Got another emai. Again another interesting read

[chiplee]

Though I am a Christian and I believe the Bible is 100% accurate

 

Uh, wow, you did "read" the bible before you decided that right? I mean, the average 3rd grader knows more about the world these days than the people who wrote the bible. They barely knew enough to keep their own human waste away from their food. They were unaware of disease, weather patterns, why stars were bright and nights were dark. The bible overflows with evidence of what its writers didn't know about the world around them. But you don't have to use that evidence. You can open the bible at random and find absurdity on almost any page. Of course you find a wealth of good moral guidance too, and a ton of beautiful poetry as Mark Twain pointed out. But you can't really believe it's 100% accurate can you?

 

 

In the book of Numbers for example, Numbers 5:11 through 31 to be exact the Bible explains the Law of Jealousies. If a man suspects his wife of being unfaithful, he reports it to the priest. The priest then makes her drink some "bitter water." If she is guilty, the water makes her thigh rot and her belly swell. If innocent, no harm done -- the woman is free and will "conceive seed." In any case, "the man shall be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.

 

I certainly hope that part isn't 100% accurate friend. Please don't make me list a thousand more lies we can all find easily in the bible.

 

 

Besides, believing the bible to be 100% accurate would be basically the same as believing the bible is perfect, and that's not even a Christian thing to say. Only God is perfect in the minds of most Christians, so you simply have to include the bible in the heap of "imperfect" things on earth.

 

 

there simply isn't anything we can do if it is God's plan.

 

You have just revealed the EXACT reason I HATE religion with a raging passion. thank you. Believers think everything is God's will, and they also think there's no way to stop Gods will. That makes them tend to be apathetic about some things that I wish we all considered our own problem, our own responsibility.

Edited June 13, 2008 by chiplee

[Skippy]

I won't debate the accuracy of the scipture with you. However, I would challenge you to actually learn about the Bible and try to prove any part of it wrong. I suspect that you, just like so many others before you that tried to do so, will not only fail but will change your tune. One book I would certainly recommend to someone like you is A Case for Christ. It was written by an investigative journalist that "investigated it" just like he would any other story he was doing. If you simply looked into the history of how the bible was actually even created you would be surprised. You obviously don't even understand the very basics of it or you wouldn't have made such an off the wall comment about it having to be imperfect because only God is perfect.

 

You have just revealed the EXACT reason I HATE religion with a raging passion. thank you. Believers think everything is God's will, and they also think there's no way to stop Gods will. That makes them tend to be apathetic about some things that I wish we all considered our own problem, our own responsibility.

 

No problem, but before you continue on you should at least learn that Christianity is not a religion. If you actually read the bible you would see that Christ himself had issues with established religion. I can list many flaws in many organized religions and not a single one of those flaws they have are supported by scripture. In many cases they contradict scripture or take bits and pieces to support their claim. Many of your televangelist and "name it and claim it" religions do this because it gets the most "believers" and thus gets them the most money.

 

And no, God's will is not everything in our lives. The single greatest thing He gave us was freedom of choice. We choose to follow Him, we choose to turn our back, and we choose to do what is right or wrong. He will not force you to do anything. Many people confuse "God's will" with the result of their actions, good or bad. God can not and will not "tempt" anyone and this is clear in the book of James. He does have work (His will) that needs to get done and relies on us to do it. But He ALWAYS enables us to do that work IF we choose to do it. If not, it will get done but He will use another way. I am no biblical scholar, but I believe there are 2 cases in the bible that God's mind was changed by His people. So His will has been changed.

 

Your suggestion of picking and choosing what to believe in the bible again shows your lack of knowledge and understanding of it.

[desert_starion]

GOOD THOUGHTS

 

 

GOOD DEEDS

 

 

GOOD WORDS

 

I think that'll sum it all up for you, save yourself from reading all those books.

[chiplee]

I won't debate the accuracy of the scipture with you. However, I would challenge you to actually learn about the Bible and try to prove any part of it wrong. I suspect that you, just like so many others before you that tried to do so, will not only fail but will change your tune.

