like milo said, god theoretically could create more life forms in other galaxies or even in other universes allegedly, but none of his teachings suggest this. in fact, practically all his teachings suggest the complete opposite. and we humans aren't allowed to pick and choose what parts of God's words we're allowed to follow and which ones we can ignore.
With regard to the bolded portion, can you point to a passage in the Bible that says humanity is alone in the Universe? I know we are commanded to worship only the one true God, but I do not recall anything that precludes life elsewhere.
With regard to the bolded portion, can you point to a passage in the Bible that says humanity is alone in the Universe? I know we are commanded to worship only the one true God, but I do not recall anything that precludes life elsewhere.
So god could have created other life forms elsewhere in the Universe? Or other universes? Or do they have to look like us?
Well, doesn't the Bible teach that God created "everything"? That would mean that, if there is life elsewhere, He created that, too, no? I have no idea what life beyond our solar system might look like, but it would be a wondrous thing to find out.
With regard to the bolded portion, can you point to a passage in the Bible that says humanity is alone in the Universe? I know we are commanded to worship only the one true God, but I do not recall anything that precludes life elsewhere.
That's kind of the point. God mentions nothing of there being intelligent life on other plants, yet he outlines the creation of EVERYTHING! And the bible definitely outlines how the only things God created with intelligence are angels, humans, and animals on Earth.
So, why would God, and omnipotent being, necessarily want to tell us about life on other worlds, rather than wait until we, as a species, are mature enough to discover it for ourselves? Just a thought . . . after all, parents may not lie to their children, but neither do they spill all the facts at once, either.
So, why would God, and omnipotent being, necessarily want to tell us about life on other worlds, rather than wait until we, as a species, are mature enough to discover it for ourselves? Just a thought . . . after all, parents may not lie to their children, but neither do they spill all the facts at once, either.
So did God not think we were ready for the abolition of slavery in the bible....but now we are? (cause we discovered it???)
Maybe we were only ready for the cure for Polio 40 years ago? We're ready Nuclear bombs (or power for that matter) now cause God hid them from us till now? What a ridiculous argument.
How do you know God's will?
It's says so in the Bible.
How do you know God exists?
It says so in the Bible.
How do we know there's only one God?
HE says so in the bible.
How should we pray, eat, live, love, fight, kill, punish?
The Bible tells you about it.
How come the bible doesn't mention life elsewhere in the universe?
Cause we're not ready.
Sound reasoning!
And the Pope just said you don't have to believe in God/Jesus so all this is pointless.
So, why would God, and omnipotent being, necessarily want to tell us about life on other worlds, rather than wait until we, as a species, are mature enough to discover it for ourselves? Just a thought . . . after all, parents may not lie to their children, but neither do they spill all the facts at once, either.
besides the history telling in the bible, the whole thing just outlines rules and laws of how to live our lives in practically every detail. it tells us everything about how to treat other humans, how to treat other animals, how to treat nature, how and what to eat, how to have sex, how to love, how to punish, how to think, what to desire, etc. this list is exhaustive (and technically impossible to follow). leaving out something like the existence of another intelligent species seems like a big thing to omit imho, not to mention how we're supposed to deal with said species.
to put it a different way (that i stole from the internets):
"It is often asked, ‘Just because the Bible teaches about God creating intelligent life only on Earth, why couldn’t He have done so elsewhere?’ After all, Scripture does not discuss everything, e.g. motorcars. However, the biblical objection to extra-terrestrials is not merely an argument from silence. Motor cars, for example, are not a salvation issue, but we believe that sentient, intelligent, moral-decision-capable beings is, because it would undermine the authority of Scripture."
and on a personal note, as far as not telling your children all the facts right away, i disagree with that wholeheartedly and i think that is one of the biggest problems between parents and children nowadays. i would never lie to my child and i certainly wouldn't withhold important truths from them. the way parents try to shelter children is complete horseshit imo. all you are doing is setting them up for shock and failure.
yes, that means my children would grow up not believing in santa claus. i'm ready for the onslaught of hatred coming my way for this statement lol.
and here's some evidence from the bible that i happened across if you're interested (i.e. i just read it - i didn't research it). it doesn't reference aliens obviously, but it does word it and suggest that we're the only ones out there in the universe for sure.
