| |
Main
Date: 17 Dec
From: estebanAA
Subject: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt matter
what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
|
| |
Date: 17 Dec
From: Vegas Vic
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
All God creatures (including man) either evolve or die off. And we have evolved.
Well... most of us. But how man first got here is a matter of faith not science.
The Adam & Eve thing? Evolved up from apes? Placed on earth by aliens from
another galaxy? We really don't know. Man isn't that smart...yet.
I'm sure Orange will correct me if I'm wrong.
On Dec 16 2006 4:04 PM, estebanAA wrote:
>
> it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt
> matter
> what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 21:10:11
From: David Nicoson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
estebanAA wrote:
> it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt matter
> what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager
|
| |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 17:12:44
From: CheckRazor
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
estebanAA wrote:
> it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt matter
> what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
>
Would you PLEASE just go to Mass, and get the religious crap off this
board. My God, you're worse than those LDS and Jehoviah Witness kids
that go door-to-door in their black suits while riding their
ten-speeds. PUH-LEEZE.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: estebanAA
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
nah -- ive been here posting for 2 years these are my only 2 God post :)
On Dec 16 2006 7:12 PM, CheckRazor wrote:
> estebanAA wrote:
> > it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt
> > matter
> > what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
> >
>
>
> Would you PLEASE just go to Mass, and get the religious crap off this
> board. My God, you're worse than those LDS and Jehoviah Witness kids
> that go door-to-door in their black suits while riding their
> ten-speeds. PUH-LEEZE.
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 17 Dec
From: estebanAA
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
by the way im not telling you how to believe in him . not even when. just that
His out there and you have to respect him and his power.
if you like to believe you came from a monkey I will not disagree with you --
good luck with that :). and you will never see your love ones again -- I would
hate to live with that on my mind. gl estebanAA
On Dec 16 2006 6:04 PM, estebanAA wrote:
>
> it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt
> matter
> what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: Nick Wool
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 17 2006 12:12 AM, estebanAA wrote:
>
> by the way im not telling you how to believe in him . not even when. just that
> His out there and you have to respect him and his power.
>
> if you like to believe you came from a monkey I will not disagree with you --
> good luck with that :). and you will never see your love ones again -- I would
> hate to live with that on my mind. gl estebanAA
>
ar, I see, a typical American? I thought even the Catholic Church has accepted
Darwinian Evolution?
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: Barking Toad
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
On Dec 16 2006 6:22 PM, Nick Wool wrote:
>
> >
> >
>
> ar, I see, a typical American? I thought even the Catholic Church has
> accepted
> Darwinian Evolution?
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 16 2006 6:48 PM, Barking Toad wrote:
> Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
Actually, it's the opposite. He kept his ideas under his hat for about 20 years
because of a fear of how the clergy would react to him.
Evolution doesn't say that people descended from monkeys, btw.
It does suggest that there's a good chance that monkeys and humans have a common
ancestor. Maybe those common ancestors where Adam and Eve.
>
> On Dec 16 2006 6:22 PM, Nick Wool wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ar, I see, a typical American? I thought even the Catholic Church has
> > accepted
> > Darwinian Evolution?
>
>
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 07:39:48
From: ben carr
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
I once heard a rather offensive joke that said god created white people
and blacks evolved from monkeys. This came from a christian.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 14:58:39
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 17 2006 6:39 AM, ben carr wrote:
> I once heard a rather offensive joke that said god created white people
> and blacks evolved from monkeys. This came from a christian.
I think Christians evolved from earthworms.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 15:41:49
From: Alan Gilbert aka brewmaster
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 17 2006 4:39 AM, ben carr wrote:
> I once heard a rather offensive joke that said god created white people
> and blacks evolved from monkeys.
de-evolved. Monkey would be the next stage of evolution.
> This came from a christian.
------
brewmaster at brewcam dot com
"Once in awhile you can get shown the light in the strangest of places if
you look at it right" -RH
-------
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 17:13:33
From: pokerchimp
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 16 2006 7:48 PM, Barking Toad wrote:
> Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
LINK PLEASE
>
> On Dec 16 2006 6:22 PM, Nick Wool wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ar, I see, a typical American? I thought even the Catholic Church has
> > accepted
> > Darwinian Evolution?
thumbers on stars, dieseldyke on absolute/vegaspoker24/7
_____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 20:23:02
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 17:13:33 -0800, "pokerchimp" <mixthing@se.rr.com > wrote:
>On Dec 16 2006 7:48 PM, Barking Toad wrote:
>> Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
>LINK PLEASE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Hope
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hope.html
It's a typical Christian lie. You'd think people so "Godly" wouldn't be such a
bunch of lying fucks.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 16 2006 7:23 PM, A Man Beaten by Jacks wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 17:13:33 -0800, "pokerchimp" wrote:
>
> >On Dec 16 2006 7:48 PM, Barking Toad wrote:
>
> >> Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
>
> >LINK PLEASE
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Hope
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hope.html
>
> It's a typical Christian lie. You'd think people so "Godly" wouldn't be such
> a
> bunch of lying fucks.
I'm not sure it's a lie as much as just a delusion.
Darwin was an explorer, a natural biologist, and studied theology.
Back then every educated person studied theology. But todays nutcase Christians
don't know that and just assume that nobody who studied theology would propose
evolutionary theory.
So they just presume that the study of theology came after the science stuff and
that once he learned the truth he would have recanted heathen ideas.
It's not they're lying, it's that I can't understand how any thing else is
possible.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 03:33:25
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Sun, 17 Dec 06 8:06:33 GMT, Gary Carson <garycarson@alumni.northwestern.edu >
wrote:
>On Dec 16 2006 7:23 PM, A Man Beaten by Jacks wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 17:13:33 -0800, "pokerchimp" wrote:
>> >On Dec 16 2006 7:48 PM, Barking Toad wrote:
>> >> Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
>> >LINK PLEASE
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Hope
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hope.html
>> It's a typical Christian lie. You'd think people so "Godly" wouldn't be such
>> a
>> bunch of lying fucks.
>I'm not sure it's a lie as much as just a delusion.
>Darwin was an explorer, a natural biologist, and studied theology.
>Back then every educated person studied theology. But todays nutcase Christians
>don't know that and just assume that nobody who studied theology would propose
>evolutionary theory.
>So they just presume that the study of theology came after the science stuff and
>that once he learned the truth he would have recanted heathen ideas.
>It's not they're lying, it's that I can't understand how any thing else is
>possible.
Now, the current nutcases may actually believe the story, but the source of
the story, Lady Elizabeth Hope, claimed to have been the witness to
Darwin recanting on his deathbed. She was, simply, a lying sack of shit.
No such thing ever happened.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 17 2006 2:33 AM, A Man Beaten by Jacks wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Dec 06 8:06:33 GMT, Gary Carson
>
> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 16 2006 7:23 PM, A Man Beaten by Jacks wrote:
>
> >> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 17:13:33 -0800, "pokerchimp" wrote:
>
> >> >On Dec 16 2006 7:48 PM, Barking Toad wrote:
>
> >> >> Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
>
> >> >LINK PLEASE
>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Hope
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hope.html
>
> >> It's a typical Christian lie. You'd think people so "Godly" wouldn't be
> >> such
> >> a
> >> bunch of lying fucks.
>
> >I'm not sure it's a lie as much as just a delusion.
>
> >Darwin was an explorer, a natural biologist, and studied theology.
>
> >Back then every educated person studied theology. But todays nutcase
> >Christians
> >don't know that and just assume that nobody who studied theology would
> >propose
> >evolutionary theory.
>
> >So they just presume that the study of theology came after the science stuff
> >and
> >that once he learned the truth he would have recanted heathen ideas.
>
> >It's not they're lying, it's that I can't understand how any thing else is
> >possible.
>
> Now, the current nutcases may actually believe the story, but the source of
> the story, Lady Elizabeth Hope, claimed to have been the witness to
> Darwin recanting on his deathbed. She was, simply, a lying sack of shit.
> No such thing ever happened.
Probably not.
