A world with out religion

[some_guy01]

That "two million" years thing is found only in textbooks.

that "two thousand" years thing is found only in one book

They missed the point.

no that was there way of living

We don't think we are the right ones, we know.

i want you to bring God straight to me, and he has to have a bodily form and i want to talk to him face to face, now if you can do that i would give chrisitianity another look if god truely want to have believers in hm then that is what he should do, what you do make yourself known isolate yourself and only write a few brief things about you in a book and send it out to people. no people would want to see you be able to hold your hand and talk to you face to face come on think logically

 

[Jay Renalsds]

(Tony1)And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.
(Malachi 4:3, KJV). (/Tony1)

I've never heard of Malachi but he sounds just like just another insane, fanatical person who knew how to write to me. People were dumb enough to follow those kinds of people then and think of them as "prophets." They taught these beliefs to their children and their children believed them. So we get to now where many people are beggining to think for themselves(even if they still do believe in something like past lives or other gods) and select their own beliefs instead of just doing as they were told as children. Try thinking for yourself Tony, and stop quoting the bible, thats not going to support your debate.

 

[KalvinB]

You probably shouldn't quote ANYTHING because that's not thinking for yourself. That's just repeating what someone else said.

Ben

 

[Tiassa]

That's a little pessimistic, eh?

You probably shouldn't quote ANYTHING because that's not thinking for yourself. That's just repeating what someone else said.

Offhand I can think of a few reasons for quotes and other citations.

Primarily at Sciforums, there exists this weird perspective on what people write: without some sort of citation, some of our posters refuse an assertion; without citaton, some of our posters fail to understand an assertion; without citation, some of our posters assume they're reading a new idea invented on the moment.

I could note, for instance, of our current international situation, that Goldman spoke out against patriotism for reasons we see even today. Well, someone might then assume that Goldman was anti-American, hates freedon, ad nauseam. The easiest way around that is to provide the citation; as Tony1 demonstrates so aptly, we can also determine much about a person's perspective by their reaction to a citation. Tony1, for instance, reminds us of the need to teach children how to read; not just Hooked on Phonics, but at least some contextual education. (For a society that thrives on doublespeak, humor, and asides, it amazes me how many people have no sense of context.)

I could note that the Congressional Record refers to Christianity as "puerile". This could be an interesting point to snag on if I don't provide the Lysander Spooner essay that was entered into the record containing such language. If I merely point out that the Congressional Record calls Chrisitanity puerile, does that create the possible perception of antichristian sentiment by the US government? If it's in the context of an essay entitled, On the Deist's Immortality which explores the accountability of human beings to their religions and to their gods/consciences/&c, is that a better context? If one sees that the report was entered to the record by a county clerk in Massachusetts ... by that time have we reduced the notion that Congress hates Christians?

The actual problem with providing citations is twofold: the first problem is one of context; frequently, we see posters--Tony1 especially--quoting sentence fragments out of the Bible that have been contextually altered. Read Tony1's Biblical citations as they relate to the point he's pretending to make, and then go back and read the whole sentence, paragraph, or chapter of the Bible whence the citation originates. There's usually a striking difference in context. The second problem is one of the posters' intelligence. Oftentimes, people let others' words stand in place of their own. This is well and fine, but if that's the majority of what you do, what are we to think? We went through this over a year ago at Sciforums; our first truly annoying poster was a Christian whose posts consisted entirely of Biblical citations with no attempt to clarify or explain relevance. In this case, I agree with KalvinB that one is not thinking for oneself; it would appear that Jay Renalsds has discovered what many of us knew about Tony1's posts.

But we could just argue on opinion; I wonder what a moratorium on citations would produce for posts?

thanx,
Tiassa

 

[666]

Tony1,

Based on your "not done mindlessly and without reason" comment, I assume you are against abortion?

The death toll there is up in the tens of millions since Roe vs. Wade.
I wonder if anyone is aware of the following two things...
1. Muslims are anti-abortion
2. Hitler only killed about 5 million.

First, i think the number tens of millions is just a tad off. We are talking about legal abortion right?

