WEEKEND TICKETS GOING FAST!

PRICES GO UP AT THE GATE

PURCHASE TICKET
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Christianity and the differences within
21305 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/12/12

DomFortress wrote:

Then he said to me, "The sins of the people of Israel and Judah are very great. The entire land is full of murder; the city is filled with injustice. They are saying, 'The LORD doesn't see it! The LORD has forsaken the land!' 10 So I will not spare them or have any pity on them. I will fully repay them for all they have done


I think that excerpt makes it pretty clear that it was a case of capital punishment, not a genocide or hate crime.
Posted 1/12/12

fixingstep wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Then he said to me, "The sins of the people of Israel and Judah are very great. The entire land is full of murder; the city is filled with injustice. They are saying, 'The LORD doesn't see it! The LORD has forsaken the land!' 10 So I will not spare them or have any pity on them. I will fully repay them for all they have done


I think that excerpt makes it pretty clear that it was a case of capital punishment, not a genocide or hate crime.
Yes it is. Because it's without due processes of fair trial, cross examination, appeal, not to mention a lack of evidence. All the plaintiff got was anecdote reporting that can't be verified, because the accused suspects were all murdered without fair trial.
21305 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/12/12 , edited 1/12/12

DomFortress wrote:
Yes it is. Because it's without due processes of fair trial, cross examination, appeal, not to mention a lack of evidence. All the plaintiff got was anecdote reporting that can't be verified, because the accused suspects were all murdered without fair trial.


i suppose there's no real way to win my point unless you concede the existence of God as the ultimate judge. I must abstain from talking further because I don't know about the situation that's being discussed.

Posted 1/12/12

fixingstep wrote:


DomFortress wrote:
Yes it is. Because it's without due processes of fair trial, cross examination, appeal, not to mention a lack of evidence. All the plaintiff got was anecdote reporting that can't be verified, because the accused suspects were all murdered without fair trial.


i suppose there's no real way to win my point unless you concede the existence of God as the ultimate judge. I must abstain from talking further because I don't know about the situation that's being discussed.
Not when the "Jewish concept of monotheism evolved from the syncretism of various polytheistic sources like Canaanite and Babylonian polytheism". (citation)
21305 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/12/12

DomFortress wrote:
Not when the "Jewish concept of monotheism evolved from the syncretism of various polytheistic sources like Canaanite and Babylonian polytheism". (citation)


I read a a few verses previous in Ezekiel like 6-8 on biblegateway and it leaves me with a painful unpleasant feeling.
I haven't read the bible in a very long time, so this was surprising.
I suppose I must contemplate what I believe in if anything.
I cease my argument here.

Canute 
33414 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 1/13/12 , edited 1/13/12

DomFortress wrote:


Canute wrote:


DomFortress wrote:



Let me just quote this paragraph from http://forgottenancestry.org/Charles_Darwin,_and_the_Theory_of_Evolution/Birds_%26_Whales.html:

"The next round of absurdity is a good example of why teaching evolution involves leaving some facts untaught. Evolutionists say that whales "to this day have vestigial leg bones!" How cute! There are two tiny bones, near the whales reproductive organs, that evolutionists refer to as vestigial legs out of ignorance. In reality, whales use these bones during reproduction, and the bones are indeed attached to muscles. The bones are even shaped differently for males and females. By learning evolution, you fail to learn what the functions of certain body parts actually do! That doesn't sound like science, does it?"

So, there appears to be a function for those bones after all.


But, let me talk about what happened in Ezekiel. This situation is nothing at all like genocide. Note well that God separates the people who are causing injustice from those who are distressed and weeping over Israel's crimes. Note that these people who are being slain feel that they can commit crimes with impunity since they believe God doesn't notice. Does anyone feel that it is a crime to kill criminals? Those who murder? Those who rape? Those who defraud laborers of their wages? I could go on and on. Read the passage carefully and you'll see that God spares those who mourn over these crimes, i.e. the innocent and the repentant. All those criminals had to do was feel sorry and try to atone for their sins and God would have spared them. Is it too much to ask that someone needs to feel sorry before they can be forgiven?