But he did have some fear that God would get angry with him. Mostly he hid the
manuscript under a mattress for 20 years because of fear of social ostrisism,
but a fear of retribution by God might have been part of it. Some of the
educated types in those days were nuts to some degree. So, it's possible he
retracted on a deathbed because he was taking one last shot at making god happy.
It took a lot of guts to claim there were some birds that didn't originate in
the Garden of Eden back in those days.
I mean, Pascal was a pretty bright guy, much too bright to swallow Pascal's
Wager, but those guys really were scared shitless of offending the Church.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 19:52:08
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Sun, 17 Dec 06 0:48:20 GMT, Barking Toad <43086432@recpoker.com > wrote:
>Even Darwin recanted his evolution theory late in life.
What a load of Snopes-bait.
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Dec
From: estebanAA
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
They do, they no longer belive in Adam and Eve? I didn't know that .Im not
Catholic but I'm sure they still belive in Adam and Eve.
On Dec 16 2006 6:22 PM, Nick Wool wrote:
>
> On Dec 17 2006 12:12 AM, estebanAA wrote:
>
> >
> > by the way im not telling you how to believe in him . not even when. just
> > that
> > His out there and you have to respect him and his power.
> >
> > if you like to believe you came from a monkey I will not disagree with you
> > --
> > good luck with that :). and you will never see your love ones again -- I
> > would
> > hate to live with that on my mind. gl estebanAA
> >
>
> ar, I see, a typical American? I thought even the Catholic Church has
> accepted
> Darwinian Evolution?
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 07:37:53
From: ben carr
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Evolution is easy to see and understand. You take a black cat and a
white cat. They live in the same area. The black cat can hide easier and
therefor lives longer. Since it lives longer it can breed more
offspring. The white cat stands out a little and dies sooner. The next
generation of cats has more black ones than white ones. This is
evolution in a nutshell
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 14:57:41
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Black cats tend to get burned up a lot on one night a year. Evolution is
sometimes not as simple as you'd like.
On Dec 17 2006 6:37 AM, ben carr wrote:
> Evolution is easy to see and understand. You take a black cat and a
> white cat. They live in the same area. The black cat can hide easier and
> therefor lives longer. Since it lives longer it can breed more
> offspring. The white cat stands out a little and dies sooner. The next
> generation of cats has more black ones than white ones. This is
> evolution in a nutshell
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 15:35:02
From: Alan Gilbert aka brewmaster
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 17 2006 6:57 AM, Gary Carson wrote:
> Black cats tend to get burned up a lot on one night a year. Evolution is
> sometimes not as simple as you'd like.
I have a black cat (well, he's more of a kitler, but he's almost entirely
jet black) and a pure white one. The black one is a very gentle friendly
fellow, and very social, and the white one (female) is a total bitch and
will go out of her way to pick on some of my other cats that she thinks
are "pussies" (or something). I'm going to keep close track of who lives
longer. I'll update once every few years.
>
> On Dec 17 2006 6:37 AM, ben carr wrote:
>
> > Evolution is easy to see and understand. You take a black cat and a
> > white cat. They live in the same area. The black cat can hide easier and
> > therefor lives longer. Since it lives longer it can breed more
> > offspring. The white cat stands out a little and dies sooner. The next
> > generation of cats has more black ones than white ones. This is
> > evolution in a nutshell
> Gary Carson
> http://www.garycarson.com
------
brewmaster at brewcam dot com
"Once in awhile you can get shown the light in the strangest of places if
you look at it right" -RH
----
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 20:49:14
From: bjgkaraoke@aol.com
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
art_classmn wrote:
> bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> > estebanAA wrote:
> > > They do, they no longer belive in Adam and Eve? I didn't know that .Im not
> > > Catholic but I'm sure they still belive in Adam and Eve.
> >
> > No, they don't. As the priest explained to our confimation class many
> > years ago, "the stories in the Old Testament are told so simple people
> > can understand them. They are just stories, they're not to be taken
> > literally." He also told us that it's ok to believe in evolution, as
> > long as we believe that God was behind everything. It made sense to me
> > at the time.
> >
> > Barbara Gallamore
>
> What did he say about the stories in the New Testament? You know, the
> ones where, a pedo god knocks up a virgin teenager and....you know the
> rest.
>
> What is so different about the propositions in the New Testament that
> makes them so different than the "simpleton" stories in the old?
>
> And where does this priest get off editing "god's book" anyway?
Art, this happened many years ago. I don't remember everything he
lectured us about, but I do clearly remember the part about the Old
Testament and evolution. I don't remember any details he discussed
about the New Testament.
Apparently, he thought he had the authority to give us this
information. Actually, I was relieved, because it made much more sense
to me than thinking I had to take everything literally. Also, he was
an extremely learned priest, so I assume he was giving us the
correct Catholic doctrine.
Barbara Gallamore
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 10:31:02
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
The WJR22 wrote:
> How about starting with this one which is easily some of the worst
> advice ever uttered.
>
> MATTHEW: Chapter 5 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil...
Tell us what's wrong with the verse.
Matthew 5:39
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASB: "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever
slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GWT: But I tell you not to oppose an evil person. If someone slaps you
on your right cheek, turn your other cheek to him as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KJV: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall
smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASV: but I say unto you, resist not him that is evil: but whosoever
smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBE: But I say to you, Do not make use of force against an evil man;
but to him who gives you a blow on the right side of your face let the
left be turned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DBY: But I say unto you, not to resist evil; but whoever shall strike
thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEY: But I tell you not to resist a wicked man, but if any one strikes
you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WBS: But I say to you, That ye resist not evil: but whoever shall
strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEB: But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes
you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YLT: but I -- I say to you, not to resist the evil, but whoever shall
slap thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other;
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 14:13:17
From: The WJR22
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On 19 Dec 2006 10:31:02 -0800, "LiamToo" <liamtoo805@yahoo.com > wrote:
>The WJR22 wrote:
>> How about starting with this one which is easily some of the worst
>> advice ever uttered.
>>
>> MATTHEW: Chapter 5 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil...
>
>Tell us what's wrong with the verse.
>
>Matthew 5:39
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>NASB: "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever
>slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>GWT: But I tell you not to oppose an evil person. If someone slaps you
>on your right cheek, turn your other cheek to him as well.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>KJV: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall
>smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>ASV: but I say unto you, resist not him that is evil: but whosoever
>smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>BBE: But I say to you, Do not make use of force against an evil man;
>but to him who gives you a blow on the right side of your face let the
>left be turned.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>DBY: But I say unto you, not to resist evil; but whoever shall strike
>thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other;
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>WEY: But I tell you not to resist a wicked man, but if any one strikes
>you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>WBS: But I say to you, That ye resist not evil: but whoever shall
>strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>WEB: But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes
>you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>YLT: but I -- I say to you, not to resist the evil, but whoever shall
>slap thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other;
Are you just too stupid to think or are you being sarcastic? What's
wrong with it is that it's both immoral and stupid. If you're against
resisting evil, then you must have no objection to someone raping your
wife or murdering your children or at the very least slapping you
around for whatever reason suits them. Anyone who would allow such
impositions would be beyond stupid. I see no reason to further belabor
the obvious.
WJR
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 11:11:50
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> I don't think that all Catholics believe that Adam and Eve actually
> existed. As the priest explained, these stories were written as
> parables to help people explain God's intentions.
> If you do believe in evolution, how can you also believe the fairy tale
> about Adam and Eve?
The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not
written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catholic
Catechism states, "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative
language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the
beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of
faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault
freely committed by our first parents" (CCC 390).
> That and all the other stories in the Bible were written hundreds of
> years ago to teach simple people.
>
> If you prefer to believe the stories, that's your perogative. Many
> people in many different Christian religions also believe the same.
But of course, we believe in God, therefore we also believe in the
Bible. If you're an atheist or non-believer, then you're one of those
poker players whose one-outers will never come on the river.
> To me, it makes more sense to believe the explanation I was given all
> those years ago, since it is logical. I have other issues with the
> Catholic Church, but that's a different subject.
What are they, this subject is OT so you can post it here, otherwise
you can post your issues at the "Atheism vs Christianity" newsgroup.
