortion activist Neal Horsley:

Alan Colmes: "You had sex with animals?"
Neal Horsley: "Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule."

AC: "I'm not so sure that that is so."

NH: "You didn't grow up on a farm in Georgia, did you?"

AC: "Are you suggesting that everybody who grows up on a farm in Georgia has a mule as a girlfriend?"

NH: It has historically been the case. You people are so far removed from the reality... Welcome to domestic life on the farm..."

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/05/06/bizarre_sex_habits_of_the_extreme_rightwing.php#mo re

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 04:32 PM

jjcourtright

05-09-2005, 04:38 PM

It doesn't appear that he was kidding...he is from Georgia.

The Evolution v. ID thing is just completely ridiculous. I thought we settled this 80 years ago.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 04:40 PM

The Evolution v. ID thing is just completely ridiculous. I thought we settled this 80 years ago.

Yeah, me too- what about that whole Church vs. State thingy I used to hear about in Social Studies class?

Robbo_the_Hood

05-09-2005, 04:41 PM

Not around these parts we haven't.

jjcourtright

05-09-2005, 04:42 PM

Do you just freak out sometimes?

Robbo_the_Hood

05-09-2005, 04:45 PM

Don't have time to freak out. I have to keep my musket clean in case the Union decides to invade again.

Droogan_Leader

05-09-2005, 04:48 PM

You are all a little too much.

And, I can't believe that conversation happened on basic cable.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 04:52 PM

You are all a little too much.

And, I can't believe that conversation happened on basic cable.

Actually, I think it was on the radio- right?

jjcourtright

05-09-2005, 04:55 PM

You are correct, sir.

Mighty Wingman

05-09-2005, 05:02 PM

To be fair though, isn't evolution still a theory ?
Isn't there a link (or two) still missing ?

Just think about this though, if Neal Horsley ( Hmmm? What's in a name? ) grew up somewhere monkeys were present he could've fathered the missing link.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 05:05 PM

To be fair though, isn't evolution still a theory ?
Isn't there a link (or two) still missing ?

Yes- A widely accepted SCIENTIFIC theory.

Droogan_Leader

05-09-2005, 05:13 PM

I'll rephrase: I can't believe that conversation happened at all.

Yes- A widely accepted SCIENTIFIC theory.

It's really losing ground among a lot of scholars in a lot of fields. One particular stronghold of intelligent design has been among astronomers. I think biologists are the most hardcore evolutionists, and even there, well, in my opinion it takes much more faith to accept evolution.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 05:25 PM

I'm NEVER going to agree that Intelligent Design makes sense, but I can't disagree with that "theory" without sounding like an atheist spoiling for a fight- so I'm gonna let that one go.

Mighty Wingman

05-09-2005, 05:27 PM

FanGirl

05-09-2005, 05:29 PM

Is there a reason kids can't be taught both?

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 05:32 PM

Certainly, I have problems buying a full subscription to I.D. even at half off the cover price. It is easier for me to believe that life on earth adapted to the conditions here.

But I stop short of believing my ( I can't speak for everyone) ancestors were monkeys (apes, whatever) , to use a quote " If we evolved from monkeys , WHY are there still monkeys? I mean W. made it over the hump what's wrong with the rest of them? "

Ahh, the old "I didn't come from monkeys" chestnut. No one is saying that your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather was a monkey, just that Apes and Humans descended from the same biological line. As for "why are there still monkeys"- well, in one geological location, monkeys evolved due to environmental factors, and in another place, they didn't need to, so they didn't- that's why they still exist.

Can you really look at a chimpanzee and tell me you see absolutely no similarity between it and a human? That's like looking at a housecat and saying "there's no way that AND a tiger evolved from a the same organism!"

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 05:34 PM

Is there a reason kids can't be taught both?

Yep- the Constitution clearly states the the Government cannot fund the teaching of religion (okay, it's not THAT clear) and Intelligent Design preassumes a higher being, the belief in which, is inherently religious.

Yes, I'm one of those idiots that thinks "In God we Trust" should be taken off of U.S. currency- I sure as hell don't trust in God...but I'm not going to force my minority opinion on what is a clear majority- I just swallow it and don't say "Under God" when I say the Pledge. It's a pretty simple fix.

Dave

05-09-2005, 05:46 PM

*See's the way this tread is going to go and slowly backs out the door*

Jason_Brown

05-09-2005, 05:55 PM

A large part of the problem is that the colloquial definition of "theory" and the scientific definition are different.

The colloquial definition is closer to the scientific term "hypothesis".

A scientific theory is supported by evidence, and is repeatable. There are no scientific "facts", merely widely-supported theories. The existence of gravity, for example, is a theory.

Unfortunately, this intellectual disconnect leads to the "it's just a theory" argument against evolution. It is also used to put Intelligent Design on the same plane as evolution, when ID is not actually a scientific theory.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 05:57 PM

Mighty Wingman

05-09-2005, 06:02 PM

Ahh, the old "I didn't come from monkeys" chestnut. No one is saying that your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great
-great-great grandfather was a monkey, just that Apes and Humans descended from the same biological line.
Okay , so where and when exactly, did the split happen?

Can you really look at a chimpanzee and tell me you see absolutely no similarity between it and a human?
Some, more than others... I see similarities between a stick of dynamite and a candle too, doesn't mean they came from the same factory. But some of the ingredients are the same.

That's like looking at a housecat and saying "there's no way that AND a tiger evolved from a the same organism!"

A housecat and a tiger: Niether can do math, play video games, or write novels.
A human and a monkey : I can't name one monkey that ever wrote a novel. I like monkeys just fine and I don't mean to offend any of the good monkey-lovin' folks here. That we share a gene, or two is obvious, but if necessity precipitates evolution shouldn't the rest of them have felt the need by now? In all recorded history no one has ever seen a line of apes growing into humans , shedding their hair, learning to speak. etc.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 06:08 PM

I don't really see a point to this post, other than to refute what I've said. What exactly ARE you trying to say? Do you believe in ID, or in Evolution, or neither, or both?

EDIT: Get off the fence, man, and take a stand! :D

05-09-2005, 06:09 PM

I firmly believe aliens from Zebulon 6 came to earth and spliced their DNA in with monkeys a hundred thousand years ago as a way to accurately test their rectal thermometers without having to use them on themselves...:rolleyes:

Denyse

05-09-2005, 06:10 PM

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 06:11 PM

Oooh, but why would you want to forgo the particular pleasure that is a rectal thermometer?

FanGirl

05-09-2005, 06:20 PM

What about the theory that Earth is alien prison for different planets? It's not nationalities as much as alien races, which is why we can't just all get along.

Efexeye

05-09-2005, 06:22 PM

What about the theory that Earth is alien prison for different planets? It's not nationalities as much as alien races, which is why we can't just all get along.

Now that I WILL refute- all humans are members of the same race and share a common genetic ancestry- THAT can be proven.

The litmus test for whether organisms are members of the same race is that they can breed- all humans can breed with all other humans, therefore, they are all members of the same race!

Mighty Wingman

05-09-2005, 06:47 PM

EDIT: Get off the fence, man, and take a stand! :D

Fair enough, I think both theories leave gaps and have their problems. Niether can be conclusively or irrefutably proven , I think what we should be teaching our kids is that "we don't really know-- but here is what we think." maybe it was this, maybe it was that, maybe a little of both. Maybe it was something we haven't thought of yet.

J.K.s theory is lookin' pretty good , but everyone knows it was Zebulon 5, not Zebulon 6, and they are still testing their rectal thermometers on rural America everytime a new prototype is developed.

karmattack

05-09-2005, 06:48 PM

I personally like Einstein's (http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Theology-Albert-Einstein.htm) views on the matter. Hey, if the guy can prove the duality of light as a particle and wave...

05-09-2005, 06:54 PM

...but everyone knows it was Zebulon 5, not Zebulon 6, and they are still testing their rectal thermometers on rural America everytime a new prototype is developed.

I stand corrected, I've never been good with interstellar coordinates or place names. I'm more of a "hang a louie at Cygnus and when you get to the nebula that looks a lot like my mother-in-law's bake zitti, you've gone too far"

Don't ask me to program the hyperdrive...

Jason_Brown

05-09-2005, 07:14 PM

Fair enough, I think both theories leave gaps and have their problems. Niether can be conclusively or irrefutably proven

ID is not a theory, it is a hypothesis.

Nothing can be conclusively or irrefutably proven, at least from a scientific standpoint.

cberquist

05-09-2005, 07:26 PM

*See's the way this tread is going to go and slowly backs out the door*

What happened to everyone in Georgia having sex with animals? Is that ONLY in Georgia? Say you head into Arkansas, would you still be bound by the same requirements?

Threadkiller

05-09-2005, 07:45 PM

It's really losing ground among a lot of scholars in a lot of fields. I think there are aspects of it that will always be questioned, that's the nature of science. But I seriously doubt any real scientist is abondoning evolution for Intelligent Design.

The whole purpose of science is that it doesn't rely on faith. Every person can observe the exact same phenomena that was used to draw the conclusions.

Teach science in schools and religion in sunday school or seminary or institute or bible school or whatever it's called where you are.

karmattack

05-09-2005, 07:45 PM

What happened to everyone in Georgia having sex with animals? Is that ONLY in Georgia? Say you head into Arkansas, would you still be bound by the same requirements? No, in Arkansas they stick to the minerals and vegetables. And by vegetables, I mean people from Arkansas.

I keeeeeeeed, I keeeeeeed.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 08:18 PM

Here is a surprise to everyone here, but I do not agree with Evolution.

I guess it is hard for me to accept that a higher creature developed from a lower creature, especially since it has not happened in the last 2000 years.

If Evolution was a real theory, we would still be seeing signs of one lower creature developing into a higher creature.

karmattack

05-09-2005, 08:45 PM

We witness evolution through natural selection. The most obvious, apparent, and relevant right now are bacteria and viruses. It's one of the reasons they say using anti-bacterial products will actually end up being a bad thing. When we kill of bacteria with a product, some that are resistant to the product will survive and then reproduce, creating a higher percentage of resistant bacteria, and so on. That's natural selection and evolution at work.

Every species of animal has its certain characteristics that helped it survive and breed, and those come from mutations (God?). If we came from primates, then ours is self-recognition and higher brain functions which helped us provide defense, shelter, and food better...which led to more breeding, learning, and so on. Some primates got a huge tail, and some got big red butts. OK, you got me on that one.

I honestly think it's both things at the same time.

"We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books . It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranges and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations."
--Albert Einstein

FanGirl

05-09-2005, 08:48 PM

There are forms of evolution. For example, the blood type AB has only been existence for a 1000 years. Prior to that it was only, A, B and O. Each from certain regions. It took a 1000+ years of conquerors invading and mixing blood before a new blood type evolved. It's rarest blood type there is because it is so relatively new. The only reason I know this is because I am AB.

Threadkiller

05-09-2005, 08:56 PM

I have no problem with people who disagree with evolution.

The problem is when they pretend they disagree for an accepted scientific reason. If you have faith in your beliefs, you shouldn't need science (real or psuedo) to validate them for you and you shouldn't feel threatened when science appears to contradict them.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 09:10 PM

True, first and foremost I disagree with it due to my beliefs, but I just assumed that was a given, and wanted to avoid possible bitterness that might ensue. I also know there are scientific reasons why Evolution is false, and the one I posted was one of them that is logical.

I am fully aware of Adaptation, I.E a species that changes something about itself to improve on it. Karma's bacterial strain post for example, I view as adapting.

I am not sure if there is evolution among plants, or bacteria, or even other animals, nor am I going to pretend to know. However, I do know there is something in the brain, spirit, and soul that seperates humans from animals. This seperation is so distinct that there is no possible way it could have just 'evolved' from some lesser critter.

It's rarest blood type there is because it is so relatively new. The only reason I know this is because I am AB.

Yes, you are quite unique! :)

slizzelizzel

05-09-2005, 09:32 PM

How do you know? With God, there is a way for everything, isn't there? Maybe he started the whole ball rolling with the big bang and decided to see where it would go?

The truth is, nobody here is ever going to change anyone elses minds on this subject. I have argued evolution in every aspect of my life, at work, at school, in class, over dinner, at club meetings, and countless message boards. No one here is going to throw down their religious beliefs here, and no one is going to adopt them.

Matt- how can you say this? :
I also know there are scientific reasons why Evolution is false

this:
I am not sure if there is evolution among plants, or bacteria, or even other animals, nor am I going to pretend to know.

and then this?

