Posts by starScream

4

Proof beer is good for you.

by BeelzeDub in

warning to simon.... do not view at the risk of dashing your dreams and fantacies!.

could this be the link to why so many jw m.s.

& elders like to drink beer so much?

Dizzy Christianity - Fraudulent and Evil Rotten - from beginning to end

by Xander in

was going to bump the other thread, but, this....just...... i mean:.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/murderers.htm.

some fun the early christians had:the pope's pears:.

You keep dodging the issue by basically saying you are right and I am illogical. There are still only two possibilities. Either biological life was created by some intelligence or it was not. You want me to say that it is simply illogical to consider that intelligence created biological life.

How did god get here? Your whole theory falls flat on its face, as the argument you use destroys your own viewpoint.

The subject is how the biological life got here. It was either intelligently created or it occured through natural chemical process. It is illogical to say that it could not have happend but through natural chemical process. You have still not adressed the evidence to dismiss it.

I say it's evidence for cheesecake. You can't prove me wrong, can you

cheesecake what? No I can't prove you wrong because I don't know what you mean.

That statement displays your ignorance of theories relating to abiogenesis

I used the word reason meaning specific purpose. I am not saying chemical reactions are random and unpredictable. You don't want to discuss, you want to dictate and call people names.

If you have to use a strawman in even describing your oponents opinions, your arguement isn;t worth a damn.

Hi pot, its me! the kettle! What was that about cheesecake blacky.

Bona Dea,

Even given the benefit of the doubt, who's to say your God is the God who created all this?

That is not the issue. The issue is the possibilty that biological life was created.

It is easier to believe that an invisible creator just "was", than to believe that the visible earth just "was". At least there is evidence that the earth exists, which is more than I can say for any "God".

The earth did not always exist. This is a scientific fact. According to the second law of thermodynamics, given the complexity of the universe, the belief that God simply was, although it is not the issue, is rational. You can't say that it is impossible that there is a God.

Biological life is not proof of God.

I know that. It is evidence. A bloody glove and a bloodstained driveway are evidence. Abaddon may want me to think they are evidence for cheesecake if he doesn't like my theory on what they are evidence for. If the jury buys his argument then a killer can walk because the evidence wasn't proof, it was still evidence though.

53

Dizzy Christianity - Fraudulent and Evil Rotten - from beginning to end

by Xander in

was going to bump the other thread, but, this....just...... i mean:.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/murderers.htm.

some fun the early christians had:the pope's pears:.

starScream

Abaddon,

You assume there is a god, when you have no direct proof, and assume that it was always there, when you have no direct proof.

The direct evidence I submitted was biological life. You may not like it that I am calling it evidence but it is and I am. You are free to scrutinize the evidence. I am not trying to win some kind of debate here. All I am trying to do is make you and anyone reading this seriously consider the reality we are living with in which either someone decided to create biological life or biological life just spontaneously came about on its own.

These are the only two possibilities. You are free to develop any theory you like concerning what may have naturally lead up to the formation of life. That was my initial intention. Think about how it could have happened without intent. If you have some kind of model theory I would love to hear it. If not then keep thinking about it. That is all I was trying to get people to do. I'm sorry if I offended your senses.

I can't prove you are a mutant space alien in perfect human disguise beaming back undetectable messages to the mothership planning an invasion,

Thats a nice attempt at an analogy but it is irrelevant. We are not dealing with unlimited paranoid fantasies about space mutants and an infinite number of other possibilites. Our dichotomy is the theory that non-living matter became living matter for no reason at all or biological life was specifically created. There are only two possibilties. Neither one is illogical based on what we know. It is no less logical to assume biological life was designed and created than it is to assume it formed naturally. The test is to see if biological life can simply form naturally. If it can't form naturally that proves it was created. So test the evidence. Don't accuse me of being illogical. Also bear in mind I don't expect to settle this on the Jehovah's Witness discussion board. I just want people to think about it. Make up your own mind. Labeling me as illogical and irrational for taking one side of a two faced coin does not illiminate one of the faces. It is there whether you like it or not.