And before you accuse Christians of being self-righteous, I encourage you to read about Mother Teresa, Padre Pio, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Faustina, St. Gertrude, Ven. Solanus Casey, St. Joseph of Cupertino, St. Alphonsus Liguori, St. Therese of Lisieux, Ven. Louis Martin, St. Bernard of Clairvaux or any saint you like. You will see that they are far from self-righteous. Instead, they are among the humblest of people. And if you have met a self-righteous Christian, know that they are far from the goal. If you want to know what a true Christian wants to be like, read about one of their heroes: the saints.
What observable and empirical evidence is there to clearly demonstrate just such function(in other words, a video record about whales having sex)? What were the names of those so called "muscles"? Where are they anatomically inserted and attached themselves to? Or is that just another pseudoscience without factual proof, when the fact is those aren't just mere "two tiny bones", but an entire set of pelvis, lschium, plus femurs.

Those are legs not for walking, just like how the human men's nipples aren't for breast feeding. But it sure feels good(no, better make that FANTASTIC) when they get stimulated(try molested, all you sexy people out there) during both foreplay as well as actual intercourse(adventurous heterosexual women, bisexual individuals, and homosexual men take notes). Furthermore, your source had this rather condescending remark disregarding the lack of fossil evidence showing an evolutionary progress in between the modern whales and those from the past.

First of all, evolutionary belief claims that these yet unproven adaptations happen out of BENEFICIAL mutations. Beneficial, information gaining mutations on a large, morphological scale have never been observed of course, but we'll let that slide for now.
---- from "Whales"(such an oversimplifying, dull, and thus uninspiring title)
I mean, whoever bothers to really study evolutionary biology with old fossil records anymore? When nowadays it's all done through genomics sequencing. Is there no limit to their degree of ignorance for these pseudoscience wash-offs? They're more pitiful than confused and suicidal beached whales, IMHO.

That includes women and children, who aren't even allowed to own and operate a business back then? How do women and children commit rape? What about those who didn't even know about those "crimes", simply because they've got nothing to do with them and thus, couldn't feel sympathy even if they tried? And what about crying crocodile tears, do those even counts? And finally, whatever happened to criminal rehabilitation and restorative justices? Surely God must knew about those humanitarian correctional methods that actually work, doesn't He?

Damon Horowitz: Philosophy in prison
Damon Horowitz teaches philosophy through the Prison University Project, bringing college-level classes to inmates of San Quentin State Prison. In this powerful short talk, he tells the story of an encounter with right and wrong that quickly gets personal.

Nalini Nadkarni: Life science in prison
Nalini Nadkarni challenges our perspective on trees and prisons -- she says both can be more dynamic than we think. Through a partnership with the state of Washington, she brings science classes and conservation programs to inmates, with unexpected results.

Kiran Bedi: A police chief with a difference
Kiran Bedi has a surprising resume. Before becoming Director General of the Indian Police Service, she managed one of the country's toughest prisons -- and used a new focus on prevention and education to turn it into a center of learning and meditation. She shares her thoughts on visionary leadership at TEDWomen.
Whatever happened to curiosity, understanding, kindness, and compassion for all those who need help and saving form sins? Did God just decided to gave up right there and then?

And you're nothing but a delusional adult, or a misunderstood child, or both. Whenever you're boasting while yourself are standing on the shoulders of giants(which BTW none of them were real scientists by profession). You self-righteous fool with the right to be wrong.


Well, I found an article (Caution: anyone who would find the black and white image of cetacean's penis offensive, should not read this scientific article) which does tie the function of these "vestigial" structures to reproduction and shows that they are connected to muscles: http://www.lamaq.ufsc.br/Artigos%20Aqu%E1ticos/Simoes-Lopes&Gutstein.pdf. Note how the article is written from an evolutionary standpoint. So, people can look at the same thing and come away with a different understanding. And though evolutionists say that an organ or body part need only have reduced functionality rather than complete uselessness in order to be vestigial, bones and muscles which aid in reproduction, i.e. the process which allows the continuance of a species, always had a very important function. And concerning snakes, come on, man! Everyone knows snakes used to have legs until God cursed them. Just read the third chapter of Genesis. And again in this case, these rudimentary hind limbs are helpful in mating, i.e. making sure the species can survive.

Concerning whether crocodile tears are effective in placating the wrath of God, who sees the heart, it should be obvious that only the appearance of contrition is ineffective. One must have " a contrite and broken heart." E.g. "The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a contrite heart: and he will save the humble of spirit." (Psalms 33:19) "A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalms 50:19) "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me: he hath sent me to preach to the meek, to heal the contrite of heart, and to preach a release to the captives, and deliverance to them that are shut up." (Isaiah 61:1)

