Crod...your 'god' isn't very clever or smart for that matter....

You have Cap'n Scarlet on your case.........give up NOW

(August 14, 2011 at 11:17 pm)Epimethean Wrote: CRod, would you feel cheated if natural selection is at work, and you are one of those selected against due to having received a double dose of the god gene?

Why because i accept the writings and understanding of the scripture or do you think i just sit out on my porch and say I believe in a god. What are you getting at, im cheated why? How?
I think you would have to do more research on your god gene; C.S. Lewis was an atheists his whole life and then converted.

Another Lewis reference. here's a quote for you.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."-CS Lewis

You have an imaginary friend who can do all of the things that you can't. Cute in a four year old, disturbing and worthy of ridicule in an adult.

(August 15, 2011 at 7:31 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Another Lewis reference. here's a quote for you.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."-CS Lewis

You have an imaginary friend who can do all of the things that you can't. Cute in a four year old, disturbing and worthy of ridicule in an adult.

There's that god gene.

---

(August 15, 2011 at 2:29 am)Captain Scarlet Wrote: In the last 100 years the media has indeed gone to science rather than theology. Secondly the medias primary job is to report and not make the news, if they were to proclaim as such they would be making the news. Thirdly they would also be alienating their followership, most of whom have been raised on a diet of various different forms of theological sewage from parents and religious hierarchies. Your challenge is thus invalid.

But given all its inherent disadvantages science still forces it was into the agenda, because it works and explains our world much more powerfully than any theology
could. The amazing discoveries of the 20th century have brought us a fantastic set of technologies and understanding of our world and are in my view not at all boring, especially when contrasted against tablets of stone and burning bushes. Then in contrast think of the theocracies around the world which have embraced bronze age thinking of their religious texts and have thus returned their societies to the bronze age and control there media to the extent that they deny scientific claims in spite of the evidence.

Now to the challenge i set you, which you have avoided. You want to talk of perfection, you believe a perfect god. Whether that god exists or not that perfect
god can be conceived of. So prove that this god can exist ,not does exist, but can exist and what are his attributes?

And add to that a new challenge. You do not accept science has primacy in seeking truth. Name a single theological discovery which has replaced a scientific discovery at any time in human history.

But science is the proof against the religion. It is constantly making ground to the opposite, the assumption that the assumption is true. With only science, yes, all the theories and will informed speculation are the best explanation. But the religion is not based on science but the science must be based on religion.
I just thought since were are so confident is our agenda for destroying religion and hopefully "freeing" all of our minds science would shatter the belief system for the sake of saving our important but not important lives.

I can not prove it to you, I believe in something and will share it if asked or i feel it necessary to intercede with my thoughts. If it was proven it would not even be science, it would be control. You will reason against such things for there is no incontrovertible truth and this particular item does not fancy your character. But whats cool is, i can still reason for it.
I would have to do some research but i think the truth already stands and your just trying to find something that suits you. The truth for you is there is no god, everything else is up for grabs and flawed, because humans are grabbing it.

---

(August 15, 2011 at 6:21 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Crod...your 'god' isn't very clever or smart for that matter....

You have Cap'n Scarlet on your case.........give up NOW

Im thinkin about it, that dude is smart.

Is that a Statler impression CRod? You do have a sense of humor, I knew it! If you can "reason for it" give it a go. (It was rhetorical, you can't.)

Original sin. A human characteristic being imperfection, the original sin is then the first mistake. One that garnered eternal damnation, because in the beginning god was incapable of forgiveness.

(August 15, 2011 at 7:55 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Is that a Statler impression CRod? You do have a sense of humor, I knew it! If you can "reason for it" give it a go. (It was rhetorical, you can't.)

No incontrovertible truth, i see it as justification. Self programming mind can do just about what ever it wants ergo...

Actually, there is incontrovertible evidence that your god doesn't exist. That's why so many christians have become pansy ass deists of late. (No offense Deist) The only people left in the christian tent, sad to say, are con-men and their marks (you).

(August 15, 2011 at 8:01 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Actually, there is incontrovertible evidence that your god doesn't exist. That's why so many christians have become pansy ass deists of late. (No offense Deist) The only people left in the christian tent, sad to say, are con-men and their marks (you).

What is this evidence?

Where would you like me to begin? Will we be using the greek bible, hebrew bible, apocrypha?