Secound, Abortions happen for the same reasons dog
s kill thier offspring. It just gets a little distorted when we through in emotions. not that the emotions need to be ignored just kept rational. Many abortions happen due to economics (same thing as lack of food). It makes people feel better to say "well then just the child up for adoption!". Wouldn't it be nice if that's all there was to it? Sure just give up the kid after 9 months of emotional bonding. Sure go ahead and lose your job, becuase you had to take so many days off to take care of the child before giving birth. Don't try the argument that women don't lose thier jobs over being pregnet. They do, they just don't come out and say it.

*proving your belief or hypothosis is what being a scientist is all about "infering" something will get you nowhere in science *

If that's true, how do you explain the gigantic "inference" called the theory of evolution?

When Christians nit pick at sience they many times forget that the questions and answers in science are usaly larger than the indiviaul. In fact the one all encompasing question "what is the universe?", and other veriations, will span many life times. It is similar to religon in that aspect. You can not understand all of science, only parts. Thus the need for inference.

Take for example quntum physics (sp?). No one fully understands it, but many understand parts of it. You can not mesure the velocity and postion of an electron at the same time. but you can mesure these properties independt of each other. Here is ware being able to infer a conclusing comes in to play. By mesuring the electron's velocity you can infer it's position and vise versa. This can be done with such great accuracy that any errors are meaningless. Thus by mesuring it's velocity you can prove it's position.

The same goes for any other aspect of science. Including the theory of evolution. No theory is absolutly correct but portions of several can be used as a tool to solve the larger problem. Many pepole, mostly the religous type, don't understand what a theory is. It is a tool not the answer. Many times when they speak about science as if they understand it all they do is make fools of them selves.

*Originally posted by Counterbalance
I cannot accept that suffering is the best route to joy. *

Few can accept that, and for good reason.

You wilt shew me the path of life: in your presence is fulness of joy; at your right hand there are pleasures for evermore.
(Psalms 16:11, KJV).

"You" refers to God.

Why suffer? Life is to short to go around suffering for no reason. No suffering is not brought upon our selves by sin. The many times suffering is brought about with out the individual comiting sin. Take for example babies who are tossed in garbage cans becuase the mother was able to get an abortion. The abortion that christians are fighting to abolish. The child had no chance to sin, but yet was forced to suffer with no intervention from your god.

*Originally posted by BevKay
God did not create evil.*

He says he did.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
(Isaiah 45:7, KJV).

So then your god is responsiable for the sins we commit, but then he turns around and curses us for his actions. Not very caring and all loving!!!!

*Originally posted by Counterbalance
Yet I see that there is too much evidence supporting the fact that “religion” has been used as a weapon or a tool of evil throughout the history of humanity. All kinds of religion, and most certainly including Christianity. *

You're confusing Catholicism with Christianity.
A common error, given that Catholics call themselves Christians once in a while.

The christians got in on it to. It's just a fact that the christian church choses to ignore.

All though I don't condem the religion for this. With out religion pepole would have just found other diferences in other pepole to kill them over, and they did!

*After all, who does not learn early in life that one will be cast out, one way or another, if they dare to declare that God and religion are a sham? *

If more had learned it earlier, few would try it later in life.

Ok you lost me here!

If they learned early on in life they would had learned that religion is a sham. At lest thats my opion.

When pepole meet some one with diferent ways and beliefs it chalanges thier own belief system. Which scares them on a deep level. This fear leads to casting out these "different people". Some times it leads to worse, killing them for being diferent.

*Fear...pain...and guilt are meant to be our rewards for daring to think differently. *

The noble atheist "daring" to think differently!
LOL!

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
(Psalms 14:1, KJV).

Fear, pain, and guilt are but a few things ingraind into us by the religious for being diferent. We are the minority, the religous are the majority. It isn't a choice, but forced into our laps, but you unlearn it after a while. It is very freeing when this happens.

regarding the bible quote. This was from a book the was translated and retranslated, and re-retranslated, and so. It was also edited, and re-edited, and re-reedited, and so on. How can it be taken as absolute truth with all of these alteration?