I can understand one's disbelief that God would include children in this destruction. Women, even though they held less power publicly, could still influence their husbands. One only needs to read Proverbs to know that women were as capable then as they are now of showing their displeasure: "It is better to dwell in a wilderness, than with a quarrelsome and passionate woman." (Prov. 21:19) "A wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish will pull down with her hands that also which is built." (Prov. 14:1) "It is better to sit in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman, and in a common house." (Prov. 25:24) "Roofs dropping through in a cold day, and a contentious woman are alike." (Prov. 27:15) Husbands then, as today, have a tendency to tell their wives everything. If a woman heard that her husband was worshiping foreign gods and committing various crimes in the pursuit of wealth, she had a duty to express her displeasure and advise her husband not to do it. Otherwise, she would be happily helping herself to the ill-gotten gains of her husband, by which she gives her consent to her husband's evil deeds. Also, the wife of an idolatrous husband was probably involved in idolatry herself. And remember that I said "the innocent and the repentant"? If a woman abstained from worshiping foreign idols and other evil things, she would surely be included among those who would not be punished.

Now to give a reason why children might be included in this punishment. Children tend toward innocence, so looked at individually, there is no reason they should die. However, the sins of the parents often bring consequences for the children. The children of wicked parents have likely absorbed the evil example of their parents, so they would likely do the same things if they grew up. Instead, God takes them from this world before they have serious sin on their souls so that they can be with Him in paradise. It is certainly more merciful to bring them early into heaven than to allow them to live long enough to lose their souls. Since God is omniscient, he can see whether someone will repent down the road after committing a serious sin or if they would not repent later. Suppose you spoke to one of these children now in Paradise, asking them: "Are you angry that God took you so soon from this world?" He would likely reply: "No, I am happy that God took me from that miserable world so that I could be with Him in heaven. I rejoice in His light and in praising Him with all the choirs of the saints, a joy which will never be taken away from me."

But, you brought up another valid point: why did God not try to reform the Israelites rather then visit wrath on them? The answer is that he did through the use of his prophets. And what happened?


33Hear ye another parable. There was a man an householder, who planted a vineyard, and made a hedge round about it, and dug in it a press, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen; and went into a strange country.

34And when the time of the fruits drew nigh, he sent his servants to the husbandmen that they might receive the fruits thereof.

35And the husbandmen laying hands on his servants, beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.

36Again he sent other servants more than the former; and they did to them in like manner.

37And last of all he sent to them his son, saying: They will reverence my son.

38But the husbandmen seeing the son, said among themselves: This is the heir: come, let us kill him, and we shall have his inheritance.

39And taking him, they cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him.

40When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen?

41They say to him: He will bring those evil men to an evil end; and will let out his vineyard to other husbandmen, that shall render him the fruit in due season.

42Jesus saith to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? By the Lord this has been done; and it is wonderful in our eyes.

43Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof. (Matthew 21:33-43)


The servants refer to the prophets whom God sent to them so that they would convert. What did the Israelites do? Rather than listen to them, they beat and killed them. Jesus even lamented over the fact that they were so impenitent: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how many times I yearned to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you would not!" (Matthew 23:37) God will not force Himself on a soul. He sends souls His grace, the strength and knowledge they need to convert and obey His laws. It is up to them to freely choose God by an act of will. If they do not use this grace to repent, they are worthy of condemnation. If God has pursued a soul with much mercy and received nothing but contempt for His efforts, the greater will that soul's punishment be.

And I do not stand on the shoulders of the saints. I look up to them and reflect on little I have done for God. I then ask their prayers so that I might no longer be immature or self-righteous, but that I grow in virtue and prefer God's glory to my own. If you're looking for a scientist, Saint Guiseppe (Joseph in English) Moscati's the one for you: http://www.moscati.it/En_GM_index.html. Again, you will not find someone who's self-righteous, but humble and generous to all. If you would refrain from mocking him, he would be generous even to you if you asked him to intercede for you before God.
Posted 1/13/12 , edited 1/13/12

Canute wrote:


DomFortress wrote:



Well, I found an article (Caution: anyone who would find the black and white image of cetacean's penis offensive, should not read this scientific article) which does tie the function of these "vestigial" structures to reproduction and shows that they are connected to muscles: http://www.lamaq.ufsc.br/Artigos%20Aqu%E1ticos/Simoes-Lopes&Gutstein.pdf. Note how the article is written from an evolutionary standpoint. So, people can look at the same thing and come away with a different understanding. And though evolutionists say that an organ or body part need only have reduced functionality rather than complete uselessness in order to be vestigial, bones and muscles which aid in reproduction, i.e. the process which allows the continuance of a species, always had a very important function. And concerning snakes, come on, man! Everyone knows snakes used to have legs until God cursed them. Just read the third chapter of Genesis. And again in this case, these rudimentary hind limbs are helpful in mating, i.e. making sure the species can survive.