You'll always find me there defending the Christian faith.
Here's the link:
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity?lnk=li
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 10:45:28
From: bjgkaraoke@aol.com
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
LiamToo wrote:
> bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> > Art, this happened many years ago. I don't remember everything he
> > lectured us about, but I do clearly remember the part about the Old
> > Testament and evolution. I don't remember any details he discussed
> > about the New Testament.
> >
> > Apparently, he thought he had the authority to give us this
> > information. Actually, I was relieved, because it made much more sense
> > to me than thinking I had to take everything literally. Also, he was
> > an extremely learned priest, so I assume he was giving us the
> > correct Catholic doctrine.
>
> Barbara,
>
> Maybe you misunderstood what the priest said. Catholics believe in the
> Bible. If Adam and Eve are in the bible, they believe them too.
>
> Catholics believe in science. They believe that religion can co-exist
> with science. Catholics, like me, believe in evolution.
I don't think that all Catholics believe that Adam and Eve actually
existed. As the priest explained, these stories were written as
parables to help people explain God's intentions.
If you do believe in evolution, how can you also believe the fairy tale
about Adam and Eve?
That and all the other stories in the Bible were written hundreds of
years ago to teach simple people.
If you prefer to believe the stories, that's your perogative. Many
people in many different Christian religions also believe the same.
To me, it makes more sense to believe the explanation I was given all
those years ago, since it is logical. I have other issues with the
Catholic Church, but that's a different subject.
Barbara Gallamore
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
> --Albert Einstein
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 14:51:36
From: The WJR22
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On 18 Dec 2006 10:45:28 -0800, "bjgkaraoke@aol.com"
<bjgkaraoke@aol.com > wrote:
>
>LiamToo wrote:
>> bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
>> > Art, this happened many years ago. I don't remember everything he
>> > lectured us about, but I do clearly remember the part about the Old
>> > Testament and evolution. I don't remember any details he discussed
>> > about the New Testament.
>> >
>> > Apparently, he thought he had the authority to give us this
>> > information. Actually, I was relieved, because it made much more sense
>> > to me than thinking I had to take everything literally. Also, he was
>> > an extremely learned priest, so I assume he was giving us the
>> > correct Catholic doctrine.
>>
>> Barbara,
>>
>> Maybe you misunderstood what the priest said. Catholics believe in the
>> Bible. If Adam and Eve are in the bible, they believe them too.
>>
>> Catholics believe in science. They believe that religion can co-exist
>> with science. Catholics, like me, believe in evolution.
>
>I don't think that all Catholics believe that Adam and Eve actually
>existed. As the priest explained, these stories were written as
>parables to help people explain God's intentions.
>If you do believe in evolution, how can you also believe the fairy tale
>about Adam and Eve?
>That and all the other stories in the Bible were written hundreds of
>years ago to teach simple people.
>
>If you prefer to believe the stories, that's your perogative. Many
>people in many different Christian religions also believe the same.
>
>To me, it makes more sense to believe the explanation I was given all
>those years ago, since it is logical. I have other issues with the
>Catholic Church, but that's a different subject.
>
>Barbara Gallamore
>
>
>
> "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
>> --Albert Einstein
If you took every cleric, or holy man, or witch doctor, or voodoo
priest that ever lived, and measured the sum toal of their combined
knowledge of god, it would be exactly equal to zero.
WJR
"Theologian: An uncommon individual who, though
possessing finite abilities, has been called by
God himself who, though possessing infinite
abilities, requires the assistance of the former
in explaining Himself to the rest of us."
-- Rev. Donald Morgan
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:05:43
From: Will_gamble
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 1:51 PM, The WJR22 wrote:
>
> If you took every cleric, or holy man, or witch doctor, or voodoo
> priest that ever lived, and measured the sum toal of their combined
> knowledge of god, it would be exactly equal to zero.
>
> WJR
Ok, I'll bite. Are you saying that Pope John Paul had no knowledge of
God? Billy Graham?
Splain please.
____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 23:04:11
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 2:05 PM, Will_gamble wrote:
> On Dec 18 2006 1:51 PM, The WJR22 wrote:
> >
> > If you took every cleric, or holy man, or witch doctor, or voodoo
> > priest that ever lived, and measured the sum toal of their combined
> > knowledge of god, it would be exactly equal to zero.
> >
> > WJR
>
> Ok, I'll bite. Are you saying that Pope John Paul had no knowledge of
> God? Billy Graham?
>
> Splain please.
That's right.
If you tell me you believe in God you aren't saying anything at all about God.
You're telling me something about you.
In the case of Pope John Paul I think he's telling me he's not very bright and
he's easily conned.
In the case of Billy Graham I think he's telling me that I should keep my hand
on my wallet when I'm around him.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 10:51:07
From: Will_gamble
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 5:04 PM, Gary Carson wrote:
>
> If you tell me you believe in God you aren't saying anything at all about
God.
> You're telling me something about you.
Fair enough, I can follow that.
>
> In the case of Pope John Paul I think he's telling me he's not very bright
and
> he's easily conned.
>
> In the case of Billy Graham I think he's telling me that I should keep my
hand
> on my wallet when I'm around him.
>
You really seem like a really smart but angry person most of the time. I
can respect your intelligence.
____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 15:54:26
From: The WJR22
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 12:05:43 -0800, "Will_gamble"
<will_gamble2@yahoo.com > wrote:
>On Dec 18 2006 1:51 PM, The WJR22 wrote:
>>
>> If you took every cleric, or holy man, or witch doctor, or voodoo
>> priest that ever lived, and measured the sum toal of their combined
>> knowledge of god, it would be exactly equal to zero.
>>
>> WJR
>
>Ok, I'll bite. Are you saying that Pope John Paul had no knowledge of
>God? Billy Graham?
>
>Splain please.
>
That's exactly the fact. It seems too obvious to merit discussion.
Clergymen of any persuasion DO NOT know any more than anyone else
about any world other than this one. They DO NOT know anymore about
the unknowable than anyone else. And they know that they don't know.
Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or insane. Period.
WJR
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 20:14:53
From: Nick Wool
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 8:05 PM, Will_gamble wrote:
> On Dec 18 2006 1:51 PM, The WJR22 wrote:
> >
> > If you took every cleric, or holy man, or witch doctor, or voodoo
> > priest that ever lived, and measured the sum toal of their combined
> > knowledge of god, it would be exactly equal to zero.
> >
> > WJR
>
> Ok, I'll bite. Are you saying that Pope John Paul had no knowledge of
> God? Billy Graham?
>
> Splain please.
They may have beliefs about their god, but knowledge? Certainly not in the
everyday sense of the word.
How can you have 'knowledge' of an entity that has been deliberately framed in
terms so vague, with the intention that it's existence cannot be prove or
disprove?
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 11:40:29
From: Will_gamble
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
I am Catholic and what my priest told me was that some Catholic scholars
believe that some things like Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, etc... where
just symbolic. Adam being mankind and Eve womankind.
On the overall believing question...
If a stroke makes a person unable to walk or talk tomorrow and they are
confined to a bed, are they still so arrogant about their belief there is
no God? A person may just have a different opinion when they start
contemplating their situation and know they are not going to get better.
They will be much more in touch with their soul in a time where they have
been stripped of worldly things and they might just find themselves
looking for answers and for the first time be open enough where God can
reach them.
Have you ever believed something and at some point in your life discovered
you were wrong? If so, this could be one of those times. It is my
opinion that the greater the hardships in life, the greater the likelihood
they believe.
My priest also told me that he had seen many people who had big estates
that had to go to assisted living. They might have to pick out one
bedroom suite for their new residence. Then their health fails some more
and they are moved to a room where they can only take a picture or two
from their former life. He said most of these peoples biggest concern was
how they had served their fellow man. Do unto others as you would have
them do unto you is what that means to me.
I believe that God will reveal himself to me one day, but not until I am
humbled enough to be able to see him. I believe in God, I just seem to
pay a lot more attention to myself at the present time. I am 56. When
you are 30, it is almost impossible unless you have really experienced
some hard times.
