GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-30-2012, 08:46   #226
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,325


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Stuff has hit the planet before, but are you sure that's what killed off the dinosaurs? Aren't there some other theories, like disease, climate change etc.
"Sure" is a big word in science, but I find the sudden change in the fossil record above and below the KT boundary to be pretty convincing, yes. Are there other theories, of course, but you have to go through some pretty tough mental gymnastics to accept one of those above the much more obvious explanation of an impact event. Occam's Razor and all that...

I'm actually surprised King took that position. Most theists I've talked to accept the impact evidence and assume an enormous tsunami as the result. Still a bit of confirmation bias, but at least one more consistent with observations.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 08:48   #227
Vic777
Senior Member
 
Vic777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,453
The introduction to the article is ....
The following is an excerpt from “Why Are You Atheists So Angry? 99 Things That Piss Off the Godless” by Greta Christina.

I have never known an angry Atheists ... this seems to be a new phenomena .... Atheists are among the most tolerant, slow to boil people IMO. Carl Sagan and Richard Dawkins are prime examples.
__________________
"It's Tom Dwan's World, we just live in it"
Vic777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 08:50   #228
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,533
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
These have been found on a global level, not just isolated incidents. It is ironic that you can accept a hypothesized asterorid hitting earth in the past and causing a cataclysim, for which there is entirely no evidence, in lieu of a global flood for which there is plenty of evidence in the fossil record.
Are you aware that the fossil record that was being compiled in the early 19th century was being done by geologists who were primarily Christian. They abandoned any attempt at Flood Geology explaining what they found because it was completely untenable. This was decades before Darwin's Origin, so you can't really apply a science community-wide conspiracy of propping up evolution.

Among the sedimentologists responsible for finding the underground water, oil, coal, uranium, etc. that power our world, and whose livelihood depends on their success, I don't think you'll find many that are basing their work on Flood Geology.

Just admit that you are willing to ignore physics/cosmology, biology, botany, paleontology, anthropology, geology, chemistry and another other branch of science when it contradicts your interpretation of scripture.

Is there any amount of evidence that could cause you to accept that the earth's age is in the billions of years and that evolution accounts for the variety of life that we have today (and that went extinct in the past)?

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 13:12   #229
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
Did someone actually tell you that, or is something else bothering you?
Yes. You in fact told me I was being unkind to my chick because I was not marrying her. That I was treating her son (in reality daughter, your mistake because you love putting words in people’s mouths) as though he were a burden. Others of your ilk have called us materialistic, hedonistic, bent on consuming sex and drugs, that were are not capable of being good people because we obviously cannot be moral people without following the bible. And you continually accuse us of desiring only to persecute the religious, why else would we come here. Yes… you people absolutely have said this over and over again.

Quote:
I have seen a lot of hypothesis, but very few facts.
I would tend to think you have an unrealistic standard for evidence then. You believe every word of an archaic book written by desert savages… yet you reject the scientific findings of natural processes. The evidence for which literally fills entire buildings. Not to mention historical facts that clearly indicate that the bible was an invention of the jews and much of its beginnings were borrowed from cultures that predate the Jews. The Sumerians were the first to tell tales of a global flood. The Jews stole that. Abraham selected one of the Mesopotamian Gods to represent the one true God. The jews stole and rewrote the Babylonian garden creation myth. We know this. These are facts. You can stand in willful ignorance of them all you want. But we can now plainly see that the bible is based on a mish mash of other culture’s religions. And these facts have been presented to you over and over again. And you continue to play your little game of “I see no evidence presented”. You have a habit of bailing on debates once you’ve been shut down only to return the next day to claim no evidence was given. And you claim we are persecutors because we never relent.

Quote:
Ironic, I have seen things quite the other way round.
No you haven’t. We love when you guys say things because we love to dismantle the absurd. If you never wrote anything there wouldn’t be any nonsense for use to take apart. Please… keep writing.

Quote:
So, you claim to have no religion, yet you evangelize for it?
To evangelize is to spread the gospel. I reject the gospel outright. I guess you might call me the Anti-Evangelist. I consider myself to be an Anti-Religionist in that we now know enough about our ancient history and our evolutionary beginnings to know that religion is a man made invention and that it was used as a means to bring order to our savage beginnings. It was man’s first attempt at explaining his origins. Ultimately a failed one… but nevertheless a definite step in our growth from rock smashing savages to bronze spear chucking brutes.

Quote:
To be this angry and evangelistic for your faith, you seem no different than those here to misrepresent Christianity in their actions. In fact, I postulate you are the same person from the opposite polarity.
Anger? In what part of that statement do you see anger. I was helping a budding free thinker through the early stages of waking up from the delusion that is religion. It’s a very real process. Those who are still deluded will attack you because they fear you. They will shun you and treat you like you’re evil. Many religious people will lash out at new non-believers in the hopes of bringing them back into the fold. Fear is one way religion controls people. Fear of being outcast, fear of hell, fear of death.