This seperation is so distinct that there is no possible way it could have just 'evolved' from some lesser critter

The truth is you DON'T KNOW, NEITHER DO I, and NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE, so I guess we can just live however the hell we want to live and in the end if all of us evolutionists turn out to be wrong, then it sucks to be us.

Threadkiller

05-09-2005, 09:36 PM

I also know there are scientific reasons why Evolution is false,See, there you go trying to make scientific arguments to back up your religious beliefs. Why? I read your "scientific reasons" and I don't believe they are scientific at all. They may seem logical but the logic is bad and assumes things about evolution that aren't part of the theory.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 09:43 PM

With God, there is a way for everything, isn't there? Maybe he started the whole ball rolling with the big bang and decided to see where it would go?

There is a way for everything through God, as long as it is not contradictory to what God has already said or done. You asked "Who Knows" I know. God spoke, it happened, we did not Evolve. (according to Genesis 1 and 2) These are my beliefs, you do not have to agree.

NOW,
Sorry that you did not understand what I was saying...

1. I do know there are scientists that say Evolution is false, and they give scientific reasons for it. (Although I personally do not know what they are, with the exception of the single one I posted.)

2. I do not know if there is proof for Evolution among bacteria or plants or even other animals.

3. Humans are so distinct and seperate from animals, there is no possible way humans could have evolved. To even think it is possible to me is ludicrous.

*sarcasm, yet to prove a point* I know I sure enjoy watching a chimp teach a class on the fall of the Roman Empire, or reading the lates best seller written by a squirrel, or going to church and watching Reverand Rhino. Most of all, I really like how creative Lions are, that last hotel and casino was really grand!

slizzelizzel

05-09-2005, 09:45 PM

See, there you go trying to make scientific arguments to back up your religious beliefs. Why? I read your "scientific reasons" and I don't believe they are scientific at all. They may seem logical but the logic is bad and assumes things about evolution that aren't part of the theory.

Exactly. I don't see why people are so defensive about evolving from apes! Who cares? We aren't saying that we ARE apes, we're saying that both Apes and Humans evolved from a common ancestor. We know for a fact that there have been several Homo species on the planet, and we are the ones who survived because we were the most versatile, but the thing that really irks me is that people rip on evolution without learning about it.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 09:48 PM

See, there you go trying to make scientific arguments to back up your religious beliefs. Why? I read your "scientific reasons" and I don't believe they are scientific at all. They may seem logical but the logic is bad and assumes things about evolution that aren't part of the theory.

Many people use science to attempt to disprove God, (I am no scientists) but since God created the universe and everything about it, that Science proves God. If science is in disagreement with God, then the scientist who came up with that particular theorum or hypothesis is wrong.

Darwin himself rejected his own theory late in his life, realizing how wrong it was.

Droogan_Leader

05-09-2005, 09:52 PM

Exactly. I don't see why people are so defensive about evolving from apes! Who cares? We aren't saying that we ARE apes, we're saying that both Apes and Humans evolved from a common ancestor.

If the Bible did not exist, there would be no stakes here. Nothing is at stake in my opinion, there will be no rifts in time and space because of this thread or any other message board dedicated to this. I believe what I believe, and for very good reasons.

In response to anyone who thinks I am so naive that I would make presuppositions about science because of my religious beliefs, well, you really are selling religious people short. I'm just putting that out there, because something I saw read that way. Faith is a very logical process that many people don't understand, and when they see a "religious" person, they superimpose their ideas about faith on them, ergo, they must have a "mystic" view of the universe. I'm not going to indulge any cravings into a debate on this topic--in fact, I'll stop right here, but if anyone's guilty, step back and check ya self. Remember what assuming does--statements like that aren't mutually respectful, and if I weren't the person I am, I might get upset.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 09:54 PM

Exactly. I don't see why people are so defensive about evolving from apes! Who cares?

Every person who believes that God created the universe.

We aren't saying that we ARE apes, we're saying that both Apes and Humans evolved from a common ancestor.

But this is so wrong! It is not possible that humans and their thought process came from the same ancestor as apes and their though process.

We know for a fact that there have been several Homo species on the planet, and we are the ones who survived because we were the most versatile, but the thing that really irks me is that people rip on evolution without learning about it.

ANd certain people stick to the existance of evolution exists without looking into how it is not possible.

slizzelizzel

05-09-2005, 09:54 PM

(according to Genesis 1 and 2)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Genesis the book that says the universe was created in 7 days? How were the days measured if the Sun hadn't been created yet?

The bible could have been mistranslated a hundred times over, I am basing my beliefs on things that have been studied and found in my lifetime, along with physical evidence of common ancestors to Apes, not some book that people believe as the word of God.

Threadkiller

05-09-2005, 09:55 PM

since God created the universe and everything about it, that Science proves God. If science is in disagreement with God, then the scientist who came up with that particular theorum or hypothesis is wrong.
.So, you are saying that since God created science, science must therefore prove that God exists? But you begin with the very unscientific assumption that God exists.

Face it, science is never going to prove that God exists or doesn't exist. It's a huge mistake to try and reconcile the two things (science and religion). If you are sure of your beliefs, why do you care that some scientists disagree with you?

If it's that important to you, don't waste your time preaching against some scientists when you could be preaching for your own beliefs instead.

Droogan_Leader

05-09-2005, 09:56 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Genesis the book that says the universe was created in 7 days? How were the days measured if the Sun hadn't been created yet?

The bible could have been mistranslated a hundred times over, I am basing my beliefs on things that have been studied and found in my lifetime, along with physical evidence of common ancestors to Apes, not some book that people believe as the word of God.

*headpalm* Can we just stop while we're ahead? I take back what I said earlier--I'd rather talk about people from Georgia and their mule lovers. That statement is so full of errors, I don't know where to begin!

FanGirl

05-09-2005, 09:56 PM

Homer Simpson already proved that God didn't exist.

Droogan_Leader

05-09-2005, 09:57 PM

Homer Simpson already proved that God didn't exist.

You didn't see last night's episode then...

slizzelizzel

05-09-2005, 09:58 PM

ANd certain people stick to the existance of evolution exists without looking into how it is not possible.

Just look at bacteria, since they are so much smaller than us, the rate of evolution is way, way faster. We are already on our 5th strain of pennecillin because the bacteria that it was made to fight against have evolved, this is a known, documented scientific fact.

Before you go and say something isn't possible, research it, and prove why it's not, just saying "its not" only makes people lose respect for you and the group of people you represent when you are arguing your side of the issue.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 10:06 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Genesis the book that says the universe was created in 7 days? How were the days measured if the Sun hadn't been created yet?

If you read a little more, you would understand that the sun rules the day, and the moon rules the night.

The first day was "light" and light and darkness were seperated from each other, it was evening and morning, next day.

Then later on the 4th day he created the Sun and the Moon to rule the night and the day.

The bible could have been mistranslated a hundred times over,

It has been translated into different languages and such, but since the bible is the word of God "IN IT'S ORIGINAL CONTENT"

I am basing my beliefs on things that have been studied and found in my lifetime,

So a mere 2 decades over several thousand years, and you base your beliefs on this and disregard the history and experiences from the other 3980ish years?

along with physical evidence of common ancestors to Apes, not some book that people believe as the word of God.

Physical evidence is only a small part of the whole. Your idea is like saying "Everything that is round came from the same place." You are discounting thought, soul, spirit, psyche, action, design, reasoning, and everything else that is distinct.

05-09-2005, 10:06 PM

http://home.comcast.net/~joehulon/pi.jpg

...the key to proving there is a God...

Well, at least to how many time I can spin my chair around in a circle before I see God...

05-09-2005, 10:11 PM

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/profiles/26/100000426/99640046879a1654.jpg

Ain't nothing like a little ass...

Matthew

05-09-2005, 10:13 PM

Just look at bacteria, since they are so much smaller than us, the rate of evolution is way, way faster. We are already on our 5th strain of pennecillin because the bacteria that it was made to fight against have evolved, this is a known, documented scientific fact.

If it is still penecillin, how is this evolution?

Besides, I already said I am not sure scientifically if plants or bacteria have evolved into new species or not, I am saying that Man was not part of this evolution, if evolution does truly exist.

Before you go and say something isn't possible, research it, and prove why it's not, just saying "its not" only makes people lose respect for you and the group of people you represent when you are arguing your side of the issue.

That was a pretty weak man, I believe I said from my first post that I am not sure about anything else, I said specifically with humans. I can see you are not willing to keep this on the level, so I am leaving this conversation with you now. Think what you want about me and what I believe or what I said.

slizzelizzel

05-09-2005, 10:21 PM

If it is still penecillin, how is this evolution?

It's not the penecillin that has evolved, it's the bacteria.

You constantly say that you don't know if evolution is impossible, then you say that its definately impossible. Pick one and go with it, you can't have it both ways.

Matthew

05-09-2005, 10:23 PM

It's not the penecillin that has evolved, it's the bacteria.

You constantly say that you don't know if evolution is impossible, then you say that its definately impossible. Pick one and go with it, you can't have it both ways.

For the last time, Evolution of humans from another species is not possible. Is that plain enough for you? I don't know how I can be any more specific.

EDIT: The reason I said what I did about your penecillin fact, is that you have not said how penecillin has evolved. You only said how penecillin has made itself better.

Jason_Brown

05-09-2005, 10:58 PM

ID just smacks of hubris.
Us humans are so cute, that we couldn't possibly be the result of billions of years of evolution. Clearly, there were aliens or Gods, involved.

karmattack

05-09-2005, 11:43 PM

Here is the best I've had this explained, and what I feel personally allows both of these things (God and evolution) to exist.

"Look at your hand and examine it closely. Trace its familiar lines and furrows, feel the texture of the skin, the supple flesh cushioning the submerged hardness of bone. This is the hand your senses report to you, a material object composed of flesh and blood. [...]

"Holding the image of your hand in your mind's eye, imagine that you are examining it through a high-powered microscope whose lens can penetrate the finest fabrics of matter and energy. At the lowest power, you no longer see smooth flesh but a collection of individual cells loosely bound my connective tissue. Each cell is a watery bag of proteins that appear as long chains of smaller molecules held together by invisible bonds. Moving closer, you can see separate atoms of hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, and so on, which have no solidity at all -- they are vibrating, ghostly shadows revealed through the microscope as patches of light and dark.

"You have arrived at the boundary between matter and energy, for the subatomic particles making up each atom -- whirling electrons dancing around a nuclear core of protons and neutrons -- are not spots and dots of matter. They are more like traces of light left by a Fourth of July sparkler waved in the dark. At this level you see that all things you once took to be solid are just energy trails [...]"

It goes on deeper into quantum space, but I'll stop there to make this point: Everything can be broken down to that same essence...the chair you're sitting on, they keyboard you're typing with. So when my fingers touch the keys, what is it that keeps them from melding together if they are basically just bundles of energy? What is the cosmic "information" that takes that energy and makes a rock, or plastic, or my body and keeps them as separate events?

I believe that's the place where God exists.

So for me, when that information changes and allows something to be a little bit different than it was before. Maybe it's an accident, maybe it's not. Maybe it's chaos, or maybe it's harnessed.

I'm personally not going to be so boldly juvenile as to pretend I know. ;)

Matt1

05-09-2005, 11:54 PM

http://www.talkorigins.org/index.html

http://www.talkdesign.org/

http://http://www.skepdic.com/creation.html

http://www.skepdic.com/intelligentdesign.html

JamesW

05-10-2005, 12:12 AM

There is a way for everything through God, as long as it is not contradictory to what God has already said or done. You asked "Who Knows" I know. God spoke, it happened, we did not Evolve. (according to Genesis 1 and 2) These are my beliefs, you do not have to agree.

The bible is written down by man. The word of god is interpreted by man. The bible (in my opinion, and i am christian) cant be simply read as one continuous narrative from creation to the birth of jesus to the "end of days". It is a collection of stories, poetry, and ALLEGORY all inspired by god but recorded by man to the best of his (or her) intelligence and ability to understand.Evolution can be fully reconciled with both the bible, and a belief in god.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 12:25 AM

I believe that the bible is the inspired word of God. God spoke the words, people just jotted down what God said.

The main topic of Christianity of course is believing that Jesus is everything he says he is, and therefore God also must be. John chapter 1 says "In the beginnning was the word, and the word was God and the word was with God... The word became flesh and dwelt among us for a short time"

The bible is the word, and the flesh is Jesus, and they were all with God always. THis is a hard topic to grasp, but I really believe it is essential to understanding Jesus, God, and who they are.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 12:36 AM

.Evolution can be fully reconciled with both the bible, and a belief in God. Not human evolution.