I always wondered if I could be forgiven for my sins.... Then one day I
was thinking about all the things my son had done that hurt and
disappointed me and how easy it is for me to forgive him each time.
Question answered.
________________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 11:31:16
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
The WJR22 wrote:
> Are you just too stupid to think or are you being sarcastic? What's
> wrong with it is that it's both immoral and stupid. If you're against
> resisting evil, then you must have no objection to someone raping your
> wife or murdering your children or at the very least slapping you
> around for whatever reason suits them. Anyone who would allow such
> impositions would be beyond stupid. I see no reason to further belabor
> the obvious.
You are taking it too literally. Here's an opinion about the verse in
question, which I concur:
"The plain instruction is, Suffer any injury that can be borne, for the
sake of peace, committing your concerns to the Lord's keeping. And the
sum of all is, that Christians must avoid disputing and striving. If
any say, Flesh and blood cannot pass by such an affront, let them
remember, that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God;
and those who act upon right principles will have most peace and
comfort."--Matthew Henry
Merry Christmas!
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 08:14:08
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> Art, this happened many years ago. I don't remember everything he
> lectured us about, but I do clearly remember the part about the Old
> Testament and evolution. I don't remember any details he discussed
> about the New Testament.
>
> Apparently, he thought he had the authority to give us this
> information. Actually, I was relieved, because it made much more sense
> to me than thinking I had to take everything literally. Also, he was
> an extremely learned priest, so I assume he was giving us the
> correct Catholic doctrine.
Barbara,
Maybe you misunderstood what the priest said. Catholics believe in the
Bible. If Adam and Eve are in the bible, they believe them too.
Catholics believe in science. They believe that religion can co-exist
with science. Catholics, like me, believe in evolution.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
--Albert Einstein
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 08:06:04
From: wadner
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
That is not evolution in the slightest.
ben carr wrote:
> Evolution is easy to see and understand. You take a black cat and a
> white cat. They live in the same area. The black cat can hide easier and
> therefor lives longer. Since it lives longer it can breed more
> offspring. The white cat stands out a little and dies sooner. The next
> generation of cats has more black ones than white ones. This is
> evolution in a nutshell
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 00:00:59
From: Stud Poker Guy
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
>>They do, they no longer belive in Adam and Eve? I didn't know that
.Im not
Catholic but I'm sure they still belive in Adam and Eve.
We believe in Adam and Eve as a myth with a purpose, to illustrate that
at some point when humanity had ability to choose evil, sin entered
into the picture. There was no literal Adam and Eve in some garden.
_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
Visit www.pokermagazine.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 15:38:32
From: Alan Gilbert aka brewmaster
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 10:00 PM, Stud Poker Guy wrote:
> >>They do, they no longer belive in Adam and Eve? I didn't know that
> ..Im not
> Catholic but I'm sure they still belive in Adam and Eve.
>
> We believe in Adam and Eve as a myth with a purpose, to illustrate that
> at some point when humanity had ability to choose evil, sin entered
> into the picture. There was no literal Adam and Eve in some garden.
God created Adam, and all was good. Then God told Adam he was going to
make a companion for him. His companion would be a woman, and would be
called Eve, and she would be beautiful, kind, loving, perfect in every
way, a perfect companion for Adam. Then God told Adam he needed to take
one his legs to create this perfect companion. "Wow," said Adam, "I'd
like to keep both my legs, what can I get for a rib?"
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://www.pokermagazine.com
> Visit www.pokermagazine.com
------
brewmaster at brewcam dot com
"Once in awhile you can get shown the light in the strangest of places if
you look at it right" -RH
_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 16:55:54
From: bjgkaraoke@aol.com
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
LiamToo wrote:
> bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> > My issues don't have anything to do with faith. My issues are with the
> > Catholic Church's stance on birth control, which is a Church edict, not
> > a faith issue. These rules are responsible for much of the poverty,
> > death, starvation, and child abuse in the world. The same people that
> > condoned and hid the child abuse by the priests under their control
> > demanded that their followers adhere to their strick guidlines on birth
> > control.
> >
> > Personally, this issue no longer affects me, but it does to millions of
> > other people in the world. In my opinion, there's no defense on this
> > subject.
>
> Here's the official Catholic position:
>
> "Christians have always condemned contraceptive sex. Both forms
> mentioned in the Bible, coitus interruptus and sterilization, are
> condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9-10, Deut. 23:1). The early
> Fathers recognized that the purpose of sexual intercourse in natural
> law is procreation; contraceptive sex, which deliberately blocks that
> purpose, is a violation of natural law.
>
> Every church in Christendom condemned contraception until 1930, when,
> at its decennial Lambeth Conference, Anglicanism gave permission for
> the use of contraception in a few cases. Soon all Protestant
> denominations had adopted the secularist position on contraception.
> Today not one stands with the Catholic Church to maintain the ancient
> Christian faith on this issue."
> --http://www.catholic.com/library/Contraception_and_Sterilization.asp
Adherence to the Catholic Church's teachings on this subject is insane.
Can you imagine if everyone in the world followed this rule? Just
think about the consequences.
Barbara Gallamore
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 14:45:37
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
The WJR22 wrote:
>
> That's exactly the fact. It seems too obvious to merit discussion.
> Clergymen of any persuasion DO NOT know any more than anyone else
> about any world other than this one. They DO NOT know anymore about
> the unknowable than anyone else. And they know that they don't know.
> Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or insane. Period.
I challenge you that if you're seriously wanting for a reply to any of
your atheistic quesitons, post them here:
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity?lnk=li
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 19:06:02
From: The WJR22
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On 18 Dec 2006 14:45:37 -0800, "LiamToo" <liamtoo805@yahoo.com > wrote:
>The WJR22 wrote:
>>
>> That's exactly the fact. It seems too obvious to merit discussion.
>> Clergymen of any persuasion DO NOT know any more than anyone else
>> about any world other than this one. They DO NOT know anymore about
>> the unknowable than anyone else. And they know that they don't know.
>> Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or insane. Period.
>
>I challenge you that if you're seriously wanting for a reply to any of
>your atheistic quesitons, post them here:
>
>http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity?lnk=li
I haven't posed any atheist questions. What you see above are
declaritive statements.
But here's a question for you. Why don't you do what Jesus wants you
to do and castrate yourself?
Matthew 19 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from
their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made
eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive
it, let him receive it.
Get back to me when you're done. I'm afraid I can't take you seriously
until then.
WJR
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 23:11:21
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 4:45 PM, LiamToo wrote:
> The WJR22 wrote:
> >
> > That's exactly the fact. It seems too obvious to merit discussion.
> > Clergymen of any persuasion DO NOT know any more than anyone else
> > about any world other than this one. They DO NOT know anymore about
> > the unknowable than anyone else. And they know that they don't know.
> > Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or insane. Period.
>
> I challenge you that if you're seriously wanting for a reply to any of
> your atheistic quesitons, post them here:
>
Atheistic question? What the hell does that mean.
Christians define atheist as someone who doesn't beleive in God.
That's nonsense. That only makes sense if their is a God.
I'm an atheist. Not because I beleive there is no God, but because I don't
really give a shit, it's nonsense and whether we were created by some supreme
being or not has nothing to do with my life.
I never thought one way or another about it until the ignorance of the whole
thing became apparant when I was in Lutheran Confirmation classes when I was
about 12. I asked the preacher what the point of memorizing bible passeges
was. He told me that it's important because if I'm in some future debate with
an athiest I can back up my beleives with quotes from the official word of God.
What? That's just nonsese.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 13:03:23
From: art_classmn
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> art_classmn wrote:
> > bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> > > estebanAA wrote:
> > > > They do, they no longer belive in Adam and Eve? I didn't know that .Im not
> > > > Catholic but I'm sure they still belive in Adam and Eve.
> > >
> > > No, they don't. As the priest explained to our confimation class many
> > > years ago, "the stories in the Old Testament are told so simple people
> > > can understand them. They are just stories, they're not to be taken
> > > literally." He also told us that it's ok to believe in evolution, as
> > > long as we believe that God was behind everything. It made sense to me
> > > at the time.