Concerning whether crocodile tears are effective in placating the wrath of God, who sees the heart, it should be obvious that only the appearance of contrition is ineffective.
One must have " a contrite and broken heart." E.g. "The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a contrite heart: and he will save the humble of spirit." (Psalms 33:19) "A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalms 50:19) "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me: he hath sent me to preach to the meek, to heal the contrite of heart, and to preach a release to the captives, and deliverance to them that are shut up." (Isaiah 61:1)

I can understand one's disbelief that God would include children in this destruction. Women, even though they held less power publicly, could still influence their husbands. One only needs to read Proverbs to know that women were as capable then as they are now of showing their displeasure: "It is better to dwell in a wilderness, than with a quarrelsome and passionate woman." (Prov. 21:19) "A wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish will pull down with her hands that also which is built." (Prov. 14:1) "It is better to sit in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman, and in a common house." (Prov. 25:24) "Roofs dropping through in a cold day, and a contentious woman are alike." (Prov. 27:15) Husbands then, as today, have a tendency to tell their wives everything. If a woman heard that her husband was worshiping foreign gods and committing various crimes in the pursuit of wealth, she had a duty to express her displeasure and advise her husband not to do it. Otherwise, she would be happily helping herself to the ill-gotten gains of her husband, by which she gives her consent to her husband's evil deeds. Also, the wife of an idolatrous husband was probably involved in idolatry herself. And remember that I said "the innocent and the repentant"? If a woman abstained from worshiping foreign idols and other evil things, she would surely be included among those who would not be punished.

Now to give a reason why children might be included in this punishment. Children tend toward innocence, so looked at individually, there is no reason they should die. However, the sins of the parents often bring consequences for the children. The children of wicked parents have likely absorbed the evil example of their parents, so they would likely do the same things if they grew up. Instead, God takes them from this world before they have serious sin on their souls so that they can be with Him in paradise. It is certainly more merciful to bring them early into heaven than to allow them to live long enough to lose their souls. Since God is omniscient, he can see whether someone will repent down the road after committing a serious sin or if they would not repent later. Suppose you spoke to one of these children now in Paradise, asking them: "Are you angry that God took you so soon from this world?" He would likely reply: "No, I am happy that God took me from that miserable world so that I could be with Him in heaven. I rejoice in His light and in praising Him with all the choirs of the saints, a joy which will never be taken away from me."

But, you brought up another valid point: why did God not try to reform the Israelites rather then visit wrath on them? The answer is that he did through the use of his prophets. And what happened?


33Hear ye another parable. There was a man an householder, who planted a vineyard, and made a hedge round about it, and dug in it a press, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen; and went into a strange country.

34And when the time of the fruits drew nigh, he sent his servants to the husbandmen that they might receive the fruits thereof.

35And the husbandmen laying hands on his servants, beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.

36Again he sent other servants more than the former; and they did to them in like manner.

37And last of all he sent to them his son, saying: They will reverence my son.

38But the husbandmen seeing the son, said among themselves: This is the heir: come, let us kill him, and we shall have his inheritance.

39And taking him, they cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him.

40When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen?

41They say to him: He will bring those evil men to an evil end; and will let out his vineyard to other husbandmen, that shall render him the fruit in due season.

42Jesus saith to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? By the Lord this has been done; and it is wonderful in our eyes.

43Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof. (Matthew 21:33-43)


The servants refer to the prophets whom God sent to them so that they would convert. What did the Israelites do? Rather than listen to them, they beat and killed them. Jesus even lamented over the fact that they were so impenitent: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how many times I yearned to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you would not!" (Matthew 23:37) God will not force Himself on a soul. He sends souls His grace, the strength and knowledge they need to convert and obey His laws. It is up to them to freely choose God by an act of will. If they do not use this grace to repent, they are worthy of condemnation. If God has pursued a soul with much mercy and received nothing but contempt for His efforts, the greater will that soul's punishment be.