Quote:
What can be known? Macro Evolution has never been proven. There is no origin to the Big Bang. From my perspective nothing that you hold on to so dearly has ever been proven.
Either you don’t understand these concepts or you’re simply being dishonest here. Evidence has been offered over and over again on evolution and you simply choose to be ignorant of it. Either that or your education level prevents you from understanding it. Much like myself looking at high order math equations… that stuff is just over my head and I’m not ashamed to admit it. Takes a special intellect… a higher intellect to grasp those things. And though I understand the principles of evolution, some of the biology and chemistry of it can be quite complex. I am by no means an expert in either of these fields and do my best to understand them. So I can definitely see why someone who chooses to be willfully ignorant of them would have no clue what they’re about.

But let us take a second here to make a clear distinction. Let’s say for a moment that everything we know about the beginnings of the universe and the origins of our species was untrue. Let’s say we learned that we were completely wrong. Doesn’t matter. We know enough about your bible to know it is an invention of man, borrowed from other cultures, and most certainly didn’t get it right. Evolution doesn’t have to be true in order for your archaic mythology to be wrong. The two have nothing to do with each other.



Quote:
Not from the vitriolic recalitrant dogma I have seen.
I can see how it seems that way to you. You keep throwing your 2700 year old story book against the wall of reason as evidence and when it doesn’t stick you take it personally. It isn’t personal… your book is just proof of nothing at all.

Quote:
That they are unprovable and you hold to them with the dogma of a true zealot?
Which are unprovable? You’ll have to be specific here.

Quote:
And yours are like jello, always wanting the same thing to be true, and when it is shown to be absurd, you come up with another hypothesis to justify the claim. You need a reverse X-Files T-shirt that simply says, "I don't want to believe!" That would be more honest.
This statement doesn’t really make any sense. It sounds like the ramblings of a mad man. Can you tell me which views are like jello… and what being jello like means exactly. You sound like you’re getting frustrated and speaking in nonsense.

Quote:
I suppose that might work on the easily baffled. So, far I have seen no evidence of your knowledge other than a belief you are trying to prove true, and have yet to date succeeded.
Then you are being willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest. The concepts presented have been evidenced to the satisfaction of the scientific community. You have to understand, the people that work on this stuff are smarter than you. They’re smarter than I. I can understand why you might press your nose against the glass pounding with your fists as your brain struggles and fails to comprehend these concepts. But it doesn’t make them any less accurate. And they grow and change as our understanding grows with new exciting evidence. You ideals remain stagnant and motionless in the snap shot of man’s infancy of 2700 years ago. And your ignorance is made absolute with the ideal of “Man is so arrogant that he thinks he knows more about his origins and the universe now than he did 2700 years ago.” Understand whether it is your intention or not, that is what you’re saying. That a group of bronze age desert scribes knew more about mankind’s origins and the origins of the universe, with no scientific training or education, than our current scientists do. Think about that. They inject God into their archaic reasoning and you choose that over real science. Doesn’t that sound like a small mind at work?



Quote:
Not at all, I am confident in what I believe. It is not the torment you project. Quite the opposite, actually.
Ignorance is truly bliss.

Quote:
Another comforting aspect is death doesn't worry me in the slightest. A very liberating place to be.
Which only proves my assertion that religion is a security blanket for adults. That is why you suspend reason and intellect. Because it makes you feel better. Not because it’s true. You’re an example of how a human being can convince themselves of the most absurd nonsense as long as it makes them feel safe. Much like a child pulling the blankets over their head to protect them from monsters… believing that that thin sheet of cloth will stop the horrors in their imagination. Your religion is no different than that thin sheet of cloth. And it has grown threadbare and worn as our knowledge has increased.

Quote:
I really haven't seen anything rational from you yet. Most posts I have read have been full of anger, rage, and its lesser cousin sardoic repitoire.
And this goes back to the first question you asked in this post. Because I disagree with you, I must be angry and full of venom. Grrrrrrrr Raaaarrrrr! LOL.

Quote:
Ironic. I find that to be true of Macro Evolution and the Big Bang. No one has an adequae explanation for the biogenesis of the Cambrian level, or the origin of the Big Bang, yet these beliefs are persistantly belocosely declared as "fact". Saying it LOUDER, like another language, does not make it inteligible.
I find it ironic that evidence to support our current understanding of these concepts has been presented to you and your kind over and over and over again and yet you still claim no evidence has been forthcoming. Again, willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.

Quote:
On the contrary, I feel blessed. These things that you attempt to postulate without evidence were foretold long before either of us were born. It provides further confidence in my belief.
Well, if I were going to write a book meant to control people… I would definitely add a part that says something like [In Patrick Stewart Voice] (And there will come a day when men will think they have come to understand the world and creation, and they will say unto you that God’s word is untrue. I say unto you these men are of the devil and they only mean to lead you to eternal torment. Grrrrrrrr Raaaarrrrrr! Avoid education. Avoid questioning dogma. If you believe anything other than what is in these pages you will surely suffer for all eternity. I am God your Lord Raaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrr!)