"God formed man out of the dust of the earth and breathed life into him"...."God put man into a deep sleep, took a rib and formed woman and breathed into her"

EDIT: I think it is interesting how a woman has more ribs than a man.

05-10-2005, 12:40 AM

If you go back to some of the more ancient texts, God first removed Adam's tail and created woman- Lilith, who turned out to be just a bitch. She was cast out of Eden, laid with the beasts, and spawned the first demons to spite God. Later, God removed the rib closest to Adam's heart and badda-boom, badda-bing -Eve.

Just an interresting tidbit.

FanGirl

05-10-2005, 12:41 AM

It really seems like in order for you to believe that God exists and created the world that he still has to be active in it's development. What if God did create the universe, but his creation of the universe was big bang. He created something that would evolve and change without his intervention and he just observes. If he truly created free will, then he would have to have no hand in anything. Otherwise, if he is changing things than there is destiny. So technically, evolutionists and creationists cold both be right.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 12:43 AM

Not human evolution.

"God formed man out of the dust of the earth and breathed life into him"...."God put man into a deep sleep, took a rib and formed woman and breathed into her"

I am quite familiar with that passage. How do you know what means God used to form man out of the dust of the earth? There are many many processes to perform many many actions. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps evolution is but the process god used to create man from the dust of the earth? Literal translation is a very dangerous thing to do, especially on this board where im sure people can quote you many passages from the bible that contradict what you think you believe in. I'm not attacking you, im just putting forth MY point of view.

Matt1

05-10-2005, 12:49 AM

JamesW

05-10-2005, 12:55 AM

What you're talking about is basically Deism, and most Creationists wouldn't cotton to it.

My position echoes Threadkiller's. Believe what you want, just don't try to make up scientific reasons for it. If you want faith to be your guide, then by all means go ahead. But don't dress up faith with pseudo-scientific lingo, and don't try to redefine the word science as some of the legislators involved with the current Kansas dispute have.

I don't see how I disagree with you. I believe in science, I believe in evolution, I also believe that the legislators you speak of in kansas have a disingenuous motive. But that doesnt change my belief in god.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 01:02 AM

I am quite familiar with that passage. How do you know what means God used to form man out of the dust of the earth? There are many many processes to perform many many actions. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps evolution is but the process god used to create man from the dust of the earth? Literal translation is a very dangerous thing to do, especially on this board where im sure people can quote you many passages from the bible that contradict what you think you believe in. I'm not attacking you, im just putting forth MY point of view.

I appreciate what you are saying of course! And I am aware that people take passages out of the bible that appear as contradictions.

Literal translation IS dangerous, IF it is taken out of context. Peoples interpretations can vary over a given passage, but then you weigh it along with the rest of the bible.

To me, since the bible is the word of God, then the bible is correct in every way. If what I believe or think disagrees with the bible, or if ymy translation of a passage disagrees with another portion of the bible, then I am wrong.

As far as "formed from the dust of the earth" (some translations say clay) this means from the Earth. It does not say "God took a rib from a monkey and formed man" nor "God made man from the genes of the monkey"..

Another passage that I like to throw out there in these debates, is "God created Man in HIS OWN IMAGE" He created all the other plants and animals first, sure, but God made a definate distinction when describing humankind.

Matt1

05-10-2005, 01:32 AM

But that doesnt change my belief in god.
Was there any part of that where I tried to dissuade you or anyone else from their beliefs? As I said, people can believe what they want.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 01:39 AM

If you want faith to be your guide, then by all means go ahead. But don't dress up faith with pseudo-scientific lingo, and don't try to redefine the word science as some of the legislators involved with the current Kansas dispute have.

Perhaps I am misinterpreting you, but it seems as though you are implying that my belief in god somehow means that I have to change or alter science to make it agree with my religion, which is not true. I have never felt that my faith was compromised or threatened by an scientific theory.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 01:41 AM

Was there any part of that where I tried to dissuade you or anyone else from their beliefs? As I said, people can believe what they want.

Agreed- believe whatever you want. Just because I think that anyone who has strong religious beliefs suffers froma mild form of dementia (and Arthur C. Clarke agrees with me), that doesn't mean that those same people don't feel sorry for me and won't laugh at me from their spot in Heaven.

You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want- ain't America great?!

PLEASE DON'T CONSTRUE MY WORDS AS A PERSONAL ATTACK! THEY ARE JUST MY BELIEFS!

JamesW

05-10-2005, 01:48 AM

Agreed- believe whatever you want. Just because I think that anyone who has strong religious beliefs suffers froma mild form of dementia (and Arthur C. Clarke agrees with me), that doesn't mean that those same people don't feel sorry for me and won't laugh at me from their spot in Heaven.

You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want- ain't America great?!

PLEASE DON'T CONSTRUE MY WORDS AS A PERSONAL ATTACK! THEY ARE JUST MY BELIEFS!

I don't take your words as a personal attack, but I find what you said and what friends of mine (who are atheist) say to be somewhat condescending. I feel like I am being talked down to in some respects, maybe some atheists act this way because many christians also are condescending, saying things like "I feel sorry for you" and "may god have mercy on your soul", but I am NOT that way and I dont really appreciate that sort of attitude. For a moment think about what you said and tell me if you would not be insulted if it were reversed (which quite probably has happened).
Its almost like you are saying "Believe whatever you like, but know that you are a complete moron for believing it" Once again, I am NOT taking your words as personal attack, but consider how they might come off to some people.

Matt1

05-10-2005, 01:53 AM

James, I have absolutely no problem with religious or spiritual people believing in science. In fact, I'm all for it. So long as those people realize that science doesn't deal with religious issues. Issues like that exist outside science's spectrum of concern, which is the natural universe.

slizzelizzel

05-10-2005, 01:53 AM

"Believe whatever you like, but know that you are a complete moron for believing it"

Change that to "but I think that you are a complete moron...", and you have my thoughts exaclty.

I can assume that you think I'm a moron for not believing in God, so why can't I think religious people are morons for believing in god?

*Note*: I use the word "I" and "you" in a general sense, no personal attacks are intended, I just want to hear why it's okay for the religious to question my disbelief but it's not okay for me to question people who do believe.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 01:53 AM

I don't take your words as a personal attack, but I find what you said and what friends of mine (who are atheist) say to be somewhat condescending. I feel like I am being talked down to in some respects, maybe some atheists act this way because many christians also are condescending, saying things like "I feel sorry for you" and "may god have mercy on your soul", but I am NOT that way and I dont really appreciate that sort of attitude. For a moment think about what you said and tell me if you would not be insulted if it were reversed (which it is quite probably that it has been switched, i dont know).
Its almost like you are saying "Believe whatever you like, but know that you are a complete moron for believing it" Once again, I am NOT taking your words as personal attack, but consider how they might come off to some people.

I did consider that, and you are right- when I tell Christians that I'm an atheist it usually elicits a response like "that's too bad" or "I feel sorry for you" or "I'll pray for you". Condescension, I think, is in the eye of the beholder. That's why I specifically posted that these were MY beliefs, and it was also meant kind of tongue-in-cheek.

I am sorry If I offended the Christians on the board, but there has been an awful lot of bible-thumping in this thread. I'm just trying to balance things out. It seems that Christians are always determined to change people's point of view to be the same as their own- personally, I'm satisfied to live and let live. Even if Christians are dead wrong. ;)

DISCLAIMER: THE WINKY INDICATES THAT I WAS KIDDING ABOUT THE LAST SENTENCE, PEOPLE.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 01:55 AM

Change that to "but I think that you are a complete moron...", and you have my thoughts exaclty.

I can assume that you think I'm a moron for not believing in God, so why can't I think religious people are morons for believing in god?

*Note*: I use the word "I" and "you" in a general sense, no personal attacks are intended, I just want to hear why it's okay for the religious to question my disbelief but it's not okay for me to question people who do believe.

Now this is where you're wrong, I simply refuse to judge you at all based on that belief. I have friends who are atheists and they are of course very logical, smart people who I know not to be morons.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 01:57 AM

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 01:58 AM

I think we can get along just fine, moron. :)

Word. Now THAT'S how you debate! :D

No name calling, no meanness, just strong opinions from adults that can agree to disagree. James, my man, welcome to the 'Shoot. You are the rarest of rare, a noob that knows what is what. Welcome again, and please stick around- we need some sanity here.

Matt1

05-10-2005, 02:05 AM

I don't know if he technically qualifies as a noob. He's been around awhile, he just rarely posts. You are correct though, when he does he always seems like an intelligent and decent bloke.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 02:06 AM

Welcome again, and please stick around- we need some sanity here.

I'm sorry, did I imply that I was sane?

Matthew

05-10-2005, 02:30 AM

I did consider that, and you are right- when I tell Christians that I'm an atheist it usually elicits a response like "that's too bad" or "I feel sorry for you" or "I'll pray for you". Condescension, I think, is in the eye of the beholder. That's why I specifically posted that these were MY beliefs, and it was also meant kind of tongue-in-cheek.

I am sorry If I offended the Christians on the board, but there has been an awful lot of bible-thumping in this thread. I'm just trying to balance things out. It seems that Christians are always determined to change people's point of view to be the same as their own- personally, I'm satisfied to live and let live. Even if Christians are dead wrong. ;)

DISCLAIMER: THE WINKY INDICATES THAT I WAS KIDDING ABOUT THE LAST SENTENCE, PEOPLE.

YOU showed us your winky???, I was not ready for THAT one...

I don't believe I have ever been offended from you saying you were an athiest, nor did I talk condescending to you for being one. I know that a lot of our views will vary because of that however. That being said, if 2 Christians want to debate scripture, or if a Christian wants to point out why they believe something based on the bible, is this bible thumping in your opinion?

I never forced any of what I believe in this thread on you or anyone else for that matter.

Jason_Brown

05-10-2005, 06:41 AM

Matthew, what's with all the Bible/Jesus talk? I thought you said you were Jewish?

Threadkiller

05-10-2005, 11:56 AM

...I'm an atheist...Just for the record, I'm gonna pray for you now and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Hah! :rolleyes: (note that I am kidding)

Seriously though, a fun fictional book about atheism is Penn Gillette's "Sock" which deals with the subject in an entertaining, thoughtful and critical way (Penn is an atheist). If you want to read something from the other side but equally thoughtful you could try "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 12:01 PM

That being said, if 2 Christians want to debate scripture, or if a Christian wants to point out why they believe something based on the bible, is this bible thumping in your opinion?

No, but saying that the Bilbe is literal truth and that anyone disagrees with what is in it is wrong (including yourself, as you said above), and that the Bible is the literal word of God- yeah, I'd categorize that as Bible-thumping.

No big deal, though- thump away! I was a Catholic for 16 years, an altar boy for 4 of those- I'm used to it.

Funny- I would NEVER discuss religion with someone in person, yet within the relative anonymity of a message board I feel comfortable (well at least less UNcomfortable) doing so...damn, we 'Shooters should write a book about online communities!

*pats self on back*

What a great idea I just had!

Threadkiller

05-10-2005, 12:12 PM

What a great idea I just had!Actually, if I end up going to grad school I was hoping to do just that with my thesis. I just got my BS in anthropology so if I stick to that subject I want to make internet/web culture my specialty (fingers crossed).

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 12:15 PM

Actually, if I end up going to grad school I was hoping to do just that with my thesis. I just got my BS in anthropology so if I stick to that subject I want to make internet/web culture my specialty (fingers crossed).

Cool, feel free to use me as a test subject! Oh, and if you do your graduate work online with University of Phoenix- no thesis! (At least for the Education department....)

bwdial

05-10-2005, 12:18 PM

***Putting the thread back on the rails by making fun of sex with animals***

Why be glad you're not from Georgia? You're not a mule.

***rimshot***

(Sorry if someone else posted this comedic gem, but I wasn't about to read five pages of creationism vs. evolution. Though, I must say that Fangirl's idea is the best.)

RobinHoodDaffy

05-10-2005, 12:29 PM

I know I am a little late weighing in on this, but my computer is in it's death rattles and I am trying to get the last shakes out of it. If I dissappear, that is why. I will return when my computer, or a new computer (seems to be the better option, just gotta wait for the money to come) gets better.

Now on to what I was gonna say, just curious, has any one here seen Inherit the Wind ?
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005PJ6V.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

There have been many versions, but this one is my favorite, due to Spencer Tracy and Gene Kelly (in a non musical, non dancing role) heck, it even has one of the Derwood's from "Bewitched".