And I do not stand on the shoulders of the saints. I look up to them and reflect on little I have done for God. I then ask their prayers so that I might no longer be immature or self-righteous, but that I grow in virtue and prefer God's glory to my own. If you're looking for a scientist, Saint Guiseppe (Joseph in English) Moscati's the one for you: http://www.moscati.it/En_GM_index.html. Again, you will not find someone who's self-righteous, but humble and generous to all. If you would refrain from mocking him, he would be generous even to you if you asked him to intercede for you before God.
Your article doesn't include any genetic sequencing regarding the subject of study, therefore it's unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

Your God didn't submit a research paper on how to genetically alter every snakes' DNA without relying on natural selection nor random mutation, thus your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

The human heart isn't capable of emotional feelings nor morality, it's only for blood circulation. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

There's no official records of those testimonies throughout history, because the accused were all murdered before due fair process. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

God Himself wasn't present for such process to take place, His prophets weren't skilled law enforcers. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

You can't even inspire yourself to challenge your mantel at mastering scientific rigors without God. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.
21305 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/13/12
the heart is capable of feelings.. at least for some people. and probabbly morality too.
Posted 1/14/12

fixingstep wrote:

the heart is capable of feelings.. at least for some people. and probabbly morality too.
Nonsense, when the fact is human morality is all in the brain, made possible only by the neural biochemistry called oxytocin.

Paul Zak: Trust, morality -- and oxytocin
What drives our desire to behave morally? Neuroeconomist Paul Zak shows why he believes oxytocin (he calls it "the moral molecule") is responsible for trust, empathy and other feelings that help build a stable society.
Furthermore, the human heart reacts to human emotional state. While the human emotions are all in the human brains, transmittable from one individual to another subconsciously through the empathic feedback of the mirror neurons. Not by some metaphysical spirits.

RSA Animate - The Empathic Civilisation
Bestselling author, political adviser and social and ethical prophet Jeremy Rifkin investigates the evolution of empathy and the profound ways that it has shaped our development and our society.
21305 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 1/14/12

DomFortress wrote:

Nonsense, when the fact is human morality is all in the brain, made possible only by the neural biochemistry called oxytocin.


it must be nice gto be so sure of yourself. let's hope for your sake you have found the One Truth because you're rather closeminded in some ways.
Canute 
33414 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 1/14/12

DomFortress wrote:


Canute wrote:


DomFortress wrote:



Well, I found an article (Caution: anyone who would find the black and white image of cetacean's penis offensive, should not read this scientific article) which does tie the function of these "vestigial" structures to reproduction and shows that they are connected to muscles: http://www.lamaq.ufsc.br/Artigos%20Aqu%E1ticos/Simoes-Lopes&Gutstein.pdf. Note how the article is written from an evolutionary standpoint. So, people can look at the same thing and come away with a different understanding. And though evolutionists say that an organ or body part need only have reduced functionality rather than complete uselessness in order to be vestigial, bones and muscles which aid in reproduction, i.e. the process which allows the continuance of a species, always had a very important function. And concerning snakes, come on, man! Everyone knows snakes used to have legs until God cursed them. Just read the third chapter of Genesis. And again in this case, these rudimentary hind limbs are helpful in mating, i.e. making sure the species can survive.

Concerning whether crocodile tears are effective in placating the wrath of God, who sees the heart, it should be obvious that only the appearance of contrition is ineffective.
One must have " a contrite and broken heart." E.g. "The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a contrite heart: and he will save the humble of spirit." (Psalms 33:19) "A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalms 50:19) "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me: he hath sent me to preach to the meek, to heal the contrite of heart, and to preach a release to the captives, and deliverance to them that are shut up." (Isaiah 61:1)

I can understand one's disbelief that God would include children in this destruction. Women, even though they held less power publicly, could still influence their husbands. One only needs to read Proverbs to know that women were as capable then as they are now of showing their displeasure: "It is better to dwell in a wilderness, than with a quarrelsome and passionate woman." (Prov. 21:19) "A wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish will pull down with her hands that also which is built." (Prov. 14:1) "It is better to sit in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman, and in a common house." (Prov. 25:24) "Roofs dropping through in a cold day, and a contentious woman are alike." (Prov. 27:15) Husbands then, as today, have a tendency to tell their wives everything. If a woman heard that her husband was worshiping foreign gods and committing various crimes in the pursuit of wealth, she had a duty to express her displeasure and advise her husband not to do it. Otherwise, she would be happily helping herself to the ill-gotten gains of her husband, by which she gives her consent to her husband's evil deeds. Also, the wife of an idolatrous husband was probably involved in idolatry herself. And remember that I said "the innocent and the repentant"? If a woman abstained from worshiping foreign idols and other evil things, she would surely be included among those who would not be punished.

