Movie Search:
05-16-2008, 02:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
 There are some performences in churches across the country with different choral works, or organ pieces of Bach and such from time to time. I haven't gone to any yet, but i would seriously consider it if they perform something in my hometown. It was built in 1679 by the way. Thought you might be interested considering your faith and all. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._juni_2006.JPG The Gothenburg orchestra performed Beethovens ninth a couple of weeks ago, the conductor was Gustavo dudamel. It was an excellent rendition, apparently they are going to perform the whole cycle of Beethovens symphonies during a period of 3 years. So there will be lots of attending from my end.       
|
|
08-23-2008, 01:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
this is funny!
you athiests try to use the bible to prove that god doesn't exist. LOL
FACT: God is real; always has been; always will be! Gods word is a man(Yeshua) not a book!
|
|
08-23-2008, 03:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
 Which one of the Gods are you referring to that is real ??? I'm sure you must be aware that there are quite a few of them out there... Well over 400 recognized religions in the world today in fact... Funny how you are so sure that your God is the real one... But then if you go across the big water, there are like billions of people over there that are absolutely sure that there God is the real one and that your God is just a myth... I believe when I die I will rot in the ground... You believe when you die that you will magically go to a magical heaven land and get a set of wings and start flying around in the clouds... We use to think that was in the clouds right over our heads... Remember Jacob's ladder to heaven, described in the Book of Genesis... God had to make everyone start speaking different languages so we wouldn't get up there... Well now we have airplanes so I guess God just decided to move heaven to parts unknown... If you want to believe all that I'm fine with it...  PS. Hope you like the little tuxedo picture I gave you...
__________________
 
|
|
08-23-2008, 08:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Democracy for instance has rallied as many followers as christianity, the one promises freedom, equality and peace. The other promises the same for the soul. Both are constructed by the same kind of men who makes profit of each. "Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy" - Plato Which is fairly easily seen these days i think. History teaches by example, and they are endless. How the body of the masses is always, always and always believing in what they don't know for facts. They are told what the facts are, and they believe it. No critical thinking, no questions raised. It's blind belief, all because people are not willing to believe the thing that matters the most. That someone just might be feeding information that are on a need-to-know basis. If you take christianity as an example. The people who spread the words apparently believe in what they preach themselves, so it all comes out naturally without hickups. Same goes for the statesman who promises you everything, as long as you vote. But both promises given are always founded upon one thing, someones word for it... What else are there to show for it ?. Belief is what everything boils down to. What are you willing to believe in on promises, made on paper or orally. That is the questions you must ask yourself as you wade through all the waste products of other men's minds. Some people are willing to believe, which is why wars have been perpetual and in multitude since the dawn of man. As well as elected officals, conspiracies, sold items of worthless use, preconceptions that has led to missunderstandings on which all kinds of atrocities have been made. The list is endless. People will believe everything and anything, history proves it. And the present most surely suggests that it will go on for eternity. Because people have always been ruled, just as some animals have been domesticated. We think we are free, becuase just like our pets, we are content with what our masters throw at us. We have grown used for centuries to be told in various ways what to think and what to do. We are dogs and cats to the people in charge. You can call them god or politican, but it has always been the same kind of people and it will remain that way. God is a well constructed figure of litterature, i have seen no concrete proof that suggests the opposite. I suppose that Jesus might have lived once, but it may also just be that he and the freedom movement he was in charge of was both martyrized. And as such it was raised up and praised a little to much, but that is the typical thing about us humans.. We praise things so much, that we are blinded from reason. People praise the flag of their country to such a lenght, that wars are almost welcomed, enemies you never seen or spoken to are hated for reasons given by the men who know the truth, while letting the people in on crumbs of it. Religion has killed millions, people have been content with knowing the deeds of the persons on stakes and learnt not to ask more. What have we learnt after 1000 years of madness ?.. Sadly nothing. People are keeping on believing, forgetting the past and thereby redoing the past. The learning curve in man is restricted to development in everything but the spirit and mind. There is only one god, and that is the mind of the individual man. Last edited by Tyrfingr; 08-25-2008 at 06:48 AM.
|
|
09-03-2008, 12:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
A scientific objection, not just a religious one.
As any "Godly" argument I make is immediately attacked by Mitch (Copycat) or Karl (Tyrfingr), one claiming to have lost his faith, to 'logic,' the other having been deprived of any religious training altogether, I will temporarily cease argument from a Christians view, to point out a few of the scientific objections to your god; Darwin.