 

I agree that this isn't the place to debate bible scripture. Why don't you join me at creationtalk.com or faithfreedom.org or christianity.com where I've been actively debating and studying this topic for nearly a decade. However, while we're "challenging" each other to learn about things, I would challenge you to learn about critical thinking, evolution, biology, chemistry, physics and common sense. You must know that you would be regarded as unworthy of intellectual debate at any of the forums I frequent if you won't drop this "infallible bible" attitude. NO ONE is able to maintain that stance any more without being horribly embarrassed in about 15 seconds. If they're not embarrassed it's because they have not one ounce of intellectual honesty in their body which is instant grounds for impeachment from any debate with me.

 

One book I would certainly recommend to someone like you is A Case for Christ. It was written by an investigative journalist that "investigated it" just like he would any other story he was doing. If you simply looked into the history of how the bible was actually even created you would be surprised. You obviously don't even understand the very basics of it or you wouldn't have made such an off the wall comment about it having to be imperfect because only God is perfect.

 

 

 

Lee Strobel is a Lawyer, also. What business does either an investigative Journalist or a lawyer have making a "case for christ"? You don't know me and I don't know you, but i promise you you will underestimate the depth and breadth of my scriptural knowledge. You already have.

 

You work from the erroneous assumption that if someone doesn't believe the bible, then they have failed to "understand" the bible. Because in your world, if you don't believe it, then you just don't get it. That's an a priori assumption and you can't do that. You have to make posteriori assumptions to retain the respect of a thoughtful person. You have to assume knowledge comes after learning instead of before, get it?

 

You will also underestimate how well read I am on this subject. It has been my intellectual hobby for years. I've read "The Case for Christ" and "Mere Christianity" and "Heaven" and so on, and I found them all to be nearly impossibly irritating and presumptuous. Strobel is the WORST. He did not make a single convincing argument, let alone a "case", and he has been identified by the intellectual community as just another huckster looking to make a buck on the hopes and wishful thinking of the masses who so desperately "need" their faith.

 

And I didn't make that "off the wall comment". I repeated it. It's what many of my Christian debate partners use to justify their "picking and choosing" the parts of the bible they are going to take literally, and the parts they are going to ignore.

 

 

 

No problem, but before you continue on you should at least learn that Christianity is not a religion. If you actually read the bible you would see that Christ himself had issues with established religion.

 

Oh, you're one of those "kinds" of Christian. I suppose you, like all the others like you, are referring to (Luke 11.2-4) 5 When you pray, don't be like those show-offs who love to stand up and pray in the meeting places and on the street corners. They do this just to look good. I can assure you that they already have their reward. 6When you pray, go into a room alone and close the door. Pray to your Father in private. He knows what is done in private, and he will reward you.

 

Tell me something I don't know. If you're going to waste my time with words like "Christianity is not a religion" then we are not going to make it far my friend. Religion: -noun, 1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually (meaning NOT ALWAYS) involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

 

 

I can list many flaws in many organized religions and not a single one of those flaws they have are supported by scripture. In many cases they contradict scripture or take bits and pieces to support their claim. Many of your televangelist and "name it and claim it" religions do this because it gets the most "believers" and thus gets them the most money.

 

You're so engrossed in your faith that you don't even hear yourself being intellectually dishonest. You completely ignore any wrong doing done in the name of your God in the past. That's another reason I call faith selfish, and assuredness of one's own personal salvation is arrogant.

 

You will say people were misguided or not following your God the right way if they did bad things in the name of your God.

 

But surely you think people do good things in the name of your God, and if people do good things in the name of your God then you probably have no trouble crediting their faith for motivating them to perform those deeds. In fact you might "Go tell it on the mountain" and sing the praises of christianity like it's exactly what the world needs.

 

That is the definition of bias. Until you can be intellectually honest enough to lose that bias, you will not be worthy of intellectual interaction with intelligent people, not on this subject anyway. Remember that.

 

An intellectually honest person would admit his faith's responsibility for the bad things before being willing to accept credit for the good things his faith does. Instead you want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to use the benefits of Christianity to bolster your faith but you won't use the detrimental attributes of your Christianity to detract from your faith.

 

This is what's so terrible about religions. People who are supposedly members of the same faith don't ever have to take responsibility for what other members of their faith do. They can simply say that those individuals misinterpreted the scripture, just as you have said here, Skippy. You just admitted that you don't believe a single bad thing has ever been done with scriptural justification.