Now to give a reason why children might be included in this punishment. Children tend toward innocence, so looked at individually, there is no reason they should die. However, the sins of the parents often bring consequences for the children. The children of wicked parents have likely absorbed the evil example of their parents, so they would likely do the same things if they grew up. Instead, God takes them from this world before they have serious sin on their souls so that they can be with Him in paradise. It is certainly more merciful to bring them early into heaven than to allow them to live long enough to lose their souls. Since God is omniscient, he can see whether someone will repent down the road after committing a serious sin or if they would not repent later. Suppose you spoke to one of these children now in Paradise, asking them: "Are you angry that God took you so soon from this world?" He would likely reply: "No, I am happy that God took me from that miserable world so that I could be with Him in heaven. I rejoice in His light and in praising Him with all the choirs of the saints, a joy which will never be taken away from me."

But, you brought up another valid point: why did God not try to reform the Israelites rather then visit wrath on them? The answer is that he did through the use of his prophets. And what happened?


33Hear ye another parable. There was a man an householder, who planted a vineyard, and made a hedge round about it, and dug in it a press, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen; and went into a strange country.

34And when the time of the fruits drew nigh, he sent his servants to the husbandmen that they might receive the fruits thereof.

35And the husbandmen laying hands on his servants, beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.

36Again he sent other servants more than the former; and they did to them in like manner.

37And last of all he sent to them his son, saying: They will reverence my son.

38But the husbandmen seeing the son, said among themselves: This is the heir: come, let us kill him, and we shall have his inheritance.

39And taking him, they cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him.

40When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen?

41They say to him: He will bring those evil men to an evil end; and will let out his vineyard to other husbandmen, that shall render him the fruit in due season.

42Jesus saith to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? By the Lord this has been done; and it is wonderful in our eyes.

43Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof. (Matthew 21:33-43)


The servants refer to the prophets whom God sent to them so that they would convert. What did the Israelites do? Rather than listen to them, they beat and killed them. Jesus even lamented over the fact that they were so impenitent: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how many times I yearned to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you would not!" (Matthew 23:37) God will not force Himself on a soul. He sends souls His grace, the strength and knowledge they need to convert and obey His laws. It is up to them to freely choose God by an act of will. If they do not use this grace to repent, they are worthy of condemnation. If God has pursued a soul with much mercy and received nothing but contempt for His efforts, the greater will that soul's punishment be.

And I do not stand on the shoulders of the saints. I look up to them and reflect on little I have done for God. I then ask their prayers so that I might no longer be immature or self-righteous, but that I grow in virtue and prefer God's glory to my own. If you're looking for a scientist, Saint Guiseppe (Joseph in English) Moscati's the one for you: http://www.moscati.it/En_GM_index.html. Again, you will not find someone who's self-righteous, but humble and generous to all. If you would refrain from mocking him, he would be generous even to you if you asked him to intercede for you before God.
Your article doesn't include any genetic sequencing regarding the subject of study, therefore it's unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

Your God didn't submit a research paper on how to genetically alter every snakes' DNA without relying on natural selection nor random mutation, thus your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

The human heart isn't capable of emotional feelings nor morality, it's only for blood circulation. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

There's no official records of those testimonies throughout history, because the accused were all murdered before due fair process. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

God Himself wasn't present for such process to take place, His prophets weren't skilled law enforcers. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

You can't even inspire yourself to challenge your mantel at mastering scientific rigors without God. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.


What do you mean that you need genetic sequencing to prove that genital muscles are attached to the bone structure in question? Though DNA is the blue print for the structure of a body, the structure of a body can be scientifically investigated without knowledge of its generic sequence. If you were in front of a house and someone pointed to the door and said: "This door leads to the vestibule," perhaps you might say that his word was not enough evidence to go on. But, if he opens the door and you could clearly see that the vestibule was indeed behind this door, would you then require the blueprints before believing that it was the vestibule? In the same way, you can see a picture of the muscle structure surrounding these bones and that they join with the genital. Any scientist you like could perform a similar autopsy, and would find the same structure. Or do you doubt that dolphins and whales share a common ancestor? I thought that evolutionists believed that they did.

God can easily alter the form of whatever he likes. I'm just showing you that there's a passage in the bible in agreement with evolutionists' belief that snakes had legs. And as to the fact that the "vestigial" legs are indeed used in mating, I saw several references to an article written by someone named Hall in 2003 specifically referring to boids (snakes in the family Boidae) using them in mating.

Perhaps the brain stores information on morality, but the body and the mind are so conjoined that the thoughts of the mind affect the body. The two places in the body which register strong emotion are the heart and the enteric nervous system, which the people of the bible noticed: "Create a clean heart in me, O God: and renew a right spirit within my bowels." (Psalms 50:12) Generally, if someone feels a strong feeling of guilt, they will feel it in their heart and/or abdomen.