It’s the fence that keeps in the sheep.

Last edited by Glock36shooter; 09-30-2012 at 13:14..
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 14:06   #230
Sarge1400
Senior Member
 
Sarge1400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
Yes. You in fact told me I was being unkind to my chick because I was not marrying her. That I was treating her son (in reality daughter, your mistake because you love putting words in people’s mouths) as though he were a burden. Others of your ilk have called us materialistic, hedonistic, bent on consuming sex and drugs, that were are not capable of being good people because we obviously cannot be moral people without following the bible. And you continually accuse us of desiring only to persecute the religious, why else would we come here. Yes… you people absolutely have said this over and over again.


I would tend to think you have an unrealistic standard for evidence then. You believe every word of an archaic book written by desert savages… yet you reject the scientific findings of natural processes. The evidence for which literally fills entire buildings. Not to mention historical facts that clearly indicate that the bible was an invention of the jews and much of its beginnings were borrowed from cultures that predate the Jews. The Sumerians were the first to tell tales of a global flood. The Jews stole that. Abraham selected one of the Mesopotamian Gods to represent the one true God. The jews stole and rewrote the Babylonian garden creation myth. We know this. These are facts. You can stand in willful ignorance of them all you want. But we can now plainly see that the bible is based on a mish mash of other culture’s religions. And these facts have been presented to you over and over again. And you continue to play your little game of “I see no evidence presented”. You have a habit of bailing on debates once you’ve been shut down only to return the next day to claim no evidence was given. And you claim we are persecutors because we never relent.



No you haven’t. We love when you guys say things because we love to dismantle the absurd. If you never wrote anything there wouldn’t be any nonsense for use to take apart. Please… keep writing.



To evangelize is to spread the gospel. I reject the gospel outright. I guess you might call me the Anti-Evangelist. I consider myself to be an Anti-Religionist in that we now know enough about our ancient history and our evolutionary beginnings to know that religion is a man made invention and that it was used as a means to bring order to our savage beginnings. It was man’s first attempt at explaining his origins. Ultimately a failed one… but nevertheless a definite step in our growth from rock smashing savages to bronze spear chucking brutes.


Anger? In what part of that statement do you see anger. I was helping a budding free thinker through the early stages of waking up from the delusion that is religion. It’s a very real process. Those who are still deluded will attack you because they fear you. They will shun you and treat you like you’re evil. Many religious people will lash out at new non-believers in the hopes of bringing them back into the fold. Fear is one way religion controls people. Fear of being outcast, fear of hell, fear of death.


Either you don’t understand these concepts or you’re simply being dishonest here. Evidence has been offered over and over again on evolution and you simply choose to be ignorant of it. Either that or your education level prevents you from understanding it. Much like myself looking at high order math equations… that stuff is just over my head and I’m not ashamed to admit it. Takes a special intellect… a higher intellect to grasp those things. And though I understand the principles of evolution, some of the biology and chemistry of it can be quite complex. I am by no means an expert in either of these fields and do my best to understand them. So I can definitely see why someone who chooses to be willfully ignorant of them would have no clue what they’re about.

But let us take a second here to make a clear distinction. Let’s say for a moment that everything we know about the beginnings of the universe and the origins of our species was untrue. Let’s say we learned that we were completely wrong. Doesn’t matter. We know enough about your bible to know it is an invention of man, borrowed from other cultures, and most certainly didn’t get it right. Evolution doesn’t have to be true in order for your archaic mythology to be wrong. The two have nothing to do with each other.





I can see how it seems that way to you. You keep throwing your 2700 year old story book against the wall of reason as evidence and when it doesn’t stick you take it personally. It isn’t personal… your book is just proof of nothing at all.



Which are unprovable? You’ll have to be specific here.



This statement doesn’t really make any sense. It sounds like the ramblings of a mad man. Can you tell me which views are like jello… and what being jello like means exactly. You sound like you’re getting frustrated and speaking in nonsense.



Then you are being willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest. The concepts presented have been evidenced to the satisfaction of the scientific community. You have to understand, the people that work on this stuff are smarter than you. They’re smarter than I. I can understand why you might press your nose against the glass pounding with your fists as your brain struggles and fails to comprehend these concepts. But it doesn’t make them any less accurate. And they grow and change as our understanding grows with new exciting evidence. You ideals remain stagnant and motionless in the snap shot of man’s infancy of 2700 years ago. And your ignorance is made absolute with the ideal of “Man is so arrogant that he thinks he knows more about his origins and the universe now than he did 2700 years ago.” Understand whether it is your intention or not, that is what you’re saying. That a group of bronze age desert scribes knew more about mankind’s origins and the origins of the universe, with no scientific training or education, than our current scientists do. Think about that. They inject God into their archaic reasoning and you choose that over real science. Doesn’t that sound like a small mind at work?