The Bible indicates that the whole creation groans and travails under the weight of sin (Romans 8:18–22). The effect of the Curse following Adam’s Fall was universal.2 Otherwise what would be the point of God destroying this whole creation to make way for a new heavens and Earth—2 Peter 3:13, Revelation 21:1 ff? Therefore, any ETs living elsewhere would have been (unjustly) affected by the Adamic Curse through no fault of their own—they would not have inherited Adam’s sin nature.
When Christ (God) appeared in the flesh, He came to Earth not only to redeem mankind but eventually the whole creation back to Himself (Romans 8:21, Colossians 1:20). However, Christ’s atoning death at Calvary cannot save these hypothetical ETs, because one needs to be a physical descendant of Adam for Christ to be our ‘kinsman-redeemer’ (Isaiah 59:20). Jesus was called ‘the last Adam’ because there was a real first man, Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22,45)—not a first Vulcan, Klingon etc. This is so a sinless human Substitute takes on the punishment all humans deserve for sin (Isaiah 53:6,10; Matthew 20:28; 1 John 2:2, 4:10), with no need to atone for any (non-existent) sin of his own (Hebrews 7:27).
Since this would mean that any ETs would be lost for eternity when this present creation is destroyed in a fervent heat (2 Peter 3:10, 12), some have wondered whether Christ’s sacrifice might be repeated elsewhere for other beings. However, Christ died once for all (Romans 6:10, 1 Peter 3:18) on the earth. He is not going to be crucified and resurrected again on other planets (Hebrews 9:26). This is confirmed by the fact that the redeemed (earthly) church is known as Christ’s bride (Ephesians 5:22–33; Revelation 19:7–9) in a marriage that will last for eternity.3 Christ is not going to be a polygamist with many other brides from other planets.
The Bible makes no provision for God to redeem any other species, any more than to redeem fallen angels (Hebrews 2:16).
Try to answer me with your thoughts, not by showing us something quoted or done by others. That's just someone's interpretation not necessarily fact.
Jeff
Not quite sure what you are talking about? My first quote from Johnnie is taken from the Bible. It is God quite clearly describing Himself as a jealous Being. The second time I quoted Johnnie I included a video that clearly puts together several passages about God and describing His attributes and again using the two I had used plus several more talking about how jealous He can be. These aren’t interpretations of who God is! These are facts in the Bible which is a source God has chosen to reveal Himself to mankind. It is not the only source but it is a source.
The Sam Harris comment is a fact. Sam is a well-known atheist who goes around the country preaching his message that there is no God. He is joined by guys likes Dawkins and Dennet and the late Christopher Hitchens. They get paid big money to say things like there is no God and denounce the Bible and Christianity as well as all major religions. Harris wrote a book called Free Will. In it he comes to the conclusion that mankind is without free will. He basically is an updated argument from David Hume. Sam Harris is a neuroscientist and tries to convince his audience that mankind is not free to think for himself. He doesn’t use the language I am going to use but the essence is that are brains are programmed by electrical impulses. These impulse need decoding and what you have done with your life, your experiences, education etc. are used to decode the message. The end result of his thesis is I guy like Ariel Castro isn’t responsible for what he did. He makes no qualms about it. He also think the guy should rot in jail. Which in reality doesn’t make sense. How can someone with no free will do something you basically admit to being programmed to do be held responsible for his action?
Dave calls me a zealot? Like that is supposed to hurt my feelings? There are all kinds of opinions on this form but he singles me out? It’s ok because he hasn’t offered a thoughtful comment to the discussion. Nor has he addressed the original post where Kia Nelson says:
that the atheist needs to make a coherent argument against God that goes beyond tearing down the evidence Christians use to support God.
In other words, at some point you have to play offence. Not play defense looking for a turnover to make a point. I read an atheist blog today that admitted that we have moved beyond Darwin. That with the advances in micro biology and what we know about cellular structures and the inner workings of the cell go beyond anything Darwin could have imagined.