The film is based on a play, which is based on the Scopes monkey trial. It brings a courtroom case about teaching every thing this thread is about. I don't know that the more by the book Christians (and that is a fine way to be this is not a slam at you) will be satisfied by the result, but for a more "sleep-in sunday morning" Christian there is some thought provoking stuff to be said. I love this play and always try to go see it if there is a production around.

Dave

05-10-2005, 12:39 PM

Yeah, thats a great play, we had to read it/watch the movie in highschool. I remember liking it bunches.

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 03:54 PM

Wow, good thing that I posted a thread about beastiality.

So much to disagree and agree with, but rather, I will just quickly spill how/what I believe.

I am a Christian. I am a Physicist. I believe in the Theory of Evolution just as I believe in the Theory of Relativity the Theory of Quantum Mechanics...

There isn't a contradiction between my religious beliefs and my scientific beliefs. Like James said, the Bible is allegory. It needed to appeal to people millenia ago. They didn't have the scientific knowledge to understand a God that started the Big Bang in motion. They were on a need to know basis. They needed to know that God created them not the universe.

The two things that bother me:

Darwin did not renunciate evolution on his deathbed!!! Just a lie that anti-evolution people like to spread to make their case more believable.

If the Bible is the inspired word of God, then what are the Dead Sea Scroll Gospels that didn't make the cut? God's first draft? Man chose what went into the Bible, and man was the editor of the Bible. The basic idea behind the Bible: Love God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind, Love your neighbor as yourself, is really, really good stuff. The rest has been modified to fit causes.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 04:13 PM

That's the Scientology belief, not necessarily the Christian one.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 04:16 PM

Matthew, what's with all the Bible/Jesus talk? I thought you said you were Jewish?

I am Jewish, but I also believe that Jesus is the messiah. I follow (or try to rather)Jewish customs, go to the synagogue, etc.etc.etc.

There are a lot of Jews that now believe this.

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 04:18 PM

That's the Scientology belief, not necessarily the Christian one.What is?....

05-10-2005, 04:27 PM

Apparently, mule lovers aren't just a Georgia thing...

http://www.muledays.org/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/T-SHIRT2004.jpg

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 04:29 PM

They'll let you get away with anything in California.
[whispering]
I hear they even want to let them ho-mos get married.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 04:37 PM

I hear they even want to let them ho-mos get married.

Maybe this is a missouri thing. Did you ever notice that hicks whisper the word homosexual like this: "hom-uh-sekshul", and they refuse to use gay as a term for homosexuals "Gay used to mean sumthin' good, like on the flintstones"

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 04:48 PM

I put the hyphen in homo to try to hick it up a little bit.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 04:49 PM

I put the hyphen in homo to try to hick it up a little bit.

Oh believe me, I noticed. :)

Matthew

05-10-2005, 04:55 PM

@JJ.

To be a Christian there is only 1 true standard, that Jesus was the son of God, and that he is the only way to get to God. We also know that Jesus is blameless before God, and perfect and without fault. Therefore everything Jesus said and did he did as an example to us. The bible are the words of God, and Jesus studied them daily, knowing this to be true.

Throughout the bible, ..Paul said "Things will come and go , but the word of God lives forever!

John said "IN the beginning was the word"

David said "The words of God are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times"

God said to Isaiah
"So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it"

Yes there "human" aspects to the bible, some of the Psalms are David crying out to God "Why have you forsaken me, Why must I endure", but that does not make them any less true or Divinly inspired.

Since the bible is God's Words to us, they are complete and holy, and not outdated. Some of the history things seem boring, but the bible IMO is to be taken as a whole. (For example, you still don't attack with an Eye for an Eye, because Jesus said 'Turn the other Cheek') But that is because Jesus is now our gateway, our sacrifice, and the messiah.

To answer your question why SOME of the dead sea scrolls did not make it into the final canon, it did not meet the criteria.

1. Written by an Apostle or a person who knew an apostle
2. Did not go against anything taught in the Torah
3. Had at least 1 reference to the Torah.

The scientology belief is that "The bible was a good tool, but it is not necessarily true in every way" then include some of the theories and how they can still be true. You can twist anything to make it seem right. OH, and Darwin did not reject the theory on his deathbed.

@ efexeye,
Since you don't believe there is a God, therefore you don't believe the bible is true. If you don't believe something is true, then it would have no meaning to you whatsoever whether or not others do. I do believe it is true, and I show why. Perhaps I should have said "My view is" before each time I say this, but that should be a given. Since it is my view and my belief, trying to tell me it isn't true or getting after me because I believe it and answer questions when asked will get no where.

I am not going to say "it is my opinion" when to me it is truth, and is not an opinion. I am sorry if this makes you or anyone else mad, but if something is true, how can it possibly be an opinion? (Hope I am making sence here, not trying to get you mad at all.)

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 05:00 PM

but if something is true, how can it possibly be an opinion?

It's true....in your opinion.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:02 PM

Just to clarify, I do not take all of the bible 100% literal, but you have to weigh certain things in context. (For example, Jesus' teachings about cutting off a hand or poking an eye out) Jesus did not literally mean for you to pluck out your eye, but rather "It would be better IF" giving an example. The LITERAL meaning of this is "Wow, Jesus is saying that I need to cut off or pluck out things in my life that lead me away from Him."

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:03 PM

It's true....in your opinion.

Not following this, "In my opinion the sun is a star?" How is this an opinion if it is true?

Jason_Brown

05-10-2005, 05:05 PM

I am Jewish, but I also believe that Jesus is the messiah. I follow (or try to rather)Jewish customs, go to the synagogue, etc.etc.etc.

There are a lot of Jews that now believe this.

Yes. They're called evangelical Christians.

(Dammit, I've already broken my pledge not to rag on Matthew.)
;)

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 05:07 PM

I know next to nothing about Scientology...never saw a reason, so these are my ideas, what I believe about the Bible.

How do we have any idea who wrote a Dead Sea Scroll?

Edit: As far as I've learned, none of the Gospels were written by apostle. Unless the apostles lived to be 80-100 years old, they were dead prior to when they were written.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 05:09 PM

Not following this, "In my opinion the sun is a star?" How is this an opinion if it is true?

I can prove to you that the sun is a star. You, however, cannot prove to me that the bible is the literal word of God. YOU may believe it, but that belief requires a leap of faith that I haven't made.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:12 PM

Fair enough, you base your "truth" on science, I base mine on scripture. You know yours is right, I know mine is right. This will cause dissension among us like I said earlier, but it is not my 'opinion' the bible is true, it is true to me.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 05:20 PM

but it is not my 'opinion' the bible is true, it is true to me.

So, it is your opinion, then, that the Bible is true? You're saying two opposite things with one statement...

Fair enough, you base your "truth" on science, I base mine on scripture. You know yours is right, I know mine is right. This will cause dissension among us like I said earlier, but it is not my 'opinion' the bible is true, it is true to me.

So, in your opinion, is the Sun is a star?

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 05:21 PM

Not to split hairs, but I thought that faith and belief went together. Having faith in something means that you believe in it. You don't know it to be true, but you believe that it to be.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:22 PM

So, do you believe that the Sun is a star?
Yes, but I would not say "It is my opinion the sun is a star" when I know fully well it is.

karmattack

05-10-2005, 05:22 PM

Dave

05-10-2005, 05:26 PM

*cracks open door, peeks in, sees way conversation is still going, slowly shuts door.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:28 PM

Not to split hairs, but I thought that faith and belief went together. Having faith in something means that you believe in it. You don't know it to be true, but you believe that it to be.

What is the definition of faith? "now Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". Faith is substance, is real, and faith is also hope, but not human hope. Faith is based on the Word Of God, since "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

Faith is based solely on your knowledge of the Word of God. If your faith is weak, strengthen it by reading, hearing, and speaking scripture.

If you have little knowledge about God, then you have little faith IN God, and therefore will not trust God.

You can believe that "Jesus was the son of God" and still have very little faith in God.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 05:29 PM

Isn't the main point of Christianity the "faith," as in to believe in something that can't be proven? Science works off of what can be proven. I'm not saying that Christianity has shortcomings in that arena, but that science and faith aren't interchangable. It seems to me that both should be able to coexist comfortably in the way JamesW and JJ are saying.

I think that is absolutely the main point- that leap of faith, and not just of Chrisitianity, but really, of any religion.

Technically, nothing can be "proven"- we can only say that certain things are true with a reasonable degree of certainty. However, one of the fundamentals of existence are that there are no absolutes.

Very strictly speaking, I CAN'T prove that the sun is a star- until I can go there and scoop some of it up- "star" is simply what we have chosen as a name for the concept of a star.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 05:30 PM

*cracks open door, peeks in, sees way conversation is still going, slowly shuts door.

Come on, what are you afraid of? :D

jjcourtright

05-10-2005, 05:30 PM

I don't want to be a dick, but it seems like you're dancing. Having faith in God means that you believe in God. Sure there are varying degrees of faith, but faith and belief are the same thing.

Mighty Wingman

05-10-2005, 05:35 PM

What did the violated mule say to Neal Horsley ?

http://www.80s.com/saveferris/images/class/teacher1.jpg
Anyone ?... Anyone ?

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:36 PM

Isn't the main point of Christianity the "faith," as in to believe in something that can't be proven?

I respectfully disagree, just because it can't be proven to some people, does not mean it has not been proven to me. If you ask God to prove himself, he will.

Science works off of what can be proven.

Again respectfully disagree in some part. Just like some Christians take things out of context and prove why they do or say or think is accurate, some Scientists take things out of context to prove what they do or say or think is accurate.

Both at times are basing their proofs, assumtions, theorums on things they do not entirely understand, but they grasp it as truth. Human nature is flawed, therefore some scientists and some christians are also flawed. I do think Science and Christians can co-exist together, but once again, to me if Science and the Bible conflict, Science is wrong.

05-10-2005, 05:37 PM

Gives new meaning to "Get off my ass"

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:38 PM

I don't want to be a dick, but it seems like you're dancing. Having faith in God means that you believe in God. Sure there are varying degrees of faith, but faith and belief are the same thing.

Your not being a dick at all! I don't feel like I am dancing at all, just wanting to show the difference between faith and belief.

Belief is a true or false. Either you believe in something or you don't. Faith in something can be increased, or decreased.

karmattack

05-10-2005, 05:40 PM

Technically, nothing can be "proven"- we can only say that certain things are true with a reasonable degree of certainty. However, one of the fundamentals of existence are that there are no absolutes. Ah yes. I should have been a little more mindful and careful with my words.

Very strictly speaking, I CAN'T prove that the sun is a star- until I can go there and scoop some of it up- "star" is simply what we have chosen as a name for the concept of a star. I was going to make a joke about this. Imagine an alien race trying to contact earth through the MPS message boards. They say they have some questions about Gakton5-96.

"Well, what is that?"

"It's the large ball of gas and fire that your planet orbits."

"Oh, you mean the sun?"

"Gakton5-96"

...hell breaks loose.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:43 PM

Hah hah! That's funny!

JamesW

05-10-2005, 05:44 PM

To me it seems that a belief that there is no god is just as unscientific as belief that there is god. There is no hard evidence either way. There are people who believe and people who dont believe. As there is no evidence to back up either claim, why on earth are we debating the subject? There is the realm of faith, and the realm of quantitative analysis and pure facts that are almost indisputable (science). I keep them separate. How do I rationalize things like the ressurection or other instances where i believe god entered this earth? They are miracles, they dont apply to the rules of science, I dont need science to prove them for me, I just believe. Those who dont believe these things to have happened need not worry either, because if you dont believe it happened, then I suppose it doesnt enter the realm science anyway, so who cares?

Robbo_the_Hood

05-10-2005, 05:45 PM

Here's my favorite creation story that I found in a book:

When Uncle Remus, awoke for the very first time he was pleased to find everything in the universe had already been created for him. There was a note attached to the Earth that said 'everything is set, all you need to make are the animals and you can fool around with the topography if you want, mountain ranges. etc, but don't make a big hole through the middle because it will be really hard to fix.

RobinHoodDaffy

05-10-2005, 05:51 PM

Not following this, "In my opinion the sun is a star?" How is this an opinion if it is true?

Actually, the sun as a star is techically a theory. We have not been able to go to it and test it, we have theories as to what is is made of and what it does, but not actual proof, that it is indeed a star like so many other stars in the universe. It is a theory, like evolution is a theory. Take that as you may.

So, what about those dinosaurs?

