"no, I'm actually an athiest"

Turtwig

goingpostal wrote: »

He could also raise the dead (including himself),

Well Elijah also carried out that feat. (By lying on a supposedly dead body of a young boy 3 times in his own bed!)

PAULWATSON

scientific1982 wrote: »

Happy now.

1500 replies and 30,000 views, I'd say the point was made.

Turtwig

PAULWATSON wrote: »

1500 replies and 30,000 views, I'd say the point was made.

What point? Sorry...did I miss something?

Pherekydes

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

If Jesus is the God of the Old Testament, and told the people that the Law still stood, then yes, he did.

Do you agree with your god or not?

Jesus existed. The God of the old testament did (does) not. Jesus was well known for obeying the laws of the time. He's also well known for not judging people, or condemning them.

Marcus.Aurelius

Pherekydes wrote: »

Jesus existed. The God of the old testament did (does) not. Jesus was well known for obeying the laws of the time. He's also well known for not judging people, or condemning them.

So when Jesus quoted from the old testament, and Paul repeated the prohibition against homosexuality, they were both lying?

Remember when Jesus said that those who were not with him would be gathered up and cast into the fire? That's a pretty big judgement for someone who did not judge or condemn.

goingpostal

Pherekydes wrote: »

Jesus existed. The God of the old testament did (does) not. Jesus was well known for obeying the laws of the time. He's also well known for not judging people, or condemning them.

But why was he so mean to that fig tree? It was only a tree. And it wasn't the trees fault that figs were out of season.

Sam Vimes

Pherekydes wrote: »

Jesus existed. The God of the old testament did (does) not. Jesus was well known for obeying the laws of the time. He's also well known for not judging people, or condemning them.

You know that the coming of Jesus was supposedly foretold in the Old Testament and that throughout the bible Jesus says that he is the son of the god of the old testament right?

Stercus Accidit

PAULWATSON wrote: »

1500 replies and 30,000 views, I'd say the point was made.

Discussion on a discussion board? Well I never.

What are you do you think you are, the messiah of trolls or something?

scientific1982

Malty_T wrote: »

What point? Sorry...did I miss something?

We're all PAULWATSONs bitches.

Colm!

You know, I'm getting tired of comments like this:

PAULWATSON wrote: »

(paedo this, paedo that, blah, blah, catholic church, blah, had enough, blah, superstition, blah, we're so educated, blah.)

There's a quote from the Intelligence² debate on the Catholic Church (look up Stephen Fry's speech on YouTube, interesting stuff), that I feel addresses this perfectly.
I’m slightly disappointed that you in particular should say “oh, I knew they’d bring up condoms and child rape and homosexuality.” It’s a bit like a burglar in court saying “you would bring up that burglary and that manslaughter, you never mentioned the fact that I gave my father a birthday present.” You know, yes, yes, are you getting the message? There is a reason we hammer home these issues: because they matter.
-Stephen Fry

tl;dr: There's a REASON people say the same things when they're asked why they reject the Catholic church. Because these are the things that MATTER to us.

That, and I also don't believe in a god or higher power, but do acknowledge the possibility of the existence of one. So yes, I am an agnostic, not someone who says this pretentiously to get attention. I rarely speak about this in public. Hell, I'm fairly sure my parents don't know much about my religious beliefs.

Greentopia

PAULWATSON wrote: »

1500 replies and 30,000 views, I'd say the point was made.

What point is that?

I've rather enjoyed this thread I must say. I contributed a little, learned some things I didn't know before about the process of evolution from people who know more about the subject than I do and had a laugh at the replies that were witty. I'd call that a win personally ::shrugs::

Pherekydes

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

So when Jesus quoted from the old testament, and Paul repeated the prohibition against homosexuality, they were both lying?

Remember when Jesus said that those who were not with him would be gathered up and cast into the fire? That's a pretty big judgement for someone who did not judge or condemn.

Jesus said those things, or are they quotes attributed to him by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Those things kind of contradict "He who is without sin cast the first stone".

PAULWATSON

Greentopia wrote: »

What point is that?

I've rather enjoyed this thread I must say. I contributed a little, learned some things I didn't know before about the process of evolution from people who know more about the subject than I do and had a laugh at the replies that were witty. I'd call that a win personally ::shrugs::

I thought it went a bit out of hand.

Some of what I "believe" (as an irrational, non scientific clown?) ;

http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/index.htm

Turtwig

Pherekydes wrote: »

Jesus said those things, or are they quotes attributed to him by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Those things kind of contradict "He who is without sin cast the first stone".

Well as Jesus Himself never wrote anything down all we have is the words of others on what He said. The earliest word being 30 years after his death. (Generous estimate)

Marcus.Aurelius

Pherekydes wrote: »

Jesus said those things, or are they quotes attributed to him by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Those things kind of contradict "He who is without sin cast the first stone".

Oh that ridiculous story discredited after it emerged that the story only appeared in later manuscripts, not in any of the original John copies.

Oh dear.

Pace2008

PAULWATSON wrote: »

I thought it went a bit out of hand.

Some of what I "believe" (as an irrational, non scientific clown?) ;

http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/index.htm

That is one ****ing ugly webpage.