 

Because of this innate intellectual dishonesty among religious people, we get radical terrorist behavior with no open denouncement from religious leaders. To this day there has not been a public Fatwa issued on the head of Osama Bin Laden by ANY Muslim cleric, Imam or Mullah. NOT ONE. They simply say he doesn't understand Islam. I beg to differ. I think he understands Islam perfectly.

 

You will undoubtedly attempt to explain your faith in terms of all the good it does for you and for people who are down and out, and you can give me examples of how charitable your church is or something. But if you're going to believe that YOUR FAITH LEAD PEOPLE TO DO THOSE THINGS, then you must also say that YOUR FAITH LEAD PEOPLE TO DO BAD THINGS.

 

The people who killed for God also thought they were doing what he wanted just as much as you think you're doing what he wanted.

 

And no, God's will is not everything in our lives. The single greatest thing He gave us was freedom of choice.

 

Oh so you understand the mind of God enough to know which thing is the single greatest thing he gave us? Amazing, considering no one has ever seen or heard from any of the monotheistic gods, ever. You should call the pope and let him know you've communicated with God and you know which of his blessings is the greatest.

 

We choose to follow Him, we choose to turn our back,

 

If he created me then he gave me an uncompromising thirst for evidence prior to belief. To turn to God I would have to defy my logical mind, the logical mind you believe he gave me. I would think that defying any part of God's creation would be as sinful as denying God himself. What if God's biggest "Test" is to put the bible here, and also put a mountain of evidence for a natural origin of human life, and see who among us will use the full power of their rationality and logic to make the best guess they can about how we got here and what this is all about? What if it actually turns out to be unfavorable to your God that you have refused to embrace a part of the mind that he gave you.

 

and we choose to do what is right or wrong.

Yeah, we choose. The question is whether it is more moral to do what's right because it's the right thing to do, or to do what's right because you think God is watching you and won't let you into heaven if you don't do it. The definition of discipline is doing the right thing when NO ONE is watching. Isn't someone always watching in your life? If you have children do you want them to do what's right when you're there, or do you want them to do what's right always. Do you fear that you will not have the moral fortitude to do what is right if you don't think God is watching over you? Who deserves the credit for the good things you do? You, or God? And for the bad things you do? You, or God, or the Devil? which is it, skippy?

 

He will not force you to do anything. Many people confuse "God's will" with the result of their actions, good or bad. God can not and will not "tempt" anyone and this is clear in the book of James. He does have work (His will) that needs to get done and relies on us to do it. But He ALWAYS enables us to do that work IF we choose to do it. If not, it will get done but He will use another way. I am no biblical scholar, but I believe there are 2 cases in the bible that God's mind was changed by His people. So His will has been changed.

 

Your suggestion of picking and choosing what to believe in the bible again shows your lack of knowledge and understanding of it.

 

 

No, it shows that I haven't interpreted it like you. Incidentally, it also shows that you haven't interpreted it like about 90% of the theologians who've denied the creation story as allegorical. They have obviously "picked and chosen" what to believe in the bible, and they believe in God. If you are a bible literalist, then I think you and I will most likely not be able to have a civil conversation for long. I can't deal with that level of intellectual dishonesty.

Edited June 15, 2008 by chiplee

[desert_starion]

WOW Chip. I am enlightened-For the longest time I could not make my GF understand why religion separates nations, all I could point out to was the facts of the world prior to present and even now- How devided we are nd that is only because WE CHOOSE WHAT TO BELIEVE AND WHAT NOT TO BELIEVE.

[craig87]

I do truly enjoy reading chiplee's post about religion. would someone else try to prove him wrong.

 

 

My thoughts about it are simple I belive that there is a god. Mainly so I can belive that my father is in a better place.

The bible was written by man so accuracy is thrown out the window.

 

It contains a wonderfull set of rules to live your life. when adapted to current time.

 

 

My big stirring question is all that john 3:16 stuff at sports games............................... doesn't calling a false idol god's only begotten son get you a one way ticket to he##

 

Oh my favortie movie is dogma so my thoughts on religion can be a little off.

[chiplee]

I do truly enjoy reading chiplee's post about religion. would someone else try to prove him wrong.