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:52 PM

So, it is your opinion, then, that the Bible is true? You're saying two opposite things with one statement...

Nope, I am saying there is a difference between opinion and truth.

It is my opinion that oranges suck. It is truth that they grow on trees.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 05:55 PM

So, what about those dinosaurs?

Dinosaurs as well as Dragons are documented in the bible.

My small examples are just that, examples. Metaphors if you will.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 05:58 PM

Nope, I am saying there is a difference between opinion and truth.

It is my opinion that oranges suck. It is truth that they grow on trees.

With this statement, you are comparing apples and oranges (please forgive that pun).

If you were saying "It is my opinion that oranges suck. It is the truth that oranges suck", then you would be comparing the same thing, and it is not a fact that oranges suck. It is a matter of opinion.

It you say "It is my opinion that the Bible is the Word of God. It is the truth that the Bible is the Word of God", that would be a mistake- you're talking about something that, to someone who does not believe, can NOT be proven.

Comparing your opinion of the flavor of oranges and the provable fact that they grow on trees, you are not, in fact, comparing the same thing.

So again, I believe that YOU believe that the Bible is literal fact. However, I haven't made the leap of faith required to hold that opinion, so to me, it is not a fact that the Bible is literal fact.

However, there is no leap of faith involved in believing that oranges grow on trees. It is an observable fact.

Robbo_the_Hood

05-10-2005, 06:01 PM

Must be a tough crowd when no one gets a chuckle out of Uncle Remus. :(

RobinHoodDaffy

05-10-2005, 06:07 PM

Must be a tough crowd when no one gets a chuckle out of Uncle Remus. :(

They are all too busy arguing over Uncle Rhesus. :)

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:09 PM

It you say "It is my opinion that the Bible is the Word of God. It is the truth that the Bible is the Word of God", that would be a mistake- you're talking about something that, to someone who does not believe, can NOT be proven.

I understand what you are saying, but I am trying to explain why I can not say "it is my opinion the bible is the Word of GOd and is trurth" because it is not my opinion, it is my truth.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 06:09 PM

I understand what you are saying, but I am trying to explain why I can not say "it is my opinion the bible is the Word of GOd and is trurth" because it is not my opinion, it is my truth.

Ah, there's the key. It is YOUR truth. That oranges grow on trees is A truth. There's the difference I was trying to explain. I think you got my point.

Boy, I sure am glad I derailed this thread- you spin me right 'round baby 'right round, like a record baby, right 'round baby right 'round... :D

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:14 PM

Yes, it is MY truth, and therefore I will state it as so if challenged, or possibly bring it up in a debate.

I will not say "It is my opinion" because it is not. This will cause some people to balk and possibly get defensive because "I am pushing my views on others" but if you are certain in your beliefs, you can state nothing other.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:15 PM

Boy, I sure am glad I derailed this thread- you spin me right 'round baby 'right round, like a record baby, right 'round baby right 'round... :D

How did you derail this thread? By arguing the difference between opinion and truth with me?

Nice job at editing!

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 06:17 PM

How did you derail this thread? By arguing the difference between opinion and truth with me?

Well, the thread was originally about hot Donkey sex- by mentioning the Kansas Creationism vs. Intelligent Design debate, I think I derailed it pretty handily...

Nice job at editing!

I don't get to edit my posts, now? :confused:

Dave

05-10-2005, 06:19 PM

Must be a tough crowd when no one gets a chuckle out of Uncle Remus. :(

Totally off topic, but i've got a DVD copy of Song of the South that was burned from a Japanese Laser Disk, and i think it's a shame that this film has been buried like it has been. It was a different world when it was shot but the story has a great moral, and lets face it, fantastic songs.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:20 PM

I don't get to edit my posts, now? :confused:

Didn't mean it that way, I meant that you edited as I was replying.... Not trying to antagonize.

Jason_Brown

05-10-2005, 06:28 PM

Totally off topic, but i've got a DVD copy of Song of the South that was burned from a Japanese Laser Disk, and i think it's a shame that this film has been buried like it has been. It was a different world when it was shot but the story has a great moral, and lets face it, fantastic songs.

Fall 2006. (http://www.jimhillmedia.com/mb/articles/showarticle.php?ID=1313)

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 06:32 PM

Didn't mean it that way, I meant that you edited as I was replying.... Not trying to antagonize.

Yeah, I'm a pretty fast typist. I'm sure one day soon, it will result in Super Terrific Carpal Tunnel Syndrome...

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:41 PM

Edit: As far as I've learned, none of the Gospels were written by apostle. Unless the apostles lived to be 80-100 years old, they were dead prior to when they were written.

Sorry I missed this one. Gospels: Matthew, Mark Luke and John.

Matthew was a tax collector, and Jesus said directly to him "stop it and come with me" John was the one who Jesus said "Take care of my mother."

Mark was written by John Mark, the man who traveled with Paul. Luke was a well knows scribe and historian who reported to Theophalas.

Then the letters were written by Paul, a Jew who was converted to Christianity. Hebrews is unknown who wrote it, then of course later on there are James, I and 2 PEter (2 of the 12 disciples) Jude (Jesus' 1/2 brother.)

Most of the New Testament scrolls were written by AD 50-AD 60. Say Matthew was 19 or 20 when Jesus said "come to me" that makes him 40-50.

EDIT: Jesus was 30ish when he started his ministry.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:46 PM

How do we have any idea who wrote a Dead Sea Scroll?

Some of them were signed, Some of them illuded to who it was, some of them we know just by the things they said, and how it fit in with the other scripture the only one that is still somewhat up in the air is "Hebrews", some say Silus, some say John Mark, some say Barnabas.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 06:48 PM

Yes. They're called evangelical Christians.

(Dammit, I've already broken my pledge not to rag on Matthew.)
;)

FUNNY!

Not quite though, they are called "Messianic Jews"

Denyse

05-10-2005, 07:10 PM

I have a question. It is not meant to be sarcastic or a flame in any way...it's a real, honest sincere question.

Isn't that somewhat of a contradiction? Jews for Jesus, Messianic Jews...Whatever the title. Isn't believing in Judaism and believing in Jesus contraindicated? All the Jews I've known (and I've disscussed this at length) have said that it's ridiculous to use those titles, since you can't be a true Jew and believe that Jesus was the son of God at the same time. They tell me (a lapsed Catholic) that it goes against all the tenents of the Jewish faith. How, when asked, do you justify it?

JamesW

05-10-2005, 07:15 PM

From what I know the messiah is a hebrew prophecy. All of the original christians were hebrews, the apostles in fact did not even know whether or not the message was to be spread to gentiles or kept among the jews.

Denyse

05-10-2005, 07:18 PM

OK, I get that...But don't Jews believe that the Messiah is still to come? That, in fact Jesus was NOT the Messiah but, at most, a prophet of some sort??

Matt1

05-10-2005, 07:23 PM

To me it seems that a belief that there is no god is just as unscientific as belief that there is god. There is no hard evidence either way.
Yes, there isn't any evidence either way. But as a general rule, scientists just don't believe unproven claims.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 07:23 PM

JamesW

05-10-2005, 07:27 PM

Yes, there isn't any evidence either way. But as a general rule, scientists just don't believe unproven claims.

I see what you mean, but do you look at atheism as a belief that there is no god, or a skeptisism about the existence of god, if its a belief then In my opinion it is just as subject to scrutiny according to science as is belief IN god. Ok maybe I'm fooling myself, but I'm using that point to illustrate once again that I really think you can be scientific and Christian as much as scientific and atheist.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 07:29 PM

OK, I get that...But don't Jews believe that the Messiah is still to come? That, in fact Jesus was NOT the Messiah but, at most, a prophet of some sort??

Well, no. There are 2 'branches' (for lack of a better word) of Jews. Those that believe that Jesus is the son of God and the messiah, and those that don't. The messiah had to fill certain qualifications as spoke about in the old testament. Some Jews say (for various reasons) that Jesus did not fulfill these things. Without going into a long explaination of all that entailed, Jesus in fact fulfilled all the prophecies, and is the true messiah. If you want to learn more about this, Here is some good reading. (http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/jesus/proofessay)

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 07:30 PM

I see what you mean, but do you look at atheism as a belief that there is no god, or a skeptisism about the existence of god, if its a belief then In my opinion it is just as subject to scrutiny according to science as is belief IN god. Ok maybe I'm fooling myself, but I'm using that point to illustrate once again that I really think you can be scientific and Christian as much as scientific and atheist.

I must admit I have a hard time understanding how someone who is, say, a hardcore biologist, reconciles their belief in God with their faith in science as a means of understanding the world- usually, scientists like to see things that are observable and conduct experiments that are repeatable...jj, any insight here?

Matthew

05-10-2005, 07:36 PM

I am not jewish, so maybe Matthew knows more about this, but what I would assume is that the early christian church were all just Jewish people who believed that Jesus was the messiah, the other Jewish people were just....Jewish and I suppose thats where the Jewish people of today come from. I think that Jews for Jesus, etc. are people of Jewish (as a race of people) decent, who follow Jewish (as a religion) cutoms and holidays, but also believe in Christ. Matthew?
That is correct for the most part!

Luke for example was a gentile who believed in Jesus. Paul was a Jew, and he taught all over Asia about how Jesus fulfilled the prophecies.

Yes, the Messianic Jews still follow the traditions, the feasts, etc. even the order of worship, but including Jesus into their tradition. For example, Passover... There are a lot of things in passover that point to Jesus, the orthodox Jews think this way in reference to Messiah, and the messianic Jews think that way in reference to Jesus.

I know this sounds a little harsh, but most theologians agree God purposefully had the Jews reject Jesus so the gentiles to be grafted in to salvation. In the old testament, if a gentile wanted to be a member of God's kingdom, he (or she) had to go through a passage process, which took some time. (3 years if memory serves me, not 100% sure on that though) but with Jesus, gentiles can grasp that salvation, since Jesus bore the weight of sin for all.

JamesW

05-10-2005, 07:37 PM

Matt1

05-10-2005, 07:39 PM

Well, my atheism has degrees to it. I reject Earthly religions and the God(s) they put forth because they don't make any kind of logical sense to me, and various other, potentially inflamatory, reasons I don't want to get in to. As for a higher being not mentioned by the world's religions, I simply disbelieve because of the lack of evidence.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 07:47 PM

For me,i guess what it boils down to is this: No matter how much you explain with science- no matter how much you discover, no mater how much you break it down, I think there is still room for God behind it all.

I agree, and go a step further. No matter how much you think you know, you soon realize there is so much more!

I think alot of people say "I can not believe in a God I can't explain"
To me that is the point, "Man's wisdom is foolishness to God". No matter how smart we are, God is way way beyond that.

FanGirl

05-10-2005, 07:52 PM

"Lord, save me from your followers."

Question - How do you get to choose what you take litterally and what you don't? I mean besides what has scientifically been proven. (i.e. the sky is not blue because there is water on the other side.) It seems like you pick and choose whichever passages you want. It seems like an all or nothing thing to me. Either the book is to be taken litterally or it's not.

I heard a great interpretation of Adam and Eve. It wasn't that they were the first humans on the planet, but the first to believe in the now Judeo-Christian God. I also heard that Jesus multipled the fish and bread by getting everyone to share.

Robbo_the_Hood

05-10-2005, 07:57 PM

I also heard that Jesus multipled the fish and bread by getting everyone to share.Hold on there, Missy. That's Commie talk. You some subersive liberal college professor or something?

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 08:01 PM

I also heard that Jesus multipled the fish and bread by getting everyone to share.

Allegory is a form of extended metaphor, in which objects, persons, and actions in a narrative, are equated with the meanings that lie outside the narrative itself. The underlying meaning has moral, social, religious, or political significance, and characters are often personifications of abstract ideas as charity, greed, or envy.

Thus an allegory is a story with two meanings, a literal meaning and a symbolic meaning.

Not my definition, I Googled it.

:)

Matthew

05-10-2005, 08:09 PM

Question - How do you get to choose what you take litterally and what you don't? I mean besides what has scientifically been proven. (i.e. the sky is not blue because there is water on the other side.) It seems like you pick and choose whichever passages you want. It seems like an all or nothing thing to me. Either the book is to be taken litterally or it's not.

Not sure what you mean, I think I was quite clear that some people go to the extremes with taking things too literal, because they take it out of context.

Others do not take it literal enough. Some of the bible is apocolytpic writing (when ever the jews had a prophecy, they wrote this way) and of course is not to be taken for what it seems at first glance. BUT if you understand the apocolyptic writing, you can then fairly discern what was meant literally. This is what I meant when I say "literal, but in context"

I heard a great interpretation of Adam and Eve. It wasn't that they were the first humans on the planet, but the first to believe in the now Judeo-Christian God.