Ignorance is truly bliss.



Which only proves my assertion that religion is a security blanket for adults. That is why you suspend reason and intellect. Because it makes you feel better. Not because it’s true. You’re an example of how a human being can convince themselves of the most absurd nonsense as long as it makes them feel safe. Much like a child pulling the blankets over their head to protect them from monsters… believing that that thin sheet of cloth will stop the horrors in their imagination. Your religion is no different than that thin sheet of cloth. And it has grown threadbare and worn as our knowledge has increased.


And this goes back to the first question you asked in this post. Because I disagree with you, I must be angry and full of venom. Grrrrrrrr Raaaarrrrr! LOL.


I find it ironic that evidence to support our current understanding of these concepts has been presented to you and your kind over and over and over again and yet you still claim no evidence has been forthcoming. Again, willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.



Well, if I were going to write a book meant to control people… I would definitely add a part that says something like [In Patrick Stewart Voice] (And there will come a day when men will think they have come to understand the world and creation, and they will say unto you that God’s word is untrue. I say unto you these men are of the devil and they only mean to lead you to eternal torment. Grrrrrrrr Raaaarrrrrr! Avoid education. Avoid questioning dogma. If you believe anything other than what is in these pages you will surely suffer for all eternity. I am God your Lord Raaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrr!)

It’s the fence that keeps in the sheep.
Well written, thoughtful, and represents my views EXACTLY. Thank you for putting into the written word what I am unable to.
Sarge1400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 14:27   #231
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokenprism View Post
Muscogee accused me of condescending. This tone is a pretty good example of condescension. Most real Christians would say, at best, that your unbelief can’t be helped. It’s inherited. You didn’t eat the fruit, but you’re paying the penalty for it because fallen Adam generates fallen children, just like giraffes have baby giraffes and not baby hippos.
No more condescending than this post. You claim you are among an elite few, and that the rest of us slobbering masses cannot help that we are damned. It’s just your invisible friend’s will. However I have the power of evidence on my side. You keep pointing to a stagnant dogma that we know to be an invention of man. I however point towards evidence that what you would call “Creation” presents all by itself. Evidence that you and your kind reject over and over again. I don’t mean ignorant to mean stupid. I don’t think you’re stupid. There is Ignorant, meaning unaware of the facts. There is willful ignorance which is choosing to ignore the facts when they’re right in your face. And by uneducated I don’t mean stupid either. I mean you have an education that does not include these disciplines. You are highly educated in apologetics and biblical scripture it seems. But not so much in the fields of biology, chemistry, cosmology, physics, and so on. Don’t feel alone, my education is self provided in these instances. I have masters in business. So what I learn about these disciplines is through whatever I can read in my spare time. But many of you reject it as though learning about science is evil and unchristian. So to a degree it’s a state of self-induced ignorance.
Quote:
I don’t think we believers say demeaning things like you’re 'uneducated' or 'ignorant' or 'deluded' or need a 'security blanket.' These are personal attacks. If any of us does, shame on him.
You need to read some of Snowbirds, Kingarthurs, or scherberts (or whatever it is) posts. But I for one am not bothered by it. I can take a little bloody nose. It’s ok. You present hypocrisy where there is none.

Quote:
It’s not charitable. I don’t know what whack-a-mole is, but it comes to mind when I think of this forum. The minute someone makes an assertion of faith, or looks to the Word of God for an answer, you guys are right there with mallets to whack that mole down.
You obviously do know what a whack-a-mole is then. What you call the word of God is an invention of man. You can believe it all you like. But the second you present it as proof of anything… yes… we are going to be here to dismantle it. We are interested in man’s future. We will not allow our world and universe to be explained through ancient mythology that we know to be man-made without offering the truth. You are more than free to present it… just don’t get upset when we smack it down.

Quote:
Almost every reply to a believer’s post includes an attack on the faith position, even if it’s not the topic of the thread. Like “No, I haven’t see the new Glock 23, and by the way, God doesn’t exist and you’re the cause of all the world’s evils.” You just can’t let the statements pass.
Please… share where this is happening. I don’t recall attacking someone’s religion simply because they like the Glock 23. I mean, clearly the Glock 19 is the superior firearm… but that has nothing to do with religion. Although I do believe Jesus would also choose the G19 over the G23 simply because of ammo costs. He’d have more to give to the poor after a range trip.

Quote:
You’re like the Revolutionary Guard of atheism
Damn that sounds cool! Can I use that? Sounds like Imperial Guard from Star Wars or something. I’m gonna get a custom patch made for my EDC Bag.

Quote:
This really should be called the atheist forum, because you guys own it. You seem to feel put upon and threatened, if not by individuals, then by institutionalized religion
There you go again. That’s the religious outlook, that anyone who disagrees should be silenced. You want to present your dogma unchallenged. Not gonna happen. If you can’t take a little bloody nose… Go home.