Hume’s argument is pretty sophisticated. But it go directly against what the Bible teaches. If I could boil the Bible into one phrase that expresses God’s feelings it would be lack of obedience toward Him. From Adam in the garden to Abraham and taking Hagar instead of obeying God to trust Him and wait for Sarah, on and on, page after page the Bible is filled with examples of God giving man a choice and man not choosing God so for Harris to say man has no free will is ludicrous to me.
I have lots of opinions about a variety of subjects, sports etc. Don’t kid yourself, a lot of the arguments Mark, Nik, Trigs and others are well laid out in the philosophy books and the social and philosophical science books.
Part of the reason I use many quotes from other people is to show that Christianity has as many intellectuals as the non-theist world view.
I choose to live my life by what I understand from the Bible about who God is, who Jesus Christ is because He claimed to be God. I either accept at by faith or I reject it. Make no mistake that those who reject Him put their faith in something else. Whether that be science, mankind and the supposed greater good of mankind – it is still faith and unprovable.
Not quite sure what you are talking about? My first quote from Johnnie is taken from the Bible.
THAT is precisely what he is talking about...
And this...
I quoted Johnnie I included a video that clearly puts together several passages about God and describing His attributes and again using the two I had used plus several more talking about how jealous He can be
And regarding this...
that the atheist needs to make a coherent argument against God that goes beyond tearing down the evidence Christians use to support God.
How about "The law of large numbers is a better explanation for our existence / reality" than "Big bearded angry dude in the sky". And for those who would argue that our world is just a little too perfectly balanced / well-oiled machine to have happened randomly, please look up again what the law of large numbers actually means.
Then there's this...
That with the advances in micro biology and what we know about cellular structures and the inner workings of the cell go beyond anything Darwin could have imagined.
Well, ya.... Chucky D started his trip in 1831, we now know more than he could have imagined. That's called scientific progress. We also better understand physics than Isaac Newton, who probably never would have fathomed atomic-level matter. I actually came up with the idea the other day that Religion is nothing but Science 1.0. It was a (albeit bloated and overly complex) hypothesis trying to explain the way the world worked. Sadly, the good scientists moved on, and the bad ones became "spiritual".
Hume’s argument is pretty sophisticated. But it go directly against what the Bible teaches.
Sophisticated and backed by observable and repeatable findings, vs. bunch of fisherman following a bearded hippie guy around... I'm gonna go with the first guy. Other things that go against the bible:
- Emancipation Proclamation
- Women's rights
- Bacon
- Fatty foods (Ooh, maybe the bible was the first diet book too?)
- Distressed jeans
- Poly-cotton blends
- Tattoos
- Revenge (there goes the death penalty bibliophiles)
- NFL football (no working on Sunday!)
God giving man a choice and man not choosing God
Go man!
I choose to live my life by what I understand from the Bible about who God is, who Jesus Christ is because He claimed to be God.
And this is NOT a problem.... if you wanted to stick by the top 10 and just generally not be a jerk, that's great. No problem with that. It's the stuff we talked earlier where the JC crew is all "No way to the gay" or "Stem cell will lead to hell" that it becomes an issue. If everyone just lived all lovey dovey, gravy... it doesn't happen that way though.
So did God not think we were ready for the abolition of slavery in the bible....but now we are? (cause we discovered it???)
The bible discusses slavery, as it was a common practice at the time. It does not advocate in it's favour . . .
Maybe we were only ready for the cure for Polio 40 years ago? We're ready Nuclear bombs (or power for that matter) now cause God hid them from us till now? What a ridiculous argument.
That would imply that God's sole purpose is to make everything "easy" for us in this life. It does not work that way . . . at least not for Christians, who are taught that following the teachings of Christ will lead to a perfect eternity, not necessarily a peaceful/happy existence here on Earth.
How do you know God's will? Jesus tells us in in the New Testament.
How do you know God exists? Jesus lived, died, and rose from the dead.