The problem isn't religion, the problem is that you're fighting against God.

But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:
Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.
Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.
Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.
Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out.
The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.
...
The LORD will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed.
The LORD shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart:
And thou shalt grope at noonday, as the blind gropeth in darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways: and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save thee.
Thou shalt betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her: thou shalt build an house, and thou shalt not dwell therein:
...
Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee:
(Deuteronomy 28:15-45, KJV).

That's a lot of curses.

There is a way out...

Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree:
(Galatians 3:13, KJV).

Who said any one was fighting? I live my life and I enjoy it. Every day brings more things to enjoy.

I just can not accept that thier was ever an instruction book (the bible) on how we should live our life.

What exactly did sacrificing his only child prove? That he can kill his own son? Hell I can do that if I wanted, but I don't do it becuase I'm mad or feel that someone, anyone, needs to pay for some sin that I created.

Once again this does not sound like an all loving god. There is an awfull lot of cursing going. The text went on and on as if your god was so pissed off he was ready to kill and make sure that the this individual never never ever recovers from his rath. Come on that's not what forgivnes is about.

 

[some_guy01]

(Tony1)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem isn't religion, the problem is that you're fighting against God.

But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:
Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.
Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.
Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.
Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out.
The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.
...
The LORD will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed.
The LORD shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart:
And thou shalt grope at noonday, as the blind gropeth in darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways: and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save thee.
Thou shalt betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her: thou shalt build an house, and thou shalt not dwell therein:
...
Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee:
(Deuteronomy 28:15-45, KJV).

That's a lot of curses.

There is a way out...

Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree:
(Galatians 3:13, KJV).
-(Tony1)



Well Tony im going to say this once many of the worlds most successful people were never religious



(tony1)*Originally posted by BevKay
God did not create evil.*

He says he did.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
(Isaiah 45:7, KJV).-(tony1)



i would have to agree with 666 your "God" contradicts itself
i have found another example of this
your god is perfect in every way(you may not agree with this but all the christians i have ever talked to have said so). Now think what makes us imperfect our opinoins and emotions. Follw me so far... good
Now if your god if perfect then he cannot have feelings of his own because that is what makes us imperfect. SO in other words he should not be able to love and care for us, yet the bible says that he does. hmmm that doesn't quite work now does it. He also cannot decided something for himself because he does not have an opinion. So he alone cannot decied if you go to heaven or hell(if there were such things). This means that judgement day cannot exist because he cannot judge, and yes judging uses his own thoughts(which simply cannot be there because of what is mentioned before that he is perfect. and even if he could have his his own thoughts/ideas they could never be perfect because not everyone would agree).


there it falls back on to itself





*666 its Quantum physics

 

[tony1]

*Originally posted by some_guy01
that "two thousand" years thing is found only in one book*

And several billion calendars.

*i want you to bring God straight to me, and he has to have a bodily form and i want to talk to him face to face, now if you can do that i would give chrisitianity another look if god truely want to have believers in hm then that is what he should do*

I note a severe inability to think logically.
There would be nothing to believe if you saw him bodily.
You would know.

*Originally posted by Jay Renalsds
select their own beliefs instead of just doing as they were told as children.*

You were told not to crap in your pants as a child.
I can only assume that you crap in your pants now that you can select your own beliefs.

*Originally posted by tiassa
Read Tony1's Biblical citations as they relate to the point he's pretending to make, and then go back and read the whole sentence, paragraph, or chapter of the Bible whence the citation originates. There's usually a striking difference in context.*

That comes from a lack of understanding on your part.

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
(2 Peter 1:20, KJV).

Your private interpretations simply don't hold water.

*Originally posted by 666
i think the number tens of millions is just a tad off. We are talking about legal abortion right?*

It could be.
It could be 19,500,000 rather than 20,000,000.

*You can not understand all of science, only parts. Thus the need for inference. *

Ah, but the same people who claim inference is valid for science claim that it is not valid for religion.

If you say I cannot infer the existence of God, then I will say that you cannot infer anything else.
That leaves "science" without a leg to stand on.