Sam Vimes

PAULWATSON wrote: »

I thought it went a bit out of hand.

Some of what I "believe" (as an irrational, non scientific clown?) ;

http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/index.htm

Just had a quick scan through the book and found this image:
http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/TaylorIMMfcCanidaeDogKindM.jpg

This basically blows any creationist argument out of the water. They'll spend pages and pages and pages trying to show how evolution makes no logical sense and then admit that it can produce both of these animals from a common ancestor: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=130627&stc=1&d=1286824810


They can't deny that evolution works, they just invent an imaginary barrier that prevents an ill defined thing called a "kind" from evolving into another "kind". They call this macro evolution, claim it has never been observed and stick their fingers in their ears as people point out the many examples of where it has been observed. Depressing so it is

Greentopia

Colm! wrote: »

You know, I'm getting tired of comments like this:

There's a quote from the Intelligence² debate on the Catholic Church (look up Stephen Fry's speech on YouTube, interesting stuff), that I feel addresses this perfectly.
I’m slightly disappointed that you in particular should say “oh, I knew they’d bring up condoms and child rape and homosexuality.” It’s a bit like a burglar in court saying “you would bring up that burglary and that manslaughter, you never mentioned the fact that I gave my father a birthday present.” You know, yes, yes, are you getting the message? There is a reason we hammer home these issues: because they matter.
-Stephen Fry

That was from the debate Fry and Hitchens had against that awful haridan Anne Widecombe and some African Bishop wasn't it? I saw that recently. Excellent stuff and only made me admire Hitch and Fry even more.
They completely demolished the opposing sides arguments in favour of the RCC.
I almost felt sorry for Widecombe and the Bishop at the end, they looked defeated and sort of shell shocked

MarcusFenix

The worst moment for the atheist is when he(or she) is really thankful and has nobody to thank.

Rabidlamb

Right, I've examined all the facts & the truth has finally emerged.
All religion is pure poppycock I tell you... poppycock.
But if it makes you happy to play with your imaginary friends & talk to them in prearranged short poems knock yourself out.
We'll be hear waiting for you in the real world.

Glad I could put the debate to rest.

Turtwig

MarcusFenix wrote: »

The worst moment for the atheist is when he(or she) is really thankful and has nobody to thank.

Well, now I wouldn't be thankful unless someone helped me. I don't expect the universe to go out its way to help. What a self centred thought to think it actually does.

philologos

goingpostal wrote: »

Ah, vicarious redemption through human sacrifice. My favourite part of the whole uplifting christian hoax.

The most significant as well as you can imagine. It's a make or break moment for Christians. Even the Bible says that if the Resurrection didn't happen our faith would be worthless.

MarcusFenix

Well the universe is expanding, probably irrationally as it is growing in ever increasing disorder, or entropy, so it is quite possible that by chance and a very slight chance, that I may be at the centre of the universe for a moment at some stage....and by fuck when that happens herself will hear about it:p

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

The most significant as well as you can imagine. It's a make or break moment for Christians. Even the Bible says that if the Resurrection didn't happen our faith would be worthless.

Yes indeed, if god didn't sacrifice himself to himself to save us from the sin that he had condemned us to for having the nature that he created us with then your faith is worthless. Unfortunately sacrificing yourself to yourself to save people from yourself doesn't make any sense, especially if the reason you're doing it is because they are the way you made them

Turtwig

MarcusFenix wrote: »

Well the universe is expanding, probably irrationally as it is growing in ever increasing disorder, or entropy, so it is quite possible that by chance and a very slight chance, that I may be at the centre of the universe for a moment at some stage....and by fuck when that happens herself will hear about it:p

Nope, the other way around actually, you are part of the centre of universe when it first began, but not for any other time in its life span will you be the centre of it.:p

Saganist

PAULWATSON wrote: »

I thought it went a bit out of hand.

Some of what I "believe" (as an irrational, non scientific clown?) ;

http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/index.htm

Try some real facts

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Marcus.Aurelius

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Yes indeed, if god didn't sacrifice himself to himself to save us from the sin that he had condemned us to for having the nature that he created us with then your faith is worthless. Unfortunately sacrificing yourself to yourself to save people from yourself doesn't make any sense, especially if the reason you're doing it is because they are the way you made them

Concise and to the point. How can anyone looking from the outside read this and say it makes sense? It's just barking mad.

Helix

MarcusFenix wrote: »

The worst moment for the atheist is when he(or she) is really thankful and has nobody to thank.

yeah, we're capable of doing thing without the help of an imaginary fairy

Sam Vimes

Caesar Augustus wrote: »

Concise and to the point. How can anyone looking from the outside read this and say it makes sense? It's just barking mad.

Indeed. To put it in human terms: Imagine I've kidnapped some people. The negotiator has just shown up to hear my demands and I have only one. I demand that I be turned over to myself for execution....and then I shoot myself in the head

PAULWATSON

Saganist wrote: »

Try some real facts

The facts are irrelevant in a lot of cases. Sometimes it can be frustrating to see people crying out for their own enslavement! There is a much bigger picture to be seen.