How do we know there's only one God? The Bible
How should we pray, eat, live, love, fight, kill, punish? However you choose to . . . free will, remember?
How come the bible doesn't mention life elsewhere in the universe? Perhaps because our ancestors might have looked upon those other life forms as "Gods"?
Sound reasoning!
And the Pope just said you don't have to believe in God/Jesus so all this is pointless.
No, the Holy Father said that Atheists will be forgiven. There is a difference.
Trigs and Jeff aside, can someone on the anti-God side explain why you folks seem so agitated? Admittedly, emotion and context can be difficult in this format, but still . . .
Trigs and Jeff aside, can someone on the anti-God side explain why you folks seem so agitated? Admittedly, emotion and context can be difficult in this format, but still . . .
Am I on block from everyone? How can this seriously be asked?
Religious folks (not all but some):
- try to prevent human rights (i.e. gay marriage)
- prevent scientific advancement (stem cell research)
- assist in the spread of diseases and unwanted pregnancy (birth control is bad)
Those are three big ones for anyone with half a brain / heart / moral code. Not to mention the everyday irritants that may or may not affect everyone (jesus freaks / zealots / "god saves" shit all over the place).
Trigs and Jeff aside, can someone on the anti-God side explain why you folks seem so agitated? Admittedly, emotion and context can be difficult in this format, but still . . .
Are you kidding? There was an entire thread about this.
Rape babies, 6k yr old earth, creationism...take your pic.
Am I on block from everyone? How can this seriously be asked?
Religious folks (not all but some):
- try to prevent human rights (i.e. gay marriage)
The abolitionist movement (anti-slavery) was an overwhelmingly Christian movement. Christians the world over work daily to advance Human Rights, as does the Catholic Church (think forgiveness of Third World debt, and how much that will help). To focus solely on one niche issue is pathetic, especially when a large number of Christians object mostly to the use of the "term" marriage.
Once again, you focus on ONE issue. The Catholic Church pretty much established the idea of an "education system" in Europe, to say nothing of sponsoring all manner of scientific inquiry.
- assist in the spread of diseases and unwanted pregnancy (birth control is bad)
But the things that they counter argue with DO prevent the spread of diseases, and it is SCIENCE that backs this up.
Those are three big ones for anyone with half a brain / heart / moral code. Not to mention the everyday irritants that may or may not affect everyone (jesus freaks / zealots / "god saves" shit all over the place).
Man, you can't ask what is pissing us off, and then say "Well, that's just ONE aspect of it". ONE THING IS FUCKING ENOUGH!
They were against slavery, great, awesome. Why now are you against what is essentially the same fucking issue (treating all those folks equal like), but with a different target? And don't give me this sanctity of marriage shit, because than any "christian" divorcee who didn't get their teeth knocked in has royally pissed off great lord almighty.
Fuck.. this is as bad as Brent's things knocking science because we can't prove everything....
Also, if you can only quote shit they did decades ago that's fucking weak. "Dude, you just robbed that store!" "Ya, but I totally gave money to charity last week". It's about current day, the church is seriously fucking people over.
Also, if you can only quote shit they did decades ago that's fucking weak. "Dude, you just robbed that store!" "Ya, but I totally gave money to charity last week". It's about current day, the church is seriously fucking people over.
Mark
Are you drunk? Seriously? Fucking people over? The Catholic Church, and other Christian groups as well, go into some of the worst hell-holes on this planet in order to alleviate the suffering of those who live there. the elevate the dignity of some of the world's poorest people, and advocate for them to be absolved of the debt that prevents them from rising out of that poverty. You can mock the Church for it's promotion of monogamy in sub-Saharan Africa, and it's stance against birth control. But condoms have not been nearly as effective of slowing the HIV rates in Uganda as the devotion of it's increasingly Catholic population to the tenets of the Church.
George Clooney and the rest of the chattering classes weep for the Sudan, and rightly so . . . but where are the "usual suspects" on Syria? the Catholic Church is there right now, with other Christian groups and NGOs, in the camps, helping the displaced, and offering a small bit of solace in this crisis.