(Facetiously,) here is how evolution believing scientists think. After having dug to a depth of 10 feet last year, New York scientists found traces of a copper-wire system dating back 100 years, and they came to the conclusion that their ancestors already had a telephone network more than 100 years ago. Not to be outdone by New Yorkers, in the weeks that followed, California scientists dug to a depth of 20 feet, and shortly after, headlines in the LA Times newspaper read: 'California archaeologists have found traces of 200 year old copper-wire system and have concluded that their ancestors already had an advanced high-tech communications network a hundred years earlier than the New Yorkers'. East Texas reported the following: 'After digging as deep as 30 feet in a corn field near Hideaway texas, Bubba Wayne, a Texas A&M archaeologist, reported that he found absolutely nothing. Bubba has therefore concluded that 300 years ago, East Texas had already gone wireless. Unfortunately, this is kind of wishful thinking used by evolutionist scientists as there has never been one single legitimate piece of evidence for evolution. You keep saying "we have the fossils" but you have never shown me a single transitional fossil. When I am asked "do you you believe in evolution?" I respond with: are you asking about microevolution or macroevolution?" By forcing the terms "microevolution" and "macroevolution" into the answer, this confronts the trap and properly frames the real issue. When people say "evolution," most are referring to macroevolution or if you will, Darwinism. Serious thinkers have problems with theories of macroevolution and this shows one to be informed, not a member of the lunatic fringe. If you say microevolution, where an organism adapts to its environment with the flexibility already built into its existing DNA, then yes I believe in that; we see it every day in nature. But if you mean macroevolution, where mutations stack on one another to create entirely new organ systems and transform one species into a totally different species, then I, along with many well-credentialed scientists, have serious problems with that theory." The common attack used by Darwinists is to point to scientifically-provable microevolution and charge the critic with being an anti-science religious zealot. A series of polls from the Gallup poll to the Newsweek poll show that about half of Americans have problems with Darwinian macroevolution. Such a position may be out of step with the majority of the press, but it's not out of step with a majority of Americans. There is a multitude of scientists who express such concerns. Models like the doctrine of irreducible complexity explain that many organs like the eye require dozens of different component parts, each made of millions or billions of complex cells, all working together to function. It argues such organs cannot evolve over time because even if such an organ is 99% complete, it still has 0% function, and thus does not do anything to help the species. This model suggests organs must be entirely present and perfectly placed together with other complex organs. No theory of macroevolution has an explanation for how such organs can come about. Regardless of what you believe, it's a fair point for a rational person to make and that does not rely on any religious belief. It's a scientific objection, not just a religious one.  Sorry if I broadsided you again guys. You'll just have to stop gloating until one of you comes up with an incredibly lengthy response that has little connection & no possible answer. *Rolls eyes* Quote:
Last edited by With Alacrity; 09-03-2008 at 01:17 AM.
|
|
09-03-2008, 06:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Atheist are never terrorist bombers...
 Bob I find myself a little confused about just what it is you do believe... Your talking about fossils and macroevolution there, but you don't tell us what did happen... I mean we have all these hominin, hylobatidae, and hominidae bones that carbon dating tells us are 3 or 4 million years old... And anyone that has just a minuscule amount of scientific background knows that carbon dating is dead on... But I'm guessing you don't believe that being the Bible says that the earth is only 7 thousand years old... So are you saying that Adam and Eve were like cave people and God just changed them up every thousand years or so ??? Or are you saying that God just made those bones as a kinda joke for his own amusement ??? And what about those dinosaurs, did Noah just forget to put them on the Ark or is that just God kidding around too ??? And what about people getting taller ??? Man [on average] is between 3 and 4 inches taller now than he was just 150 years ago... Now I would say that we are evolving due to better eating habits, you know better nutrition... But you don't believe in evolution, so why is God making us taller all of a sudden ??? 