*Thus by mesuring it's velocity you can prove it's position.*

That is the most ridiculously misstated explanation of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle I've ever heard.
I can only assume that your major is candle-making.

*No theory is absolutly correct*

That's all I've ever thought of the theory of evolution.

*Many pepole, mostly the religous type, don't understand what a theory is.*

Most people, especially the "scientific" types, have even less understanding of what a theory is.
A theory is when someone sits down and makes something up.
Sometimes they're lucky and what they make up bears some resemblance to reality.

*Many times when they speak about science as if they understand it all they do is make fools of them selves. *

You do have a point there.
Anyone who speaks about the theory of evolution as if they understand it, all they do is make fools of themselves.

*Why suffer? Life is to short to go around suffering for no reason.*

I can see that English is perhaps a second, or third, language for you.
There is no reason to suffer.

*So then your god is responsiable for the sins we commit*

Well, if you commit them, you are responsible.

*When pepole meet some one with diferent ways and beliefs it chalanges thier own belief system. Which scares them on a deep level.*

Well, that explains why atheists react badly to Christianity.

*This was from a book the was translated and retranslated, and re-retranslated, and so. It was also edited, and re-edited, and re-reedited, and so on. How can it be taken as absolute truth with all of these alteration? *

Since the vast majority of other books are made up on the fly, how can you take them as any kind of truth?
Or, do you not know how books are written?

*There is an awfull lot of cursing going.*

Who do you think is going to experience it all?

 

[Jay Renalsds]

[*Originally posted by Jay Renalsds
select their own beliefs instead of just doing as they were told as children.*

You were told not to crap in your pants as a child.
I can only assume that you crap in your pants now that you can select your own beliefs.

Once again tony you missed the point. Their own (religious) beliefs is what i meant, since religion was the topic of the reply, not child rearing, I thought you would catch that. Sorry. For that matter selcting your own beliefs doesn't necessarily mean that none of your own beliefs are those of your parents. By selecting your own beliefs you may make some of your own, or borrow some from your parents or someone esle. I hope this provides some clarity for you, but I doubt it.

 

[some_guy01]

There would be nothing to believe if you saw him bodily.

I would belive he exists

Most people, especially the "scientific" types, have even less understanding of what a theory is.

LIKE YOU WOULD KNOW!
the·o·ry (th-r, thîr)
n. pl. the·o·ries
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially ONE THAT HAS BEEN REPEDITLY TESTED or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

*No theory is absolutly correct*

Thats why it is called a theory, although it has some basis/evidence supporting it

*So then your god is responsiable for the sins we commit*

Well, if you commit them, you are responsible.

but before your quote said that god created the good and evil, so if we comit them then go to hell, why did he create them to punish his own people???? it makes no sense

I note a severe inability to think logically.

depends on your idea of logic, Logically means to think with evidence supporting your ideas. example

I like biology class
Biology is this class
I like this class

that is logical thinking, ever do proofs in geometry????

*When pepole meet some one with diferent ways and beliefs it chalanges thier own belief system. Which scares them on a deep level.*

Well, that explains why atheists react badly to Christianity.

no we react to it badly because of what i said before. Christains always think they are the right ones and hve to prove it to the world and athiests get tired of them coming around praising how we should do this and how we should do that. Its almost like a cult in terms, you guys tell us how we have to live our lives. Thats why you never hear an athiest complain about buddism, islam, or any of the other religions that don't send out missionaries. They are not power hungry like christains

 

[tony1]

Jay...
So now that you have progressed far beyond your childhood, do you or do you not crap in your pants?

You have the idea that religious beliefs are somehow different from every other belief that a person can hold.

 

[Jay Renalsds]

Religious beliefs are different from most other types of beliefs, their not based on logic. Their based on a voice in someones head who wrote down what he heard. Whether this voice is the voice of god or not cant be proven or disproven, but that is what makes religious beliefs diffrent from most others.

Back to a world without religion, the worship of the devil has caused less people to die than the worship of god. I am not saying that everyone who worships god is going to kill someone, I am just saying that too many people take their beliefs too far(like the killing of people at abortion clinics.)