> > >
> > > Barbara Gallamore
> >
> > What did he say about the stories in the New Testament? You know, the
> > ones where, a pedo god knocks up a virgin teenager and....you know the
> > rest.
> >
> > What is so different about the propositions in the New Testament that
> > makes them so different than the "simpleton" stories in the old?
> >
> > And where does this priest get off editing "god's book" anyway?
>
> Art, this happened many years ago. I don't remember everything he
> lectured us about, but I do clearly remember the part about the Old
> Testament and evolution. I don't remember any details he discussed
> about the New Testament.
>
> Apparently, he thought he had the authority to give us this
> information. Actually, I was relieved, because it made much more sense
> to me than thinking I had to take everything literally. Also, he was
> an extremely learned priest, so I assume he was giving us the
> correct Catholic doctrine.
>
> Barbara Gallamore
Thanks for answering my smarty pantsed inquiries.
It is indeed correct Catholic doctrine, and it mirrors what "my" priest
says about it today. He is "my" priest only in that we grew up
together and remain close friends. He would sooner attend a swingers
party than insert his opinion into or alter Catholic doctrine.
My question (and I asked him this) is: Why should the interpretation of
these stories as myths for simpletons stop at the Old Testament? There
is no more evidence for the veracity of the New Testament stories than
the Old Testament stories. Certainly the same good lessons in the New
Testament can be learned and applied without all the hocus pocus,
right?
It is not his bidness to address pointed questions or defend Catholic
Doctrine so I never get far with him asking stuff like that. He does
masses, marries 'em and buries 'em. It's a living.
ac
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 13:00:35
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Will_gamble wrote:
> I am Catholic and what my priest told me was that some Catholic scholars
> believe that some things like Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, etc... where
> just symbolic. Adam being mankind and Eve womankind.
Up to this day, some Catholic scholars have other opinions on any
subject in the Bible actually. Even priests have their own groups like
Franciscans, Dominicans, etc. However, as long as everybody are within
the acceptable parameters of Catholic belief, everybody is fine.
As the Catechism puts it, "Methodical research in all branches of
knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and
does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith,
because the things of the world and the things the of the faith derive
from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the
secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite
of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them
what they are" (CCC 159). The Catholic Church has no fear of science or
scientific discovery.
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:50:00
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> My issues don't have anything to do with faith. My issues are with the
> Catholic Church's stance on birth control, which is a Church edict, not
> a faith issue. These rules are responsible for much of the poverty,
> death, starvation, and child abuse in the world. The same people that
> condoned and hid the child abuse by the priests under their control
> demanded that their followers adhere to their strick guidlines on birth
> control.
>
> Personally, this issue no longer affects me, but it does to millions of
> other people in the world. In my opinion, there's no defense on this
> subject.
Here's the official Catholic position:
"Christians have always condemned contraceptive sex. Both forms
mentioned in the Bible, coitus interruptus and sterilization, are
condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9-10, Deut. 23:1). The early
Fathers recognized that the purpose of sexual intercourse in natural
law is procreation; contraceptive sex, which deliberately blocks that
purpose, is a violation of natural law.
Every church in Christendom condemned contraception until 1930, when,
at its decennial Lambeth Conference, Anglicanism gave permission for
the use of contraception in a few cases. Soon all Protestant
denominations had adopted the secularist position on contraception.
Today not one stands with the Catholic Church to maintain the ancient
Christian faith on this issue."
--http://www.catholic.com/library/Contraception_and_Sterilization.asp
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:01:34
From: bjgkaraoke@aol.com
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
LiamToo wrote:
> bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> > I don't think that all Catholics believe that Adam and Eve actually
> > existed. As the priest explained, these stories were written as
> > parables to help people explain God's intentions.
> > If you do believe in evolution, how can you also believe the fairy tale
> > about Adam and Eve?
>
> The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not
> written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catholic
> Catechism states, "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative
> language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the
> beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of
> faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault
> freely committed by our first parents" (CCC 390).
>
>
> > That and all the other stories in the Bible were written hundreds of
> > years ago to teach simple people.
> >
> > If you prefer to believe the stories, that's your perogative. Many
> > people in many different Christian religions also believe the same.
>
> But of course, we believe in God, therefore we also believe in the
> Bible. If you're an atheist or non-believer, then you're one of those
> poker players whose one-outers will never come on the river.
No, you don't have to believe that the stories in the Bible are the
literal truth.
See Will's post below. A person can believe this and still believe in
God.
> > To me, it makes more sense to believe the explanation I was given all
> > those years ago, since it is logical. I have other issues with the
> > Catholic Church, but that's a different subject.
>
> What are they, this subject is OT so you can post it here, otherwise
> you can post your issues at the "Atheism vs Christianity" newsgroup.
> You'll always find me there defending the Christian faith.
My issues don't have anything to do with faith. My issues are with the
Catholic Church's stance on birth control, which is a Church edict, not
a faith issue. These rules are responsible for much of the poverty,
death, starvation, and child abuse in the world. The same people that
condoned and hid the child abuse by the priests under their control
demanded that their followers adhere to their strick guidlines on birth
control.
Personally, this issue no longer affects me, but it does to millions of
other people in the world. In my opinion, there's no defense on this
subject.
Barbara Gallamore
>
> Here's the link:
> http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity?lnk=li
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 10:24:51
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
FaceDownAcesUp wrote:
> Yeah, but is that really believing in evolution? It sounds more like
> they're just compromising so as not to look completely foolish in the
> face of modern science.
You must not have heard about the proclamations of Pope Pius XXII and
Pope John Paul II on evolution. We really believe in evolution.
> Saying you believe in evolution but also that God played a part in it
> somewhere along the line is like saying you believe in gravity, but you
> also think little flying invisible angels determine how fast things
> fall to the ground.
Talking about gravity, here's what a expert had to say:
"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who
set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is
or can be done." --Sir Isaac Newton
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 10:06:46
From: FaceDownAcesUp
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Bob T. wrote:
> FaceDownAcesUp wrote:
> > LiamToo wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The Catholic Church has no fear of science or
> > > scientific discovery.
> >
> > Sure they do. They refuse to accept the fact of evoultion and still
> > insist the world is only four thousand years old. Christians fear
> > accepting evoultion because it undermines the book of genesis and the
> > rest of their made up baby jesus religion.
> >
> Actually, the Catholic Church has accepted evolution because it matches
> scientific reality. They believe that God has directed the results of
> evolution in some way, but they believe that the Earth is billions of
> years old and that species evolved over time.
Yeah, but is that really believing in evolution? It sounds more like
they're just compromising so as not to look completely foolish in the
face of modern science.
Saying you believe in evolution but also that God played a part in it
somewhere along the line is like saying you believe in gravity, but you
also think little flying invisible angels determine how fast things
fall to the ground.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 18:35:58
From: Nick Wool
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 19 2006 6:06 PM, FaceDownAcesUp wrote:
> Bob T. wrote:
> > FaceDownAcesUp wrote:
> > > LiamToo wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > The Catholic Church has no fear of science or
> > > > scientific discovery.
> > >
> > > Sure they do. They refuse to accept the fact of evoultion and still
> > > insist the world is only four thousand years old. Christians fear
> > > accepting evoultion because it undermines the book of genesis and the
> > > rest of their made up baby jesus religion.
> > >
> > Actually, the Catholic Church has accepted evolution because it matches
> > scientific reality. They believe that God has directed the results of
> > evolution in some way, but they believe that the Earth is billions of
> > years old and that species evolved over time.
>
> Yeah, but is that really believing in evolution? It sounds more like
> they're just compromising so as not to look completely foolish in the
> face of modern science.
>
> Saying you believe in evolution but also that God played a part in it
> somewhere along the line is like saying you believe in gravity, but you
> also think little flying invisible angels determine how fast things
> fall to the ground.
I think we are falling into the thiests' trap here with the use of 'believe'.
Gravity happens, whether or not it is believed in. Evolution, aerodynamics,
electro-magnetism and the rest of the well-established scientific theories are
out there, independent of any belief systems.