Quote:
Maybe you’ve heard this before, but Christians – the real ones – don’t think much of the word ‘religion.’ There are a LOT of unfortunate labels in this debate. We don’t own that label, but it’s all you’ve given us. You take issue with ‘religious’ people, and if you were to poll the regenerated, you’d find that we do too.
That is an elitist statement. It’s ok LOL… just understand that’s what is meant when you’re accused of being condescending.

Quote:
Add to the mix the historical atrocities committed by ‘religious’ people – the Inquisitions, the Crusades, etc. All this is laid at the feet of ‘Christians’ but they were not committed or endorsed by CHristians. You may or may not realize that there are distinctions. There is the church, and there is the Church. The first is an assembly of religious unbelievers. It’s visible, and it’s everywhere. Examples of these include Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, LDS, Methodists, Unitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Assemblies of God, and a host of lesser known groups who hold to one or more heretical doctrines that disqualify them as 'Christians.' If I painted with a broad brush, I would say they are not Christian. Not even close. The denominations probably contain one or two regenerated people, but those people will eventually become uncomfortable and leave. If we use the analogy of the sower, these people are the seeds that sprang up quickly; they’re the one that fell on hard ground and took no root; they’re the ones choked by thorns. They’re counterfeits, impostors, heretics, and they are behind most of the historical events you decry. The Inquisitions and Crusades were led by Popes, not Apostles. That alone takes Christians off the table as the guilty parties. The people behind these events weren’t Christians, and therefore, your beef is not with Christians. It’s with sinners in red robes. People no more saved and Spirit-led than you are. Many of them are outwardly moral, and even well-meaning – they’ll say that God loves you and is anxious for you to come to Him. And they’re wrong.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Then there is the Church. The invisible assembly of the saints of all time. This is the body of real, regenerated believers. They don’t persecute anyone. They don’t use the Bible as a hammer, they don’t antagonize the lost, they don’t show up at rallies and protests and marches to wave insulting signs. They make simple declarations of faith, they stand on what they believe and cannot be moved off of it – ever – and they will never turn their backs on it – ever. Like the Church they belong to, they are ‘invisible.’ These are the people who give to those in need; who loan without expecting repayment; who watch their tongues (not easy, and we're not always successful); who help the needy; who act toward you with kindness and restraint; who quietly go about their lives relying on the grace of God every minute. These people too, have fallen natures, but they have something else: the Spirit of the living God dwelling inside them, and it is this Spirit that makes the best behavior possible. Their dual natures are constantly at war, they are constantly provoked and tempted, and they fight, but they fight themselves.
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]You can’t tell the difference between these groups through casual observation. They all look the same to you. Because the lost man is dead in trespasses and sins – as they once were – he can’t accept that they even exist.
No True Scotsman I see. No sorry, you will not be allowed to use this to slither out of your religion’s responsibility for the millions of deaths and torment done in the name of YOUR god and christ (I intentionally choose not to capitalize those in case you’re wondering).

Quote:
He can read the Bible (some of you apparently have) but he can’t understand it because it wasn’t written for him.
Nonsense. It is an archaic script written by men who were less educated than your average 12 year old. It isn’t anymore complex than that. Apologists attempt to insert more complexity than there is in an effort to keep it elusive and vague so that it can continually be twisted and turned to evade being dismantled. But it is what it is. Ancient writings by men who knew very little of what was happening around them.


Quote:
To the extent that you have an issue with Christians, it is an issue with the message.
Untrue. The bible never killed anyone. Well that we know of. Maybe one of the huge ones fell out a window and smashed someone’s head in. But the book itself has never hurt anyone. Its followers are the ones that have killed, raped, and tortured in its name and the name of the god by which it was inspired. I have an issue with religious people.

Quote:
It's the message that judges you. They don’t judge you – the gospel judges you. It openly judges you – this is why you hate it. This is why you have to silence it, and silence the messengers.
Trust me… it’s the people. The book just sits there. But you are right that the book carries a hateful message and instructs the people behave so horribly.

Quote:
In order to take the sting out of the judgment that you know is coming, you try to discredit the message.
Hmmm it does that all by itself. By being so obviously full of holes.

Quote:
It’s a futile endeavor. He is coming back, you will be judged
I’ll believe it when I see it. And I’ll make buds with him then.

Quote:
and so would we, had we not been plucked out of the mass of humanity, washed, brought back to life – eternal life that will never end – and placed in God’s Son to enjoy the benefits of His salvation.
Elitist much?

Quote:
We don’t deserve it. We didn’t earn it. We’re as stunned as anyone that God did this, but He did it for His purposes, and they are at present unknown to us, or known only vaguely: He does what He does ultimately for His own glory. Both in saving some, and judging others, He is glorified. That’s all we know.
That god is a selfish, cruel, egomaniac that tortures people much like a child burning ants with a magnifying glass in the sun for his own glory? What a wonderful being this god is.