__________________
|
|
09-03-2008, 05:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
WOW Mitch, You REALLY stuck your foot into it this time. For a man who 'claims' to believe in Darwinist evolution your ignorance stuns me. I said ignorance (ignorance is the lack of knowledge on a topic) I am NOT calling you stupid. Mitch sez: "Bob I find myself a little confused about just what it is you do believe." Bob sez: I don't think I've made any secret of what I know to be truth according to Gods word. Would you like a statement of faith? First you throw a bunch of non-names into the equation (hominin?) I'll presume you mean homini[d] that all mean the same thing and do nothing to throw any light on the subject as you haven't given me an example of a single actual hominid you wish to discuss. Nebraska man? Oh, that's right, that turned out to be a pigs tooth. Maybe you mean Peking man? DARN! that conveniently vanished like all evidences of evolution from China evaporate to when investigated too closely. Or Lucy? Have you actually seen the scraps of bone that they call Lucy-LOL! Or Neanderthal man? Recent evidence from mitochondrial DNA studies have been interpreted as evidence that Neanderthals were not a subspecies of H. sapiens. (A little aside here: Neanderthal man is estimated to be 40 to 60 THOUSAND years old and yet they are able to extract good DNA from them while they are unable to get good DNA from men known to be only a few thousand years old. REMARKABLE! Neanderthal man must have had better embalmers.) Or is it where we find rare animals with an added chromosome? Unfortunately that is not only non-beneficial to the species, they are sterile (unable to reproduce) and STILL are the same species. (Biblical word: kind). A burning desire to prove evolution or disprove God’s creation is what leads otherwise intelligent scientists and skeptics to fail to question evolutionary assumptions adequately. But faith in the Creator-God of the Bible and His Word, which tells us that man and all other major kinds of creatures were created— they did not evolve is the Creation antidote to being taken in by such astounding evolutionary claims. There is no indisputable evidence that man has ever evolved from apelike creatures, and even less evidence that the earth is millions of years old. Mitch sez: "And anyone that has just a minuscule amount of scientific background knows that carbon dating is dead on." Bob sez: Oh my! You really, REALLY stuck your foot into it this time. Even Darwinist scientists don't claim any accuracy in carbon 14 dating back beyond a few thousand years (not millions) As to the accuracy of carbon 14 dating you have GOT to be kidding. Carbon dating has been shown to be in error thousands of times over. Not only is it based on many erroneous assumptions. Live mollusks off the Hawaiian coast have had their shells dated with the carbon-14 method. These tests showed that the shells died 2000 years ago! This news came as quite a shock to the mollusks that had been using those shells until just recently. Some accuracy! Many recently dead animals have been tested with differences of thousands of years difference in the age of the animal, sometimes from one end of the animal to the other. Many other recently live animals have been found dead for hundreds of years by carbon 14 dating. The same kinds of errors have been found with the other and supposedly more accurate dating methods. Mostly because they are based on wrong assumptions. Besides which, none of them goes back more than a few thousand years, not millions. That tells me that you have no idea as to how Darwinists ascertain something to be millions of years old. Certainly not with your "dead on" carbon 14 dating. See # 1 below They claim: 1) Fossil dating is accurate since the method follows strict scientific guidelines: (NOT TRUE- They use many erroneous assumptions) Index fossils: The age of rocks around a fossil is used (The depth of the fossil in the strata indicates the strata's age and the depth of the strata indicates the fossils age. That is circular reasoning.) 2) Mathematical calculations are used (based on erroneous assumptions) 3) The state of decay, carbon-14, and isotopes figure in calculations (see above) 4) Tree of life relationships often help sort the dates (Mystical nonsense coming from the ancients and rehashed by Charles Darwin before carbon dating, still used today, and failing to account that the KIND of tree doesn't change.) Mitch sez: "But I'm guessing you don't believe that being the Bible says that the earth is only 7 thousand years old..." Bob sez: I don't know where you find where the Bible SAYS anything about the age of the earth. That is found by genealogies within the Bible which I find no reason to doubt. Mitch sez: So are you saying that Adam and Eve were like cave people and God just changed them up every thousand years or so ??? Or are you saying that God just made those bones as a kinda joke for his own amusement ??? Bob sez: You've lost me. Where does a bunch of monkey bones have any relationship to this discussion?_?_? Mitch sez: And what about those dinosaurs? Bob sez: Yah, how about them? Uh? What about them? Mitch sez: And what about people getting taller ??? Bob sez: What about them getting taller? Does that somehow change their species? I've visited my late great, great, great, grandfathers home in Germany. I had to nearly bend double to get my 6'4" frame through the doorway. I have no reason to believe gramps had to duck to get into it but I have reasonable assurances that gramps was still human. (Did you know that Jesus height was about 5'2").. You must have skipped reading where I wrote about microevolution, "where an organism adapts to its environment with the flexibility already built into its existing DNA." Mitch sez: But you don't believe in evolution, so why is God making us taller all of a sudden ??? Bob sez: Again, I believe in MICROEVOLUTION. It is scientific fact, where an organism adapts to its environment with the flexibility already built into its existing DNA. "However it's obvious that God is making us taller so our feet will reach the floor." (Sorry I couldn't resist that) MACROEVOLUTION, I'll leave to science fiction writers as faith based, (a religion) unproven, and unprovable. Remember, my objections in THIS post were for scientific reasons. If you would like me to illuminate you as to how "scientists" determine things are MILLIONS of years old it will take a much longer post than this one to explain the circular reasoning used (mostly having to do with strata), and the faulty assumptions leading to questionable results. Oh heck, one quickie example. "Thousands of fossilized trees passing through "millions of years" of strata. In other words, that proves that one end of the tree is millions of years older then the other. A-Freekin'-mazing!!!! Especially when you consider that many of the trees are inverted... Of course that could be easily explained by some Jesus freak pointing out that that happened during a universal flood a few thousand years back, but that's too simple and not acceptable is it? Pity.  Believe it or not, using modern dating techniques, evolutionary scientists estimate that the Earth AND THE MOON are about 4.5 BILLION years old. That goes beyond stupid on so many counts it simply goes right back to 'A burning desire to prove evolution or disprove God’s creation is what leads otherwise intelligent scientists and skeptics to fail to question evolutionary assumptions adequately.' Now why would they have such a burning desire? Oh that's right, you don't believe in Satan. Then why? Why indeed...  With Alacrity ~~~ 73 & God Bless ~ >"),Bob>< ~~~
|
|
Yesterday, 06:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
The Giants, Unicorns, And Talking Snakes Show...