Some people believe this, but even if it is so, in the flood the only people left on the earth were Noah, His wife, their 3 sons and their wives. Which are all decendants of Adam.

I also heard that Jesus multipled the fish and bread by getting everyone to share.
Of course everyone shared, because after Jesus had 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish, there was so much food that even after everyone ate their fill, there was lot's of leftovers!

Matthew

05-10-2005, 08:10 PM

Thus an allegory is a story with two meanings, a literal meaning and a symbolic meaning.

This is correct, except biblically you change symbolic to spiritual. I believe this to be true, but once again, the literal AND the spiritual meaning have to be in context.

Efexeye

05-10-2005, 08:12 PM

This is correct, except biblically you change symbolic to spiritual. I believe this to be true, but once again, the literal AND the spiritual meaning have to be in context.

I actually posted that to make the point that the biblical story of the Loaves and Fishes is not literally what happened, but an allegorical story, IMO.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 08:14 PM

I actually posted that to make the point that the biblical story of the Loaves and Fishes is not literally what happened, but an allegorical story, IMO.
Yes, the literal is Jesus multiplied the loaves and fishes for everyone. The spiritual is even if at first glance we think we are without, and have nothing to share, through God we have an abundance, more than enough to not only share, but have leftovers.

Denyse

05-10-2005, 08:16 PM

more than enough to not only share, but have leftovers.

Did they have take-out boxes for those???;)

Gotherella

05-10-2005, 08:17 PM

*deep breath*

For all of recorded human existence (and most likely before any records), people have sought to explain the world around them through myths and religions. All societies have creation stories and theories about what happens in the "next life." My feeling is that as science explains some of these things in "real" terms, we must adjust and update the old myths and theories based on new information. There aren't many people left who believe that slaves should be buried with their masters so they can accompany them to the next life or that Odin will greet them in Valhalla.

Humans are hard-wired to make meaning of the things we experience in this world. It is very difficult for us to grasp concepts like infinite complexity. I see the concept of a higher being as a way to explain the things we don't yet understand and to answer the unanswerables: Where did we come from? Why are we here? What happens after we die?

Personally, I enjoy the search and my process of attempting to make meaning from what I experience. I want to know as much as I can from science and from all religions and teachings. I'm okay with "I don't know, and I will probably never know." And I want to do the best I can for others while I'm here.

My problem with some people's religious fervor is their instistence that there is one truth, and those who believe it are right, and those who don't are wrong and unworthy of respect. I'm sick of my kids being told by other kids at school that they "Have to believe in God," and being taunted, ostracized, and even physically assaulted. No matter how you slice it, that's just wrong.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 08:21 PM

My problem with some people's religious fervor is their instistence that there is one truth, and those who believe it are right, and those who don't are wrong and unworthy of respect. I'm sick of my kids being told by other kids at school that they "Have to believe in God," and being taunted, ostracized, and even physically assaulted. No matter how you slice it, that's just wrong.

True, that is wrong. That is not how Jesus walked.

To blame God (not saying you are, but saying in general) for human reactions or actions is wrong also. IF you are going to believe in something as 1 truth, then that is how you are going to act. But punching people or ostracizing people because they do not believe it is wrong. If everyone lived by Jesus' example, this would not be an issue.

EDIT: You are right, humans have the questions "Where did we come from? Why are we here? What happens after we die?"

For me, the more I learn about GOd, the more I know these answers. I know where I came from, I know why I am here, and I know what happens after I die.

Matthew

05-10-2005, 08:22 PM

Did they have take-out boxes for those???;)

Kinda, didn't they fill like 7 crates after it?

BAMSS04

05-10-2005, 08:24 PM

I would have to hear the audio, just because if a news station really had that on him ( yes even Fox :p ) it would be national news. I watched it the news this morning, no mention of it.

So do you have an audio link?

slizzelizzel

05-10-2005, 08:29 PM

Back to the whole mule sex thing, last Quarter in Rural Sociology our professor told us on several occasions that bestiality really is just a part of rural farm life and has been for ages. It's actually more common than homosexuality in many rural areas.

Mighty Wingman

05-10-2005, 10:02 PM

May the force be with you. (http://ibelgique.ifrance.com/sw-anthropo/txt/religiontxtangl.html)

Gotherella

05-10-2005, 11:49 PM

May the force be with you. (http://ibelgique.ifrance.com/sw-anthropo/txt/religiontxtangl.html)

Okay, I can see where he was going. But can someone explain the midachlorian (or however you spell it) thing again? I'm still unclear on that concept. Maybe I need to watch the movie a couple more times?

Matthew

05-11-2005, 12:08 AM

Unless I am mistaken, the metachlorine count in the cell shows how susceptible (sp?) you are to embrace and control the force around you. While everyone has some metachlorine, the higher the count, the more able you are to sence the force.

Gotherella

05-11-2005, 12:27 AM

You are right, humans have the questions "Where did we come from? Why are we here? What happens after we die?"

For me, the more I learn about GOd, the more I know these answers. I know where I came from, I know why I am here, and I know what happens after I die.

And that's what religion is for.

ratm1966

05-11-2005, 12:53 AM

I hate to get this thread off track, but.......

Here is an updated article about Georgia Farmboys and other ultra rightwing people......Everything in the article is the same from before, but the last 3 paragraphs are new stuff.

Bizarre Sex Habits of The Extreme Right-Wing

Last night, anti-abortion extremist Neal Horsley was a guest on The Alan Colmes Show, a FOX News radio program. The topic was an interesting one - whether or not an internet service provider should allow Horsley to post the names of abortion doctors on his website. Horsley does that as a way of targeting them and one doctor has been killed. In the course of the interview, however, Colmes asked Horsley about his background, including a statement that he had admitted to engaging in homosexual and bestiality sex.

At first, Horsley laughed and said, "Just because it's printed in the media, people jump to believe it."

"Is it true?" Colmes asked.

"Hey, Alan, if you want to accuse me of having sex when I was a fool, I did everything that crossed my mind that looked like I..."

AC: "You had sex with animals?"

NH: "Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule."

AC: "I'm not so sure that that is so."

NH: "You didn't grow up on a farm in Georgia, did you?"

AC: "Are you suggesting that everybody who grows up on a farm in Georgia has a mule as a girlfriend?"

NH: It has historically been the case. You people are so far removed from the reality... Welcome to domestic life on the farm..."

Colmes said he thought there were a lot of people in the audience who grew up on farms, are living on farms now, raising kids on farms and "and I don't think they are dating Elsie right now. You know what I'm saying?"

Horsley said, "You experiment with anything that moves when you are growing up sexually. You're naive. You know better than that... If it's warm and it's damp and it vibrates you might in fact have sex with it."

In addition to Horsley, Colmes has recently interviewed Randall Terry another radical anti-abortionist and anti-gay activist. In the middle of an otherwise serious interview (http://www.newshounds.us/2005/03/25/radical_christian_antigay_activist_and_schiavo_spo kesperson_randall_terryjokes_about_being_homosexua l.php), Terry began joking - apropos of nothing - that he and Colmes were ex-lovers.

Another extremist interviewed by Colmes not too long ago was Rev. Fred Phelps who stated on the show that he thought the death penalty should be given for those who engage in "sodomy." When Colmes asked (http://www.newshounds.us/2005/04/14/hellfire_and_brimstone_visit_the_alan_colmes_show. php) Phelps if he had ever engaged in gay sex, Phelps blustered but never said no.

Hmm, I'm beginning to sense a pattern here. Come to think of it, Ann Coulter is reputed to have an unusually, er, wide-ranging sex life, too, though as far as I know it's just confined to men. Still, it doesn't exactly match the profile of an ultra-conservative.

Of course, the important part of the article is in bold print. Yes, she is on my list of 5 from the other thread and I guess this means there is hope for me yet.....woooohoooooo!!!!

Matt1

05-11-2005, 01:20 AM

Hey, if there's hope for Bill Maher, I suppose there's hope for you too pal.

actualsize

05-11-2005, 01:27 AM

[QUOTE=Matt1]Well, my atheism has degrees to it. I reject Earthly religions and the God(s) they put forth because they don't make any kind of logical sense to me, and various other, potentially inflamatory, reasons I don't want to get in to. As for a higher being not mentioned by the world's religions, I simply disbelieve because of the lack of evidence.[/QUO

I'm with you there. And what I've never been able to understand is this: If a person believes God created the universe and everything in it, in order to understand "why are we here? etc.", how is that a satisfactory explanation? Where did God come from? Who was His creator? I've never been able to get past that.

This is where the concept of infinity comes in - or doesn't, because it won't fit in our little brains.

42

Matt1

05-11-2005, 02:32 AM

I'm with you there. And what I've never been able to understand is this: If a person believes God created the universe and everything in it, in order to understand "why are we here? etc.", how is that a satisfactory explanation? Where did God come from? Who was His creator? I've never been able to get past that.
Me neither. One of the many, and I do mean many, reasons I'm not part of the God Squad. I could get into the others, we both could I'm certain, but this thread appears to be calming down so I'm not all that anxious to throw fuel on the fire.

I am anxious, however, to hear more about right-wing theocrats and their animal fucking escapades.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 03:03 AM

And that's what religion is for.
No, religion is for meeting people, hanging out with other believers, and learning about God.

Belief in God is finding your purpose.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 03:09 AM

I actually posted that to make the point that the biblical story of the Loaves and Fishes is not literally what happened, but an allegorical story, IMO.

I know, and I posted to show how it is both.

(This is an opinion) Passages in the bible have both a litteral and a spiritual meaning. Some say that is not true, but I happen to think it is.

ONCE AGAIN FOR ANY READY TO POUNCE: Literal within context.

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 04:28 AM

I just got done having a really, really good discussion (It lasted two and a half hours) with two people that believe that the Bible is the word of god, and after actually talking to people about it in person rather than spouting out 'facts' on a message board, I have to say it was probably the most satisfying discussion I've had in years, whether or not any of us came to any conclusions on our faith because of it.

I don't know if I'm making any sense, but I think that the only way to go about discussing religion is to listen to what other people believe, helping them at least accept your right to believe what you believe, and trying to find some common ground.

Just thought I'd throw in my two enlightened cents.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 05:30 AM

I don't know if I'm making any sense, but I think that the only way to go about discussing religion is to listen to what other people believe, helping them at least accept your right to believe what you believe, and trying to find some common ground.

As opposed to how you leave and stop posting when you are challenged? :)

The bottom line of common ground is we are all in this place together, and we are pulling for each other. If your brother and I disagree, (and yes we had some bad blood last 2 weeks) what makes us different, is next time we will treat each other the same. I know he has human value, and he knows I do also. We will probably some time in the future have bad blood again, but remember we live here. You do not yet, and you do not get any favor from me just because he is your brother.

For the record your brother never said I do not have the right to believe in God, and I never said to him "you are going to hell for not believing it"

Most people here have gotten beyond debating 101.

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 10:39 AM

As opposed to how you leave and stop posting when you are challenged?

The bottom line of common ground is we are all in this place together, and we are pulling for each other. If your brother and I disagree, (and yes we had some bad blood last 2 weeks) what makes us different, is next time we will treat each other the same. I know he has human value, and he knows I do also. We will probably some time in the future have bad blood again, but remember we live here. You do not yet, and you do not get any favor from me just because he is your brother.

For the record your brother never said I do not have the right to believe in God, and I never said to him "you are going to hell for not believing it"

Most people here have gotten beyond debating 101.

When did I stop posting because I was challenged? Was it when I had to leave for class and work? Sorry if it seemed like I backed down because I didn't post for a few hours.

I never asked for any favor because efexeye is my brother, what in my post made you think I did? Who are you to say "I don't live here"? I guess if I'm here then I'm here, no matter how long I've been here.

The main thing is, you missed the entire point of my post. I had just finished having a lengthy discussion about my personal religious beliefs and those of two very close friends of mine, and felt really good about talking about it to someone, I wasn't trying to back up anyone or rip on anyone, but it seems that that's all you're looking for, so that's what you saw.

I'm really having trouble figuring out what exaclty you are trying to prove here, as I never said anything about your or efexeyes religious beliefs in my last post.

Finally, while I agree that most of us here are beyond debate 101, maybe you need to see that this isn't a debate, it's only a discussion. The reason most people feel uncomfortable about talking about religion is that they feel that they are going to have to defend their decision. The only way for people to make progress in the understanding of other religions is to STOP debating and start listening and trying to understand what makes the other person think what they do.