Quote:
Coming here and debating these issues is great fun – it’s a kind of sport. If we weren’t talking about this, we could all be friends and go shooting. This is the thing that links us together. We like Glocks. This forum is a sideshow, and no one’s mind is going to be changed. I jumped into this thread to correct a brother who offered bad counsel, and in that sense I crashed the thread. I don’t have an agenda to convert you, so I’m playing, just like you.
I’m curious… what do you think (just by what they write) of the level of godliness of Snowbird, Kingarthur, and Scherbert (whatever it is)? You’ve read many of their posts. You think they are the religious damned? Or true regenerated chosen of Christ?

Quote:
The big issue you guys have is that there is no proof for the existence of God. The Bible says you know He’s there, because you can see His creation. If you lived in a jungle and never heard a word about the gospel, you would still know that God exists because you can see His work all around you.
But we now know it isn’t his work. The bible says it took god 6 days to make all this. That is simply false. It says he made us of dust and earth… we know that’s not true. We know we were not created separate from every other living thing on this planet… that we are a part of an all encompassing process of evolution, natural selection, and adaptation. And no… you’re not allowed to say “Well maybe this is the way god brought about creation.” No… your book doesn’t say that. You don’t get to steal the work of dedicated scientists and make it a part of your dogma in order to evade its dismantling. Your book clearly states how god did things, and you can tell it’s the writings of simpler minds. Your book got it wrong. So we know it to be false. We don’t need to prove that god does or does not exist to know the men that wrote the bible knew nothing of how nature works.

Quote:
Practically every primitive culture had some sort of sacrifice system in place. Why didn’t isolated groups of people – if they were going to create a god in their image – create a benevolent one? Because humanity is young, and it has racial memory of the Fall and the flood. You’ve heard about the cavalryman who found a seashell on a mountain, and asked a Crow Indian how it got there. He said that long ago, there was a great flood, and a man and his family sailed around in a boat and became the father of all the Indians. There is a geological record of the flood.
There is no record of a worldwide flood. This is simply untrue. If my memory serves me there was massive flood in the mediteranian area ages ago. This is more than likely where the Sumerian legend of the great flood originates. And the writers of your bible stole this mythology and made it their own. Your bible is a mish mash of other culture’s myths and legends that predate the jews.

Quote:
There is an expanding universe that started with an inexplicable BANG.
Which is not mentioned in your magic book. You do not get to make this a part of your dogma. The Big Bang or the Expanding Universe are not biblical.

Quote:
There is the fact that the entire world has been changed by the Christian message – two thousand years’ worth of history that shaped cultures and continents. And you propose to undermine all that by enlightening us with your modern, educated, incorrigible assertion that it was all B.S.? That’s no choice at all.
The appeal of Christianity is not evidence of its truth. Otherwise the same could be said for Islam. It, like Islam has been used by men as a means to power, to control people, to instill obedience via fear with a twist of salvation. This is exactly my point. In man’s infancy when we were far less educated and far more ignorant religion was the ultimate free lunch. It explained everything with “God Did It!”. And the more we learn about our world and cosmos the fewer places your God has left to hide. Believe all you like. You will be counted among those that eventually died as deluded men holding on to an archaic mythology which man, at current, has the understanding to look beyond.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 15:51   #232
mike g35
RACEGUN SHOOTER
 
mike g35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Charleston W.V.
Posts: 2,249
This threads like a bar fight, pointless but fun. Anyone want a beer? I'm buying.




Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
Carver Custom Team
GSSF, USPSA, NRA
www.bb-enterprise.biz
mike g35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 16:00   #233
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by onebigelf View Post
Why do you assume that my life must be smooth and free from troubles for it to be good? My life is good because I see wonders everywhere. And in those wonders I see the hand of God.
Which "wonders" are these?

Quote:
Look at a woman, or a cat, or a child. Imagine all of the complex development and the interactions on the chemical and biological level necessary for their existence. One thing off and life doesn't happen.
No... one thing off and you get disabilities, malformations, birth defects. Is God such a inept creator?

Quote:
Watch the movement and think of all that goes into that simple action.
Watch the lack of movement in a person born as a quad and ask yourself... "Did God screw the pooch?"

Quote:
You really think that is all just luck?
Luck? I don't believe in luck. It is the result of proper conditions. If the conditions were not proper... we wouldn't be here to wonder. But there is nothing that points to a God of any sorts. You simply choose to inject that as the answer to what you see around you. Pretty lazy in fact.

Quote:
What about intelligence?
It evolved with us. We used to crap where we stood and bash each other over the head with rocks. Much of our species was more than likely born out of rape, or the strongest males forcibly taking mates. We're better than that now. Not because of god... but because we learn and pass that knowledge to our young. It's the defining principle of culture.

Quote:
What about love?
What is love? Define it? Prove that it exists. Show me that what you call love is the same as what I call it. Who loves their partner more? You or me? Prove it? How much does love weigh? What does it smell like? Taste like? What color is love? What is it made up of?