 

man thanks, and I wish that too

 

 

My thoughts about it are simple I belive that there is a god. Mainly so I can belive that my father is in a better place.

The bible was written by man so accuracy is thrown out the window.

 

It contains a wonderfull set of rules to live your life. when adapted to current time.

 

 

My big stirring question is all that john 3:16 stuff at sports games............................... doesn't calling a false idol god's only begotten son get you a one way ticket to he##

 

Oh my favortie movie is dogma so my thoughts on religion can be a little off.

 

Please explain your "stirring question" in a little more detail

 

 

Dogma is an awesome movie. In an effort to retain the same level of intellectual honesty I demand from people I too have no choice but to entertain the possibility of there being a God. As I work my way back in time in my imagination I get to the same place every thinking man has probably gotten to for eons. I have to ask "why is there something instead of nothing?". Then after asking myself, I want to know the answer.

 

42 comes to mind, lol. Another movie you might like is "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" where Douglas Adams sends his characters on a journey to the restaurant at the edge of the universe. Perhaps you've seen it, Craig, but I'll explain for the sake of the thread.

 

In the movie you see an extremely advanced civilization build a computer to answer "the meaning of life" question. After sending its builders away to give it time to think for tens of thousands of years the computer's answer is "42". Naturally the computer's designers are angered and confused. Adams point seems obvious that if you spend your life trying to figure out the meaning of life, and why there is something instead of nothing then you will undoubtedly be disappointed. You may be disappointed because you never find out, or you may be disappointed to find out there is no externally imposed meaning to a human life.

 

My feeling is that in Adams' example, the huge computer represents mankind's current complex construct we call religion, and the advanced civilization is man kind, looking to religion for the meaning of life, and eventually being horribly disappointed. I think he is saying no matter how complicated or powerful the system is that you construct to give you the meaning of life, you can't be disappointed when it lets you down.

 

So back to the "why is there something instead of nothing" point. Of course we want to know that and of course we want to know our parents and loved ones are in a better place when they die. What's more I think is we want them to be comforted by a notion of heaven if we should happen to die young while they are alive. I want this too. I'm not inhuman. And I imagine on my death bed I may entertain the notion of a God a little more seriously than I do now. But what that will prove has nothing to do with the reality of God. It will prove the frailty of the human mind and how much it hurts to face death. Richard Dawkins even misses this point. People have suggested that he will convert on his death bed and he just says he's going to have cameras there so no one can "claim" they were there and saw him convert. He sacrifices an opportunity to make a valid point every time that question is posed to him, and it's posed often.

 

The God we are intellectually obligated to consider possible is so detached from earthly life that I think it's reasonable to doubt he cares what we call him or how we worship him or if we do or don't kill in his name or if we eat ham on fridays. Could catholics be any more ridiculous with their religion? my goodness.

 

So debunking religion becomes automatic. Skippy and I are both atheists to THOUSANDS of religions. He doesn't believe in Allah or Zeus or Thor or the Buddha. Neither do I. He knows exactly what it feels like to think a religious person has their religion all wrong, because that's what he thinks of Islamic people. I know what it feels like too, because it's what I think of Christians. He will think we are very different, but he will be wrong. I love my family and Christmas and some of my greatest role models were devout Christians. I'm more of a humanist than an atheist.

Edited June 15, 2008 by chiplee

[surferdude]

Obama isn't the Anti-Christ by any measure of the word - he's slickster and he isn't a born-again Christian, sorry.

 

The Anti-Christ is of JEWISH decent, otherwise the Jews won't accept him as their "Messiah" and fall for his lies of deceit concerning peace with her enemies.

 

And it's the Book of Revelation - one revelation about the Lord Jesus Christ and the End Times.

[craig87]

Obama isn't the Anti-Christ by any measure of the word - he's slickster and he isn't a born-again Christian, sorry.

 

The Anti-Christ is of JEWISH decent, otherwise the Jews won't accept him as their "Messiah" and fall for his lies of deceit concerning peace with her enemies.

 

And it's the Book of Revelation - one revelation about the Lord Jesus Christ and the End Times.

 

the jews god is your god. remember that the seperation of religions is at the new testement.

 

Ok then so it is then possible jesus christ being of jewish decent is in fact the anti-christ. Talk about self hatred.