 

[tony1]

*Originally posted by some_guy01
I would belive he exists*

You would know.

*LIKE YOU WOULD KNOW! *

Of course, a theory starts with a hypothesis, which is somewhat less solid...

---hypothesis \Hy*poth"e*sis\, n.

1. A supposition; a proposition or principle which is supposed or taken for granted, in order to draw a conclusion or inference for proof of the point in question; something not proved, but assumed for the purpose of argument, or to account for a fact or an occurrence;

An hypothesis being a mere supposition, there are no other limits to hypotheses than those of the human imagination. --J. S. Mill.

2. (Natural Science) A tentative theory or supposition provisionally adopted to explain certain facts, and to guide in the investigation of others; hence, frequently called a working hypothesis.

Syn: Supposition; assumption.---

*Thats why it is called a theory, although it has some basis/evidence supporting it*

See above for what it is based on.

*You:
So then your god is responsiable for the sins we commit*

Me:
Well, if you commit them, you are responsible.

You:
depends on your idea of logic,*

I notice you skipped over your logic-based statement there.
Your little alternative, while cute, doesn't begin to explain your obvious inability to deal with issues logically.

*They are not power hungry like christains *

And what power would you have that we are hungry for?

 

[666]

*You can not understand all of science, only parts. Thus the need for inference. *

Ah, but the same people who claim inference is valid for science claim that it is not valid for religion.

If you say I cannot infer the existence of God, then I will say that you cannot infer anything else.

Please explain how you can infer your god's existence.

That leaves "science" without a leg to stand on.

Only in opion. It has much more then a leg, for example the equipment you are using was made from scientific principles. Show me one object or even a being that your god created. Not something you belive he created, something you witnesed him creating.

*Thus by mesuring it's velocity you can prove it's position.*

That is the most ridiculously misstated explanation of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle I've ever heard.
I can only assume that your major is candle-making.

First it was not ment to be an explanation of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. It was from the Copenhagen Interpritaion.

Secound your reply shows how you have to resort to school yard tactics to attempt to discredit me instead of accualy trying to challenge my assertations with a degree of inteligence.

[QOUTE]*No theory is absolutly correct*

That's all I've ever thought of the theory of evolution.[/QUOTE]

I came off with the felling that you thought all theorys were absolutly incorrect. I must have miss read your intentions.

*Many pepole, mostly the religous type, don't understand what a theory is.*

Most people, especially the "scientific" types, have even less understanding of what a theory is.
A theory is when someone sits down and makes something up.
Sometimes they're lucky and what they make up bears some resemblance to reality.

It appears that you still don't have a clue as to what a hypothosis or a theory is. I'll give you the definitions.

Hypothosis:
A tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences.

Theory:
The analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another.

Note that these definitions were taken from the Marriam-Webster Dictionary.

*Many times when they speak about science as if they understand it all they do is make fools of them selves. *

You do have a point there.
Anyone who speaks about the theory of evolution as if they understand it, all they do is make fools of themselves.

Of course this line of thinking holds true unless you accualy stuidy it and understand it. Then you are not making a fool of your self.

Tell me, what part of the theory of evolution do you not agree with?

*Why suffer? Life is to short to go around suffering for no reason.*

I can see that English is perhaps a second, or third, language for you.
There is no reason to suffer.

That statment was mostly aimed towards Catholics, but it applys to Christains to. One of the major thems I have picked up from the bible is need to constantly punish one self just for being human.

Once again your reply shows a pathetic ploy to use school yard tatics.

English is my first language. Written english is not my strong point, especialy spelling.

*So then your god is responsiable for the sins we commit*

Well, if you commit them, you are responsible.

You missed my point here. If your god created everything including evil/sin then he is responsible for our sins. After all he created our sins.

*When pepole meet some one with diferent ways and beliefs it chalanges thier own belief system. Which scares them on a deep level.*

Well, that explains why atheists react badly to Christianity.

You took my quote out of context. My stament was made regarding how Christians cast out those who do not belive as they do. Atheists react badly to Christianity becuase they can see how false it's fundamentals are.