But you're right, Mark, lets talk about stem cells . . .
Trigs and Jeff aside, can someone on the anti-God side explain why you folks seem so agitated? Admittedly, emotion and context can be difficult in this format, but still . . .
Wait, wait... where did I say I was on the anti-god side? I'm a moderator remember...
Why, and by why I mean for what purpose are they doing this? Is it for the purpose of helping people only, or otherwise? I don't doubt they are helping people. Their motives are possibly venerable, but are they multi-intentioned? History has spoken for itself.
If it's conversion oriented, then I have to say that's wrong. Whatever the result.
Are you drunk? Seriously? Fucking people over? The Catholic Church, and other Christian groups as well, go into some of the worst hell-holes on this planet in order to alleviate the suffering of those who live there. the elevate the dignity of some of the world's poorest people, and advocate for them to be absolved of the debt that prevents them from rising out of that poverty. You can mock the Church for it's promotion of monogamy in sub-Saharan Africa, and it's stance against birth control. But condoms have not been nearly as effective of slowing the HIV rates in Uganda as the devotion of it's increasingly Catholic population to the tenets of the Church.
George Clooney and the rest of the chattering classes weep for the Sudan, and rightly so . . . but where are the "usual suspects" on Syria? the Catholic Church is there right now, with other Christian groups and NGOs, in the camps, helping the displaced, and offering a small bit of solace in this crisis.
But you're right, Mark, lets talk about stem cells . . .
Gotta get more on their side with increasing knowledge throughout the populous of their intense corruption. Why not go after the least educated and most desperate?
Bill . . . I am quite certain that there is some conversation about Catholicism, or whatever Faith is doing the "helping". But the message is not "convert or the assistance stops". Catholic charities help because there is a need . . . and because it is the Christian thing to do.
Gotta get more on their side with increasing knowledge throughout the populous of their intense corruption. Why not go after the least educated and most desperate?
As opposed to those organizations and governments, based on non-religious belief structures, that have historically been shown to be corruption free. Try harder, Dave . . .
No, corruption is endemic to humanity . . . Religion tries to improve on that. Sometimes people of Faith come up short, as I have. But we keep trying . . . and some of us get there. So long as we keep trying . . . God will forgive us our failings.
Comments
With regard to the bolded portion, can you point to a passage in the Bible that says humanity is alone in the Universe? I know we are commanded to worship only the one true God, but I do not recall anything that precludes life elsewhere.
So god could have created other life forms elsewhere in the Universe? Or other universes? Or do they have to look like us?
That's kind of the point. God mentions nothing of there being intelligent life on other plants, yet he outlines the creation of EVERYTHING! And the bible definitely outlines how the only things God created with intelligence are angels, humans, and animals on Earth.
This video is what God tells about Himself compiled from various scriptures.
Comp, I will answer you tonight when school is done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEba8tEVJ7k
You realize you are asking a religious zealot to have an original thought? I like your gumption son.
So did God not think we were ready for the abolition of slavery in the bible....but now we are? (cause we discovered it???)
Maybe we were only ready for the cure for Polio 40 years ago? We're ready Nuclear bombs (or power for that matter) now cause God hid them from us till now? What a ridiculous argument.
How do you know God's will?
It's says so in the Bible.
How do you know God exists?
It says so in the Bible.
How do we know there's only one God?
HE says so in the bible.
How should we pray, eat, live, love, fight, kill, punish?
The Bible tells you about it.
How come the bible doesn't mention life elsewhere in the universe?
Cause we're not ready.
Sound reasoning!
And the Pope just said you don't have to believe in God/Jesus so all this is pointless.
besides the history telling in the bible, the whole thing just outlines rules and laws of how to live our lives in practically every detail. it tells us everything about how to treat other humans, how to treat other animals, how to treat nature, how and what to eat, how to have sex, how to love, how to punish, how to think, what to desire, etc. this list is exhaustive (and technically impossible to follow). leaving out something like the existence of another intelligent species seems like a big thing to omit imho, not to mention how we're supposed to deal with said species.
to put it a different way (that i stole from the internets):
and on a personal note, as far as not telling your children all the facts right away, i disagree with that wholeheartedly and i think that is one of the biggest problems between parents and children nowadays. i would never lie to my child and i certainly wouldn't withhold important truths from them. the way parents try to shelter children is complete horseshit imo. all you are doing is setting them up for shock and failure.
yes, that means my children would grow up not believing in santa claus. i'm ready for the onslaught of hatred coming my way for this statement lol.