18

Need help with the Trinity

by dins in

i have been talking to a coworker of mine about religion and it's been rather interesting; it involves accepting christ into your heart as your saviour.

another thing is the trinity.. is there anything that any of you have found in the bible based on these beliefs.

i keep reading scriptures about god being one, and christ his son but then my coworker insists they are one in the same.. how, if anyway.

starScream

dins,

artful and achristian have obviously studuied the subject extensively.

Jesus is the "Son of Man" he claimed this. He is the Son of God. To deny his deity for being the Son of God would be to deny his humanity for being the Son of Man

The trinity is not three persons that are one person. They are three persons that are three persons and One God.

I don't think your coworker said "they are one in the same" though. If he/she did they were not entirely accurate. If you are reffering to God you can be reffering to the Father and not the Son. Christ and God are not simply "one in the same." This difference yet consistency is established with the Trinity which means three that are one. The trinity is three persons. Each person is God and there is only one God.

If you actually believe Jesus is God it will make perfect sense to you. I have no problem understatnding the trinity. I think that it is because I accept and know Jesus for who and what he is. That is what it comes down to. We don't believe Jesus is God to justify the Trinity. We believe Jesus is God because that is who he is and there is nothing else he can be before he comes to earth (tense intentional).

aunthill, the Jesus is God scriptures will blow your mind.

53

Dizzy Christianity - Fraudulent and Evil Rotten - from beginning to end

by Xander in

was going to bump the other thread, but, this....just...... i mean:.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/murderers.htm.

some fun the early christians had:the pope's pears:.

starScream

There are fundamental differences between asking to prove where God came from and proving where biological life came from. We both recognize the existence of biological life. We know there was a time when biological life did not exist. Me saying that biological life was created and you saying it came about on its own is like: two people who say that biological life was created; one saying the creator was created and another saying it came about on its own.

You do not recognize the existence of a creator of the biological life in question. There is now way of knowing if there was a time when the creator did not exist. We do know that biological life did not exist and came into being at one point.

I'm not asking you to prove biological life exists. My assertion that biological life is evidence that God exists is in response to the challenge that God does not exist. To attack the evidence I submit by challenging the origin of God(b-life creator) does not address the evidence. The fact remains, biological life does exist.

You are acting like you challenging me to show where God came from is the same thing. If you recognize the existence of God then it is the same thing. The problem is that if you do then you are posing a response to a challenge that does not exist. Your challenge is paradoxal. Mine is not.

I think the former more likely, and so would a class of five year olds, which is a good way of seeing stupid arguements. Try it some time.

Ok

If you gain some satifsfaction from saying 'entropy' when you are asserting that something complex and orgainsed (god) came from nothing, fine, but I don;t see how it makes your arguement any stronger.

No I did not say that. You said that. Apparently you understand the second law of thermodynamics. The question:

Which one is entropic?

was directly attached to this statement by you,

I am saying things started simple and grew complex. Your belief requires complexity (god) from the outset. Which makes more sense?

You asked which one made more sense. I cited physics 101. You apparently thought that decreasing entropy would convince me that your theory was more plausible. A classroom of physicists blah blah blah

16

Do You Think Your Faith Was Real?

by sandy in

i was baptized at 13 and i never felt a close personal relationship with god.

my prayers were without emotion.

i nver felt close to god.

starScream

logansrun,

Why would anyone want to have an irrational belief system that is not grounded in tangible reality as the guiding principle in their life?

I said :

Faith means trust. It is something that is intangible and irrational.

Faith is irrational. Something that is irrational can still exist and be valuable. Pi is irrational as a number. It cannot be tangibly defined or rationally expressed as a number even though it is a number with numeric value. What part does Pi have in engineering?

I am assuming your question was rhetorical and at me....

I said, faith means trust. In terms of Christianity I made the focus of this trust Jesus Christ. I made no refference to a belief system nor did I say anything about said system being the "guiding principle" in my life. I'm not even sure what guiding principle said system is in contrast to that would qualify it with the word "the".

The implcation of your question has been misguided in terms of what I said.

If your question was not rhetorical...