Quote:
What about the rationality of thought that you are so proud of. Just luck? Just an accidental development of neurons and chemicals and cells?
Functions of nature.

Quote:
God is a certainty of statistics, my friend.
Excellent. Please provide these statistics. I'd like to pass these equations on to our math department. Once proven accurate and valid... the discussion will be over. This is the evidence we've all been asking for. Please... by all means... blow my mind.

Last edited by Glock36shooter; 09-30-2012 at 16:18..
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 16:01   #234
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike g35 View Post
This threads like a bar fight, pointless but fun. Anyone want a beer? I'm buying.
I don't drink.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 16:23   #235
Sarge1400
Senior Member
 
Sarge1400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
I don't drink.
Why is this a standard reply from non-drinkers? The question was "Anyone want a beer?" Nobody asked you if you drank; an appropriate answer would have been "No, thank you".

Sorry for the tangent, but your reply reminded me of some of the prideful snottiness that we hear from the believers around here.
Sarge1400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 16:32   #236
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarge1400 View Post
Why is this a standard reply from non-drinkers? The question was "Anyone want a beer?" Nobody asked you if you drank; an appropriate answer would have been "No, thank you".

Sorry for the tangent, but your reply reminded me of some of the prideful snottiness that we hear from the believers around here.
Just a statement of fact. Not meant to be prideful. My chick would take a free drink in a second. But not beer. She likes mixed drinks. I like it when she drinks. I can take advantage of her lack of good judgement. And she always thanks me for it in the morning. LOL.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 16:39   #237
Sarge1400
Senior Member
 
Sarge1400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock36shooter View Post
Just a statement of fact. Not meant to be prideful. My chick would take a free drink in a second. But not beer. She likes mixed drinks. I like it when she drinks. I can take advantage of her lack of good judgement. And she always thanks me for it in the morning. LOL.
LOL, as you were. oops, I mean
Sarge1400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 16:59   #238
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,325


You are on quite the roll this evening G36Shooter. I enjoyed reading your treatise.



(even if you don't drink)
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."

Last edited by Geko45; 09-30-2012 at 17:00..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 17:45   #239
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
These have been found on a global level, not just isolated incidents.
Outstanding. Where? Could you provide some specific examples that demonstrate a simultaneous flood all around the world?
Quote:
It is ironic that you can accept a hypothesized asterorid hitting earth in the past and causing a cataclysim, for which there is entirely no evidence, in lieu of a global flood for which there is plenty of evidence in the fossil record.
What are we talking about here? The KT Extinction event? You really need to be more specific about things.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 21:33   #240
Syclone538
Senior Member
 
Syclone538's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike g35 View Post
This threads like a bar fight, pointless but fun. Anyone want a beer? I'm buying.
I'll take Bacardi Oakheart and Cherry Pepsi, not fountain pop, cold, no ice.
__________________
Some people want freedom, even for those they disagree with, and some don't.
Do lot Do so sinh Ban buon quan ao Chup anh cho be
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAcop View Post
...
The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.
...
Syclone538 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2012, 05:55   #241
Cavalry Doc
Silver Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,086


Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
"Sure" is a big word in science, but I find the sudden change in the fossil record above and below the KT boundary to be pretty convincing, yes. Are there other theories, of course, but you have to go through some pretty tough mental gymnastics to accept one of those above the much more obvious explanation of an impact event. Occam's Razor and all that...

I'm actually surprised King took that position. Most theists I've talked to accept the impact evidence and assume an enormous tsunami as the result. Still a bit of confirmation bias, but at least one more consistent with observations.
But just how close can you attach these two events? 10 years, 100? 1000? It bears looking into, but it's not certain. Lots if things have happened that man was not around to witness.
Cavalry Doc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2012, 13:42   #242
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,325


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
But just how close can you attach these two events? 10 years, 100? 1000? It bears looking into, but it's not certain. Lots if things have happened that man was not around to witness.
You are making an argument based on the validity and soundness of the evidence as it supports the proposed hypothesis. This is a reasonable thing to do (I'd disagree that the time interval in question is significant, but let's set that aside for a moment). My point in raising the issue was that King declared that there was no evidence at all.

Quote:
It is ironic that you can accept a hypothesized asterorid hitting earth in the past and causing a cataclysim, for which there is entirely no evidence
Clearly there is evidence. We have a global KT boundary with unusually high levels of iridium (as typically found in meteors). We have an impact crater of sufficient size to cause a global catalclysm (the Chicxulub Crater off the coast of the Yucatan Peninsula). We have the iridium samples from various locations around the worls that vary in direct proportion to their distance to the crater. And finally, we have the fossil record which shows a sudden extinction event centered on the KT boundary (with large amounts of species that existed before it, going extinct suddenly after it).