 

and about the john 3:16 i just find the stupidity of drawing a comparison between jesus and kobe a little off in my box.

[Star_V8_Quest]

I learned a long time ago not to listen to what a man says, but to watch what he does.

wt....?

are you not watching him? have you not seen what he does?

do you not see who he has allied himself with for years?

I guess I am just one of Obama's "typical white folk". I must be a racist.

[chiplee]

WOW Chip. I am enlightened-For the longest time I could not make my GF understand why religion separates nations, all I could point out to was the facts of the world prior to present and even now- How devided we are nd that is only because WE CHOOSE WHAT TO BELIEVE AND WHAT NOT TO BELIEVE.

 

this stuff can be hard to explain, but isn't it enough just to notice that religions divide? Do we really need to explain why or can we just see it happening and act on it. It seems like the faith we see around us is harmless, especially when it seems like you shouldn't have any problem with that dear old Christian lady who lives across the street. I mean, what could be more innocuous than her version of religion? On a personal level the answer really is nothing. Nothing could be more harmless than what she choses to believe. But she also votes. And she also biases toward trusting elected officials on the basis of their faith. If she doesn't have time, or the eyesight, to do the research it would take to pick the "best" candidate, she will be confident she can chose the candidate who's faith most closely matches her own, and the rest will be in God's hands. She can and will make this decision with little if any knowledge of the candidates character or stance on important issues. If this weren't true in this country you would not see George Bush in office, period.

 

She also contributes to a demographic parameter and Sam Harris points out that she indirectly provides cover to radicals by adding to the Christian numbers. Radicals will be emboldened by the idea that other believers only wish they could believe as absolutely as they do, and they will be able to convince themselves that this is what the masses need, even if they don't know it. Then they'll detonate their bomb vest in a crowded bus.

 

Then, conveniently for religious people everywhere, the moderate majority can easily ignore what radicals do under the pretense I explained in the previous post, that they have misinterpreted scripture. They are both wrong, and if people were honest in polls about religiosity we would see true observance of Christianity is rapidly waning in this country. Christians will read what I've written and think I'm talking about Islam, which is true for today. But 500 years ago those words could just as easily have been about Christians. They ignore time frame just as I've already mentioned. What happened in the past though, so long as the same ancient text is used to guide our actions, can always become prevalent again one day.

Edited June 15, 2008 by chiplee

[Skippy]

Wow, didnt have time to read the whole thing yet. However, for someone stating you are such an intellectucual you still do not seem to understand the basics of the bible, it's purpose, or how it was created.

 

It is clear you think your knowledge is far more vast then anyone else's, so anyone trying to convince you of anything will be met with your "superiority" attitude. That's fine, each to own. Your choices are again, your choices.

 

One of those Christians? No, it is shear fact that Christianity is the belief that Christ is the son of God and died for our sins. That is true regardless of any established religion you may affiliate yourself with. So again, at least have the basic understanding of what it is you are debating as you can come here and claim you study this and study that and spent decades doing this, but if the words you type contradict even the most basics of the subject you have "researched" so much, as they have on a few occasions here, then you are either a "stupid" intellect or a liar.

[SQF]

Let me say this, I read silliness.

With that being said, Obama is Muslim in the eyes of Muslims. His birth father was raised Muslim, if you are born to a Muslim father then you are a son of Islam. Regardless of what he practices Obama is of Muslim decent, which is what was said in post #1 of this thread.

 

I will not vote for Obama because I am a conservative, I like my money, I want to keep my money, I will help out the less fortunate when I choose to not when the government decides it is worth it. Neither of the major party candidates are going to change anything, the American public is too apathetic, and lazy to make any real change. Real change will come during the revolution :gun:

[chiplee]

Wow, didnt have time to read the whole thing yet. However, for someone stating you are such an intellectucual you still do not seem to understand the basics of the bible, it's purpose, or how it was created.

 

It is clear you think your knowledge is far more vast then anyone else's, so anyone trying to convince you of anything will be met with your "superiority" attitude. That's fine, each to own. Your choices are again, your choices.