The Bible is hardly anecdotal. See this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible#Archaeological_and_historical_research. It appears that there is widespread agreement that the Bible is historical from the 7th - 8th centuries B.C. That covers the time of the prophets. So, it seems that the record of Israel's idolatry and the practice of widespread injustice has a factual basis. Asking to have God's knowledge of the reasons each person who was punished received that fate is a little much, don't you think?

And while some of my arguments are experiential, I think that we'd agree on these points: 1) Wives influence their husbands; 2) Women are usually the ones who maintain religious practices in the household; 3) Children learn from their parents; and 4) Children are not as mentally developed as adults, so are less guilty than them even if they perform a similar crime (as recognized by our court system). I was just applying these phenomena to Biblical events.

God is present everywhere and knows the thoughts of all men. The prophets merely attempted to bring the people to repent. The Israelites refused and so were punished. When Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah, they were spared. All God wants is for people to regret their errors and try not to do them again. If they fall and repent again, God once again forgives. The only people whom He punishes are those who absolutely refuse to do this. And, if one kills those people who tell one to stop committing crimes, one can certainly be classified as unrepentant.

And permit me to note a glaring inconsistency with this post of yours: when you wish to use the Bible to show that God is wrathful and unmerciful, it's perfectly fine. When I use it to show how patient and merciful He is--that He only punishes when people persist for a long time in sin and adamantly refuse to repent, you consider it anecdotal. The Bible either is a valid way to learn about God or it isn't. You can't accept some passages and deny others just because they don't support your argument.

I must confess that science isn't my strong suit, but science and history are separate fields. The only place where they join is in archaeology, because of scientific dating methods and the like. Otherwise, history tends to rely on written records. So, saying something in history is "unfit for scientific peer review" is irrelevant.
Posted 1/14/12 , edited 1/14/12

fixingstep wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Nonsense, when the fact is human morality is all in the brain, made possible only by the neural biochemistry called oxytocin.


it must be nice gto be so sure of yourself. ]let's hope for your sake you have found the One Truth because you're rather closeminded in some ways.
When you made a claim about my person without sufficient justification, you're automatically licensing me to disproof your claim without necessary justification. That's the logic behind Occam's Razor. Furthermore, your condescending attitude towards my person, and not at my scientific evidences, only proves that your "tolerance is condescending".

If you wanna have something worthwhile to say to me that's actually true, then get off on your self-righteousness and prove your claim with empirical evidences. AKA a testable mechanism.


Canute wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Your article doesn't include any genetic sequencing regarding the subject of study, therefore it's unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

Your God didn't submit a research paper on how to genetically alter every snakes' DNA without relying on natural selection nor random mutation, thus your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

The human heart isn't capable of emotional feelings nor morality, it's only for blood circulation. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

There's no official records of those testimonies throughout history, because the accused were all murdered before due fair process. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

God Himself wasn't present for such process to take place, His prophets weren't skilled law enforcers. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.

You can't even inspire yourself to challenge your mantel at mastering scientific rigors without God. Your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Rejected.


What do you mean that you need genetic sequencing to prove that genital muscles are attached to the bone structure in question? Though DNA is the blue print for the structure of a body, the structure of a body can be scientifically investigated without knowledge of its generic sequence. If you were in front of a house and someone pointed to the door and said: "This door leads to the vestibule," perhaps you might say that his word was not enough evidence to go on. But, if he opens the door and you could clearly see that the vestibule was indeed behind this door, would you then require the blueprints before believing that it was the vestibule? In the same way, you can see a picture of the muscle structure surrounding these bones and that they join with the genital. Any scientist you like could perform a similar autopsy, and would find the same structure. Or do you doubt that dolphins and whales share a common ancestor? I thought that evolutionists believed that they did.

God can easily alter the form of whatever he likes. I'm just showing you that there's a passage in the bible in agreement with evolutionists' belief that snakes had legs. And as to the fact that the "vestigial" legs are indeed used in mating, I saw several references to an article written by someone named Hall in 2003 specifically referring to boids (snakes in the family Boidae) using them in mating.

Perhaps the brain stores information on morality, but the body and the mind are so conjoined that the thoughts of the mind affect the body. The two places in the body which register strong emotion are the heart and the enteric nervous system, which the people of the bible noticed: "Create a clean heart in me, O God: and renew a right spirit within my bowels." (Psalms 50:12) Generally, if someone feels a strong feeling of guilt, they will feel it in their heart and/or abdomen.