Just because you do not 'believe' in aerodynamics does not mean
that the aeroplane you are on will fall out of the sky due to your lack of
belief, nor would it stay up in the sky with the wings snapped off because you
believe that your god has precedence over the theory of aerodynamics.
Believe, however, is important in religion, because the whole basis of most
religions are based on faith and nothing else. It might make you feel better to
believe silly stories which are unverifiable as true, but surely that is a
dangerous road to go down?
Once we accept something as 'true' without taking the trouble to look for
supporting evidence because your god prefers it that way, what's to stop you
going out and shooting non-believers and other sinners because your holy book,
priest or your god's voice telling that is what you should do?
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 09:13:15
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
FaceDownAcesUp wrote:
> LiamToo wrote:
>
> >
> > The Catholic Church has no fear of science or
> > scientific discovery.
>
> Sure they do. They refuse to accept the fact of evoultion and still
> insist the world is only four thousand years old. Christians fear
> accepting evoultion because it undermines the book of genesis and the
> rest of their made up baby jesus religion.
>
Actually, the Catholic Church has accepted evolution because it matches
scientific reality. They believe that God has directed the results of
evolution in some way, but they believe that the Earth is billions of
years old and that species evolved over time.
There are, of course, many fundamentalist Protestants that believe as
you describe above, especially in the US.
- Bob T.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 08:48:54
From: FaceDownAcesUp
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
LiamToo wrote:
>
> The Catholic Church has no fear of science or
> scientific discovery.
Sure they do. They refuse to accept the fact of evoultion and still
insist the world is only four thousand years old. Christians fear
accepting evoultion because it undermines the book of genesis and the
rest of their made up baby jesus religion.
They fear parts of stem cell research because it doesn't jive with
their kooky idea that the minute an egg is fertilized it's on par with
a full grown human in terms of it's right to life.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 07:11:27
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> Adherence to the Catholic Church's teachings on this subject is insane.
> Can you imagine if everyone in the world followed this rule? Just
> think about the consequences.
There are more than 2 billion Catholics in the world and I believe that
that is a good number enough to be the most if compared to the
membership of any organized religion. We don't judge other people. We
were to told to love others instead. We do not impose our religion on
others because we respect their own free will, but some of us will
defend our faith if attacked.
If we are deemed to be insane, then so be it, it's our prerogative to
be just that. However, the consequences of our deeds as just fine to
us. Others do not have to follow.
Merry Christmas!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 09:44:41
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Gary Carson wrote:
> The Catholic Church in PI does not tell women they should work as prostitutes --
> they tell them they should tithe.
>
> They do tell women that they know are prostitues that they should not use birth
> control of any kind. And to be sure to raise their children as Catholics.
>
> It's really an organization run by scum.
I know that you've been to the PI, Olongapo , Subic Naval Base to be
exact.
When my parents were stationed in Clark Air Base, I was there too for 5
years. In both places, there were prostitutes for the marines and the
navy. However, that has nothing to do with the Catholic Church.
The church is being run by people, human beings that are susceptible to
sin. However, they are not scums.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 16:56:34
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 19 2006 9:11 AM, LiamToo wrote:
> bjgkaraoke@aol.com wrote:
> > Adherence to the Catholic Church's teachings on this subject is insane.
> > Can you imagine if everyone in the world followed this rule? Just
> > think about the consequences.
>
> There are more than 2 billion Catholics in the world and I believe that
> that is a good number enough to be the most if compared to the
> membership of any organized religion. We don't judge other people. We
> were to told to love others instead. We do not impose our religion on
> others because we respect their own free will, but some of us will
> defend our faith if attacked.
The Catholic Church in PI does not tell women they should work as prostitutes --
they tell them they should tithe.
They do tell women that they know are prostitues that they should not use birth
control of any kind. And to be sure to raise their children as Catholics.
It's really an organization run by scum.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 16:04:40
From: WuzYoungOnceToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 19, 2:33 pm, "LiamToo" <liamtoo...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> "To the Sphere of religion belongs the faith that the regulations valid
> for the world of existence are rational, that it is comprehensible to
> reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound
> faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without
> religion is lame, religion without science is blind." --Albert Einstein
> 1879-1955
>
> Here's a long list of scientists who believe in God
I didn't ask you who did/didn't believe in God. Your Newton quote went
beyond his belief in a divine being. It was a declaration that gravity
"cannot explain who set the planets in motion" (which baselessly
presupposes that there is a "who" to identify in the first place).
> some of whom are are still alive:
The vast majority of whom are not...even if your list was somehow
relevant. I am, however, amused by your inclusion of a few of the more
prominent IDers at the end. Dembski? Are you fucking kidding me?
<<verbose, irrelevant list snipped >>
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 12:33:25
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
>
> Got anything from an expert that isn't three centuries old?
"To the Sphere of religion belongs the faith that the regulations valid
for the world of existence are rational, that it is comprehensible to
reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound
faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without
religion is lame, religion without science is blind." --Albert Einstein
1879-1955
Here's a long list of scientists who believe in God, some of whom are
are still alive:
Leonardo da Vinci
1452-1519
physics, art
Nicholas Copernicus
1473-1543
Taught the planets revolved around an immoveable sun
Tycho Brahe
1545-1601
At least a theist
Francis Bacon
1561-1626
scientific method
Galileo Galilei
1564-1642
telescope, gravity, solar system
Johann Kepler
1571-1626
planet's elliptical orbits
William Harvey
1578-1657
circulation of blood. At least a theist.
Puritans
1600-1700
A higher percentage of Puritans were in the English Royal Society than
in the general population
Athanasius Kircher
1601-1680
Jesuit who anticipated the germ theory and wrote of Noah's flood
John Wilkins
1614-1672
scientist and clergyman who wrote how Noah's ark would be of
adequate size to fit all of the animals.
Walter Charleton
1619-1707
President of the Royal College of Physicians who wrote on the flood
and miracles
Blaise Pascal
1623-1662
math, fluid flow
Robert Boyle
1627-1691
Boyle's law - chemistry. Learned Hebrew, Greek, Syriac. Founded the
Boyle lectures to prove Christianity vs. atheists, theists, pagans,
Jews, and Muslims.
John Ray
1627-1705
natural history
Nicolaus Steno
1631-1686
stratigraphy
Thomas Burnet
1635-1715
geologist and clergyman
Nicolas Lemery
1645-1715
chemist who converted to Catholicism
Sir William Petty
1623-1687
statistics, economics
Christiaan Huygens
1629-1695
Huygen's Principle. At least a theist
Isaac Barrow
1630-1677
Cambridge math prof. who taught Newton. He later retired to teach
God's Word
Robert Hooke
1635-1703
physicist and geologist. Hooke's Law of elas-ticity. At least a
theist
Increase Mather
1639-1723
son of Cotton Mather, astronomer on comets, theologian, and one of the
first presidents of Harvard.
Nehemiah Grew
1641-1712
physician and botanist. Protestant who wrote on the unique creative
design of plants and animals.
Isaac Newton
1642-1727
Co-inventor of calculus, gravity, Newton's 3 laws
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz
1646-1716
co-inventor of calculus, and anticipated Boolean algebra
John Flamsteed
1646-1719
Founded the Greenwich observatory
William Derham
1657-1735
ecology
Cotton Mather
1662-1727
published treatises on "animacules" causing smallpox, and President of
Harvard
John Woodward
1665-1728
paleontology
John Harris
1666-1719
mathematician, clergyman, Wrote an English dictionary 1704
William Whiston
12/9.1667-8/22/1752
succeeded Isaac Newton at Cambridge. Wrote on flood geology.
Translated Josephus and was an Arian like Newton. He thought the Tatars
were the lost tribes, and the Millennium would start in 1766.
John Hutchinson
1674-1737
paleontologist who wrote on the flood. Also studied Hebrew.
Bayes
1702-1761
Probability, Presbyterian minister
Benjamin Franklin
1706-1790
Believed in God, unsure about Christ's divinity, had a mistress, was
perhaps the last person who could know all of science.
Carolus Linnaeus
1707-1778
taxonomy-classified life
Gustavus Brander
1720-1787
paleontologist who wrote on the flood
Jean Deluc
1727-1817
Coined the word geology. He and his father invented the barometer.