[FONT="][/FONT]
Jeff
Not quite sure what you are talking about? My first quote from Johnnie is taken from the Bible. It is God quite clearly describing Himself as a jealous Being. The second time I quoted Johnnie I included a video that clearly puts together several passages about God and describing His attributes and again using the two I had used plus several more talking about how jealous He can be. These aren’t interpretations of who God is! These are facts in the Bible which is a source God has chosen to reveal Himself to mankind. It is not the only source but it is a source.
The Sam Harris comment is a fact. Sam is a well-known atheist who goes around the country preaching his message that there is no God. He is joined by guys likes Dawkins and Dennet and the late Christopher Hitchens. They get paid big money to say things like there is no God and denounce the Bible and Christianity as well as all major religions. Harris wrote a book called Free Will. In it he comes to the conclusion that mankind is without free will. He basically is an updated argument from David Hume. Sam Harris is a neuroscientist and tries to convince his audience that mankind is not free to think for himself. He doesn’t use the language I am going to use but the essence is that are brains are programmed by electrical impulses. These impulse need decoding and what you have done with your life, your experiences, education etc. are used to decode the message. The end result of his thesis is I guy like Ariel Castro isn’t responsible for what he did. He makes no qualms about it. He also think the guy should rot in jail. Which in reality doesn’t make sense. How can someone with no free will do something you basically admit to being programmed to do be held responsible for his action?
Dave calls me a zealot? Like that is supposed to hurt my feelings? There are all kinds of opinions on this form but he singles me out? It’s ok because he hasn’t offered a thoughtful comment to the discussion. Nor has he addressed the original post where Kia Nelson says:
that the atheist needs to make a coherent argument against God that goes beyond tearing down the evidence Christians use to support God.
In other words, at some point you have to play offence. Not play defense looking for a turnover to make a point. I read an atheist blog today that admitted that we have moved beyond Darwin. That with the advances in micro biology and what we know about cellular structures and the inner workings of the cell go beyond anything Darwin could have imagined.
Hume’s argument is pretty sophisticated. But it go directly against what the Bible teaches. If I could boil the Bible into one phrase that expresses God’s feelings it would be lack of obedience toward Him. From Adam in the garden to Abraham and taking Hagar instead of obeying God to trust Him and wait for Sarah, on and on, page after page the Bible is filled with examples of God giving man a choice and man not choosing God so for Harris to say man has no free will is ludicrous to me.
I have lots of opinions about a variety of subjects, sports etc. Don’t kid yourself, a lot of the arguments Mark, Nik, Trigs and others are well laid out in the philosophy books and the social and philosophical science books.
Part of the reason I use many quotes from other people is to show that Christianity has as many intellectuals as the non-theist world view.
I choose to live my life by what I understand from the Bible about who God is, who Jesus Christ is because He claimed to be God. I either accept at by faith or I reject it. Make no mistake that those who reject Him put their faith in something else. Whether that be science, mankind and the supposed greater good of mankind – it is still faith and unprovable.
THAT is precisely what he is talking about...
And this...
I quoted Johnnie I included a video that clearly puts together several passages about God and describing His attributes and again using the two I had used plus several more talking about how jealous He can be
And regarding this...
that the atheist needs to make a coherent argument against God that goes beyond tearing down the evidence Christians use to support God.
How about "The law of large numbers is a better explanation for our existence / reality" than "Big bearded angry dude in the sky". And for those who would argue that our world is just a little too perfectly balanced / well-oiled machine to have happened randomly, please look up again what the law of large numbers actually means.
Then there's this...
That with the advances in micro biology and what we know about cellular structures and the inner workings of the cell go beyond anything Darwin could have imagined.