*This was from a book the was translated and retranslated, and re-retranslated, and so. It was also edited, and re-edited, and re-reedited, and so on. How can it be taken as absolute truth with all of these alteration? *

Since the vast majority of other books are made up on the fly, how can you take them as any kind of truth?
Or, do you not know how books are written?

So then you agree that the bible is false? How can belive in a religion based on false statments?

If a book contains a statment that 2+2=4 are going to belive it is false becuase it was writen in a book other then the bible?

Also lets draw the distinction between fiction books and reference books. If you ever belived that fiction books contained the truth I can see how you drew your conclusion.

I do agree that reference books can have errors in them, but for the most part they contain correct information (or the truth).

*There is an awfull lot of cursing going.*

Who do you think is going to experience it all?

Once again you have taken my quote out of context. try quoting the whole thing next time. here it is once again for your review.

""Who said any one was fighting? I live my life and I enjoy it. Every day brings more things to enjoy.

I just can not accept that thier was ever an instruction book (the bible) on how we should live our life.

What exactly did sacrificing his only child prove? That he can kill his own son? Hell I can do that if I wanted, but I don't do it becuase I'm mad or feel that someone, anyone, needs to pay for some sin that I created.

Once again this does not sound like an all loving god. There is an awfull lot of cursing going. The text went on and on as if your god was so pissed off he was ready to kill and make sure that the this individual never never ever recovers from his rath. Come on that's not what forgivnes is about.""


Also one here is one thing I was hoping you would comment on,but didn't

'''regarding the bible quote. This was from a book the was translated and retranslated, and re-retranslated, and so. It was also edited, and re-edited, and re-reedited, and so on. How can it be taken as absolute truth with all of these alteration?""


Hopefully this time you can keep from using insults in an attempt to keep from accualy thinking about your respones.

 

[some_guy01]

Of course, a theory starts with a hypothesis, which is somewhat less solid...

a hypothesis is the first assumption in a experiment
a "scientific" theory does not have anything to do with the 'scientific method', but it is what is created when partial evidence is given (ie the bones of a ten-thousand year old human being) and the whole picture is left to be put back together by more research and study

that second definition is partially wrong; a hypothosis is what you think is going happen. a theory is what you think is going to happen based on evidence

I notice you skipped over your logic-based statement there.
Your little alternative, while cute, doesn't begin to explain your obvious inability to deal with issues logically.

WHAT I SAID IS WHAT LOGICAL THINKING IS and it is accepted among many scholars (even the ones at Pepperdine, who by the way are christain)!!!

your logic god created everything, which by the way is not logic

 

[tony1]

*Originally posted by 666
Please explain how you can infer your god's existence.*

I infer it from the existence of the universe.

*for example the equipment you are using was made from scientific principles.*

Actually, mine is made from metal and plastic.

*Show me one object or even a being that your god created. Not something you belive he created, something you witnesed him creating.*

You're going to end up shooting yourself in the foot, if you insist on actually witnessing the creation of something before you believe in its existence.

I can claim that you don't exist, based on the fact that you weren't there at your own conception, until after the fact.
Not only that, believing that you were conceived isn't enough, only proof of your having "witnessed" it, is acceptable.

*First it was not ment to be an explanation of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. It was from the Copenhagen Interpritaion. *

You do realize the GPS system was created to identify position even though a lot of vehicles have speedometers.
I'm sorry, but you're going to have to come up with something a little better than "by mesuring it's velocity you can prove it's position."
Especially if you're going to put the word "thus" in front of it.

*Secound your reply shows how you have to resort to school yard tactics to attempt to discredit me instead of accualy trying to challenge my assertations with a degree of inteligence.*

Argumentum ad hominem?
Shouldn't you make assertions that show "a degree of inteligence" before you expect to be challenged with a degree of intelligence?

*I came off with the felling that you thought all theorys were absolutly incorrect. I must have miss read your intentions.*

You said "No theory is absolutely correct."
When I think of the theory of evolution, I immediately think, "No theory is absolutely correct."