 

One of those Christians? No, it is shear fact that Christianity is the belief that Christ is the son of God and died for our sins. That is true regardless of any established religion you may affiliate yourself with. So again, at least have the basic understanding of what it is you are debating as you can come here and claim you study this and study that and spent decades doing this, but if the words you type contradict even the most basics of the subject you have "researched" so much, as they have on a few occasions here, then you are either a "stupid" intellect or a liar.

 

 

Typical. You don't have it in you to counter my arguments so you accuse me of thinking I'm smarter than everyone and claim that I wouldn't listen to your arguments anyway so you're not even going to write them. How convenient for you? The problem with that is that you are the one who claims to know the factual meaning of Christianity, a thing men before us have devoted their lives to discovering. It is you who makes the most extraordinary claims about the power of your intellect, though you do it through indirect means. It is you who seems to have an extremely high opinion of the power of your mind, yet you throw spears at me for expressing confidence in my hard won opinions on the matter. Like I said, so freaking typical.

 

If you perceive me to be an intellectual then you perceive wrong. I said I was well read on the subject, and I made several pleas to your "intellectual integrity". Having intellectual integrity does not mean a person is an intellectual. It means they are worthy of intelligent discourse with other at least semi-intelligent people. Men like Stephen Jay Gould, Daniel C Dennett and Christopher Hitchens bear the title "intellectual". I am an enthusiast, and an amateur one at that. That does not mean that I have no intellect, however, and when I do you the favor of sharing a bit of my intellect with you, your job is to return the favor, whether you agree, disagree or hate me. That's how even mildly intelligent men discuss things. If you refuse, then you and I can be done discussing this thing.

 

If you are incapable if bringing the full power of your intellect to bear in writing to show how it is you and not I who has managed to understand Christianity, then I suggest you stop claiming that it is you and not I who has managed to understand Christianity. In other, less intellectual, words, if you can't prove it, shut up about it. It is transparent.

 

There are very few "shear" facts about Christianity. And what you've stated is perhaps the furthest from being one of them. You are suggesting that Christianity IS NOT a religion. If you elect to interpret that way, that's fine. Justify it. There are many interpretations, and your confidence that your's is the correct interpretation goes right to the heart of the issue we have on this planet with religious people. They're all convinced to a high degree of certainty that they are correct about a thing none of us can EVER have enough reason to be sure about.

 

So before you expose the depths of your depravity any further, I would also suggest that you refrain from posing red herring style arguments that leave only stupidity or dishonesty as possible options for my character. You will get only pure honesty from me. Whether you get stupidity or not depends on the subject and how much thought I give it, but I'm not incapable of stupidity any more than you are. Pointing it out here shows a lack of creativity on your part, and an unwillingness to put your intellect out on the table for all to see, and judge.

Edited June 16, 2008 by chiplee

[Skippy]

I never said I wasn't replying, I just didnt have the time right then.

 

Dude I just read the rest of your diatribe and OH MY LORD! You are so fundamentally flawed in so much of what you say it is borderline humorus.

 

I wont make extended replies, as that would take way to much. I will just cut to the chase on many things.

 

Christianity - To make it more clear, a Christian is a person regardless of the rituals or customs they follow (be it Catholic, Protestant, Jew, or Baptist: Religions) believes in Christ, believes he is the son of God, and believes he is the only true way to God. "Religion" is not Christianity so don't try to apply Webster to it any more than you would say believing in santa is a religion as that tradition follows what you define Christianity as being. There are Christian Jews, there are Christian Baptist, there are Christian Catholics. Those things are religions and none of which I am a part of. If you are truly going to come here and rip apart Christianity, at least truly know what it is.

 

The Bible is the single most scrutinized book ever written and though it was written over hundreds of years by many different people that didnt even speak, read, nor write the same language it has absolute no contradictions in its original languages and has NEVER been proven to provide one false statement. It has more supporting documentation than any "history" book you have ever read in school or that has ever been written in modern time and yet people still question it. People such as yourself simply make your claim you have read this you have read that and think you have a full understanding of it and have solved all the mysteries and debates that hundreds and thousands before you couldn't do. JOB WELL DONE! Unfortunately for you, I not even being a biblical scholar, see in your post the lack of even the basic understanding of the scripture and God himself which you

can only get from scripture.