Efexeye

05-11-2005, 11:23 AM

Don't worry, slizzle, some people are just determined to try and start fights. Personally, I'm hovering my finger over the "ignore" link right now, and that would be quite an accomplishment- even a jackass noob like Matt Chippendale couldn't get me mad enough to ignore him, but this guy here- I'm tired of the pseudo-intellectual ramblings and constant, thinly disguised attempts to start a fight.

And I DON'T think I'm alone in that.

RobinHoodDaffy

05-11-2005, 11:27 AM

Oh yeah, well Fuck you too........what.........he isn't talking to me?......how embarrassing, and everyone ignored my monkey joke that I was so proud of......I'll just back out now..... :o

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 11:29 AM

Monkey joke?

ratm1966

05-11-2005, 11:31 AM

Oh yeah, well Fuck you too........what.........he isn't talking to me?......how embarrassing, and everyone ignored my monkey joke that I was so proud of......I'll just back out now..... :o

Yeah, and almost everyone ignored my failed attempt at getting this thread off of religion and back on track of Georgia farmboys having sex with animals. Okay, and other fanatics who are anti-gay/other things too, yet they have had those types of relationships in the past.

You know, they say that most people who are fanatical about something in their beliefs, have done that very thing before.

RobinHoodDaffy

05-11-2005, 11:32 AM

Monkey joke?

"Uncle Rhesus"

So, how's about those Donkey shows?

ratm1966

05-11-2005, 11:56 AM

"Uncle Rhesus"

So, how's about those Donkey shows?
Well, I have lived in New Mexico since late '99 and have only crossed the border into Mexico once. I haven't caught a 'Donkey' show yet and probably never will. That crap is just downright disgusting.

Dave

05-11-2005, 12:57 PM

No to take this thead into another unwanted direction, but i would like to learn more about Ann Coulter's wide and varying sex life. Where can i read more about it? also Matt1 were you suggesting that she had sex with the vary lizard-like Bill Maher? He is proof that money will get you the ladies.

Gotherella

05-11-2005, 01:09 PM

But I stop short of believing my ( I can't speak for everyone) ancestors were monkeys (apes, whatever)

More evidence in support of our evolution from apes:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/enviro/EnviroRepublish_1298389.htm

Mighty Wingman

05-11-2005, 01:55 PM

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/img/health/monkey130804.jpg
1. I'm considering making this my new avatar. And I enjoyed the article.
2. Let it be said that I'm not spoiling for a fight here. Nor a lengthy debate.
3 Theories like say, gravity, or water evaporation, can quickly and easily be proven.
4. The theory of evolution cannot, here's why. a) The link is still mising. b) The (link) creature from which humans and apes supposedly evolved from is long been extinct. And lets just say, that creature still existed. What environmental conditions caused some of their line to become human and some to remain apes? The staunchest supporters of evolution don't have clue about that, do they ? Let's just for fun say, you could ressurect that creature from which both humans and apes owe ancestry, and recreate the conditions that caused us and them to split so drastically, it would still take somewhere around 65 million years to prove your point. My guess is, none of us will be here in 65 million years.
5. Scientist like to claim that they are unbiased and impartial owing all their beliefs to what can be proven. Often times this is simply not true. Without much effort or prodding I can fetch you dozens or even hundreds of examples where scientist found what they were looking for, instead of what was actually there, cases where scientists altered the variables of their already skewed experiments to get the results they wanted and just tossed all the evidence that disagreed, the same of course could be said for religious people...And Michael Moore .
6. For a truly scientific mind it is ever important to maintain impartiality to look at ALL the results, even the ones that say what you don't want to hear or believe.
7. I look at science and religion as two sides to the same coin. Both are noble pursuits. Both are born of our human need to understand where we've come from, who we are and where we're going, to give our existence meaning and purpose. Sure, monkeys have social classes, sex-drive and respond to visual stimuli. Let me know when you find one pondering the existencial quandaries of the universe, then , you'll have proven the theory of evolution to me .

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 02:01 PM

Let me know when find one pondering the existencial quandaries of the universe, then , you'll have proven the theory of evolution to me .

That's just the thing, they havn't evolved to the point that they have the ability to do that, we have, however.

I wholeheartedly agree with your 6th point, but I don't think that in completely refusing to even think that evolution is possible, you aren't taking your own advice.

Mighty Wingman

05-11-2005, 02:03 PM

Oh , I admit it as a possibility , not a fact.

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 02:06 PM

I don't believe it's a fact either, and apparently neither does anybody else, seeing how it's still the Theory or evolution.

Mighty Wingman

05-11-2005, 02:09 PM

But you believe gravity is a fact , right ?

Gotherella

05-11-2005, 02:14 PM

1. I'm considering making this my new avatar. And I enjoyed the article.
2. Let it be said that I'm not spoiling for a fight here. Nor a lengthy debate.

Um, er...I meant that article as a joke. Tying together the religious debate and the original bestiality tone of this thread.....monkey porn.....get it?

Besides, any woman who has forgone shaving her legs for a few days has considered that we may be descended from hairy apes. ;)

Mighty Wingman

05-11-2005, 02:23 PM

http://www.filibe.com/movies/Charlton%20Heston%20'68.jpg
Keep your hairy legs off a me, you damn dirty ape ! :)

jjcourtright

05-11-2005, 03:21 PM

Ugg. So much to respond to. I must admit I have a hard time understanding how someone who is, say, a hardcore biologist, reconciles their belief in God with their faith in science as a means of understanding the world- usually, scientists like to see things that are observable and conduct experiments that are repeatable...jj, any insight here? Some things require faith. The Big Bang for example. We can explain what happened immediately after the Big Bang, but we don't know what came before it. It seems to be a miracle. It sounds trite, but right now, as far as I know, the best anybody can tell you is that something miraculous happened.

Paul was a Jew, and he taught all over Asia about how Jesus fulfilled the prophecies. I thought that Paul taught all of Europe and Thomas taught all Asia. The "Thomasine" Christians were more like you(and probably the way that Jesus intended), Jews for Jesus, while the "Pauline" Christians are closer to what we in the west think of Christians to be.

I heard a great interpretation of Adam and Eve. It wasn't that they were the first humans on the planet, but the first to believe in the now Judeo-Christian God.
I've thought before that maybe Adam and Eve were the first whom God put souls into. My faith is in a state of constant change, I pick and choose what ideas make most sense to me, rather than strictly adhering to a specific denomination.

Personally, I enjoy the search and my process of attempting to make meaning from what I experience. I want to know as much as I can from science and from all religions and teachings. I'm okay with "I don't know, and I will probably never know." And I want to do the best I can for others while I'm here.
Similar to what I just said.

I just got done having a really, really good discussion (It lasted two and a half hours) with two people that believe that the Bible is the word of god, and after actually talking to people about it in person rather than spouting out 'facts' on a message board, I have to say it was probably the most satisfying discussion I've had in years, whether or not any of us came to any conclusions on our faith because of it.

I don't know if I'm making any sense, but I think that the only way to go about discussing religion is to listen to what other people believe, helping them at least accept your right to believe what you believe, and trying to find some common ground.

Just thought I'd throw in my two enlightened cents. I love talking religion. Especially after a couple of beers. With beer, I can talk politics and religion indefinitely. Some Mormon kids came by the house last week and I talked to them for 15 minutes without bringing up the obvious "mistake"(for lack of a better word) in their religion. It's fun, and it's a great way to grow in mind and soul.

Efexeye

05-11-2005, 03:31 PM

But you believe gravity is a fact , right ?

Nope- gravity is a theory. Can't be proven.

jjcourtright

05-11-2005, 03:34 PM

Damn, I meant to address that to. We see gravity work the way that we've "seen" evolution work. We don't know for sure what causes either of them, hence Theory of General Relativity and Theory of Evolution.

05-11-2005, 03:34 PM

Jump out of an airplane at 15,ooo feet and gravity doesn't care if you don't believe...;)

Matt1

05-11-2005, 03:36 PM

Wingman, I don't think you have an accurate understanding of what evolution is all about. I think this FAQ might clear some of your misconceptions up.

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html

jjcourtright

05-11-2005, 03:37 PM

That site didn't tell me anything about evolution. This is all it had to say:

Access Denied (policy_denied)

Your system policy has denied access to the requested URL.

For assistance, contact your network support team. If you feel that this website is needed for offical business please have your IMO submit a ticket requesting a SmartFilter exemption

karmattack

05-11-2005, 03:37 PM

Some things require faith. The Big Bang for example. We can explain what happened immediately after the Big Bang, but we don't know what came before it. It seems to be a miracle. It sounds trite, but right now, as far as I know, the best anybody can tell you is that something miraculous happened. You know, this brings up something I like to think about, and was just reminded of because of a chat I had with Efexeye: the concept of "nothing."

Try as hard as you can, and your brain just cannot grasp the concept of it. You'll picture an empty space, blackness....but those are both "something." Say the universe is expanding in a circle. What is beyond the edge? Is it nothing?

Now after trying to conceptualize something that simple, I really wonder if any one of us really understands whatever it was that CREATED "nothing."

BAMSS04

05-11-2005, 03:48 PM

I tryed that once, I got about 30 mins into thought and had a head ache. the thought of nothing generally means blackness, but if the color black does not exist then nothing, is clear like the air. usually the only way to tell something is clear is by having something with a color behind , under, on top, or beside it. So the most logical explination of nothing I have come up with , is clearity. Everything is clear.

See why I got a head ache!!! :eek:

( Spell check is not working so forgive the typos)

TLS

05-11-2005, 03:57 PM

I always picture nothing to be all white. It's those darn looney tunes, you know, the one where they draw daffy duck and add weird things to him and then paint him in different surroundings. Before the scenery was added he was just there, in the middle of nothing (only him on a blank page).

Gotherella

05-11-2005, 04:01 PM

the concept of "nothing."
Try as hard as you can, and your brain just cannot grasp the concept of it. You'll picture an empty space, blackness....but those are both "something." Say the universe is expanding in a circle. What is beyond the edge? Is it nothing?
Now after trying to conceptualize something that simple, I really wonder if any one of us really understands whatever it was that CREATED "nothing."

Goes back to the limits of human perception. We can only experience what our bodies and brains are capable of experiencing. We're probably not physically capable of understanding the complexities of space, time, infinity, and nothingness. Hell, there are probably entire dimensions and realities that we will never know about because we lack the capability to perceive them.

I think that's why so many people have faith -- it's a lot more reassuring than "I don't fucking know."

Mighty Wingman

05-11-2005, 05:02 PM

Wingman, I don't think you have an accurate understanding of what evolution is all about. I think this FAQ might clear some of your misconceptions up.

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
Okay dude , I spent some time looking around on that site and didn't find any of the answers-- the type of answers I was looking for. I will lend you my ear , so let me ask you these questions in totally non-smartass way.

1. What is the name of the common ancestor we share with apes ?
2. When did this ancestor go extinct?
3. What conditions ( environmental, dietary etc.) led us to become human and kept apes , apes?
4. When did we first become able to use tools and control fire?
5. Can you pinpoint my "misconceptions" so I don't insult you with my ignorance again ?
6. If you had a homo-erectus for a pet what would you name him ?

Matt1

05-11-2005, 06:02 PM

I'll try to answer your questions the best that I can. Bear in mind though that I'm not a specialist in anthropology.

1. What is the name of the common ancestor we share with apes?
Off the top of my head, I have no idea. But I know that if you're looking for some definitive specimen that's some kind of half human half ape chimera, you probably won't find it. Hominid species evolved into modern humans over the course of millions of years, developing along the way many of those traits that we define as uniquely human. Our common ancestor with the apes probably looks alot like an ape.

Also, our genetic similarities with chimpanzees (Our DNA differs from their's by like 2% if I recall correctly) leaves little room for doubt that we share a common ancestor.

EDIT: Did a quick search, and thought I'd add the latest candidate for our common ancestor: http://www.primates.com/pierolapithecus/

3. What conditions ( environmental, dietary etc.) led us to become human and kept apes , apes?
The last theory I heard on this was that a species of ape in Northern Africa was essentially tree-bound, and started coming down on the ground as their forest habitat began to recede, and they were forced to migrate over large exapanses of open terrain to hunt food.
4. When did we first become able to use tools and control fire?
Homo habilis I believe was the first species of hominid to use tools. I think they existed about 2 million (http://server4.103092804.com/Release3/linkredirect.php?h=42468,404550,1115848838) years ago.
6. If you had a homo-erectus for a pet what would you name him ?
So much for not being a smart-ass. ;)

05-11-2005, 06:03 PM

6. If you had a homo-erectus for a pet what would you name him ?

I would name him George...