*It appears that you still don't have a clue as to what a hypothosis or a theory is. I'll give you the definitions.*

I can get definitions, too.
I prefer the following...

---hypothesis, n.
1. A supposition; a proposition or principle which is supposed or taken for granted, in order to draw a conclusion or inference for proof of the point in question; something not proved, but assumed for the purpose of argument, or to account for a fact or an occurrence;--- Webster's

---supposition n.
1. The act of supposing, laying down, imagining, or considering as true or existing, what is known not to be true, or what is not proved.
2. That which is supposed; hypothesis; conjecture; surmise; opinion or belief without sufficient evidence.--- Webster's

Not to take anything away from science (since one does have to start somewhere), but if you think that science is based on anything other than someone sitting down and making things up, you are sadly mistaken.

*Of course this line of thinking holds true unless you accualy stuidy it and understand it. Then you are not making a fool of your self.*

Based on the logic evident in those two statements, I can only conclude that not studying it is the best way to make you look like a fool.
Is that really what you intended?

In any case, evolutionists make fools of themselves prima facie by believing in evolution.
Keep in mind that the only difference between creationism and evolutionism is not the origin of life since both agree on that.
It is the question of how long it took.
Creationism says it took a short time.
Evolutionism says it took a long time.

*Tell me, what part of the theory of evolution do you not agree with?*

Part?
The whole idea is nonsense.
Unless, of course, you can prove that you are a different species from your grandparents.

*One of the major thems I have picked up from the bible is need to constantly punish one self just for being human.*

What Bible is that from?

BTW, can you define "school yard tactics?"

*If your god created everything including evil/sin then he is responsible for our sins. After all he created our sins. *

That is a fallacy.
He created evil, not your sins.
You create your sins.

*You took my quote out of context. My stament was made regarding how Christians cast out those who do not belive as they do. Atheists react badly to Christianity becuase they can see how false it's fundamentals are. *

Read it yourself, I didn't take it out of context, you did.
You stated that people get scared when their beliefs are challenged.
Atheists get scared when their beliefs are challenged.
You intended to take it out of context and refer only to Christians, who are, in fact, least likely to get "scared" when their beliefs are challenged.

*So then you agree that the bible is false?*

You are a master of the fallacious argument.

*How can belive in a religion based on false statments?*

How can I believe anything antichristian since it is all false?

*If a book contains a statment that 2+2=4 are going to belive it is false becuase it was writen in a book other then the bible? *

Is there no end to your fallacious reasoning?
Aside from the fact that 2+2=4 can be false, in the cases that it is true, it doesn't even have to be written at all.
If it isn't written at all, does that mean that it disappeared from human consciousness altogether?

*Also lets draw the distinction between fiction books and reference books. If you ever belived that fiction books contained the truth I can see how you drew your conclusion.*

How do you propose to tell the difference between the two categories?
By the word "reference" imprinted on the spine somewhere?
All you need to do to realize that not much separates the two categories, is to read a reference book from a few years ago.
It reads just like fiction.
I propose that today's reference books will read like fiction several years from now.
Of course, if they read like fiction several years from now, then they are fiction now, only you don't know it.

*I do agree that reference books can have errors in them, but for the most part they contain correct information (or the truth).*

How noble of you to admit that they "can have" errors in them.
Have you heard of "phlogiston?"
Or have you heard of "philosophy?"
Rather than admit that old science is rotten science, people prefer to relabel bad science, "philosophy," in the hopes that no one will notice how much really putrid science actually exists.

*There is an awfull lot of cursing going.*

Who do you think is going to experience it all?

*'''regarding the bible quote. This was from a book the was translated and retranslated, and re-retranslated, and so. It was also edited, and re-edited, and re-reedited, and so on. How can it be taken as absolute truth with all of these alteration?""*

Aside from the fact that it wasn't actually re-retranslated, it also wasn't re-reedited.

Very few Bibles are translations of translations let alone translations of translations of translations.

In any case, that is the "Tu quoque" fallacy, anyway, unless you are prepared to argue that the Bible is the only edited, translated book in existence.