 

Without having any the basic understanding of the Bible, regardless of whether you want to admit there is a God or not, will prevent you from even being able to open mindedly try to understand what I am about to say. The God of the bible is a Fair, Just, Pure, and a Righteous God. If you don't get that out of reading the scripture then you don't comprehend it enough for me to even start explaining right/wrong, taking responsibility, and whether or not someone that believes in the bible can actually do wrong. There is nothing in scripture that says it is OK to murder, to steal, or to commit adultery. It

even says the opposite. So if scripture says it is wrong and scripture is God's word, then obviously that is against his will. Please, Mr. Intellect that is basic A+B=C so A-C must = B. You stating otherwise as you have is just plain stupid, as is your claim that Muslims did not even speak out against the terrorist that claimed to do things in their name. What rock have you been living under?

 

You can continue to try to double-speak and try to turn the tides on "intellectual things" if you want by saying: you are going against God if you don't question God, but it is clear by doing so that it is you trying to avoid the truth. Question God, investigate God and his Word. He welcomes it. As I said before you will fail because no matter how intellectually superior you think you are, you still don't hold a grain of salt against others that have tried the same thing and failed. However, I suspect as with much of your argument you will simply try to turn the tables and make stupid comments like "defying your logical mind is against God".

 

Your definition of discipline would be mine and many others definition of Integrity. You can have good discipline in how you rob a bank every week, but that still doesnt make it a positive thing regardless who is watching. And to answer your questions you have to have just the basic understanding of scripture. Some of which I have already told you above so I will let you answer those yourself based on that information.

 

You are correct we interpret things differently. I choose to use a moral sound doctrine to guide me, you choose to allow your current "what makes me feel good today" emotions to guide you. Let me ask you just these very fundamental questions of evolution since your life seems to be hinged on that. Beyond the scientific facts that the odds of life popping up out of absolutely no life are so astronomically high, if we evolved from monkeys/apes, then why are there still monkeys/apes? Are those the stupid ones that just didn't get it? If that is the case, then where are the "other evolution steps" today that went from monkeys to man? Apes survived and man survived. Even monkey's survived. But what in the world happened to those in between? Were they the really really stupid ones?

[Dcrasta]

Let me say this, I read silliness.

With that being said, Obama is Muslim in the eyes of Muslims. His birth father was raised Muslim, if you are born to a Muslim father then you are a son of Islam. Regardless of what he practices Obama is of Muslim decent, which is what was said in post #1 of this thread.

 

I will not vote for Obama because I am a conservative, I like my money, I want to keep my money, I will help out the less fortunate when I choose to not when the government decides it is worth it. Neither of the major party candidates are going to change anything, the American public is too apathetic, and lazy to make any real change. Real change will come during the revolution :gun:

 

 

Umm, A muslim is a person that practices Islam. Barak Obama is a practicing Christian. Just because your father is a bank robber, does that make you a bank robber?

 

If you have kids, and they decide to become Hindu, they will be Hindu religious followers, not whatever you are.

 

That is not logic, that is the opposite of logic. If a Muslim believes you are Muslim because your father is Muslim, you as a non Muslim dont have to believe that. The Islamic world does not like Obama, they feel he has turned his back on them and their religion by becoming a christian (like his mother and grandmother).

 

You are a conservative, and you want to keep your money. Good. I want to keep my money too. Let me ask, how much are you keeping now with our past 8 years of republican-conservative rule? How are the rising energy prices help you keep your money? Like the presidents tax breaks for the wealthy? Are they working for you? Im just say....

[PDX87Starion]

it has absolute no contradictions in its original languages and has NEVER been proven to provide one false statement.

 

There is nothing in scripture that says it is OK to murder, to steal, or to commit adultery. It

even says the opposite.

 

Exactly what version or testament and language are you referring to?

 

Because those are bold statements that can be easily proven wrong with any OT you will find in English.

[Star_V8_Quest]

Umm, A muslim is a person that practices Islam. Barak Obama is a practicing Christian. Just because your father is a bank robber, does that make you a bank robber?

 

If you have kids, and they decide to become Hindu, they will be Hindu religious followers, not whatever you are.

 

That is not logic, that is the opposite of logic. If a Muslim believes you are Muslim because your father is Muslim, you as a non Muslim dont have to believe that. The Islamic world does not like Obama, they feel he has turned his back on them and their religion by becoming a christian (like his mother and grandmother).