The Bible is hardly anecdotal.
See this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible#Archaeological_and_historical_research. It appears that there is widespread agreement that the Bible is historical from the 7th - 8th centuries B.C. That covers the time of the prophets. So, it seems that the record of Israel's idolatry and the practice of widespread injustice has a factual basis. Asking to have God's knowledge of the reasons each person who was punished received that fate is a little much, don't you think?

And while some of my arguments are experiential, I think that we'd agree on these points: 1) Wives influence their husbands; 2) Women are usually the ones who maintain religious practices in the household; 3) Children learn from their parents; and 4) Children are not as mentally developed as adults, so are less guilty than them even if they perform a similar crime (as recognized by our court system). I was just applying these phenomena to Biblical events.

God is present everywhere and knows the thoughts of all men. The prophets merely attempted to bring the people to repent. The Israelites refused and so were punished. When Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah, they were spared. All God wants is for people to regret their errors and try not to do them again. If they fall and repent again, God once again forgives. The only people whom He punishes are those who absolutely refuse to do this. And, if one kills those people who tell one to stop committing crimes, one can certainly be classified as unrepentant.

And permit me to note a glaring inconsistency with this post of yours: when you wish to use the Bible to show that God is wrathful and unmerciful, it's perfectly fine. When I use it to show how patient and merciful He is--that He only punishes when people persist for a long time in sin and adamantly refuse to repent, you consider it anecdotal. The Bible either is a valid way to learn about God or it isn't. You can't accept some passages and deny others just because they don't support your argument.

I must confess that science isn't my strong suit, but science and history are separate fields. The only place where they join is in archaeology, because of scientific dating methods and the like. Otherwise, history tends to rely on written records. So, saying something in history is "unfit for scientific peer review" is irrelevant.
Because anatomically speaking, a mammalian's penis doesn't have any muscle tissue that's attached to the pelvis through a tendon,

while a mammalian's vagina doesn't have any muscle tissue that's attached to the pelvis through a tendon. You know why? Because anatomically speaking a mammalian penis is a mammalian vagina turned inside-out. A male body is a variation of a female's, the bible had it all wrong.

The sexual organs of both sexes operate without the need of structural support from the bones during reproduction. Leg bones are biologically for walking purpose, period. But during human sexual intercourse they're great for extra handling and support for various humping positions, aka pelvic thrust. Do I have to show you how it's done(keywords: でふぉるめ四十八手)? Oh wait, your religious dogma only condones the missionary position. How depressingly boring.

BTW, the only sexual intercourse that would require muscle contraction from anywhere near the pelvis is during anal sex. Tighten up that anus and get a FABULOUS squeeze plus an adventurous good time, but don't forget to use generous amount of lube.


So yeah, show me those exact references that you kept claiming to see. You know how it goes in show and tell; I'll show you mine if you show me yours. If not, then your anecdote reporting is unfit for scientific peer review. Because you didn't demonstrate how whales used their leg bones during any part of their natural mating habits. Rejected.

The biblical monotheistic deity is totally anecdote reporting, as in man-made "Jewish concept of monotheism evolved from the syncretism of various polytheistic sources like Canaanite and Babylonian polytheism", according to modern anthropology, archaeology, and theology.

God isn't all "patient and merciful" to those He deemed unworthy. And for me asking God's categorical moral imperative that His justification for ethnic genocide was based on, isn't much for someone who claims to be all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-present. For God Himself needing prophets for this simple task only shows His own contempt for, as well as a lack thereof, self-respect. Not grace. By comparison, the secular humanists' modern methods of criminal rehabilitation and restorative justices, are far more curios, understanding, kind, and compassionate for all those who need help and saving form sins. Not to mention more "patient and merciful" than a cruel and genocidal man-made monotheistic deity.

Damon Horowitz: Philosophy in prison
Damon Horowitz teaches philosophy through the Prison University Project, bringing college-level classes to inmates of San Quentin State Prison. In this powerful short talk, he tells the story of an encounter with right and wrong that quickly gets personal.

Nalini Nadkarni: Life science in prison
Nalini Nadkarni challenges our perspective on trees and prisons -- she says both can be more dynamic than we think. Through a partnership with the state of Washington, she brings science classes and conservation programs to inmates, with unexpected results.

Kiran Bedi: A police chief with a difference
Kiran Bedi has a surprising resume. Before becoming Director General of the Indian Police Service, she managed one of the country's toughest prisons -- and used a new focus on prevention and education to turn it into a center of learning and meditation. She shares her thoughts on visionary leadership at TEDWomen.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.