The U.S. Marine Corps as its motto is semper fidelis. This means ever faithful. Given what they do and how well they do it I have no reason to ask them why. I'm sure it is because it helps them do what it is they do. (If your question was not rhetorical) and the subject interests you so much maybe you could write your dissertation on the power of faith.

jgnat,

yes, I remember Christianity was too easy to be true. That was why it was false. My mom made that point so many times it stopped sounding moronic. I remember going to the meetings and seeing all these people that are "suposedly" christian just hanging around. "Yes, I am so much better then they are. I am going to the meeting and showing Jehovah that I am better than they are. I am exposing their error by sitting in the Kingdom Hall not paying attention."

16

Do You Think Your Faith Was Real?

by sandy in

i was baptized at 13 and i never felt a close personal relationship with god.

my prayers were without emotion.

i nver felt close to god.

starScream

I don't know if what the JWs have can be called faith.

I absolutely believed everything the Watchtower said and claimed to be. I wasn't trying to trick myself. It was very real for me. I don't think it was faith though. It was mental education by an instituiton. Faith means trust. It is something that is intangible and irrational. To a Christian it is trusting in Christ through love. That does not fit with the Watchtower. The Watchtower has as its facade presumption of authority in contrast to faith in Christ.

I would say I did not have faith in Christ because the term "faith in Christ" I would not have understood what it meant or even be aware that such a term existed. If someone told me they had faith in Christ I would have been laughing on the inside. I knew subconciously they were not within the 'presumption of authority' and that their faith was useless. I remember talking to people at doors and they would say how much God changed their lives and they looked very emotional about it. I remember automatically judging them as unchristian or wicked because they might have been wearing sweat pants or have a beard. I remember that I actually felt confident that I was superior because I went to "church" three times a week, walked around wearing a suit, and made the organization look "christian" aka good. The fact that I was at their door told me I was right and that YOU should listen to ME!!!!

53

Dizzy Christianity - Fraudulent and Evil Rotten - from beginning to end

by Xander in

was going to bump the other thread, but, this....just...... i mean:.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/murderers.htm.

some fun the early christians had:the pope's pears:.

starScream

I ask you now to prove where god came from.

I already stated the evidence for the existence of God. Biological life is evidence of a creator. You are recognizing God exists based on the evidence and asking me where God came from?

Otherwise we are tied when it comes to initial origins.

I have never heard a naturalist admit a tie on the God debate. This is unprecedented (for me anyway).

You ask for proof of abiogenesis, the origin of life from inanimate matter. There is no proof, just theories.

Then show a specific model theory.

I am saying things started simple and grew complex.

Your belief requires complexity (god) from the outset. Which makes more sense?

Which one is entropic? Does entropy makes sense or is entropy just a theory?

I am still surprised that you admit a tie at the very least. I don't care about "cramming" God down your throat. I don't think there is much more I can say that would make you come to the same conclusion I do that spontaneous generation is more of a missing leap or even impossibility than a link. If you call spontaneous generation a tie in terms of evidence for creation then I think you at least consider them both possible despite what you consider likely.

12

What does the Bible say about Jesus Christ?

by UnDisfellowshipped in

who is jesus christ?

what does the bible say?

1: jesus christ is god almighty, the supreme being [omnipotent] (john 1:1-3; john 20:28-29; hebrews 1:6, 1:8, 1:10; psalm 45:6; psalm 102:25; titus 2:13; romans 9:5; colossians 2:9).

starScream

William,

You know you don't have a bible underneath a table leg in your house. Stop telling lies.

12

What does the Bible say about Jesus Christ?

by UnDisfellowshipped in

who is jesus christ?

what does the bible say?

1: jesus christ is god almighty, the supreme being [omnipotent] (john 1:1-3; john 20:28-29; hebrews 1:6, 1:8, 1:10; psalm 45:6; psalm 102:25; titus 2:13; romans 9:5; colossians 2:9).

starScream

When you say that God created all things by Himself

he did say that at Isa 44:24

are you saying that the Father created all things by Himself?

No this Jehovah character that I reffered to must have been Jesus unless Jesus' pants are on fire and hanging from a telephone wire.

If so, then why did God say, "Let US make man in OUR own image"?

for the same reason Jehovah said "I caused an overthrow among you people, like God's overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah." (amos 4:10-11)

God is more than one person.