 

You are a conservative, and you want to keep your money. Good. I want to keep my money too. Let me ask, how much are you keeping now with our past 8 years of republican-conservative rule? How are the rising energy prices help you keep your money? Like the presidents tax breaks for the wealthy? Are they working for you? Im just say....

well,if nafta wasn't passed,my job i had 5 years ago would still be here

if clinton would have pushed to have us drilling by now,i guess the oil and gas might not be where it is.

if he would have stayed on top of the country instead of interns,he might would have caught this little terrorists that hijacked our planes before it ever happened.

i could go on,but like the obama thread...eyes will be closed and ears plugged :biggrinumbrella1:

and how will i keep my money.

if obama is elected,i may have to resort to keeping it with my guns...wait...i may not have that right either.

[Skippy]

Exactly what version or testament and language are you referring to?

 

Because those are bold statements that can be easily proven wrong with any OT you will find in English.

 

The original language of the book of the Bible when it was originally written by the author or his scribe. Not a "version" or "translation". If it was hebrew, then hebrew. If it was latin, then latin. If it was aramaic, then aramaic. If it was greek, then greek.

 

You take any of the text that was written in their language about an event and compare it to another person's written testament to it in another language it says the same thing. This doesn't even take into the account the other thousands of writings that gave the same accounts as the one's actually selected for the bible. Many people miss the fact the bible's books were chosen through a very rigorous process that lasted a very long time amongst thousands of writings. This is the reason a Catholic bible may have 7 additional books that are not in a "typical" bible. The Catholic church wanted them in, but those in charge of selecting the books to include did not feel they were supported enough by other works outside of the books them self. Not that they are not true, but their supporting documentation to stand the brutal test of time the bible has gone through simply wasnt there.

Edited June 16, 2008 by Skippy

[PDX87Starion]

well,if nafta wasn't passed,my job i had 5 years ago would still be here

Correct

nafta sucks, and was turbo charged under Bush even after it was proven it was bad for US jobs unlike how it was sold.

 

if clinton would have pushed to have us drilling by now,i guess the oil and gas might not be where it is.

Wrong

The saudies just increased output and the price still surged. Over the past 4 years US oil companies have received and are sitting on nearly 10,000 permits that they aren’t using to increase domestic production. Since 1999, drilling permits for oil and gas development on public lands increased more than 361 percent.

 

 

if he would have stayed on top of the country instead of interns,he might would have caught this little terrorists that hijacked our planes before it ever happened.

funny but wrong

This happened on Bushs watch. There were warnings and special briefings, but no action was taken, none. Nine months isnt enough time to do anything, except a record amount of vacation?

 

"Blame it on the liberals" is getting played out and is a stretch after two terms of full republican control.

[RWDAddict]

This is why I make some ludicrious post. The posts between Chiplee and Skippy were both extremely interesting and they both made interesting points. I was glued to my computer reading them. Thanks to both of you for letting us in on what you believe. Very interesting :woot:

[FlattopMike]

This is why I make some ludicrious post. The posts between Chiplee and Skippy were both extremely interesting and they both made interesting points. I was glued to my computer reading them. Thanks to both of you for letting us in on what you believe. Very interesting :woot:

 

The only problem with that is that some people read garbage like you put up and believe it.

[RWDAddict]

That's a possibility. I mean there were some facts in there just the point of the story led to a good laugh. That's why you post to refute such claims.

[Whiplash]

This happened on Bushs watch. There were warnings and special briefings, but no action was taken, none. Nine months isnt enough time to do anything, except a record amount of vacation?

 

Actually Clinton tried to take out Osama while he was in office. Anyone remember the Sub firing the missile over Pakistan without Pakistan approval? It missed Osama by 15 mins. Clinton tried to get support from the "House" but was turned away. Seems that the Reps. didn't think much about Osama back then.

[Whiplash]

Any of you youngsters heard of Oliver North. He spent more $$ on putting a security system around his house than I think his house was worth. He was asked why? He said because I'm affraid of Osama Bin Laden. I think most of Congress asked him who that was. North said it was someone to be affraid of. That was in the 1980's.