Now, you can challenge any or all of those points on whatever grounds you like (which you have done, for instance) and we can discuss the relative merits of the argument as compared to the evidence, but that is not what King has done (and not what he typically does). He declares unilaterally that evidence does not exist and when someone like me posts such evidence, he never returns to the discussion (or at least doesn't acknowledge that his point has been countered). Invariably, some time later, he makes the same claim again, even though he knows that he was presented with evidence previously.

That's disengenious.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2012, 16:55   #243
High-Gear
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 739
Quote:
Quote: Originally posted by Brokenprism
This really should be called the atheist forum, because you guys own it.

The Internet...Where religion goes to die!
__________________
Ĉu vi parolas Esperanton?

Last edited by High-Gear; 10-01-2012 at 16:56..
High-Gear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2012, 23:28   #244
G23Gen4TX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by High-Gear View Post
The Internet...Where religion goes to die!
The sooner the better.
G23Gen4TX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2012, 06:10   #245
Cavalry Doc
Silver Membership
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,086


Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
You are making an argument based on the validity and soundness of the evidence as it supports the proposed hypothesis. This is a reasonable thing to do (I'd disagree that the time interval in question is significant, but let's set that aside for a moment). My point in raising the issue was that King declared that there was no evidence at all.



Clearly there is evidence. We have a global KT boundary with unusually high levels of iridium (as typically found in meteors). We have an impact crater of sufficient size to cause a global catalclysm (the Chicxulub Crater off the coast of the Yucatan Peninsula). We have the iridium samples from various locations around the worls that vary in direct proportion to their distance to the crater. And finally, we have the fossil record which shows a sudden extinction event centered on the KT boundary (with large amounts of species that existed before it, going extinct suddenly after it).

Now, you can challenge any or all of those points on whatever grounds you like (which you have done, for instance) and we can discuss the relative merits of the argument as compared to the evidence, but that is not what King has done (and not what he typically does). He declares unilaterally that evidence does not exist and when someone like me posts such evidence, he never returns to the discussion (or at least doesn't acknowledge that his point has been countered). Invariably, some time later, he makes the same claim again, even though he knows that he was presented with evidence previously.

That's disengenious.
It's absolutely genuine. Some measurable facts like the KT boundary have been used by imaginitive people to tell a story. There are missing but critical pieces of the puzzle still. It's plausible, but not definite. But many people are uncomfortable with the fact that a lot of what has happened in the universe and on this planet are still really mysteries. It's narcissistic to pretend you have all the answers.
Cavalry Doc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2012, 06:36   #246
Clutch Cargo
Amsterdam Haze
 
Clutch Cargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike g35 View Post
This threads like a bar fight, pointless but fun. Anyone want a beer? I'm buying.




Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Cool. We can discuss theories how a lone guy hung and perfectly balanced a 9 ton coral rock gate you can move with a finger.

http://coralcastle.com/
__________________
GTDS
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
Clutch Cargo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2012, 06:38   #247
Clutch Cargo
Amsterdam Haze
 
Clutch Cargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by High-Gear View Post
The Internet...Where religion goes to die!
Quote:
Originally Posted by G23Gen4TX View Post
The sooner the better.
Religion has killed millions upon millions of fellow human beings over time. I'm into faith, myself.
__________________
GTDS
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
Clutch Cargo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2012, 07:10   #248
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,325


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
It's absolutely genuine. Some measurable facts like the KT boundary have been used by imaginitive people to tell a story. There are missing but critical pieces of the puzzle still. It's plausible, but not definite. But many people are uncomfortable with the fact that a lot of what has happened in the universe and on this planet are still really mysteries. It's narcissistic to pretend you have all the answers.
Now you are being disengenious (again). I didn't claim to have all the answers, but I did show that there is evidence in support of the theory. You agreed there was evidence (although your position is that it is inconclusive), but then in the same breath claim King was not being disengenious.

King claimed that there was absolutely no evidence at all, inconclusive or otherwise. Clearly there is at least some. You (and he) might not find it compelling, but to continually claim there is zero is just flat out wrong. And you sticking to your one trick pony argument when it's not even applicable to the point at hand is equally wrong.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2012, 09:48   #249
snowbird
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: land of the free
Posts: 3,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
Okay, so all religious violence is acceptable to you with the exception of Islam. Got it.
Have you not on several occasions claimed to be a Christian? So why are you bearing false witness against your neighbor, and on behalf of a false prophet's homicidal followers who are attacking us, no less?
__________________
"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
-T. Roosevelt, President 1901-09, US soldier, martial artist, hiker, agriculteral worker, and conservationist, among other things.
snowbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2012, 08:00   #250
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,325


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
It's narcissistic to pretend you have all the answers.
Serious question, why do you only seem to challenge athiests when they evaluate empirical evidence and come to a tentative conclusion, but never seem to challenge theists when they claim absolute certainty based on no evidence at all?

It seems to me that if you believe that we are narcissitc for following the scientific method (which never claims absolute certainty) then you must also consider them to be that much more so since they claim divinely inspired absolutes based on faith alone?
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:05.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,349
395 Members
954 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42