Wrote of a worldwide flood.
Richard Kirwan
1733-1812
mineralogy
William Herschel
1738-1822
discovered Uranus, galactic astronomy
James Parkinson
1755-1824
perforated appendix, Parkinson's disease, wrote on the flood and
coal from plants
William Kirby
1759-1850
entomologist and English clergyman
John Dalton
9/15/1766-7/17/1844
atomic theory, Dalton's law of gases. Quaker
Benjamin Barton
1766-1815
physician, biologist, recent creationist
Thomas Malthus
1766-1834
economics, over-population, clergyman
Georges Cuvier
1769-1832
comparative anatomy
Samuel Miller
1770-1840
Presbyterian minister and influential science writer chronicling the
18th century,
Charles Bell
1774-1842
anatomist and surgeon
John Kidd
1775-1851
chemical synthetics
Humphrey Davy
1778-1829
thermokinetics, safety lamp
Benjamin Silliman
1779-1864
mineralogy, geology, founded the American Journal of Science
Peter Mark Roget
1779-1869
physician and physiologist, Roget's Thesaurus
Thomas Chalmers
1780-1847
social scientist, professor of theology, popularized the "gap theory"
David Brewster
1781-1868
optical mineralogy, kaleidoscope, opposed Darwinism
William Buckland
1784-1856
geologist and priest in the Church of England
William Prout
1785-1850
food chemistry
Adam Sedgwick
1785-1873
Named Cambrian and Devonian periods. A friend of Darwin but against
evolutionary ideas, saying the result would be harmful.
Joseph Townsend
English geologist and clergyman published much of William Smith's
work
Michael Faraday
1791-1867
Electromagnetics
Sam. F.B. Morse
1791-1872
Telegraph
John Herschel
1792-1871
son of William, he found 500 nebulas
Charles Babbage
1792-1871
Computer science, Operations research, Opthamaloscope, mathematical
analysis of Biblical miracles
William Whewell
1794-1866
anemometer
Joseph Henry
1797-1866
Electric motor, galvanometer
Richard Owen
1804-1892
zoology, paleontology, non-Christian theist against Darwinism
Matthew Maury
1806-1873
oceanography
Louis Agassiz
1807-1873
glaciers, fish, most famous biologist behind Darwin
Henry Rogers
1808-1866
geology of the Appalachians, wrote of the universal flood
Phillip H. Gosse
1810-1888
Ornithologist. Plymouth Brethren, said the earth was young, but
fossils and sediments created with appearance of age
James Simpson
1811-1870
anesthesiology, gynecology
James Dana
1813-1895
President of the Geological Society of America, theistic evolutionist
James Joule
1818-1889
A unit of energy is named after him
George Stokes
1819-1903
Stokes Law in fluid flow
Charles Piazzi Smyth
1819-1900
Astronomer, studied Egyptian pyramids. Weird guy influential in
Anglo-Israelism error
John William Dawson
1820-1899
Canadian geologist and old-earth Creationist
Gregor Mendel
1822-1884
Mendelian genetics
Louis Pasteur
1822-1895
Bacteriology, biochemistry, sterilization, immunology. Opposed
Evolution
Henri Fabre
1823-1915
entomology of living insects
Lord Kelvin (William Thompson)
1824-1907
A unit of temperature is named after him, Atlantic cable
Joseph Lister
1827-1912
antiseptic surgery
Joseph Clerk Maxwell
1831-1879
Maxwell's law in electrodynamics, statistical thermodynamics
Bernhard Riemann
(Georg F.B. Riemann)
1826-1866
non-Euclidean geometries, Riemann space
Edward Hitchcock
1793-1864
geologist in Mass. And Vermont, against Darwinism
James Glaisher
1809-1903
Founded the British Meteorological Society
Henry Rawlinson
1810-1895
deciphered Behistun inscription
Joseph Henry Gilbert
1817-1901
agricultural chemist, apposed Darwinism
Thomas Anderson
1819-1874
discovered pyridine, opposed Darwinism
William Huggins
1824-1910
astral spectrometry
Balfour Stewart
1828-1887
electricity in ionosphere
P. G. Tait
1831-1901
vector analysis
Sir William Abney
1843-1920
Interstellar molecules, son of a clergyman
Alexander MacAlister
1844-1919
Professor of Anatomy at Cambridge
A.H. Sayce
1845-1933
Expert on the Hittites
John Bell Pettigrew
1848-1894
President of the Royal Medical society. Allowed for evolution and
design
George Romanes
1848-1894
biologist, physiologist. Christian, personal friend of Darwin, lost
his faith, returned to Christianity, unclear if a theistic evolutionist
or creationist.
Lord Rayleigh (John Strutt)
1849-1919
Fluid flow, successor to Maxwell at Cambridge
John Ambrose Fleming
1849-1945
electronics, electron tube, thermionic valve
Edward H. Maunder
1851-1928
astronomer at Greenwich
William Mitchell Ramsay
1851-1939
One of the two greatest archaeologists. Liberal who became a
conservative Christian
Sir William Ramsay
(born in Glasgow)
1852-1916
discovered argon, isotopic chemistry, transmuting elements. Founded
the Indian Institute of Technology
Howard A. Kelly
1858-1943
Gynecology/Obstetrics prof. at Johns Hopkins. Wrote A Scientific Man
and His Bible.
George Washington Carver
1864-1943
authority on peanuts and sweet potatoes at the Tuskegee Institute
Wilbur and Orville Wright
1867-1912, 1871-1948
First successful flight 12/17/1903. Wilbur assisted his father in
legal work for the Church of the United Brethren in Christ
Douglas Dewar
1875-1957
Wrote books on evolution prior to being a creationist Christian
Paul Lemoine
1878-1940
ex-Evolutionist and President of the Geological Society of France
Albert Einstein
1879-1955
non-practicing Jew who firmly believed in God
Charles Stine
1882-1954
An organic chemist with DuPont. Wrote the booklet, "A Chemist and His
Bible"
A. Rendle Short
1885-1955
Professor of surgery
L. Merson Davies
1890-1960
Geology, paleontology
Sir Cecil P. G. Wakeley
1892-1979
surgeon, president of the Bible League
Werner von Braun
1912-1977
rockets, Lutheran
A.E. Wilder-Smith
1915-1995
Phys. org. chemistry. 70 pubs. and 30 books.
Lane P. Lester
living
Wrote Natural Limits to Biological Change
Hugh Ross
living
astronomer
Michael Denton
living
molecular biologist who wrote Evolution : A Theory in Crisis
Charles Thaxton, Walter L. Bradley, Clarence Meninga
living
molecular biologists. Authored The Mystery of Life's Origin
Thomas G. Barnes
living
wrote Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field
William A. Dembski
living
math, Intelligent Design
Robert Newman
living
Intelligent Design
Dean H. Kenyon
living
Biology, Biophysics
Jeffrey P. Schloss
living
ecology, evolutionary biology, Int. Design
Jonathan Wells
living
cell biology
Howard J. Van Till
living
astronomer, wrote The Fourth Day
Davis A. Young
living
old-earth geologist, wrote Christianity & The Age of the Earth.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 11:40:22
From: WuzYoungOnceToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 19, 12:24 pm, "LiamToo" <liamtoo...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Talking about gravity, here's what a expert had to say:
>
> "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who
> set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is
> or can be done." --Sir Isaac Newton
Got anything from an expert that isn't three centuries old?
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Dec 2006 11:34:45
From: WuzYoungOnceToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 19, 12:06 pm, "FaceDownAcesUp" <superbee...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Bob T. wrote:
> >
> > Actually, the Catholic Church has accepted evolution because it matches
> > scientific reality. They believe that God has directed the results of
> > evolution in some way, but they believe that the Earth is billions of
> > years old and that species evolved over time.
>
> Yeah, but is that really believing in evolution?
Yes.
> It sounds more like
> they're just compromising so as not to look completely foolish in the
> face of modern science.
I think you're the one who needs to take steps to avoid looking any
more foolish than you already do. You're making claims about church
doctrine even though you clearly have no idea what it actually is, and
are now trying to back-peddle using a ridiculous rationalization.