*Hopefully this time you can keep from using insults in an attempt to keep from accualy thinking about your respones. *

What insults?
If you're assertions are so delicate that they can't handle controversy then don't make such delicate assertions.

 

[tony1]

*Originally posted by Jay Renalsds
I am just saying that too many people take their beliefs too far(like the killing of people at abortion clinics.) *

1. Open mouth
2. Insert foot

Abortion clinics without people being killed in them are called "closed."

What do you think they do in abortion clinics, tend petunias?

 

[wet1]

What do they do at abortion clinics?
Aborting 'demons' like me??
Or aborting baby's??
You never know what is growing inside a woman, do you?
So it must be very difficult for you, to be against at one side, but you are for an abortion clinic if there is a 'demon' inside at the other side...

I wonder about that.
You are so terribly obsessed by people 'channeling demons'.
How about that?
Or does the demon enter the babies body as soon as it is born??
Tell me, explain.
I guess we are attacked when we are born, as soon as we are out of our mothers, we are under attack by 'demons' who are standing in line to take over the next new born baby.

Is that in your bible Tony?
About abortion...
Can you exactly tell me where is written that abortion is forbidden. In that words, no old talking, no, the word: abortion.
Can't be difficult for you, for you learned the bible by heart and that is all you did til this day. And I bet you are stil busy doing so.
You know who agrees with you on this item, abortion?
The Pope...
The catholic pope...
I thought you hated that catholics so much.
Yeah, well, they use the same bible...

Get a grip Tony.
There are things that need solutions in life.
I know you don't live your life like we, 'demons' do, but maybe you better think a little, then always babbling about what is in your bible.
Illusions, your bible.
Your illusions...

 

[Bambi]

Tony comes through yet again

I knew he'd back me up on it; otherwise some of you might not have believed what I'm about to tell you.

The other day, I met a fertilized egg. He was very apprehensive of the fact that he doesn't have a U.S. citizenship yet since he hasn't yet had the chance to mature into a functioning infant, much less to be born. Since the new terrorist law is about to go into effect, this nameless egg was afraid of indefinite incarceration by domestic security authorities. He was quite annoyed by the fact that while he has been granted the status of Person by Christian decree, he was still being denied the status of Citizen until he actually transforms into an actual little human and undergoes birth to a U.S. mother or on U.S. soil. He didn't consider it fair to be required to undergo such stress and pain just to be granted a citizenship.

However, I addressed the egg's concern by noting that while he had a complete human DNA, so did many of the other cells who never ever get even recognized as People, much less citizens. Every day, I told him, a typical human sheds millions of cells -- each of which is capable of giving rise to another human given proper treatment, but nevertheless doesn't even dream of having its rights addressed by the Christian extremists. So, I told the egg, be happy with what you have: at least you are a Person.

 

[tony1]

*Originally posted by Banshee
What do they do at abortion clinics?*

Well, mainly they grind up defenseless little kids.

*Originally posted by Bambi
The other day, I met a fertilized egg.*

Are you pregnant?

*He was quite annoyed by the fact that while he has been granted the status of Person by Christian decree, he was still being denied the status of Citizen until he actually transforms into an actual little human and undergoes birth to a U.S. mother or on U.S. soil.*

Being just a fertilized egg, he simply didn't realize that he automatically enjoys all the benefits of US citizenship until he is born.

*Every day, I told him, a typical human sheds millions of cells -- each of which is capable of giving rise to another human given proper treatment,*

Of course, fertilized eggs don't need any special treatment, being in the normal course of affairs, so to speak.

*So, I told the egg, ...*

Talking to eggs, is that normal atheist dogma?

 

[Sir. Loone]

With out reigion?

Originally posted by tony1
*Originally posted by Jay Renalsds
I am just saying that too many people take their beliefs too far(like the killing of people at abortion clinics.) *

1. Open mouth
2. Insert foot! Amen!

Abortion clinics without people being killed in them are called "closed."

What do you think they do in abortion clinics, tend petunias?

They are 'DEATH MILLS!' And all that deal in favor there of will be one day utterly destroyed by GOD Him self! If they do not know Jesus for the pardoning of sins!