Well, ya.... Chucky D started his trip in 1831, we now know more than he could have imagined. That's called scientific progress. We also better understand physics than Isaac Newton, who probably never would have fathomed atomic-level matter. I actually came up with the idea the other day that Religion is nothing but Science 1.0. It was a (albeit bloated and overly complex) hypothesis trying to explain the way the world worked. Sadly, the good scientists moved on, and the bad ones became "spiritual".
Hume’s argument is pretty sophisticated. But it go directly against what the Bible teaches.
Sophisticated and backed by observable and repeatable findings, vs. bunch of fisherman following a bearded hippie guy around... I'm gonna go with the first guy. Other things that go against the bible:
- Emancipation Proclamation
- Women's rights
- Bacon
- Fatty foods (Ooh, maybe the bible was the first diet book too?)
- Distressed jeans
- Poly-cotton blends
- Tattoos
- Revenge (there goes the death penalty bibliophiles)
- NFL football (no working on Sunday!)
God giving man a choice and man not choosing God
Go man!
I choose to live my life by what I understand from the Bible about who God is, who Jesus Christ is because He claimed to be God.
And this is NOT a problem.... if you wanted to stick by the top 10 and just generally not be a jerk, that's great. No problem with that. It's the stuff we talked earlier where the JC crew is all "No way to the gay" or "Stem cell will lead to hell" that it becomes an issue. If everyone just lived all lovey dovey, gravy... it doesn't happen that way though.
Mark
No, the Holy Father said that Atheists will be forgiven. There is a difference.
This is ridiculous.
Am I on block from everyone? How can this seriously be asked?
Religious folks (not all but some):
- try to prevent human rights (i.e. gay marriage)
- prevent scientific advancement (stem cell research)
- assist in the spread of diseases and unwanted pregnancy (birth control is bad)
Those are three big ones for anyone with half a brain / heart / moral code. Not to mention the everyday irritants that may or may not affect everyone (jesus freaks / zealots / "god saves" shit all over the place).
Mark
Are you kidding? There was an entire thread about this.
Rape babies, 6k yr old earth, creationism...take your pic.
See bolded
Man, you can't ask what is pissing us off, and then say "Well, that's just ONE aspect of it". ONE THING IS FUCKING ENOUGH!
They were against slavery, great, awesome. Why now are you against what is essentially the same fucking issue (treating all those folks equal like), but with a different target? And don't give me this sanctity of marriage shit, because than any "christian" divorcee who didn't get their teeth knocked in has royally pissed off great lord almighty.
Fuck.. this is as bad as Brent's things knocking science because we can't prove everything....
Mark
Also, if you can only quote shit they did decades ago that's fucking weak. "Dude, you just robbed that store!" "Ya, but I totally gave money to charity last week". It's about current day, the church is seriously fucking people over.
Mark
Are you drunk? Seriously? Fucking people over? The Catholic Church, and other Christian groups as well, go into some of the worst hell-holes on this planet in order to alleviate the suffering of those who live there. the elevate the dignity of some of the world's poorest people, and advocate for them to be absolved of the debt that prevents them from rising out of that poverty. You can mock the Church for it's promotion of monogamy in sub-Saharan Africa, and it's stance against birth control. But condoms have not been nearly as effective of slowing the HIV rates in Uganda as the devotion of it's increasingly Catholic population to the tenets of the Church.
George Clooney and the rest of the chattering classes weep for the Sudan, and rightly so . . . but where are the "usual suspects" on Syria? the Catholic Church is there right now, with other Christian groups and NGOs, in the camps, helping the displaced, and offering a small bit of solace in this crisis.
But you're right, Mark, lets talk about stem cells . . .
Jesus wept.
Wait, wait... where did I say I was on the anti-god side? I'm a moderator remember...
If it's conversion oriented, then I have to say that's wrong. Whatever the result.
As opposed to those organizations and governments, based on non-religious belief structures, that have historically been shown to be corruption free. Try harder, Dave . . .
Good night now . . . and God bless.