Whether or not there is a metaphysical force driving the universe
(including creation itself) is not within the domain of science, so the
Catholic church's acceptance of biological evolution with the proviso
that "God is ultimately behind it all" is as complete an acceptance as
is anyone else's.
> Saying you believe in evolution but also that God played a part in it
> somewhere along the line is like saying you believe in gravity, but you
> also think little flying invisible angels determine how fast things
> fall to the ground.
The two things are not incompatible. The only difference between them
is that gravity is observable, testable, measurable, etc...while little
flying invisible angels are not. Science and faith are completely
separate conceptual domains, not inherently opposed ways of thinking
about the world.
|
| | | | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 10:49:43
From: WuzYoungOnceToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 20, 9:02 am, "LiamToo" <liamtoo...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> > The vast majority of whom are not...even if your list was somehow
> > relevant. I am, however, amused by your inclusion of a few of the more
> > prominent IDers at the end. Dembski? Are you fucking kidding me?
>
> You must know him then. He's there in your neck of the woods.
Yeah, every one of the several million people in the D/FW metroplex
know each other.
> Dembski is a research professor in philosophy at Southwestern Baptist
> Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.
That certainly makes him an expert on cosmology, evolution, and all of
the other scientific disciplines he loves to prattle on about in spite
of his complete lack of credentials.
|
| | | | |
Date: 20 Dec 2006 07:02:23
From: LiamToo
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> The vast majority of whom are not...even if your list was somehow
> relevant. I am, however, amused by your inclusion of a few of the more
> prominent IDers at the end. Dembski? Are you fucking kidding me?
You must know him then. He's there in your neck of the woods.
Dembski is a research professor in philosophy at Southwestern Baptist
Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.
|
| |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 03:43:53
From: igotskillz com
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 16 2006 8:04 PM, estebanAA wrote:
> it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt
matter
> what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
if you don't believe in God, you are drawing dead.
Thank YOU
www.igotskillz.com
----
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 23:24:41
From: kevin cline
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
Firstly, I can't believe in your notion of God any more than I can
believe in the tooth fairy.. If you believe in God, then you must also
believe that God made me that way. Secondly, Pascal's wager is silly.
I don't have time to attend synagogue Friday, church Saturday and
Sunday, and pray five times a day to Allah. I don't have the means to
support a church, a synagogue, a mosque, the Hindu temple, the Buddhist
temple, and the Shinto shrine. So I don't do any of those things. I
take care of my life in this world, and trust that if there is an
afterlife, I will be judged for my acts rather than my ability to
maintain some silly superstition.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 03:37:28
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On 16 Dec 2006 23:24:41 -0800, "kevin cline" <kevin.cline@gmail.com > wrote:
>Firstly, I can't believe in your notion of God any more than I can
>believe in the tooth fairy.. If you believe in God, then you must also
>believe that God made me that way. Secondly, Pascal's wager is silly.
There is a definite negative EV to spending time on delusion and
having a delusional view of the world.
Meanwhile, Pascal's wager presumes the only possibilities are either
that there is no God, or that belief in God gets you sent to heaven.
There are other possibilities, such as that God is perverse and will
actually throw you in Hell for believing in him, just for the fuck of it.
Alternately, you could believe in the wrong God and get punished
for that, too.
The existence of a perverse, malign God makes more sense anyway,
given the world we're looking at. Tsetse flies, cancer, dysentery,
ticks, Auschwitz, serial killers, and of course, tens of thousands
of species of beetles. Humans do not appear to be his favorites.
"The scientist J.B.S. Haldane, when asked what his studies had taught him about
God, famously replied, 'I'm not sure, but he seems to be inordinately fond of
beetles.'"
A Fondness for Beetles, Slaktivist, August 16, 2005
|
| |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 21:46:46
From:
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
The end is near...the signs are all around.....
Numerous posts I read like these give me confidence of what is
prophesized in the bible about the end days. It's not just this, it's
the things all over the TV and in the news.
If you don't understand what's currently going on in the world, then
you are blind.
TWO CHARACTERISTICS OF THE END OF THE AGE FROM THE APOSTLE PAUL
1. GODLESSNESS IN THE LAST DAYS
II Timothy 3:1-5,7 "But realize this, that in the last days
difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of
money, boastful, arrogant, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful,
unholy, unloving, unforgiving, malicious gossips, without self-control,
brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of
pleasure rather than lovers of god; holding to a form of godliness,
although they have denied its power; always learning and never able to
come to the knowledge of the truth."
For anyone who has watched television, read a newspaper, lost a
retirement to corporate greed and corruption, or just walked outside
their front door, it is obvious this prophecy has been fulfilled by our
generation. Our leaders are often corrupt; our cities are filled with
crime, brutality, and neon signs proclaiming our sinful, godless
nature. The New Age Movement brings in increasing numbers of mystics
who claim to be the enlightened ones. They are some of the most
educated and influential people in our societies, and yet the most
lacking in real truth.
2. APOSTASY (FALLING AWAY FROM THE FAITH)
I Timothy 4:1-3 "But the spirit explicitly says that in later times
some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful
spirits and doctrines of demons. By means of the hypocrisy of liars
seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid
marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be
gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth."
In spite of its phenomenal growth, Christianity has had apostate
tendencies throughout history. But Paul speaks of a particularly
significant departure from sound doctrine. This apostasy will be the
climax of all previous apostate tendencies, and will be worldwide in
scope. Paul continues his description of this apostasy in 1 Timothy
4:1-2, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times
some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and
doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their
conscience seared with a hot iron."
As the consciences of men become seared, and their hearts hardened to
the truth, they will clamor towards doctrines that sound nice, but do
not have the ring of truth. These doctrines are "doctrines of
devils," that entice the human nature with teachings that deny the
true gospel of Christ Jesus. In 2 Timothy 4:3-4 Paul says, "For the
time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead,
to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number
of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn
their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." (NIV)
JUST BE PREPARED!!!
A Man Beaten by Jacks wrote:
> On 16 Dec 2006 23:24:41 -0800, "kevin cline" <kevin.cline@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Firstly, I can't believe in your notion of God any more than I can
> >believe in the tooth fairy.. If you believe in God, then you must also
> >believe that God made me that way. Secondly, Pascal's wager is silly.
>
> There is a definite negative EV to spending time on delusion and
> having a delusional view of the world.
>
> Meanwhile, Pascal's wager presumes the only possibilities are either
> that there is no God, or that belief in God gets you sent to heaven.
> There are other possibilities, such as that God is perverse and will
> actually throw you in Hell for believing in him, just for the fuck of it.
> Alternately, you could believe in the wrong God and get punished
> for that, too.
>
> The existence of a perverse, malign God makes more sense anyway,
> given the world we're looking at. Tsetse flies, cancer, dysentery,
> ticks, Auschwitz, serial killers, and of course, tens of thousands
> of species of beetles. Humans do not appear to be his favorites.
>
> "The scientist J.B.S. Haldane, when asked what his studies had taught him about
> God, famously replied, 'I'm not sure, but he seems to be inordinately fond of
> beetles.'"
> A Fondness for Beetles, Slaktivist, August 16, 2005
|
| | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 01:27:24
From: ben carr
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
God makes adam and eve, they have 2 sons, one kills the other then goes
away to another town...what the hell? Where did this town come from?
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Dec
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
On Dec 18 2006 12:27 AM, ben carr wrote:
> God makes adam and eve, they have 2 sons, one kills the other then goes
> away to another town...what the hell? Where did this town come from?
His sister had founded it years earlier when she got tired of the incestuous
rape and ran off.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 20:02:05
From: art_classmn
Subject: Re: OT: :) -ev not believing In God
|
estebanAA wrote:
> it's like not calling a $1 bet after the flop in a 1,000,000 pot. doesnt matter
> what your holding . gl all have a God weekend :) estebanAA
Perfect example of religious stupidity.
Pascal's Wager and the god of the gaps is all it takes for morons like
this to believe in fairy tales.
Unfortunately for idiots like estAA, the exact argument can be used to
prop up any legend you want.
|
|