 Thats right Bob I don't believe in Satan or talking snakes or unicorns... lol !!! And please understand that we atheist don't have a book telling us that we will burn in hell for an eternity if we don't try and convert you Christians to atheism... And as to all you have said above, I think it all depends on where you get your information... You know like I get my information from legitimate scientific sources [regardless whether I spell all the words right or not], and you get yours from Christian web sites... You know those sites where they talk about science on one page and drinking poison, talking in tongues, and handling rattlesnakes on the next... Its like comparing Albert Einstein to bozo the clown... 
__________________
|
|
Yesterday, 09:32 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
"Deprived of religious training". The term "training" in that sentence sounds a little wierd. But i will of course admit, that i am not any kind of professor in theology, and i don't know half of everything about all that is stated in the bible or any other scriptures of religion, i will touch that subject further down this page. I hope that my philosophies of life isn't being taken as attacks. I don't mean to come off as if i am attacking someone for their personally accepted views, oppinions or faiths. But i do raise questions, counter and retort against people or groups who takes themselves a little too seriously. Because i have always had (when it comes to religion) a hard time stomaching the fact, that some people claim that their beliefs are THE truth. In my humble oppinion, there is no spiritual or religious truth of such kind that it is universally applicable to everyone. If there were, then the truth would be of such clarity that nobody would disagree, there would only exist one faith a long time ago and everyone would be happy. And of course, the same thing goes for science and evolution. Which is why i feel that those two should simply be held apart, because they only confuse things further for people when being in the same room of thought. Much for the same reason that the state and the church was once divided, to provide people with unbiazed truths and freedoms, that were not tainted from a source of belief that brings truth and freedom to one set of people, and forcing the other to conform. I have gone over this before so it feels a bit redundant and repetitious. But i feel that i have to make it absolutely clear. That i am not against people needing or believing in any religion, and i am not against belief in any spiritual convictions. I don't know anything about the afterlife. And no scripture on earth, can convince me of any truth, lest it would say "1+1=2". Since i was a young boy, i always only accepted the truth that we know for facts. I mean true facts now, that stones are hard, and gravitation pulls, fire is hot etc. I have long since learnt from studying people who debate or discusses either evolution, or possible outcomes of death with other people who have set beliefs about any of it. That the outcome of the debate will always perpetuate itself without coming to any form of conclution in favour of any side, regardless of arguments or presented "proofs". Therefore i have come to trust only in myself and my own senses of reality. And not engaged in any debate with the aim to disprove anything, just debate it and leave any oppinion i have as food for thoughts, or trash in the bin. All up to the people who listen. Now i haven't made efforts to read or learn about any religion, simply because. And this has been repeated by me many times now; Books and scriptures written by living men thousands of years ago, holds no grounds for proof in regard to any afterlife of any sort. Belief is strictly for people who can or want to accept any promise of glorious eternity and a paradise. It is the nature of any living thing to defy death and fight for life. And this is no different for the mind that is enclosed in our human husks... Religion is the manifestation of life for the mind of people. It can't be seen, touched nore heard, so the conviction of it's existence is left entirely up to the mind to grasp and accept, or reject. Sadly in many occations, the minds if people are often swayed in directions of other peoples oppinions, instead of being convinced on it's own merits. Most everything that mankind have created, is all just in the minds. Governments, sociecties, politics, religions, laws and ideas.. This is why we are limiting ourselves from our true potentials as human beings. Because most of these products of minds are universally accepted without having been questioned enough, or in some cases, at all. Most people don't raise questions to things that have been thought out by people, that they are deeming to be more enlightened, intelligent or wiser than themselves. Or even more dangerous. When those words have come from untouchable sources such as saints, holy and/or all powerful beings. If a mind has accepted that, then there is no point in engaging in debates about anything that could interfere with those words. Thus i end with a quote. I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded, what others do only from fear of the law - Aristotle You could also say, fear of the manifestations of your mind.
|
 |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:56 AM.