Dave

05-11-2005, 06:11 PM

and would you hug him, and squeeze him and pet him?

05-11-2005, 06:12 PM

You betcha...

05-11-2005, 06:16 PM

http://www.nonstick.com/sounds/Abominable_Snowman/ltas_002.wav

Gotherella

05-11-2005, 06:25 PM

Thank you thank you thank you! Sweet audio goodness....

Dave

05-11-2005, 06:32 PM

http://www.nonstick.com/sounds/Abominable_Snowman/ltas_002.wav

yea!!!!!! that was great. Big smiles over here. :D <--- see!

Matthew

05-11-2005, 07:34 PM

Slizzel, I had too much wine when I said what I did, I apologize for coming off like I did, I did not know I was being so harsh.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 07:42 PM

I thought that Paul taught all of Europe and Thomas taught all Asia. The "Thomasine" Christians were more like you(and probably the way that Jesus intended), Jews for Jesus, while the "Pauline" Christians are closer to what we in the west think of Christians to be.
.

http://www.ccel.org/bible/phillips/CNM12-AreaofActs.gif

Is a map of Paul's journeys. They are in Macedonia and Asia Minor. The ongoing thought is that Peter = Catholics, Paul= Lutherans. but I am not all sure about Thomas.

As far as for what Jesus intended, he intended for the whole world, Jew and Gentile to be able to get to God. The main idea is not how you worship, but that you do worship.

I personally like both. I like the Jewish stuff, becuase they are things that God commanded in the old Testament to teach us about who God is. I also like praise and worship services too.

Denyse

05-11-2005, 07:47 PM

Sounds to me like you want to have your cake and eat it too...I'm not saying that to be mean, but I get the feeling you are hedging your bets.

Actually...

You know what? When this debate starts needing visual aids, I think it's time to start stepping away from the keyboard. If I want to read anymore on the subject, I'll enroll in a Theology course. This thread is dead to me.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 07:50 PM

the concept of "nothing."

I know, and the concept of eternal is hard for me. The no ending is not so hard to grasp, but the no beginning thing.

God does not exist in the bounds of what we call time, and that is all I understand. We are born, we age, we die. Our souls live forever. It is impossible to understand "no beginning' in my human head.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 07:53 PM

You know what? When this debate starts needing visual aids, I think it's time to start stepping away from the keyboard. If I want to read anymore on the subject, I'll enroll in a Theology course. This thread is dead to me.

I did not view it as a 'debate that needed visual aids', I thought it would help show where Paul went. If you don't want to read theological or bliblical debates don't. Your choice. But since it is a free country, I can talk about this or debate it just as much as anyone else can talk about having sex with animals.

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 08:35 PM

Slizzel, I had too much wine when I said what I did, I apologize for coming off like I did, I did not know I was being so harsh.

I don't consider that any kind of excuse, as you must have been drinking for a long, long time to get all those posts in while you were drunk, but I can at least forgive you.

slizzelizzel

05-11-2005, 08:39 PM

I did not view it as a 'debate that needed visual aids', I thought it would help show where Paul went. If you don't want to read theological or bliblical debates don't. Your choice. But since it is a free country, I can talk about this or debate it just as much as anyone else can talk about having sex with animals.

You know what? I take back the forgiving you thing. You just don't get it do you? Denyse wasn't trying to start any shit with you! She was simply making a statement.

Keep up the whole "Its a free country" thing, I remember when I used that. Yeah, it was when I was five.

Matthew

05-11-2005, 08:46 PM

You know what? I take back the forgiving you thing. You just don't get it do you? Denyse wasn't trying to start any shit with you! She was simply making a statement.

Keep up the whole "Its a free country" thing, I remember when I used that. Yeah, it was when I was five.

Dude, chill! I was not pissed off at Denyse at all! If you remember correctly, within the last week someone used that same line on me when I was opposed to something else.

EDIT: I said I was wrong in what I said to you. I also said elsewhere that I will lighten up on you. I have been an ass to you and your brother.

psychofiend

05-11-2005, 11:38 PM

Dude, chill! I was not pissed off at Denyse at all! If you remember correctly, within the last week someone used that same line on me when I was opposed to something else.

EDIT: I said I was wrong in what I said to you. I also said elsewhere that I will lighten up on you. I have been an ass to you and your brother.
You always seem to be getting very defensive. Perhaps it's the dark side taking over? Probably not.
...Actually looking at what i just wrote, i realize it isn't as funny and/or witty as i thought it would be. Fuck it.

TLS

05-12-2005, 08:51 AM

I know you weren't talking to me, but I am bored and thought since I have an answer for everything I would have fun and try to answer these questions.
1. What is the name of the common ancestor we share with apes ?
This is a trick question. Our ancestors are aliens that crashed in Egypt.
2. When did this ancestor go extinct? When they were able to phone home and have someone pick them up. Some of their pawns got left behind resulting in the human race. (I sometimes fear that the aliens left us here to breed so they can come back and gather more pawns/slaves.)
3. What conditions ( environmental, dietary etc.) led us to become human and kept apes , apes? Apes are native to Earth as us humans are not. See above answers for more detail.
4. When did we first become able to use tools and control fire? A long long time ago in a galaxy far far away....
5. Can you pinpoint my "misconceptions" so I don't insult you with my ignorance again ? Huh? I don't get it.
6. If you had a homo-erectus for a pet what would you name him ? Cha-Chi

RobinHoodDaffy

05-12-2005, 11:36 AM

Be careful, I hear Jo-Nee loves Cha-Chi. Whenever those two get together it always means someone is going to lose a Ming vase.

Gotherella

05-12-2005, 11:40 AM

Be careful, I hear Jo-Nee loves Cha-Chi. Whenever those two get together it always means someone is going to lose a Ming vase.

Apparently Chachi means "little penis" in Korean (or is that an Urban Legend?).

Efexeye

05-12-2005, 11:42 AM

It does mean penis- just not "little" penis.

Gotherella

05-12-2005, 11:43 AM

It does mean penis- just not "little" penis.

But "little penis" is funnier.

RobinHoodDaffy

05-12-2005, 11:44 AM

...and in the Kama Sutra, Yanni means vagina. Just like his music.

Dave

05-12-2005, 02:07 PM

Well now i'm torn, do i hate Yanni or not?

Efexeye

05-12-2005, 02:11 PM

This one time, at band camp, I stuck a flute in my Yanni!

ratm1966

05-13-2005, 12:17 AM

I think it was in this thread where I mentioned how some of the most outspoken anti-gay people are really gay themselves or have had gay relationships in the past....well, it appears the Mayor of Spokane, WA fits that bill.

Here is a link to a story on his voting record concerning Gay Rights...

Spokane Mayor (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4999455,00.html)

Here is the most recent article....

12 May Article (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002272759_webwest12.html)

Odd how the brother of a deceased deputy stated that this dude and the deputy did sign young boys out from the Morning Star Boys Ranch to take them on outings, as he is accused of doing, yet the Mayor denies it. As does the Reverend who runs the place. I guess his organization is as good as the Catholic church at covering these things up, seeing as how the log books didn't reflect any of the outings.

Of course, this is all just speculation right now. Well, except for the fact that he admitted to being gay.

cberquist

05-13-2005, 01:47 AM

Can we please get back on topic? Apparently there is a mule fucking epidemic in Georgia and I for one would like to know how President Bush is going to address this problem.

... or the new Pope.

ratm1966

05-13-2005, 01:52 AM

Can we please get back on topic? Apparently there is a mule fucking epidemic in Georigia and I for one would like to know how President Bush is going to address this problem.

... or the new Pope.

Well, Bush will probably try to just not believe it is happening. If forced to believe it, he will somehow work it so that he gets us all to believe it will be good for the economy, as a happy mule is a productive mule.

As far as the Pope goes, he and the Vatican will probably try to cover up these abuses perpetrated on the poor defenseless mules and will then try to recruit the abusers into the clergy. We all know there is nothing like having a molester as a member of the clergy to validate your religion.

ozchick

05-13-2005, 02:00 AM

Nah. Surely Bush will send in the Army to nuke those mules! :D

ratm1966

05-13-2005, 02:04 AM

Why would he nuke the mules? They are the vistimns here. It is the farmers from Georgia who deserve to get nuked, because they are the one molestering the mules.

actualsize

05-13-2005, 02:05 AM

Gives new meaning to: "That's the night that the lights went out in Georgia."

ozchick

05-13-2005, 02:10 AM

Why would he nuke the mules? They are the vistimns here. It is the farmers from Georgia who deserve to get nuked, because they are the one molestering the mules.

Yeah but the farmers are Americans and by definition can't be wrong. The mules are just trying to make trouble.

ratm1966

05-13-2005, 02:13 AM

The farmer would fit right in at the Neverland Ranch. Maybe we can ship them all there.

ozchick

05-13-2005, 02:16 AM

Good point. I'm sure the farmers are just "mule-like" and therefore the molestation of the mules can't be wrong.

05-13-2005, 02:18 AM

I just want to take the opportunity to point out that I only live in Georgia and I am not now nor ever have been a farmer...

ratm1966

05-13-2005, 02:23 AM

I just want to take the opportunity to point out that I only live in Georgia and I am not now nor ever have been a farmer...Okay....we believe you.

I can't believe he expects us to believe that load of mule crap. We all know he is either living on or near a farm and took bessie to the senior prom.

Yup, we sure do.

ozchick

05-13-2005, 02:28 AM

I bet any minute now you'll provide a list of your celebrity pals who are willing to testify that you're not a farmer too.

ratm1966

05-13-2005, 02:29 AM

I bet any minute now you'll provide a list of your celebrity pals who are willing to testify that you're not a farmer too.

Yeah, and that traitorous, communist pig, Jane Fonda doesn't count.

highriskrc

05-13-2005, 02:38 AM

There is not doubt in my mind that we had to come from a God or something of the nature... I really don't believe that we are all derived from stardust as the big bang theory would have us believe... and I don't think that we evolved from a bunch of fucking apes.... it just doesn't make sense.... sure the little human evolution drawings of half-monkey's/half-human's looks interesting... and in some weird Congo-type way it may make a little sense... but not enough for me to believe that we are from these creatures.... There are just too many questions left unanswered to know where we actually came from.... and no one will ever know until we die, providing that there is a God... and then, just hope that you made the right choices on Earth.
Robbie

ozchick

05-13-2005, 02:42 AM

Dude. What are you talking about??? This here thread is about Mule farking. Don't try derailing this very important topic! Sheesh!

Threadkiller

05-13-2005, 02:49 AM

and then, just hope that you made the right choices on Earth.
Hee hee, reminds me of that South Park.
Hell Director: "I'm afraid it was the Mormons. Yes, the Mormons were the correct answer."
Everyone Who Just Arrived in Hell: "Awwww!"

05-13-2005, 06:50 AM

Okay....we believe you.

I can't believe he expects us to believe that load of mule crap. We all know he is either living on or near a farm and took bessie to the senior prom.

Yup, we sure do.

I'm from Texas... where the men are men and the sheep run scared...

(Actually, I'm a native Californian)

karmattack

05-13-2005, 09:35 AM

3. What conditions ( environmental, dietary etc.) led us to become human and kept apes , apes? Come on! Has nobody seen 2001: A Space Odyssey? It was a big black rectangle that made my subwoofer rumble. Then the one monkey hit the other monkey with the bone, and then the baby was floating in space.

God does not exist in the bounds of what we call time, and that is all I understand. We are born, we age, we die. Our souls live forever. It is impossible to understand "no beginning' in my human head. The only thing I can relate this to is the first law of thermodynamics / conservation of energy -- that in a closed system, energy is neither created nor destroyed. This is one of the principles all science is based on. It also helps put into perspective beliefs about reincarnation, if one is willing to believe the soul is a form of conscious energy (hey look! my aim name!). There is a thought I had in high school, and was later weirded out when I heard Bill Hicks joke about, that came from the conservation of energy principle combined with the long-running Psych theory of streaming subconsciousness.......that we are all tiny portions of the same concious energy source experiencing itself in a subjective way. Maybe this conscious energy created the illusion of the universe just to figure itself out? Maybe that's why it's the question underneath everything we do? What is the matrix?

Well now i'm torn, torn? (http://gprime.net/video.php/tornmime)